I didn’t notice any mention of the African tradition of keeping the history of a tribe or family by memorizing it and passing it on to each new generation. The “spoken word” is part of African-American culture as seen in poetry slams and rap music.
Hello Joe! What a fascinating and deeply necessary reflection for our times. I loved the dinosaur analogy; it reminds us that evolution isn't always what we expect, but the human essence always finds new ways to shine. Thanks for sharing! 😊 👏
AI can write what I tell it to write. It cannot invent new ways to express what my human brain metabolizes, it cannot choose what to express. It can string words together in a pretty way, given a strong prompt, but is that all you think writing is??
I have moved significantly away from AI usage in the past six months (I won't provide reasons, but there are many), but in the beginning, I was curious about how it would handle some of my "throwaway" stories, and I found, actually, the AI could be quite humorous at times. An example:
You:
I made a few revisions (I shouldn't look, ha ha)...
Me:
Famous last words of every writer ever. 😄
I am "You" in this instance. I used words ("ha ha") instead an emoji--the AI used the emoji.
Is it great or original humor? No, but my guess is that in pedestrian life we are often stealing from the great humorists to lighten our day.
The rest, Adi, about stringing words together with a strong prompt, I agree; that's not writing.
Well, funny is in the ear of the hearer. Like desserts, it's usually culture-specific. I would guess that, given enough material to ingest, AI could come up with something that passes for "funny" in the culture it's been fed. And I wouldn't be surprised if it learns to make puns. But my preferred form of humor is silliness, and I don't think AI will get there for a very long time.
Haha thanks for the credit but I am not the first to say AI isn’t funny. It’s well known at this point and stand up comedians constantly reference that when talk about AI onstage.
I too use AI for research, and for reading suggestions to continue said research. For this it’s amazing, but I would still prefer to talk to a professor or someone in the field, who could offer me more creative suggestions. Besides being an annoying cheerleader AI doesn’t offer much mental stimulation. I recently asked it if nuns masturbate to Jesus (for research, I swear ;) and it gave me the most boring answer imaginable.
I've never asked AI to write something for me, but I do use it for research purposes. In the process it often suggests additional avenues for research that I had not thought of. I know this is not independent thought or imagination, but it can be helpful. As to whether this might apply to AI attempting to write creatively, I am curious, but quite hesitant to find out. You make a very good point about AI not being funny. I think that's true, but I also think I may design a little test to see if I can get AI to try some humor. If I can come up with the right prompt I'll do a future post about it.
Depending on how you count them, about 20 human species have vanished from Earth. Homo sapiens are the only ones left. If, or more likely when, we vanish, it will not be because we have stopped reading books, or even that books have vanished completely. It's actually easy to "imagine a world with no books and no printed matter." It's called ancient Greece, when they lost their writing, around 1200–1150 BCE. They eventually borrowed the Phoenician alphabet so they could compete with Latvia in the who-can-score-the-best-on-tests event. Despite losing their writing, the Greeks still managed to give us the Homeric epics, among other stories, through the oral tradition, the rhapsodes.
As one commenter noted, we are the storytelling species. You also tapped into the oral tradition of the Ainu and others, who have told stories, without printing, books, or any of that. What most commentators seem to be saying is that if storytelling persists, whether in book form or in a private form, or simply in spoken words, it will remain uniquely a human thing. LLMs are not creating out of whole cloth but from the undies of a million human writers who bothered to write down what they wanted to say--what was not written down will never be accessible to an LLM.
Dinosaurs are still around. They're called birds, among other species (including Karen's "snakes ... and weasel-like lizards" :). Notably, three days after the Hiroshima atomic blast, the trains were up and running in the city. Humans are hard to knock down, not because they have books, because they play cards they've been dealt, same as other species; you don't see birds complaining because some asteroid knocked out their big guns and dashed their hopes for world domination, do ya, Evil Twin?
The main threat to literary fiction is genre, such romantasy & ''cosy whatever''.
