Will many authors be using AI to write?
For some writers, the act of writing is a joy. They don’t write to get published per se. They write simply because they love to write. They have no qualms being starving artists as long as they can engage in their artistic pursuits.
Then there are professional full-time writers. They write for pay. They have deadlines to meet. Their income is dependent on producing quality work consistently. They need to continuously generate ideas that publishers will pay for.
Some fortunate writers straddle the line between being extremely passionate about writing and making good money doing what they love.
Writers who write purely for passion are not enthused by AI.
Just as there are many writers who still use a typewriter and refuse to use computers or laptops.
There exists a rare breed of writers who write their first draft using a pen or pencil. They don’t even use a typewriter. This is a vanishing species, but such writers do still exist.
Such writers — who engage in writing simply because they want to — are not fond of tools like ChatGPT. In fact, suggesting they use some writing aid is likely to offend them. They take pride in their art form.
What category of authors are likely to employ AI for writing?
Those authors who have no objections using tools to work more efficiently and quickly.
It’s similar to using a word processor with inbuilt proofreading and spellchecking capabilities.
It’s rare these days to encounter writing errors because almost everyone utilizes a word processor. Incorrect grammar and spelling are automatically highlighted by MS Word and Google Docs. Writing tools like Grammarly make it nearly impossible to commit writing mistakes. Even MS Word nowadays has an advanced “Editor” feature. Any errors existing are intentional.
AI as a writing instrument is unlikely to appeal to writers people read expressly to read them. For instance, if you want to read Salman Rushdie, you’ll instantly recognize if a tool like ChatGPT has done the writing. He possesses a very distinctive writing style.
Would you like Stephen King stories written by ChatGPT? What about Poe, or a Hindi writer like Amritlal Nagar?
All well-known writers and journalists have their own peculiar writing styles.
I’m a content writer, not a conventional author or journalist with a dedicated following, but even so, many clients hire me because they appreciate my writing style. They have worked with me previously and like my work. They have read my blog posts. They have encountered my writing on other websites. They want more of the same.
It has its downsides. For example, sometimes when I want to outsource work to another writer, clients protest. They don’t just want content; they want content written by me specifically.
Therefore, if this holds true for many writers, AI won’t help them unless it can flawlessly replicate a writer’s style.
Considering the wonders AI tools like ChatGPT are capable of, it may soon happen they can mimic a writer’s style exactly. They already can, to some extent. You can upload a document to ChatGPT, ask it to analyze the style, and then direct it to employ that same style for subsequent writing tasks.
Anyway, whether writers use AI to write or not is up to them. Artificial intelligence is a reality.
Sometimes AI writing can be great. More often, it is uninspired. It lacks individuality. It’s flawless.
The human brain can’t match the amount of data AI can access. Nonetheless, there is no real “feel” to it, at least not yet. A discerning reader can identify that what they are reading was not penned by a human being.
This may or may not matter to you. It’s a complex, philosophical issue.
When writing was evolving, scholars like Socrates were vehemently opposed to it. He believed knowledge and wisdom conveyed through writing is not interactive. You can’t ask questions in real time. Writing, Socrates thought, undermines the brain because knowledge should reside in the brain and not on a scroll or parchment.
But writing revolutionized knowledge sharing. It may have unleashed religions like Christianity and Islam because without the Bible and Quran, these faiths wouldn’t have spread as much. Epics like the Ramayana and Mahabharata would not have been written without the advent of writing.
Writing made it feasible to preserve knowledge. Knowledge could be accessed even centuries or millennia later.
I’m not only referring to modern alphabetic writing. Even when people lived in caves, they preserved knowledge via cave paintings.
Book publishing came. Knowledge moved from scrolls and parchments to printed books. Knowledge flourished. It spread to different corners of the world. Mass publishing democratized knowledge and education.
Then came electronic media which further boosted knowledge sharing. Digital media suddenly catapulted the amount of knowledge to an entirely different unfathomable level. They say that the amount of data that our brain processes in a day, a working man in the 18th century processed that much data in his entire lifetime.
Despite the most advanced writing tools and word processors, books are still being written. People still tell stories. Newspapers and magazines still publish opinion pieces, editorials, and articles. The underlying art and capability still exist.
The same will unfold with AI tools like ChatGPT. Just as every technology and tool gets exploited, AI will be too. But it will also be leveraged by people capable of doing some marvelous work.
There will still be mediocre writers. There will still be terrible writers. And skilled writers will find their abilities enhanced manifold.
It’s not about whether you utilize AI to write. It’s about how you use AI to write.
