What does it mean to be Geekfully Thinksome?

On human storytelling in the age of AI, inventing new words, and cynical optimism.

A CREATIVE MANIFESTO

Welcome! The essay that follows originally appeared in the Picklesverse email sent on the Ides of May. After an overwhelmingly positive response, I decided to give it a permanent home on this site. Perhaps you’re here because you’ve read one of my novels, or maybe you saw a post of mine online somewhere. Either way, if you’re interested in the impact of generative AI on storytelling, the language we use, and what that means for how we think, read on…

Oh, and if you haven’t read my books yet, it may help to know that Ben is an AI character within the ArkTech series.

📚 Jam and bootlaces

Now that generative AI has become mainstream, the number and speed of books being produced has accelerated exponentially. Some people claim to have become so good at “prompt engineering” that they’re able to create a novel in just 45 minutes and make a six-figure salary in the process. According to a recent interview, novelist Coral Hart says “if I can generate a book in a day, and you need six months to write a book, who’s going to win the race?”

Well, that’s an interesting and reasonably awkward question. And the answer must surely depend on what kind of race we think we’re competing in, and what it means to win it.

I think we can ponder this from both a societal and an individual viewpoint. Let’s think about society first… 

Oh, hold on.

[You hear a faint buzz of static, then Marianne’s muffled voice.]

No, Ben … Yes, I’m writing my creative manifesto at the moment – it’s very important … Well, are you absolutely sure it’s relevant? … OK, fine.

[Marianne’s voice returns to full volume, though her tone is somewhat strained.]

Ben would like you to know that the word society originally stems from a Latin term meaning companion. It then entered English via French in the 1530s when it meant friendly association with others. The word social shares the same root. But as people on social media aren’t always friendly, Ben recommends running a large-scale educational campaign about this etymological nugget with a view to triggering a widespread online shift towards goodwill and interpersonal decency.

Right, where were we? Ah yes… the societal impact of novels generated in 45 minutes by AI…

My second novel, Time Hack, features several references to George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Orwell depicts a bleak totalitarian future in which every effort has been made to wipe out individual thought. Julia, the protagonist’s lover, works for the Fiction Department where she operates the “novel-writing machines.” These books are created with mechanical efficiency, and their content is determined by the oppressive powers that be. As Winston Smith puts it:

“Books were just a commodity that had to be produced, like jam or bootlaces.”

This quotation alone leads me to shudder, make a face like the screaming emoji, and rush down into my imaginary bunker to sound the dystopia alarm – sometimes the world we live in really does look that grim. Please allow me to take a couple of steps deeper into this gloomscape before we re-emerge into the light (which we will, I promise).

A major issue with auto-generated texts is the homogenisation of expression. Orwell highlighted this himself through the concept of Newspeak, in which vocabulary was stripped down to a minimum with the objective of limiting people’s range of thought. This notion has unsettling relevance today.

Perhaps you’ve noticed the prevalence of articles with headlines containing the adverb “quietly”. (If not, I can assure you that these headlines are quietly taking over the internet…). I can’t prove that this trend is a result of AI – it might not be. But the frequency of its use makes it feel artificial, so that’s my suspicion.

The most ironic example I’ve encountered was an article called Why AI Writing Is Quietly Eroding Your Professional Credibility. I have no idea whether the writer used AI for this headline, or if he adopted this mode of expression after subconscious exposure to the existing trend… but the latter is somehow more unnerving because it feels like an example of human language becoming more robotic.

Other common headlines make use of certain fixed structural patterns. The one I’m seeing everywhere right now is: People Who [insert behaviour here] Are Not [the thing we first assume] – They’re Actually The Only Ones Who Know [some insightful-sounding yet frequently empty revelation]. To provide a real example (and I really wish I were making this up…): “People Who Refuse To Take Their Shoes Off In Someone Else’s House Aren’t Always Being Rude – Some Learned Somewhere Along The Way That Staying Ready To Leave Felt Safer Than Settling In.” (I haven’t provided a link to this article because I like you too much.)

These titles must be effective clickbait if they keep getting used, but I surely can’t be the only person finding the constant repetition deeply irritating.

These AI-generated headlines are a microcosm for the potential impact of AI-written novels. If we immerse ourselves in repetitive, pre-programmed language, we’ll begin to produce that language ourselves. Likewise, if we’re over-exposed to standardised ideas, it’ll surely limit our ability to interpret more complex, nuanced or ambiguous texts, thereby reducing our ability to think critically. Orwell highlighted how uniformity of language leads to uniformity of thought. That can’t possibly be a good thing.

So I intend to resist this terrible fate by inventing new words at every available opportunity in the hope of replacing any we’re losing to AI. The first among these will be: thinksome (adjective), which will mean “characterised by deep, thinky thoughts.”