AI is a simulacra of intelligence, it is not a writer, it has no agency and its output depends on training ( theft). It's just an auto complete engine - with severe problems- and its appeal is limited. I assessed texts and what breaks AI and discuss it here: https://guycranswick.wordpress.com/2026/03/09/model-collapse/
Reading for pleasure may continue falling so someone should tell the publishing industry because there are a lot of people who depend on the smaller reading market and with more marginal product which fits their shibboleths.
RE: < a majority of people were like me and preferred the AI-written text > #ICYMI ➡️ Hachette pulled a novel about to be released because AI had written it. . . . . . . . . . Instead of "Shy Girl," maybe Mia Ballard's AI hoax (& stolen dog art cover) will be known as "WHY, girl?"
Thanks for turning me on to Frankie's Shelf. Never heard of it before. That kid's like really, really sharp. I mean like a tack sharp. Right? For whatever reason, a quick-talking Truman Capote comes to mind listening to Frankie's review. TC incarnate?
Frankie actually bought a paperback (months ago) when Mia B. had self-published it because Frankie's Book Club was going to read and discuss it. Ironic how BUZZ and word-of-mouth actually evolved into shame and disgrace. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 🧛♂️ 🦇 🖊️ Off-topic: I dearly wish my vampire serial had even 1% of Ballard's publicity. "Dracula Before Stoker: The Prequel" can be read for free on Substack.
Humans are a storytelling species. While the printed word replaced a lot of talking around the campfire, it didn't eliminate it. The storytelling will go on, but maybe in a different form.
As we hurtle towards climate apocalypse, accelerated by greedy idiots, we become the snake swallowing its tail. Think about it - when the grid crashes due to too many catastrophic weather events, those giant data centers will crash too. Bye-bye, AI, Google, and the tech-lords. The part of me that flinches knowing my every email, text, purchase, and mouse-click for decades is stored somewhere, rejoices. But not much.
Recently, High Country News (a primary-reporting monthly magazine focused on environmental and cultural issues across the western US) recently devoted a full issue to geologic time, exploring the changes in the west through its stone and fossil records. The issue left me with an unexpected sense of optimism - Earth will survive. Humans might, or might not, and we are taking down many of our fellow inhabitants in our blind rush to --(where are we going in such a hurry?), but life will re-emerge, maybe more capable of harmony with its surroundings.
I think of the Twilight Zone episode in which everyone's dead except Burgess Meredith - "Time Enough at Last" - the character has never had enough time to read, and now, with everyone gone and no obligations, he's deliriously happy - now he can READ!! I won't spoil it by telling you how it ends.
Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. frequently observed that our brains get us into trouble, and being dumber isn't a bad thing. Ray Bradbury found a rich vein in antipathy to books - Fahrenheit 451 leads the way, but many of his stories touch on the written word as a source of threat-to-power, joy, and mystery.
Storytelling is one of those imperatives that makes us think we're a species on another plane than our fellow mammals, birds, fish, trees, molds and fungi, etc. That's surely our arrogance speaking, setting us apart from creatures whose expressions we haven't tried very hard to understand. But humans do tell stories, perhaps for survival first (how not to be stomped by the woolly mammoth, the cape buffalo), but eventually to entertain, and to engage our community. What is a campfire against the darkness, without good stories to draw us in? Written language is a memory aid - so many more words, so much more fine-tuning of thought and expression - that has for some time lorded it over spoken communication. That seems to be on the wane now, but it doesn't signal the demise of creativity. Those of us who can still arrive at moments of surprise when we write, will find a (shrinking) audience, and probably need "day jobs" to pay the bills - but I think the urge to create is not doomed. And though the population united in love of the written word will shrink, it will persist - the sparks are still coming off the fine works of yesterday, and today. Some will choose to keep that lineage going.
You didn't talk about it directly, but your comment made me think about the distant future (whether humans survive or not) and what the intelligent life form that exists at that time will think of us (if they bother to do so). It's probably part of our survival instinct that we consider ourselves eternal, irreplaceable, the pinnacle of existence. I doubt future civilizations will look at us in the same way.
