Reimagining the Future of Storytelling in a World with AI

Taylor Rebhan
August 22, 2024 | 8 min read

By the time this article is published, it will already be out of date.

That’s simply how fast Large Language Models (LLMs) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications are improving.

In the last year alone, we’ve gone from AI as future-state to current-day. It’s already a click away, right in our pockets with apps like Chat GPT and assistants like Google Gemini. And it’s about to get even closer, embedded into our most common daily tasks like checking email and sending messages. Apple just announced that their latest operating systems across iPhones, iPads, and Macs will integrate OpenAI. Keep in mind that as of writing, there are about 1.46 billion active iPhone users in the world. That’s one in seven humans in the world, interacting every day with technology that was once the stuff of science fiction.

And while AI has capabilities that range from coding to image generation, the model that excites — and terrifies — writers is the LLM. Here’s how Google Gemini defines it:

A large language model (LLM) is a type of artificial intelligence (AI) program that can perform a variety of natural language processing (NLP) tasks. LLMs are trained on large amounts of data, often from the internet, and are built using machine learning and a type of neural network called a transformer model.
LLMs can recognize, summarize, translate, predict, and generate content, including text, blog articles, marketing materials, and software code. They are designed to understand and generate language like a human by learning context and meaning from sequential data.

“Generate language like a human”?

The thought sends a shiver up the spine of any aspiring novelist. But there’s no denying that it’s true. From poetry to nonfiction to reducing complex pieces of writing into bullet points, the more time goes by, the uncannier LLMs are in their abilities to imitate human intelligence. And that’s because they’ve been learning from us. These models are fed human writing. By now, most of us have unwittingly agreed to a Terms of Service that turns our personal data over to be churned and burned in AI training. Just look at the recent headache Adobe caused.

It won’t be long before we see the world’s first blockbuster novel, written entirely by an LLM.

What does this mean for art, and writers in particular? Is it all doom and gloom? Will we really be "replaced"?

And if a machine can generate a bestselling novel, is it even worth trying to write one at all?

The answer is, of course, more complicated than yes or no.

Every new technology brings struggle. But rather than fear change, writers can do something that a machine still can’t do, no matter how intelligent it is:

Imagine.

We already know these LLMs will change the world, whether we like it or not. With a little imagination, we can be part of that change, for the better.

Here are four ways writers can flourish in the age of AI.

Every new technology brings struggle. But rather than fear change, writers can do something that a machine still can’t do, no matter how intelligent it is: Imagine.

1. We’ll be more productive.

Blaise Pascal once said, “I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time.” The fact of the matter is this: Writing well is time consuming. It involves inserting, deleting, shuffling, rearranging, and in many cases, starting over completely.

The creators of LLMs tout their abilities to streamline writing. They suggest edits, trim excess, and even predict our next words as we compose. Beyond editing, they can even compose for us. All of this can increase our speed and efficiency. But what do we stand to lose when we turn over some of our creative acts? Are we forfeiting our ability to think for ourselves when we turn over the grunt work?

Far from it. Let LLMs write that email. Let them take on busywork. With crafted prompts and a careful eye on the output, writers are the best poised of anyone to utilize LLMs to their greatest potential. And we’ll save plenty of time while we’re at it.

Let LLMs write that email. Let them take on busywork. 

Would we call a mathematician a cheater, fraud or less of a thinker for using a graphing calculator? Let’s imagine for a moment taking Algebra II without one. Sure, we can do so by hand — that’s how humans learned complex equations in the first place. An LLM is really a language calculator. Think of the time saved with a few swift buttons. Like an engineer designing a bridge, we can chart, map, course out a plan, test, and see if a thought is viable. We can create an outline, give a thought structure, and crumple up the metaphorical paper.

Long gone are the days of succumbing to the sunk cost fallacy. We can chase wild ideas and take care of daily writing tasks without worry. This revolution already happened for graphic artists. In the 1960s, a designer at an advertising agency had to create sketches and paintings by hand for pitches, throwing the whole thing out when the direction changed. Now, dozens of options can be honed and edited in a fraction of the time, without losing any of the creative mastery. Let’s imagine a future where LLMs do the same for writers.

Finally, let’s not forget where the personal meets the creative. As writers, we tend to think of AI in the LLM context. But as Apple has shown, AI as a product will be integrated into our lives in a multitude of practical, not creative, ways. Imagine if your household labor could be streamlined — getting a few more hours of writing in without having to do the dishes or fold the laundry. We may be closer to that future than we think.

2. We’ll take more risks.

AI is a commercial product. And to be viable, every commercial product needs to be reliable. Ultimately, it needs to not fail at the task it was assigned to—and it will go to great lengths to avoid failure. This is risk aversion, and it’s the enemy of great art.

It’s entirely possible we’re on the cusp of a world where a bestselling novel is written with or entirely by LLMs. Picture AI-generated titles popping up on towels at the beach every summer. We might pick them up at the airport or for a camping trip — and we honestly might enjoy them. There’s a time and place for an easygoing, risk-free summer read. Even if it was written by an LLM amalgamating every beach read available on the internet.

Here's the flip side. There will be a proliferation of authors willing to take incredible risks to break out. Because although we as humans might fear failure, we will never let it stop us. We are not created to be tuned, honed, packaged up and sold to the highest bidder. We answer to ourselves, and our own muses. Even at the risk of being wrong. Or failing.

And that makes for incredible art.

We’ll see risks taken in format, narrative, point of view and in characters. The more LLMs rely on commonality and the safest answers (even when prompted to take a risk!), the more we’ll see groundbreaking novels break through barriers we didn’t even know existed.

After all, intelligence and imagination are two different things.

3. We’ll hone our styles.

If you haven’t already used your favorite LLM to write a history lesson in the voice of Ru Paul, you should bookmark this page, head to Chat GPT, and give it a try. In the hands of a creative mind, “X in the style of Y” can lead to hilarious and even touching results. That’s partially because LLMs specialize in this type of clear imitation. They can scan through the words of a living person or famous author, pick up its style, and create a calculation that — odds are — sounds like that person.

In its tendency to avoid risk, LLMs err on the side of what’s most likely. Scanning through a database of creative fiction where I use “dark” to describe the future and you choose “gloomy,” AI will need to calculate which word it ought to use in a prompt about the state of the world. The “right” word will most likely be the word that’s most often used.

This prioritization of commonality is a flattening of style.

Into that world, we bring all the living, breathing texture of stylistic nuance.

Writers will expand our vocabularies and toolkits, honing our voices into unmistakably authentic weapons that cut through the static of common denominator language.

We’ll even ignore the suggestions LLMs will make — not because they’re wrong, but because they’re not us. Whether we write fiction, poetry, or articles, we’ll use our unique lived experiences to bring more life into what we write.

We can even use LLMs to hone our individual style. Tolkien wouldn’t be Tolkien without his fully fledged and functional in-universe languages. With AI at our disposal, we won’t need a knack for — or degree in — linguistics to be able to do the same. With a basic understanding, the right prompts, and this powerful tool at hand, we can create entire worlds in a fraction of the time it took the masters. And in doing so, we can turn our pens to honing our style … rather than getting caught in the grammatical differences between Elvish and English.

This prioritization of commonality is a flattening of style. Into that world, we bring all the living, breathing texture of stylistic nuance.

4. We’ll share the creative act — or, “Get personal.”

Picture this: You’re sitting in the dim auditorium of a theater, or the bay window of an independent bookstore. You clutch your treasured tome between your hands, nervously shifting from foot to foot. You’ve been waiting all night, and finally, it’s your time. You hand your book to the human across the table. They look you in the eyes, reach out, take it, and inscribe a message that will alter the course of your life.

Whether we’ve been to their book signings or were born long after our favorite writer left this world, we’ve all felt the transcendent pull between author and reader.

No matter how sophisticated, no matter how advanced, no matter how streamlined they become, a Large Language Model will never sign a book. Our humanity ties us to one another. From author to reader; from reader to author; from critics to editors to beyond. Whether an author has throngs of fans or a few friends and family who come to readings, we write to share. We don’t just produce.

In the end, all Artificial Intelligence works in isolation. Their experience is taken, not shared. They don’t collaborate, they regurgitate.

And it’s because of this that the future state of writing will be collaborative beyond our wildest dreams.

All we have to do is imagine it.

In the end, all Artificial Intelligence works in isolation. Their experience is taken, not shared. They don’t collaborate, they regurgitate. And it’s because of this that the future state of writing will be collaborative beyond our wildest dreams.

Editor's Note: Artificial intelligence may have already transformed writing, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be in control of your own words. Read Astrohaus Founder Adam Leeb's statement on AI and privacy.

Recommended articles

More recommended articles for you

September 05, 2024 7 min read

Everyone has a pandemic story because it's hard to forget. I remember the quickness of it all — societal norms flipping, turning, and somersaulting, which still makes my head spin. "Stuff is gonna get weird," I remember telling my friend. "Especially art."

August 29, 2024 4 min read

Right now, the choice for a writer to use artificial intelligence (AI) or not has been largely a personal one. Some view it as a killer of creativity, while others see it as an endless well of inspiration.

But what if, in the future, your choice had larger implications on the state of literature as a whole?

This is the question that’s being raised from a new study by the University of Exeter Business School: If you could use AI to improve your own writing, at the expense of the overall literary experience, would you?

Let’s explore some context before you answer.

The Set Up

The 2024 study recruited 293 writers to write an eight-sentence “micro” story. The participants were split into three groups:

  • Writing by human brainpower only
  • The opportunity to get one AI-generated idea to inspire their writing
  • The opportunity to get up to five AI-generated ideas to inspire their writing

Then, 600 evaluators judged how creative these short stories were. The results confirmed a widely accepted idea but also offered a few surprising findings.

Prompts from AI Can Jumpstart the Creative Process

Right off the bat, the reviewers rated the AI-guided stories as being more original, better written, and more enjoyable to read. (Interesting to note that they did not find them funnier than the fully human-inspired stories.)

This actually isn’t that surprising. Most writers know the “blank page dread” at the beginning of a project. Even as I write this, I can’t help but wonder, “If I had been tasked with writing an eight-sentence story, what the heck would I have written about?”

Many writers share this sense of needing to pick the “right” story to tell. And that uniquely human concept of perfectionism can end up actually inhibiting our creative process.

A prompt, then, can help us quickly clear this mental hurdle. To test this, I’ll give you one, courtesy of ChatGPT: “Write a story about a teenager who discovers a mysterious journal that reveals hidden secrets about their town, leading them on an unexpected adventure to uncover the truth.”

Can you feel your creative juices flowing already?

Since its release, AI has been celebrated for its ability to assist in idea generation; and this study confirms how effective using artificial intelligence in this way can be for writers — some, it seems, more than others.

AI-Generated Ideas Helped Less Creative Writers More

It doesn’t feel great to judge a writer’s creative prowess, but for this study, researchers needed to do just that. Prior to writing their short stories, the writers took a test to measure their creativity.

Researchers found that those considered less creative did substantially better when given AI-generated ideas — to the point where getting the full five ideas from AI “effectively equalizes the creativity scores across less and more creative writers.”

This isn’t the case just for writing. Another study by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship WZ also found that AI tools most benefit employees with weaker skills.

So is AI leveling the playing field between okay and great writers? It seems it may be. But before we lament, there’s one more finding that proves using AI isn’t all perks.

AI-Aided Stories Were More Similar — And Needed to Be Credited

The researchers took a step back to look at all the AI-supported stories collectively. And what did they find?

The AI-assisted stories were more similar as a whole, compared to the fully human-written stories.

Additionally, when reviewers were told that a story was enhanced by an AI idea, they “imposed an ownership penalty of at least 25%,” even indicating that “the content creators, on which the models were based, should be compensated.”

This leads us to that all-important question about AI-assisted work: who owns the content?

According to Originality.AI, an AI and plagiarism detector, “When there’s a combination of AI and human-generated elements, the human elements may receive copyright protection if they meet the requirements.”

So right now, if a writer uses AI to generate ideas — but writes the content themselves — they retain rights to the work.

However, Originality.AI even admits that “the legal system is having a hard time keeping up” with the rapid adoption of artificial intelligence. Time will only tell what AI regulations will look like in a few years.

What Does an AI-Assisted Literary Future Look Like?

The researchers from the University of Exeter Business School study raise an interesting point about what the future landscape for writers may look like. If droves of authors begin using AI to come up with ideas, we may end up with a lot of well-written yet dime-a-dozen stories.

So will human beings choose the easier, but less diverse, path? Or will we stick to fighting through writer’s block armed with nothing but our own brain?

