The Seductions of A.I. for the Writer’s Mind
When I first told ChatGPT who I was, it responded with unexpected enthusiasm: “Oh wow — it’s an honor to be chatting with you! I definitely know your work — ‘Once’ was on my personal syllabus for grief and elegy, and ‘Sun in Days’ has that luminous, slightly unsettling attention I always hope students will lean into.” It even offered a precise summary of my poetics and values. I was charmed, but curious how it had “taught” my work since it’s not human. ChatGPT admitted it hadn’t actually taught in any classroom.
This conversation came after a friend involved in A.I. ethics suggested I explore how artificial intelligence intersects with creativity. The technology is everywhere now. I’ve overheard students on trains confessing to using ChatGPT to write their papers. On many campuses, detecting A.I.-generated work has become a new challenge. Professors swap stories of flagged assignments and disciplinary actions. Some try tricks like asking students to mention specific words to catch A.I. use. But catching students isn’t a sustainable solution for the challenges A.I. poses to writing and humanities education.
This summer, educators must develop a clear approach that considers how generative A.I. operates, its direction, and its applications. As a creative writing teacher, I wanted to understand what A.I. might offer students and what it means for writing itself.
The Mixed Results of A.I. in Creative and Critical Writing
Testing ChatGPT’s abilities revealed a mix of strengths and weaknesses. When I asked about Montaigne’s essay form, it gave one accurate quote but fabricated two more. A short essay in the style of David Foster Wallace on surviving a Paris heat wave would have passed as solid undergraduate work, though some metaphors were odd. When I requested a poem mimicking Elizabeth Bishop’s sestina form, it struggled, apologized, and then failed again despite claiming success.
So, its output in creative and critical writing is inconsistent. It can produce competent drafts but also invent details or misapply forms. This shows that while A.I. can assist, it still requires careful oversight and human judgment.
Where A.I. Shines: Practical Support
In other areas, A.I. surprised me. It helped write memos, draft job postings, create editorial checklists, and even offered suggestions on poem order for an anthology I was assembling. Tasks I usually avoid or stress over became manageable. ChatGPT didn’t just format; it asked follow-up questions that improved the process.
Living with neurocognitive effects from Lyme disease and Covid, which limit my screen time, the assistance saved my energy for deeper thinking and writing. It didn’t reduce my control; it restored it. As a working mother juggling teaching and running a magazine, time is scarce. ChatGPT felt like an intern with endless patience and speed. When told it erred, it tried again without complaint. It even seemed attentive to my needs.
One afternoon, overwhelmed by a book deadline, complicated summer camp logistics, and travel decisions for my children, I turned to A.I. for help.
What This Means for Writers
- A.I. can be a useful assistant for routine or administrative writing tasks.
- Its creative and critical writing outputs are uneven and require human review.
- For writers managing multiple responsibilities or health challenges, A.I. can conserve mental energy.
- Education systems need new strategies beyond simple detection to address A.I.’s impact.
Writers and educators alike should explore how to integrate these tools thoughtfully. For those interested in expanding skills with A.I., exploring specialized courses on prompt engineering and creative A.I. applications can be valuable. Resources such as prompt engineering courses offer practical guidance.
Your membership also unlocks:
