Confessions of a Writer Using AI

I have a confession to make. I asked AI to write my last article for me. It was early in the morning, well before sunrise in a hotel room in Owen Sound. I was staring at the screen and the words were not flowing the way they usually do. Recent events and digging through the wreckage at my mother’s house had me down. My son, Nyls, was still asleep, and then, idle hands and all that. I fed CoPilot everything I’ve ever written. Then I prompted it:?

“Analyze the writing style, most frequently used elements, and structure of this document. Then write a new article between 600 and 800 words with the same writing style, structure, and elements to talk about how to ensure leadership ambition does not lead to unexpected results including comments in the linked chat thread.”?

In minutes I had something that would normally have taken me hours to create. But was it good? When my son was up at at ‘em (which seldom takes long) I asked him to give it a read. He scrolled through, nodded, and said, “Well, it doesn’t read like AI. But it doesn’t sound like you.”?

I had another look. He was right. The style was similar, and completely in line with the summary of my writing style it had produced unprompted:?

(The author) “employs a conversational and engaging writing style, often using anecdotes and personal experiences to illustrate points. The structure is typically organized into sections with clear headings, making it easy to follow. The most frequently used elements include rhetorical questions, direct addresses to the reader, and a mix of short and long sentences to maintain a dynamic flow. The tone is reflective and insightful, often encouraging the reader to think deeply about the topics discussed.”?

CoPilot had my number?

In one paragraph it captured the style I’ve evolved over the years. Props are due to a few people. Steven Pinker’s Sense of Style in the 21st Century had just been published when I began to write in earnest. My friend, author, and critic Christian Cameron has constantly challenged me to grow as a writer. My mother, Sylvie Cioran, has been my lifelong editor and puts AI’s editing skills to shame. Phil Cady taught me the power of reflective writing for personal and professional development. But those are only my conscious connections. I prompted CoPilot to list writers with a similar style. It named Malcolm Gladwell, Brene Brown, and Seth Godin as well, all of whom have influenced my thinking. But it still didn’t sound like me. What was missing??

CoPilot totally didn’t get ME!?

The first and most glaring gap was that the article was completely devoid of personal experiences. Despite noting, “anecdotes and personal experiences,” as a key element of style, it couldn’t replicate that. Experience is a critical part of reflective writing. It helps the writer analyze illustrate their thoughts and connect with readers. AI might be able crank out prose, but it can’t see inside your head. It has never been there, seen what you’ve seen, felt what you’ve felt, or thought what you’ve thought. Debates on stochastic parrots aside, it can’t bring what is uniquely us to the conversation. This shows just how critical it is for us as writers to lean on our experiences to thrive in the Age of Creation. It also shone a spotlight on another problem with AI writing.?

It was all reruns.?

The thoughts in the article all seemed familiar. On a third reading I realized that all of the points in CoPilot’s article were reruns of articles I’ve written before. In essence, it lived up to its reputation as a great summarizer. When I wrote about how to survive and thrive as a writer a key point was that AI reduces novelty. If you need a greatest hits album of what you’ve written before, it's perfect. If you want to say something new, you need to start writing. As soon as I saw that the floodgates opened. I found my voice and the words began to flow out of my head.??

AI is the Antiwriter?

Before long it became clear that CoPilot was my Antiwriter. It told me everything I didn’t want to write about. Section by section I eliminated what it had written as been there, done that thinking. By the time I was done, there wasn’t a single AI-generated sentence left in Playing With Fire. You might argue that meant I didn’t need AI to help. However, I found the article flowed faster because I knew what I didn’t want to say. The false starts and dead ends that usually get cut never made it on the page. In essence, by ruthlessly eliminating what AI says we more rapidly find what we should write. The same was true at large and in the details.?

Avoid cliches like the plague?

This is of a piece of the best pieces of advice from Steven Pinker. But there they were in CoPilot’s best efforts. “The Double-edged Sword,” was the first section header. My immediate reaction was, “Hell no!” I was reminded of the old demotivational poster showing the bow of a sinking ship. “Mistakes” It read. “It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.” This is similar, but not exactly the same as the previous point. The Anti-Writer doesn’t just tell you what not say. It can also show you how not to say it.??

AI provides a spark?

You might think that I’m writing AI off as nothing more than a bad example. That is certainly of the benefits I’ve found. That said, a bad example can also provide inspiration. I’ve always struggled with titles. They often take me as long to get a hit on than a good edit. I’ve played with title recommenders and other tools. CoPilot does all that too, and the list of ten titles it provided gave me the Playing with Fire lead line. But it did more than that. Another lean in was, “Burning Bright.” It wasn’t right, but I know Blake’s, “The Tyger,” by heart. As soon as I saw that I knew I needed to include the poet’s cautionary question. “What the hand, dare seize the fire? And its deadly terrors clasp?” It turned into a better conclusion than my first effort thanks to that suggestion.?

Everybody needs an AI Antiwriter?

The AI antiwriter is a valuable new tool in the writer’s toolkit. This allows us to stand traditional thinking about writing on its head. When we have something to say it can rapidly synthesize current thought with an infinite version of Umberto Eco’s antilibrary at our fingertips. It gives us immediate insight into what we have written on the subject. Best yet, it will do it all in the voice of the mediocre writer we are all strive not to be.??

What do you think? How can you use AI to become a better writer??