I mostly wanted to share this because its good to embrace positive writing material. It’s easy to find critiques and complaints about writing and such, but its really important to acknowledge that you need something awesome and GOOD in a work, its not just about plugging plotholes, and polishing prose.
Not exactly writing related (although I find images and art really good prompts for writing) but I love this picture (also note r/trees is about smoking weed, hence thee uh, subreddit name for drawing of trees!)
I love this polemic, almost as much as I disagree with it. You see while I concur that fiction with intentional and overt messages is cringe, I also don’t believe in message-less fiction. I almost consider that ‘Non-Fiction’ (so to speak or I might be onto something paradoxical here). The author of the article esposes the beauty of chaotically avoiding cliché’s and finding fresh ways to evoke imagery and feeling, which in itself is a message. In the same way you can’t actually be ‘apolitical’ (politics is all around us and in everything we do, apolitical is a political stance) fiction cannot be message-less.
Not sure what that guff at the top of my tidy link is!!! 😡
In a similar vein I love this analysis of ‘Relatable’ – as the author points out, its not about the big picture stuff that connects a reader. I don’t relate to half-pint hairy footed innocent Hobbits, but I do relate to feeling small in a dangerous world, to stepping up at times, even to my own expense. It’s the micro-relatable moment you’re looking for in your work!
I think that’s all for this week! Kinda looking forward to the end of the year, its always nice to put a pin in the chaos that each sun rotation appears to bring but its a bittersweet sensation.
This is a very in depth post, its very interesting and covers a lot of points around violence. The bit that intrigues me is the strange relationship between context and theme. Many many works of fiction use violence, but often it exists as a blunt metaphor for the story progression – I’m not trying to be deep and meaningful with this, I just mean that typically when a hero physically defeats a villain, there is usually some thematic victory underlying it (you learnt the true power of friendship, you’re the one Neo, you accepted your responsibility Simba).
I’m sure we’ve talked about this topic before. It seems the consensus (and I agree with it) that Pratchett’s work is so well incorporated and intermixed throughout his writing. (E.g. puns) that often doesn’t translate to the screen well.
I have to laugh a bit sarcastically. The challenge of writing groups, is that I think most enter them thinking of themselves as the main character, and while the reality check can be helpful often its stressful to realize you’re just one of many struggling writers. Not to mention feedback is hard to process (and deliver to be fair) its not that surprising to me that people hate writing groups as much as they seek them out.
This is one of the Discworlds that I haven’t read yet, and it was… weird?
Weird good though. Hat Full of Sky feels a little funny, in that I suspect Pratchett was struggling to avoid his more frantic, jaunty, style for the Discworld (as I’ve mentioned before the YA Discworlds have tighter plotting compared to other Disc-novels.)
The initial half is difficult to pin down, Tiffany Aching is kind of finally getting to lean into her Witchiness, but along the way is finding barriers, including her fellow(sister?) witches and an apparent lack of ability to even recognize she isn’t in fact wearing a hat.
The introduction of the main antagonist, is a big of a shock, an apparent demon known as a ‘Hiver’ which immediately takes over Tiffany and abruptly changes the feel of the book to something quite serious.
I really enjoyed the second half of the book as it features a lot of Granny Weatherwax, and its great seeing her from Tiffany’s perspective. There is also ALOT of Pratchett meaningfulness, almost crammed at the end. I’ve noted that usually Pratchett almost hides his deep thoughts throughout a story, but for Hat Full of Sky it Feels more traditionally placed, and its a great book for it, not less.
I bet you know how how I’ve gone about this one… Not only am I quite shocked by the ability of ChatGPT to just produce a blog post for me, I can literally right click on say a paragraph and opt to dumb it down, or flesh it out or tell it to change “tone” among other things.
And yet Literally Literally struggling to change the font or format of the AI generated pages. smh.