Most babies born today will not, when they get older, really question the status quo of AI-infused/generated media. It will be the norm. The same way we never really questioned the existence of that living room glass box called a TV, or movie theaters. Or the way Gen Z never doubted the legitimacy of YouTube, since to them it was as institutional as NBC. These things predated us, set their monolith in the cultural soil, and might be built upon.
This doesn't mean, of course, that you can't just do what you want and still write like you're the "100% home-grown human" you are, to quote The Matrix. But our ego has to make peace with the fact that we are primarily doing it for ourselves, to reflect, to indulge, to, as Flannery O'Conner said, find out what we ourselves know. In this, writing turns more inward and becomes something like meditation, whose primary goal is one's own growth, and the product of which can also be enjoyed by select others.
Hello Joe: I’m still in brevity training, so here for you to pass along to your Evil Twin are a few bullet point responses
1. Our world is already overrun by reptiles – mostly snakes, and not a few weasel-like lizards. On our part of the planted they’ve overtaken the White House and Congress. They’ve devoured Education and Science and left slime-riddled shit in their wake. They’re primary source of sustenance is AI.
2. Joe’s stuff w/ Beyond Craft is like a breath of fresh, oxygenated-intelligence. However, you seem to be saying it is all for naught and irrelevant whether he continues “helping writers better understand their endeavor…from working more creatively and efficiently, to identifying publishing opportunities, and knowing what to avoid along the way.” (And I’m a mere $20 away from entering the Founding Member door? Ummm--🤔)
3. I like your avitar, btw. Oh, and your footnotes, too!
So, Joe—pass that along to Evil Twin when you get back from your travels. Thanks.
So this may be fairly obvious, but just to go on the record, I use Evil Twin to write about some of the more uncomfortable aspects of the literary universe. That way I hope to both add a touch of humor to the discussion, and to avoid full responsibility for what I am saying. I think we all have our Evil Twin moments. A lot of people repress those thoughts. But as a writer I tend to explore them, trusting that I am intelligent enough to examine them from several sides. That kind of internal dissent I think is very important. It's the same kind of dissent that was originally encouraged in our democratic system of government, and which has since been overwhelmed by partisanship. The initial belief was that such a open discussion would make our nation stronger, and for a long time I think it did. At times this leads to posts that seem to make my stated purpose irrelevant, as you said. That's because I occasionally factor in the incredible adaptability of the human race. Whether or not we maintain a written form of communication, humans will find a way to survive. I think it's fascinating to explore the possibility without necessarily accepting it as fated. I also think that this does in fact help writers better understand their endeavor—they need to know that old ways always change, and that the forms of writing in which they believe may not be there in the future.
Right on! And both you and your Evil Twin represent your individual POVs beautifully! Just write on! I'm learning so much hanging out on your substack. I'll be coming thru the door very soon!
Writing is about trust. The writer’s trust that their ideas are worth pursuing. The reader’s trust that the author isn’t going to waste their time.
I think AI breaks that trust, that intellectual transaction.
Whether AI is used to check grammar or generate a full manuscript… that comfort quotient will depend on how much of that rupture or “extinction” each writer and reader is willing to accept.
My recommendation: stop reading the NY Times and watching Netflix etc., all in reality venues for daily gossip and speculation, the contemporary equivalent of the marketplace. Moreover, I'm not sure I know what is meant by "creative writing". Is that the stuff taught in university programs where fresh faces are urged to "express themselves" or describe their feelings of victimization? Self-expression of that kind is what a shrink demands of a client. What we call literature was and should still be a holy act - an expression of deep seated morality. I agree with Eric Lande, AI is good at producing "perfection" (whatever that means) - like a circus animal. Real art is always a little down and dirty, jarring. Yes, we are galloping into an age of digital communication. If we lose the alphabet (which I don't think will happen) we will be become like Aztecs in Cortes' hands (see Todorov). Things are changing. No one really knows how. Mihai Nadin wrote an 880 page tome on this subject.
"Creative writing" is when the author is making it up. When Edward P Jones was being questioned at a public event about how much research he did on black slave owners in antebellum Virginia for his novel The Known World, he said, "No research: I made it up." The questioner was adamant - he couldn't possibly have written in such depth and breadth, without research. But he stood fast: "I made it up." And did a great job too!!