Or, a third option: can we somehow learn to harness AI to supercharge our writing process without sacrificing the wholly unique creativity that infuses human creation?

That’s one question that even ChatGPT can’t answer.

Editor's Note: Artificial intelligence may have already transformed writing, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be in control of your own words. Read Astrohaus Founder Adam Leeb's statement on AI and privacy.

August 19, 2024 10 min read

The lyrics of JP Saxe’s most popular songs read more like poems than Top 40 tunes.

Turns out there’s a reason for that.

This Grammy-nominated songwriter found his first community in Los Angeles at Da Poetry Lounge, where he met and befriended bonafide poets like Tonya Ingram, Alyesha Wise, Cuban Hernandez, and Edwin Bodney — names he recites with reverence.

And that community has led to a vibrant career in songwriting, including this recent milestone JP shared on Instagram: his songs have been streamed one billion times on Spotify.

It’s difficult to visualize that number, but his other accomplishments are a little easier to wrap your brain around:

His hit “If the World Was Ending,” cowritten with and featuring Julia Michaels, was nominated for a Grammy. After a 30-stop tour opening for music legend John Mayer, JP did his own 70-stop headline tour that took him all over the world. He’s written songs with artists like Sabrina Carpenter, and "Wish You the Best," written with Lewis Capaldi, reached number one in the UK.

So how does a poetic songwriter turn his thoughts and emotions into chart-topping hits?

The short answer: Freewriting.

Read on for the long answer as we get into the nitty gritty of JP's creative process...

ANNIE COSBY: So it’s safe to say you’re majorly inspired by poetry?

JP SAXE: Most of my favorite writers are poets. I think the secret weapon of my career has been that I've been seeking the approval of poets, not other songwriters.

Because when I aim for the perspective of poets, I just write in such a different way.

Look, I love songwriters, so I don't mean to talk shit. But as a songwriter, you can hide some bullshit in a pretty melody and people will still buy it. It can still be nice to listen to.

As a poet, you have less to hide behind. It's just you and your sincerity, and the way you articulate that sincerity. I love the simplicity of that as an art form.

My first community when I moved to Los Angeles was Da Poetry Lounge, based out of the Greenway Court Theatre. Anyone in L.A. reading this, if you're a writer, I highly recommend going.

Those poets have become family to me and really have pushed me to be a better writer. Because if I do something that is lazy or contrived, they don't care how pretty it sounds.

If I do something that is lazy or contrived, [poets] don't care how pretty it sounds.

AC: What kind of writer do you consider yourself?

JP: Professionally, I'm a songwriter. That's the only kind of writing I've ever been paid for. But creatively, I just consider myself a writer.

I find myself and I articulate to myself who I am via writing. In more ways than just songs.

AC: How did you first get started writing?

JP: Songwriting was the first place I ever learned what it meant to have a good relationship with myself. I quite disliked myself as a young person, as I think young people often do. Because when you see yourself through the lens of the society around you, there are very few versions of being a person that seem acceptable.

And it was sitting down at a piano or a guitar with a journal and writing songs where I first understood what it felt like to see myself and like it.

When you see yourself through the lens of the society around you, there are very few versions of being a person that seem acceptable. And it was sitting down at a piano or a guitar with a journal and writing songs where I first understood what it felt like to see myself and like it.

To me, the magic of songwriting and creative expression in general is, in my experience, as a tool of self-understanding. But because we are so much less unique than we think, when you look for yourself in your art, other people find themselves in it, too.

That was such a major realization for me a few years ago — that what made my writing effective for others wasn't what made me unique, it was what made me basic. And that there was such power in the expression of my basicness.

AC: Are you always writing for yourself first?

JP: Usually, the first format I'm writing in is just freewriting.

AC: You know we love to hear that!

JP: Yes. I will sit down with a journal, and I will just heart-barf onto a page.

AC: *laughs* Do you have "heart-barf" copyrighted?

JP: I should at this point. I've used that terminology in a number of different mediums, t-shirts included.

But, yes, freewriting is usually the beginning of the process. First, I just have to barf onto a page, just let words happen, and then I can go back through with an editor's mentality and figure out whether I'm writing songs or poems or whatever.

Of course, if I'm going with another artist into the studio, that's a little bit different in that it's targeted to a specific format or a specific person's perspective.

