What Is So Wrong About Using AI In Writing?

At least once a week, I get bogged down in a heated discussion on AI and how much I dislike it slipping into everything. The phrase that comes to mind is insidious invasion. Slow, creeping, and inescapable. Only it isn't slow at all. From tv commercials to plumbing tips, AI is now a part of everything everywhere and all at once. I can't even type this line without a little helpful button appearing on the side of the page offering to help me word my emotions better. I can literally use AI to rant about AI. Before I even get a word down, the website takes me to a page full of nothing but AI prompts. Has the word dystopia become overused yet? Because I would like to invoke it again.

But before I get carried away with shaking my futile fist at the clouds, I want to clarify my main issue. I understand how AI can help in many areas. Sorting massive amounts of information in moments is very useful. Gathering relevant ideas from across the web with a few button presses is great. Tools have been improving humanity's collective lives for millennia. AI is simply the newest in a line of such tools. It is only natural to resist the new when you are used to the way things always worked in the past. The farrier didn't look fondly upon the car's birth, and the town crier felt a fatal wound when newspapers entered circulation. AI is here and with it, society must adapt.

The issue arises when the tool becomes the craftsman. In what world would one go onto a blog wanting to read a post written by AI? It wouldn't be my words. It wouldn't be my style. It wouldn't be my thoughts. It wouldn't be my perspective. It would merely be my general idea taken by an algorithm and churned into something that resembles other ideas written by others in the past. Derivative, tamed, and smoothed out in a neat interchangeable hunk of blandness. Guess what? If I simply wanted to rant about AI, it could write something succinct and charming and engaging, but it wouldn't be real. It wouldn't be me on the paper. Today, I can have AI make a book for me. And then someone can have AI summarize it for consumption. And nothing genuine would have been communicated.

The harsh truth about all books and stories and poems is that none of it is truly original. Back in Bible times, the author of Ecclesiastes already made it clear. What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun. Christopher Booker could sum up all stories into seven basic plots. My college film book said that Hollywood only made 10 movies. Other scholars say there are 3, 6, 7, 20, and 36 types of stories. Whatever the number, individuals can sit down and see patterns, and unfortunately those patterns will apply to every single story. The true beauty in stories isn't in originality. It is in the act of connecting.

All the same minor details and major actions can be shared between two stories and yet the reader can get two totally different impressions and reactions. Why is that? Because the writer sculpts how it is depicted. The writer's opinions and thoughts and worldview will ultimately shape the story and that reaches through the page to grip the reader. It is why a cheaply made passion project of a film might stir you and its high budget Hollywood glamorous remake might leave you cold. Or perhaps the opposite if one prefers good lighting and better effects with a broader appeal in the new script, The point is that the intent, the effort and the process is what makes a story real.

A story only works when it has its imperfections and oddities because that is what makes it stand out from the crowd. For the filmmakers, Wes Anderson isn't breaking outside of the film language and yet you instantly know his handiwork. For artists, Claude Monet didn't create a new type of paint or canvas and yet people travel to see his works. For the musician, Prince wasn't using scales and chords that hadn't been used before, but he left a lasting mark that influenced generations. As a writer, there are countless examples of well-known book characters that weren't all that different from their contemporaries and yet they still stand the test of time. Why? Because they weren't made by the collective. They were specifically made by individuals and not AI fed with all the other stories that exist. A story by AI is made for everyone and nobody.

Even an artist who is staring at another piece will not duplicate it exactly. There will always be little differences from the artist's eyes and hands. Sometimes those little changes can spiral out into a whole new style. New genres of music are born all the time and half of it is just from necessity while trying to duplicate something that inspired the musician. Everything made by a living, breathing human being is unique simply by virtue of the fact that there is only one of them.

Taking your hand off the tools and letting them do the work from you is a waste of everyone's time. The tools will only make what has been made before. We want new mistakes and new stories. We need you to write your own story.

After all, if you can't bother to actually write your story, how can anyone actually read it?

Today's song: Everything Glorious - David Crowder Band

I have been on a bit of nostalgic trend recently. The mid-2000s CCM has me in its clutches. I especially love the mash-up of hopeful lyrics with tiny electronic flourishes.