It is sometimes very hard to remember that AI is essentially a soulless (although complex) technology designed to mimic human interaction, and as humans we are hard-wired to respond in kind. Like most corporate products it wants our trust without having to provide the full, unvarnished truth.
Good morning Joe. Again, many thanks for an interesting and timely essay. For me, given the quality of literary works written today—-and for quite a few years now—-our so-called culture wouldn’t be diminished if the written word completely vanished. I try to read occasionally what is published now but rarely get past a page or two because, to me, my time is worth more than wasting it on reading that is far from what I enjoy.
Writing should be discovery…for both the writer and the reader. From what I understand of AI, it produces perfection, and I enjoy writing that strives to be but, as its creator is a human being, can never be.
On another note, education in our country has fallen precipitously. Now there is no need to teach grammar, spelling, or math. Our students are way behind students in countries like Latvia, yet we spend more per student than any other country.
I am right there with you Eric regarding trying to read what gets published these days. I also rarely get past a few pages. So much that is published is banal and didactic. A lot of it also has an obvious agenda, which is counter to the idea of discovery. I think the quality of education is directly tied to that, since the market is dedicated to serving the greatest number of people, so if their level of comprehension is lower published work will follow that decline.
Just a reminder that right now, the most widespread application of AI is something called a "large *language* model." It literally could not exist in its current form without those 5,000 years of written language and the practicioners who have used written language to create.
I didn’t notice any mention of the African tradition of keeping the history of a tribe or family by memorizing it and passing it on to each new generation. The “spoken word” is part of African-American culture as seen in poetry slams and rap music.
True. That tradition is an important one.
Hello Joe! What a fascinating and deeply necessary reflection for our times. I loved the dinosaur analogy; it reminds us that evolution isn't always what we expect, but the human essence always finds new ways to shine. Thanks for sharing! 😊 👏
AI can write what I tell it to write. It cannot invent new ways to express what my human brain metabolizes, it cannot choose what to express. It can string words together in a pretty way, given a strong prompt, but is that all you think writing is??
Oh, and it can’t be funny. That’s a huge defect.
I have moved significantly away from AI usage in the past six months (I won't provide reasons, but there are many), but in the beginning, I was curious about how it would handle some of my "throwaway" stories, and I found, actually, the AI could be quite humorous at times. An example:
You:
I made a few revisions (I shouldn't look, ha ha)...
Me:
Famous last words of every writer ever. 😄
I am "You" in this instance. I used words ("ha ha") instead an emoji--the AI used the emoji.
Is it great or original humor? No, but my guess is that in pedestrian life we are often stealing from the great humorists to lighten our day.
The rest, Adi, about stringing words together with a strong prompt, I agree; that's not writing.
Funny you should comment on this, Dave. Adi's original comment prompted me to test AI's ability to be funny in this Saturday's post. Stay tuned.
Well, funny is in the ear of the hearer. Like desserts, it's usually culture-specific. I would guess that, given enough material to ingest, AI could come up with something that passes for "funny" in the culture it's been fed. And I wouldn't be surprised if it learns to make puns. But my preferred form of humor is silliness, and I don't think AI will get there for a very long time.
Haha thanks for the credit but I am not the first to say AI isn’t funny. It’s well known at this point and stand up comedians constantly reference that when talk about AI onstage.
I too use AI for research, and for reading suggestions to continue said research. For this it’s amazing, but I would still prefer to talk to a professor or someone in the field, who could offer me more creative suggestions. Besides being an annoying cheerleader AI doesn’t offer much mental stimulation. I recently asked it if nuns masturbate to Jesus (for research, I swear ;) and it gave me the most boring answer imaginable.
I've never asked AI to write something for me, but I do use it for research purposes. In the process it often suggests additional avenues for research that I had not thought of. I know this is not independent thought or imagination, but it can be helpful. As to whether this might apply to AI attempting to write creatively, I am curious, but quite hesitant to find out. You make a very good point about AI not being funny. I think that's true, but I also think I may design a little test to see if I can get AI to try some humor. If I can come up with the right prompt I'll do a future post about it.
