Artificial Intelligence and Creative Writing
The Ethical Conundrum
From where I sit I can see the squirrels in the back garden, tightrope walking along the washing line to nibble at the peanuts in the ‘squirrel-proof’ bird-feeder we have placed there. They are scrappy, ingenious creatures showing adaptability, inventiveness and creativity.
But the greater inventiveness came from us humans setting up the obstacle course for the squirrels, to distract them from damaging the more expensive bird-feeder with camera. The camera downloads the photographs to the phone that can then identify the birds using AI.
Oh, how I love living in the 21st century. AI is great.
But then again…
In my ‘portfolio’ career, one of my income sources is proofreading. My customers are usually students, many of whom have English as a second language. My job is to correct spelling, grammar, typographical errors and check reference lists. I also edit sentence structure and offer advice on the clarity of the argument.
I am aware that this stream of work is slowing and that some of the assignments I read have not been written entirely by the student. I, like most readers, can spot AI gobbledygook or the plodding monotonous style of regurgitation of texts rather than an insightful understanding and analysis.
I have also found that some of my academic work was in the databases used without permission by Meta to scrape for data for the development of their AI tool. Generative AI is based on plagiarism which means that my hard work and struggles have been stolen to make rich men even richer.
(If you ask AI about domestic abuse, it may use some data scraped from mine and my colleagues work. But if you ask me, I can tell you about the struggle to get funding, the putting together of proposals. I will tell you how it feels to read a Domestic Homicide Review, to sit on the edge of a focus group, to hear a woman dismiss her pain, to see a professional fight back tears and all the shades of fear and laughter that survivors bring to an understanding).
This knowledge of the way that some writers are using the AI tools out there and how it is detrimental to deep-learning, writing and connection with material (and how it may deplete my income) means that I may not be best placed to write about AI.
I could even be called a Luddite.
Go on, call me a Luddite! Fair enough, I’ll reply.
For those that don’t know, although the term Luddite is used as a slur for the resistance to advancement of technology, that is not the real root of the word.
The Luddite movement was built on working class solidarity against the misuse of technology by wealthy mill and factory owners, started in Nottingham by weavers and spreading across the Midlands into Yorkshire. The Luddites were not opposed to the technology, but the way that it was being used to undercut workers’ wages and quality control. They were named after Ned Ludd, a character who almost certainly didn’t exist. He was an imaginative pseudonym used to sign their letters of demands. He was a creative work of working class fiction. The Luddites were anti oppressive working conditions and shoddy goods being foisted onto customers.
And that is reflective of where I stand on AI.
There are things that technology does well for the writing process. I have moved from handwriting my undergraduate dissertation, to using a work Word Processor for my Masters degree, to using my own laptop with access to the internet for my PhD.
I’m not going to lie, writing a PhD was hard. Writing one without access to spellcheck, grammar review, internet sources and referencing software would have been too great a struggle. I am grateful to technological advances. If you are writing for a qualification – use all of these things. Technological assistance in this way is not cheating. (And if you are writing in a second language, please pay a proofreader to make sure all your hard work isn’t lost in clumsy, plodding prose or undecipherable syntax – this is also not cheating).
I am aware that AI can now generate synopsis and reviews of vast amounts of literature. It may be o.k. to use this to obtain a general overview. But to rely on this, means you will never have that moment where you read something and make a note in the margin, or get distracted by that quirky footnote that takes your thoughts somewhere else and provides a new way through the literature. And deep reading isn't just about facts. There can be a pleasure in the way that an author expresses those facts - the story-telling, the emotions, the style, the choice of language.
Writing isn’t just about convincing an examiner that you have understood the task. Even academic writing is more than that. It is a process of learning. I know what I think because I write. I write, because I think.
And I write on Vocal because I want my writing to connect.
“The only link between you and the reader is the sentence you’re making” (Verlyn Klinkenberg).
I don’t want to lose that connection.
I have my own rules for ethical writing.
- I read the work of others
- I make notes and those notes include the names of the authors and the title of their works
- I watch films and think about the writing and how it can be used to improve my own
- I use spellcheck, grammar review and if necessary referencing software
- When writing creatively, I start with characters that are based on people I have known or traits I have observed and then I change one thing to create someone new
- Changing one thing creates a different world
- I embrace my quirkiness and unpredictability
- I allow myself to feel emotions and follow my intuition
I have my own rules for ethical reading.
I don’t want to preach. (Actually, I probably do. It is a feature of my personality – bought up by teachers and in the Catholic faith, it is sort of hard-wired.). You don’t have to follow my rules. Rules, after all, are only useful, until they are not. But I do want humanity to thrive, through innovation, originality and the connection that comes from authenticity.
And I really want the joy in my life that comes from the blur and the fuzz of human creativity.
If you've enjoyed what you have read, please consider subscribing to my writing on Vocal. If you'd like to support my writing, you can do so by a regular subscription or leaving a one-time tip. Thank you.
About the Creator
Rachel Robbins
Writer-Performer based in the North of England. A joyous, flawed mess.
Please read my stories and enjoy. And if you can, please leave a tip. Money raised will be used towards funding a one-woman story-telling, comedy show.
Reader insights
Outstanding
Excellent work. Looking forward to reading more!
Top insights
Compelling and original writing
Creative use of language & vocab
Easy to read and follow
Well-structured & engaging content
Excellent storytelling
Original narrative & well developed characters
Expert insights and opinions
Arguments were carefully researched and presented
Eye opening
Niche topic & fresh perspectives
Heartfelt and relatable
The story invoked strong personal emotions
Masterful proofreading
Zero grammar & spelling mistakes
On-point and relevant
Writing reflected the title & theme
Keep reading
More stories from Rachel Robbins and writers in Writers and other communities.
Writing Trauma and Grief
I have just read a beautiful flash fiction – prize winning – Fearful Symmetry by Holly Barrett. (Here) It is about a complicated grief. Grief for a sibling never known, a family living with trauma. I have a lump in my throat that refuses to be swallowed.
By Rachel Robbinsabout a year ago in Writers
I light a candle to St. Lucia (or Lucy), the Christian martyr from Syracuse, Sicily.
St. Lucia (or Lucy) was a Christian martyr from Syracuse, Sicily, who died in 304 CE during the Diocletian persecution. Her name means “light”, and she became associated with vision, clarity, and illumination.
By Novel Allen28 days ago in Writers
Key Differences Between Commercial and Defense-Grade Components
1. Standards That Shape History Standards are the backbone of component reliability. Commercial parts are designed to meet everyday needs, following ISO, ASTM, or SAE standards to perform consistently in predictable environments like passenger aircraft, industrial machines, and vehicles. Defense-grade components, however, face far harsher conditions. They adhere to MIL-STD, MIL-SPEC, and Department of Defense regulations, ensuring they survive extreme heat, vibration, and electromagnetic interference. These standards also demand stricter audits, documentation, and compliance checks, because failure is not an option in defense applications.
By Beckett Dowhan7 days ago in Writers
'20/20'
"Do It Again" the track that would ultimately open the Beach Boys final album on Capitol Records which was released on February 10th 1969 had originally been released as a single in August of 1968. The track was the first of many post-Pet Sounds era throwbacks to the early Beach Boys sound which would become continually more cliched and eventually lead the Beach Boys to the level of self-parody they would eventually succumb to in the 1980s while their closest contemporaries The Beatles nearing the end of their run in 1969 would go on to be viewed as the most influential band of all time. However, the song itself is not bad on its surface, and it opens with a futuristic sounding (for 1969) drumbeat captured by then-Beach Boys engineer Stephen Desper using tape delays on the drums performed by Dennis Wilson and John Guerin. The song has been re-recorded numerous times over the years on various Beach Boys-related projects most notably the 2011 re-recording at Capitol studios featuring the five surviving Beach Boys at the time backed instrumentally by various members of both the Brian Wilson Band and Mike Loves touring "Beach Boys" to promote the then upcoming Beach Boys 50th Anniversary reunion tour in 2012. The hammering and power drill sound at the end of the song was an excerpt from a track called "Workshop" that was to be a part of the uncompleted "SMiLE" album.