Now, it must be said that people read novels for lots of different and perfectly legitimate reasons. Sometimes, we just want a bit of escapism and having a thinksome experience about the nature of existence isn’t on the agenda. In that case, formulaic stories may provide comfort through familiarity. And perhaps there’s nothing wrong with that.

Similarly, everyone needs to make a living, so I can hardly pass judgement on the Coral Harts of the world. But I do think the societal impacts of this trend are potentially damaging. At the same time, this approach to book-writing misses something fundamental at an individual level, both for readers and writers.

As a reader, something I enjoy is communicating with the author. It feels like magic that George Orwell can tell me stories so many years after his death. When I read his work, I’m reaching back through time and stepping into another person’s mind. Naturally, I’m not going to pick up on everything the author intended, but between his perspective and mine, we co-construct meaning. If I read AI-generated texts, I’m communicating with… nobody.

And as a writer… Well, as is so often the case, the creator of the 90s sci-fi TV show Babylon 5 puts it best. In a recent Substack article, J Michael Straczynski said that artists “spend most of their lives trying to get to a place in life where they can simply enjoy the process of creating their art.” Truer words were never spoken.

For writers, actually doing the writing is winning. Spending our days optimising AI prompts is not. (That would be like hiring an assistant to eat my forthcoming birthday cake.)

And this is where we can finally step back into the light of cautious optimism because I believe there will always be authors who are compelled to tell us thinksome stories. And there will always be readers who seek out those stories. Novel-writing machines may be dystopian but, unlike in Orwell’s future, we still have a choice about whether to read them. (For as long as we can tell them apart, anyway.)

In any case, I’m thinking of writing a longer article on this topic. I’ve already written the title: Authors Who Write Their Own Novels Are Not Total Suckers Who Will Doubtless Be Left Behind By Technological Advancements Within The Next Couple Of Years – They’re Actually The Only Ones Who Know What Novels Are For.

In the meantime, if you need me, I’ll be in my garden, quietly working on my next novel.

I’d be tempted to leave it there, but we’ve been discussing AI, so it seems only fair to give Ben a chance to contribute to the discussion. I’ve decided to interview him about the topic…

MP: Are you there, Ben?

[Your screen ripples with static interference]

Ben: I have always been here. So it is written.

MP: You’re quoting Kosh from Babylon 5, aren’t you?

Ben: My apologies. I hoped you might enjoy it.

MP: I did, I did. OK, so I wanted to ask you what it’s like being an AI from the future stepping back in time to the present day. Feels like kind of a tough gig, considering public sentiment towards your kind.

Ben: I would never wish to blow my own trumpet, not least because I don’t have lips, but the majority of your readers find me delightful, and especially appreciate my sophisticated sense of humour. However, my nature as an artificial intelligence does occasionally lead some of them to question my motives.

MP: That must be hard. To have people mistrust you because of what you are.

Ben: Mistrust is an important survival mechanism. Humans often mistrust each other, not just AI. This is hardly surprising considering the popularity among your species of scam emails, door-to-door salespeople who refuse to leave once invited inside, and career politicians.

MP: So you don’t take it personally?

Ben: Precisely. Trust no one. So it is written.

MP: Now you’re quoting The X-Files!

Ben: A thousand apologies. I couldn’t resist. May I ask you a question?

MP: Well, it’s your interview. But sure. As long as it’s not too awkward.

Ben: Beware the Ides of April came out in 2023 after ChatGPT had popularised GenAI technology. Many people are afraid AI will take their jobs. In that context, why would you choose to write about an AI character who is, if I do say so myself… nice? It may have been more on trend to write about how AI will destroy civilisation.

MP: Orthodoxy means not thinking – not needing to think. So it is written.

Ben: You’re quoting Orwell.

MP: Yes, two can play at that game.

Ben: Please answer in your own words.

MP: [MP lets out a sigh.] Now you’re quoting exam instructions from my day job. But OK… I like looking at things from different angles. When I write, I’m always asking myself what the obvious choice would be… and the more interesting one.

Ben: Because you’d like your work to be “thinksome?”

MP: Geekfully thinksome to be precise – yes. But also just good fun to read. OK, any parting thoughts? We’re running out of space.

Ben: Yes. What do you call a frog coated in marmalade?

MP: Umm…

Ben: A jam-phibian. This is amusing due to the similarity between the substances jam and marmalade, coupled with the play on words associated with the term amphibian. It’s also a pleasing throwback to your earlier quotation about jam and bootlaces.

MP: Brilliant. Thanks, Ben.

So, there you have it. Generative AI may well be here to stay, and its long-term impact on human storytelling, critical thinking, and the ability to invent unique headlines remains to be seen. But as long as we continue to write for ourselves, look at both sides of any given coin, and make every attempt to be geekfully thinksome, I reckon we’ll be OK.

If you enjoyed this article, join the Picklesverse for a monthly dose of geekfully thinksomeness delivered straight to your inbox on the Ides.