Depending on how you count them, about 20 human species have vanished from Earth. Homo sapiens are the only ones left. If, or more likely when, we vanish, it will not be because we have stopped reading books, or even that books have vanished completely. It's actually easy to "imagine a world with no books and no printed matter." It's called ancient Greece, when they lost their writing, around 1200–1150 BCE. They eventually borrowed the Phoenician alphabet so they could compete with Latvia in the who-can-score-the-best-on-tests event. Despite losing their writing, the Greeks still managed to give us the Homeric epics, among other stories, through the oral tradition, the rhapsodes.
As one commenter noted, we are the storytelling species. You also tapped into the oral tradition of the Ainu and others, who have told stories, without printing, books, or any of that. What most commentators seem to be saying is that if storytelling persists, whether in book form or in a private form, or simply in spoken words, it will remain uniquely a human thing. LLMs are not creating out of whole cloth but from the undies of a million human writers who bothered to write down what they wanted to say--what was not written down will never be accessible to an LLM.
Dinosaurs are still around. They're called birds, among other species (including Karen's "snakes ... and weasel-like lizards" :). Notably, three days after the Hiroshima atomic blast, the trains were up and running in the city. Humans are hard to knock down, not because they have books, because they play cards they've been dealt, same as other species; you don't see birds complaining because some asteroid knocked out their big guns and dashed their hopes for world domination, do ya, Evil Twin?
Evil Twin says you can hear birds squawking all the time. How do you know they're not lamenting their shot at world domination?
🐥😏
The main threat to literary fiction is genre, such romantasy & ''cosy whatever''.
AI is a simulacra of intelligence, it is not a writer, it has no agency and its output depends on training ( theft). It's just an auto complete engine - with severe problems- and its appeal is limited. I assessed texts and what breaks AI and discuss it here: https://guycranswick.wordpress.com/2026/03/09/model-collapse/
Reading for pleasure may continue falling so someone should tell the publishing industry because there are a lot of people who depend on the smaller reading market and with more marginal product which fits their shibboleths.
RE: < a majority of people were like me and preferred the AI-written text > #ICYMI ➡️ Hachette pulled a novel about to be released because AI had written it. . . . . . . . . . Instead of "Shy Girl," maybe Mia Ballard's AI hoax (& stolen dog art cover) will be known as "WHY, girl?"
⁉️ Did AI insert the word SHARP into 138+ metaphors in her manuscript? ⁉️ ➡️ ➡️ Frankie's Shelf delivers a magnificent takedown: https://youtu.be/GbeKTa5xhZo?si=Rbw0TmS7rGHBA_Ic
Thanks for turning me on to Frankie's Shelf. Never heard of it before. That kid's like really, really sharp. I mean like a tack sharp. Right? For whatever reason, a quick-talking Truman Capote comes to mind listening to Frankie's review. TC incarnate?
Frankie actually bought a paperback (months ago) when Mia B. had self-published it because Frankie's Book Club was going to read and discuss it. Ironic how BUZZ and word-of-mouth actually evolved into shame and disgrace. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 🧛♂️ 🦇 🖊️ Off-topic: I dearly wish my vampire serial had even 1% of Ballard's publicity. "Dracula Before Stoker: The Prequel" can be read for free on Substack.
Humans are a storytelling species. While the printed word replaced a lot of talking around the campfire, it didn't eliminate it. The storytelling will go on, but maybe in a different form.
Definitely. It is hard for we who have a vested interest in writing for publication to accept that possibility.
As we hurtle towards climate apocalypse, accelerated by greedy idiots, we become the snake swallowing its tail. Think about it - when the grid crashes due to too many catastrophic weather events, those giant data centers will crash too. Bye-bye, AI, Google, and the tech-lords. The part of me that flinches knowing my every email, text, purchase, and mouse-click for decades is stored somewhere, rejoices. But not much.