By Sean Callaghan6 days ago in Beat
Comments (26)
This is great! I love how you told the good and the not-so-good about modern tech. Well written. Congrats on the TS and working on your doctorate. 💜
I see you as a denier of technology. I am 76 years old and I have learned AI because I have always been an accroter of technology. I kearned computere in 1981 at The LA Times first computer class. I didn't go to Catholic School m I am am empath and psychic dreamer. I like you Rachel but you remind me of my roommate. We could not have coffee. Sorry. I write my own stuff. I do utilize AI as a tool. I grew up with cursive writing. Did you? If we do not learn AI we woill be left behind. Technology is scary for many people. I remember when I told someone I was in a LA Times first computer class they fed me horror stories about computers but I said, "Hey, hold, I have a job to do at The LA Times. It requires learning computers!"
Not sure how I missed this first time around but... very thoughtful and engaging read. Interestingly, I wrote an extended essay for my 1986 history and law degree on machine breaking. Part of the research was done using the Janet network. I had to provide the librarian with a list of keywords which she later searched and returned next day with a printout of sources I could request. using inter-library loan. Would have been a lot quicker, easier and less painful if I could have done my own search and got the results on my screen straight away. And the research would have been more detailed. When I did my law masters (2018) dissertation, I was advised not to use Google search, because the results were unreliable and it was considered un-academic. I completely ignored that and used Google a great deal. Much better than the Alta Vista I used in the 1990s and Janet in the 1980s. One of the things I picked up from my study of historic machine-wrecking was that worker reaction was not always anti. It depended on the level of control that they (workers) had or did not have when it came to implementation. I listened to a recent panel discussion about AI by film makers and two of the actors said they had licenced their voices for use in AI production but their contract included strict limitations on use and that any other use had to be approved by the actor. They argued that AI is here to stay so it was better to gain control of it than take a moralistic anti stance. I think it is good that the debate has now reached a level of intelligent discussion following the panic and doom-saying of a couple of years ago. Great article and always good to reach well thought material on AI.
This was such an engaging read! I love how you start with the squirrels and end with something so profound about writing and humanity.
"Totally agree!"
Well said!
Well done
Congraz, and a well-written article.
PS. Well done on TS! Well deserved! (PPS - THANK YOU!)
I appreciate the history lesson, and I would be proud to be called a Luddite 😁 I am with you in that I don't read anything marked as AI. I also stop reading if it feels AI-ish. I quietly take my heart and go.
You did a job well done, congratulations on top story ✅🏆👍🏼
Thanks for sharing your rules for writing and reading - it is reassuring to know that other people also set these parameters for themselves, and that they broadly match my own (I see mine as a work in progress, although over time I appear to be becoming more rather than less inflexible). When I was writing the final few essays for my degree I discovered the 'editor' feature on Word, and have found it both useful and reassuring (I take great delight in seeing 98 or 99% accuracy on the spelling and grammar checks) but always feel a sense of trepidation when I click on the plagarism checker and wait for it to check for similarities to other work on the internet, even though I know that all my work is 100% my own, with any quotations properly attributed. For my creative writing it is even more scary, as we all absorb the things we see, hear and read and filter them into our own work: what if this time I unconsciously stole someone else's work? AI is a valuable tool for checking vast numbers of documents quickly, but I think conversations such as this are helpful in preventing blind acceptance of this new technology wholesale, and allowing the 'writing' side to slip in unnoticed on the tails of the proofreading systems.