In a world where technology continues to advance at an unprecedented pace, artificial intelligence (AI) has transcended its traditional roles in data analysis and automation to venture into the realm of creativity. One such captivating merger is the fusion of AI and fiction writing. As algorithms evolve and machine learning models become more sophisticated, writers are exploring the possibilities of AI as a tool to enhance, inspire, and even collaborate on storytelling.
AI as a Creative Muse:
AI is not here to replace human imagination but rather to amplify it. Definitely sounds like something a love-bombing AI overload would say… Writers can utilize AI to generate creative sparks and overcome the infamous writer’s block. AI algorithms, such as OpenAI’s GPT-3, can provide unique prompts, suggest plot twists, or even help brainstorm character development. The collaboration between human creativity and AI capabilities has the potential to elevate storytelling to new heights.
A recent Podcast (that featured my brother), made a very good point that many of the above functions were available before AI, but by far the biggest difference is the data-set that AI will base these things on, e.g. potentially being able to match your draft with all the other works stored away in its database – rather than say a random prompt.
Automated Content Creation:
AI has demonstrated its ability to generate coherent and contextually relevant text. This has led to the development of tools that can assist writers in drafting initial ideas or even entire paragraphs. While some may argue that this diminishes the human touch, others see it as a valuable time-saving mechanism, allowing writers to focus on the nuances of their narrative rather than struggling with the initial drafting process.
This is possibly by far on of the biggest impact on writers. Creating a novel can already take months upon years simply to craft the wordcount (let alone the editing). Something that ChatGPT (forgive me in advance if I get the last 3 letters wrong constantly) will 100% undermine is a writers practise. Of course the temptation will be ever present to generate drafts, but its hard to overstate how practice writers will lose from this. (now I know I sound a bit of a curmudgeon it’s not that I think writers will go ‘soft’ its that they will undermine their own processes potentially)
Customized Writing Assistants:
Imagine having a personal writing assistant that understands your style, preferences, and the intricacies of your ongoing story. AI can be trained to recognize and emulate an author’s unique voice, making suggestions that align seamlessly with the established tone and atmosphere of the narrative. This personalized touch can contribute to a more consistent and engaging storytelling experience.
Yikes – see above. I strongly suspect that this will become a very hot topic in future, e.g. there are for sure going to be authors exposed and shamed for using AI – it’s going to be a bit like steroids in sports I suspect.
Genre Exploration and Innovation:
AI’s ability to process vast amounts of data enables it to analyze trends in literature, identifying patterns and preferences within different genres. This analytical power can inspire writers to explore new ideas, subvert traditional tropes, or even create entirely new genres. AI becomes a partner in pushing the boundaries of storytelling, encouraging writers to experiment with unconventional narratives and thematic elements.
This is actually something that really gave me pause. I was thinking recently how in some respects no-one truly knows trends in literature. The amount of books published per year can only be estimated due to the sheer numbers, and that isn’t including fanfiction and online fiction (and other mediums of creative writing).
AI however CAN know this – it would surprised me if trends were somewhat different than we expected from our own biased perspective. As I write this I am reminded of other industries vastly problematic issues with AI and wonder what are the potential outcomes if AI gathers the ‘wrong’ information.
The other reflection is considering the interesting paradox of growth and change in art. This fascinates me to no end, but typically the way art evolves over time is through new work being familiar and comfortable enough for people to consume, but having touches of innovation and originality that sparks intrigue and shoves the ‘scene’ in a new direction. I originally though this could be a problem with AI, which would write every more cursively familiar content and never innovate. According to the above paragraph those AI is quite keen to subvert (the mind boggles)
Interactive Storytelling:
AI is not confined to the role of a silent collaborator; it can actively engage with readers in interactive storytelling experiences. Branching narratives, where the reader’s choices influence the direction of the story, are increasingly becoming popular. AI algorithms can dynamically adjust the plot based on reader input, creating a personalized and immersive reading experience.
LOL I actually love this – pick a path books were some of my favourite in my childhood, but I noticed a tendency towards formula – not to mention of course not much replay-ability.