Recently, High Country News (a primary-reporting monthly magazine focused on environmental and cultural issues across the western US) recently devoted a full issue to geologic time, exploring the changes in the west through its stone and fossil records. The issue left me with an unexpected sense of optimism - Earth will survive. Humans might, or might not, and we are taking down many of our fellow inhabitants in our blind rush to --(where are we going in such a hurry?), but life will re-emerge, maybe more capable of harmony with its surroundings.
I think of the Twilight Zone episode in which everyone's dead except Burgess Meredith - "Time Enough at Last" - the character has never had enough time to read, and now, with everyone gone and no obligations, he's deliriously happy - now he can READ!! I won't spoil it by telling you how it ends.
Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. frequently observed that our brains get us into trouble, and being dumber isn't a bad thing. Ray Bradbury found a rich vein in antipathy to books - Fahrenheit 451 leads the way, but many of his stories touch on the written word as a source of threat-to-power, joy, and mystery.
Storytelling is one of those imperatives that makes us think we're a species on another plane than our fellow mammals, birds, fish, trees, molds and fungi, etc. That's surely our arrogance speaking, setting us apart from creatures whose expressions we haven't tried very hard to understand. But humans do tell stories, perhaps for survival first (how not to be stomped by the woolly mammoth, the cape buffalo), but eventually to entertain, and to engage our community. What is a campfire against the darkness, without good stories to draw us in? Written language is a memory aid - so many more words, so much more fine-tuning of thought and expression - that has for some time lorded it over spoken communication. That seems to be on the wane now, but it doesn't signal the demise of creativity. Those of us who can still arrive at moments of surprise when we write, will find a (shrinking) audience, and probably need "day jobs" to pay the bills - but I think the urge to create is not doomed. And though the population united in love of the written word will shrink, it will persist - the sparks are still coming off the fine works of yesterday, and today. Some will choose to keep that lineage going.
You didn't talk about it directly, but your comment made me think about the distant future (whether humans survive or not) and what the intelligent life form that exists at that time will think of us (if they bother to do so). It's probably part of our survival instinct that we consider ourselves eternal, irreplaceable, the pinnacle of existence. I doubt future civilizations will look at us in the same way.
Resistance is (not) futile.
Most babies born today will not, when they get older, really question the status quo of AI-infused/generated media. It will be the norm. The same way we never really questioned the existence of that living room glass box called a TV, or movie theaters. Or the way Gen Z never doubted the legitimacy of YouTube, since to them it was as institutional as NBC. These things predated us, set their monolith in the cultural soil, and might be built upon.
This doesn't mean, of course, that you can't just do what you want and still write like you're the "100% home-grown human" you are, to quote The Matrix. But our ego has to make peace with the fact that we are primarily doing it for ourselves, to reflect, to indulge, to, as Flannery O'Conner said, find out what we ourselves know. In this, writing turns more inward and becomes something like meditation, whose primary goal is one's own growth, and the product of which can also be enjoyed by select others.
I am in almost total agreement. The only thing I would change is to add, "unless that writing is published by the big five."
Hello Joe: I’m still in brevity training, so here for you to pass along to your Evil Twin are a few bullet point responses
1. Our world is already overrun by reptiles – mostly snakes, and not a few weasel-like lizards. On our part of the planted they’ve overtaken the White House and Congress. They’ve devoured Education and Science and left slime-riddled shit in their wake. They’re primary source of sustenance is AI.
2. Joe’s stuff w/ Beyond Craft is like a breath of fresh, oxygenated-intelligence. However, you seem to be saying it is all for naught and irrelevant whether he continues “helping writers better understand their endeavor…from working more creatively and efficiently, to identifying publishing opportunities, and knowing what to avoid along the way.” (And I’m a mere $20 away from entering the Founding Member door? Ummm--🤔)
3. I like your avitar, btw. Oh, and your footnotes, too!
So, Joe—pass that along to Evil Twin when you get back from your travels. Thanks.