Thoughtful and useful piece, Rachel. You might (or might not!) want to add this open letter to Lisa Nandy for readers in the UK: https://www.change.org/p/protect-authors-livelihoods-from-the-unlicensed-use-of-their-work-in-ai-training
The best use of AI is from a place of already having the knowledge and initiative to serve the right prompts
🎉🎊 Congratulations on achieving Top Story! 🏆✨ So well deserved! 🙌👏 Your talent shines through every word! 🖋️💫 Keep inspiring and soaring to new heights! 🚀🌟 🥳🎈💐 Way to go!
Excellent story. I believe AI has its place too and I hope that virtuous use will eventually amplify human creativity. I also agree it does need some governance especially when it is stealing the hard work of others. Connection achieved. ✔️👍😁
Very eloquently said, and I love the example you started with using the squirrels (such cute and sneaky little buggers!)
AI is useful to a point, it cannot replace human creativity, we just need to know the limitations to which we can morally substitute our brain power and become the very robots which we despise. It has some uses, we just need to be careful.
Rachel, you are spot on with this writing. I write " old school" and it's really frustrating to see these people publish stories and poems on Vocal that are obviously assisted by AI, even if they're not word for word AI. The idea of using AI to enhance a poem or a story on a creative writing website to me is absurd and offensive to the others who are writing from their hearts. There is a rockstar rider on Vocal, who is currently not writing on Vocal in several of her pieces now have the AI generated labeling. So why would I think that those are the only AI generated poems? When I see an AI generated label on several pieces of someone's work, I will automatically assume that all of their work hals some form of AI assistance and are just not being labeled as AI generated to keep the writers credibility as a writer. I know the struggle that I have had writing theses for school. But I would rather struggle than use AI. This is an excellent informative piece that you have written, and know that we are out here applauding you.. well done, Rachel-
Some of our biggest fears about AI has come true. I think this line you wrote sums it up: -Writing isn’t just about convincing an examiner that you have understood the task. It is a process of learning. I know what I think because I write. I write, because I think.- With college kids having access to this system of cheating, who knows if they are learning anything. Makes me wonder what percentage of students use it regularly to do their homework. Sad. This a great article, Rachel! Thank you for writing it.
Very insightful Rachel! I must admit that I am not the biggest fan of AI!
It sounds like we have similar values in writing, reading & engaging. I especially liked, "Rules, after all, are only useful, until they are not." I have lost track of how many times I have offered up similar assessments of everything from Roberts Rules of Order to The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church. They should facilitate the work, ministry, & writing respectively, no handcuff them.
I am 75. I could not wait to throw my IBM typewriter out my window, but I put it in my closet for back up. I worked at The LA times in the early 80s. I began my writing career with typewriters and writing on long sheets of yellow paper. I embraced technology completely. I write my own stuff. I have gobs of my photography and videos. I utilize AI as a tool. I also had over 20 years of musical training. At 75, I find myself in irony how I defend technology to a new generation. If I had a time machine, I would take you with me back to the 70s. Your article is wonderful. However, I am a geek. lol
For a time, I worked for a betting company that wanted me to check AI-generated previews of upcoming matches. The job didn't last long, mostly because the time it took to factcheck the AI (which struggled to distinguish between a defeat and draw - something pretty fundamental) was greater than the time it would take me to rewrite the whole damn thing myself. Clearly, AI will get better. I've used enough machine translation over the last 20ish years to see that progress. But I don't know if it will ever get consistently good. The danger is that audiences lose interest in good and settle for 'just about adequate'; McCreativity, where everything fits an inoffensive template.
Computers do things very fast. We use cars and trains because they are faster than walking. So using a computer program to identify a bird is fine, What is not fine is using tools to replace the work of others. I use an AI generator for my Vocal pictures, because I am not an artist, and I would only use free are anyway to I think that is Ok. The music scares me a little I used AI (and my own performance) in my Harmonic Verses entry (also I demonstrate how AI can fail) but for writing, maybe OK for documentation, but as the meme says "Why would I read what you couldn't;t be bothered to write". Your work is excellent and some great points here.