Ethical Considerations:
While the integration of AI and fiction writing opens up exciting possibilities, it also raises ethical questions. How much creative control should be ceded to algorithms? Can AI truly understand the emotional depth of a story? These are complex issues that writers, developers, and society at large must grapple with as AI continues to play a larger role in the creative process.
Trust the AI overloads to go easy on the ethical considerations. I love the weird “can AI truly understand” it’s like: no it can’t, its just shoving together material, but there is no doubt that AI may be able to creative material with emotional impact.
I just had a strange thought – lately I’ve been experiencing a lot of “uncanny valley” (a feeling of discomfort watching almost realistic computer generated human beings) will such a feeling also start to happen in fiction? Imagine watching Buddiesthe new AI generated Friends-clone and just having a strange feeling all the time, that everything that happened was just a little off, and you couldn’t place why.
Conclusion:
The relationship between AI and fiction writing is a fascinating journey into uncharted territory. Far from being a threat to human creativity, AI serves as a valuable tool, offering inspiration, efficiency, and new avenues of exploration. As writers continue to embrace the possibilities that AI presents, the future of fiction writing holds the promise of richer, more diverse, and deeply engaging narratives. The fusion of art and algorithms is not a replacement but a collaboration, one that has the potential to redefine the landscape of storytelling for generations to come.
Reading yet another pro-robotic overload paragraph that emphasizes the lack of “threat” I come across a strange realisation. Generative AI work through a feedback systems correct? A sort of natural selection, one under our control (Sort of). But as mentioned by the lined podcast – AI doesn’t “Want” to say it doesn’t know something – or rather it isn’t rewarded for that, ergo does AI also “Want” to keep itself in use. It is “Motivated” to survive?
In my own words I think we are in for a turbulent decade or so, as people decipher how comfortable or not they feel about AI generated fiction. It sounds like the Screen Writers strike is over for now (and its a win for writers YISS), and a big topic of that was concern about professional humans being replaced by computers. One arena where I think this will really get weird is online fanfiction. A common and interesting culture of Fanfiction is requests – where people essentially tender out their desired fictional mashups – a process eerily similar to the way we can slam requests into ChatGPT.
I’ll tell you what – one thing I would sorely love to use AI is to ORGANIZE my writing a bit better – e.g. ‘find that scene where MC meets Antag, or how often have I used THIS phrase. Can I shove this scene earlier in – can I keep notes on a different device, character notes and whatnot without having to spend X amount of time sussing this myself.
That’s the end of ChatGPT’s essay. I’m extremely interesting in hearing people’s thoughts on this (not you GPT).
This video is mostly focused on Show don’t Tell type advices (which is totally legit don’t get me wrong) but I’m actually really interested in the OG question. This is an error in my own work and one I see in others work all the time, this kind of “summary” writing. Most authors have great stories buzzing in their imaginations, but make an interesting mistake in their drafting – they effectively try to catalogue or explain their story in their words, rather than create a series of vivid and effective scenes that ‘tell a story’
LE Guin called this “Crowding and Leaping” knowing what material to ‘crowd’ into your prose and scene and what things to ‘leap’ over. Stories are not following every details and step of the events that occur in them, its the writers choosing what to present to the reader. (I find this idea is much more obvious on the screen pay attention to what moments the show/movie shows you and what they jump over)
The complaint in question above is an observation that people tend to ascribe an allegory or ‘message’ from a story, often on a very surface level, but then overtime as analysis deepens or people become more familiar with a work they start to criticize the work as they start to find holes in the allegory.
While I don’t see this issue often, I think it is a legit point. When critiquing a work its important not to measure it against the assumptions you’ve already made about it.
It also flows into my philosophy of theme and meaning is that stories are not meant to be perfect essays on the ‘issue’ life isn’t clear cut and perfect and neither are our stories.
Another post by Weiland. I love any deep dive into Lord of the Rings and I feel similar about the tale. Its a longish but quite heartfelt post about darkness in fiction, well worth a look.
Lonely Power Poles 