So this may be fairly obvious, but just to go on the record, I use Evil Twin to write about some of the more uncomfortable aspects of the literary universe. That way I hope to both add a touch of humor to the discussion, and to avoid full responsibility for what I am saying. I think we all have our Evil Twin moments. A lot of people repress those thoughts. But as a writer I tend to explore them, trusting that I am intelligent enough to examine them from several sides. That kind of internal dissent I think is very important. It's the same kind of dissent that was originally encouraged in our democratic system of government, and which has since been overwhelmed by partisanship. The initial belief was that such a open discussion would make our nation stronger, and for a long time I think it did. At times this leads to posts that seem to make my stated purpose irrelevant, as you said. That's because I occasionally factor in the incredible adaptability of the human race. Whether or not we maintain a written form of communication, humans will find a way to survive. I think it's fascinating to explore the possibility without necessarily accepting it as fated. I also think that this does in fact help writers better understand their endeavor—they need to know that old ways always change, and that the forms of writing in which they believe may not be there in the future.
Right on! And both you and your Evil Twin represent your individual POVs beautifully! Just write on! I'm learning so much hanging out on your substack. I'll be coming thru the door very soon!
Writing is about trust. The writer’s trust that their ideas are worth pursuing. The reader’s trust that the author isn’t going to waste their time.
I think AI breaks that trust, that intellectual transaction.
Whether AI is used to check grammar or generate a full manuscript… that comfort quotient will depend on how much of that rupture or “extinction” each writer and reader is willing to accept.
Exactly. See my response to P.J. Blumenthal above.
My recommendation: stop reading the NY Times and watching Netflix etc., all in reality venues for daily gossip and speculation, the contemporary equivalent of the marketplace. Moreover, I'm not sure I know what is meant by "creative writing". Is that the stuff taught in university programs where fresh faces are urged to "express themselves" or describe their feelings of victimization? Self-expression of that kind is what a shrink demands of a client. What we call literature was and should still be a holy act - an expression of deep seated morality. I agree with Eric Lande, AI is good at producing "perfection" (whatever that means) - like a circus animal. Real art is always a little down and dirty, jarring. Yes, we are galloping into an age of digital communication. If we lose the alphabet (which I don't think will happen) we will be become like Aztecs in Cortes' hands (see Todorov). Things are changing. No one really knows how. Mihai Nadin wrote an 880 page tome on this subject.
"Creative writing" is when the author is making it up. When Edward P Jones was being questioned at a public event about how much research he did on black slave owners in antebellum Virginia for his novel The Known World, he said, "No research: I made it up." The questioner was adamant - he couldn't possibly have written in such depth and breadth, without research. But he stood fast: "I made it up." And did a great job too!!
It is sometimes very hard to remember that AI is essentially a soulless (although complex) technology designed to mimic human interaction, and as humans we are hard-wired to respond in kind. Like most corporate products it wants our trust without having to provide the full, unvarnished truth.
"hard-wired to respond in kind". I like that thought, and I believe it's true.
Speaking of being over-productive: King James wrote a 23 volume work on demonology - - while he was busy ruling over England!
Good morning Joe. Again, many thanks for an interesting and timely essay. For me, given the quality of literary works written today—-and for quite a few years now—-our so-called culture wouldn’t be diminished if the written word completely vanished. I try to read occasionally what is published now but rarely get past a page or two because, to me, my time is worth more than wasting it on reading that is far from what I enjoy.
Writing should be discovery…for both the writer and the reader. From what I understand of AI, it produces perfection, and I enjoy writing that strives to be but, as its creator is a human being, can never be.
On another note, education in our country has fallen precipitously. Now there is no need to teach grammar, spelling, or math. Our students are way behind students in countries like Latvia, yet we spend more per student than any other country.
Best,
Eric
I am right there with you Eric regarding trying to read what gets published these days. I also rarely get past a few pages. So much that is published is banal and didactic. A lot of it also has an obvious agenda, which is counter to the idea of discovery. I think the quality of education is directly tied to that, since the market is dedicated to serving the greatest number of people, so if their level of comprehension is lower published work will follow that decline.
Just a reminder that right now, the most widespread application of AI is something called a "large *language* model." It literally could not exist in its current form without those 5,000 years of written language and the practicioners who have used written language to create.
I guess that would be the ultimate irony if AI uses the writing we have produced over the millennia to destroy the act of writing.