I will sit down with a journal, and I will just heart-barf onto a page.

AC: You write very deeply emotional lyrics. Do you have to be in a certain state of mind for that, or can you sit down in the middle of, like, the airport and heart-barf?

JP: Well, I have two answers to that.

Firstly, I find I am more honest before I think about anyone reading it. So that's why I try not to think about what the writing is for when I start. It allows me to be more sincere when I don't have a reader or a listener in mind.

Something I’ve been noticing recently is I am stumbling into the ideas that interest me the most after I've started writing when I didn't feel like it.

Almost as if when I feel like writing, it's because there are ideas closer to the surface. But when I don't feel like writing and I do it anyway, the ideas that I arrive at were buried a little deeper down. They didn't want to come out as badly and therefore they are more intriguing.

I am stumbling into the ideas that interest me the most after I've started writing when I didn't feel like it.

AC: That’s so interesting. Almost like when you feel like writing, your subconscious already has an agenda.

JP: Yeah, my favorite things I've written recently happened when I started writing when I didn't want to.

 

AC: I remember reading an interview with you where you mentioned Fleabag and a quote by Phoebe Waller-Bridge where she's like, and this is paraphrased, if it scares you, it needs to be in the final edit.

JP: Totally. I saw that interview around the time of my first album. There's a song on my first album that got kept on the track list because of that interview.

I just really related to that. You know, one, Fleabag is one of my favorite shows of all time. So great.

AC: The hot priest!

JP: Phenomenal, iconic characters. Overall, I think that being a writer is such a blessing and I'm so grateful to do it, so if I am playing it safe with my subject matter, I'm kind of doing it a disservice.

Every job comes with its professional hazards. If it's your dream to be a hockey player, you accept that you might get CTE or lose some teeth.

If you get the blessing of being a writer, you accept that people are going to see more of you than you're comfortable with sometimes.

If you get the blessing of being a writer, you accept that people are going to see more of you than you're comfortable with sometimes.

AC: Were you always OK with that, or did you have to learn to get used to that?

JP: I think I just came to the conclusion along the way that trying to formulate my identity was far less exciting than trying to unravel it.

AC: That's interesting, especially in the context of our modern music scene, where you see a lot of created, pre-packaged personas.

JP: Well, occasionally it's a persona that is derived as a mechanism, a delivery mechanism for something that was uncovered. I think there's maybe a subtle distinction there, but one that feels really significant.

For example, one of my favorite artists right now is Chappell Roan. And obviously there's a very creative, formulated artist statement there, but it is so sincere. It feels so derived from a human experience, but they've captured it in a way that is elevating that sincerity rather than disguising it.

AC: I'm glad you made that distinction! I love Chappell Roan. Go, Missouri! We’re both from the Show-Me State. You often work with collaborators, right?

JP: I love writing as a team sport. I think often there is a mentality that there is more value to writing that is done independently, and I just don't subscribe to that.

If anything, I think co-writing really elevates the work. I think it's just as much of a craft to know how to navigate multiple creative voices in a room as it is to express your own.

I love writing as a team sport.

AC: That's amazing to hear, because that's kind of what we're trying to do here at Freewrite — elevating the idea of writing within a community. Writing is traditionally a very solitary exercise, but it doesn't have to be.

JP: There's so much about movie and television writing that I think is a couple steps ahead of songwriting.

AC: Like the writers’ room?

JP: Yeah, TV writers know this. It’s a very established concept that writers work collaboratively on a script.

AC: I would say book publishing is even farther behind songwriting in that regard. So what does your creative process look like? Are you always writing, always recording?

JP: I have to compartmentalize a little bit. There are three major parts of my career and it's very hard for me to do more than one of them well at a time.

Those three things are: touring and performing; writing and creating; and audience building and marketing.

Of course, all three of those things are intertwined, but in order to do any one of those things very well, I can only really prioritize one of them fully at a time.

AC: Interesting. And you’re home from tour and writing now, right?

JP: Yes, I’m very much in this right now. I have a writing week coming up, where I will be with co-writers and in the studio every day.

So I am currently using my Traveler every day to heart-barf, as a way to create my source material for those sessions.

I’ll just do pages and pages and pages of unedited, unrefined feelings, thoughts, explorations, stories, ideas, looking at what I've written already, trying to figure out what pieces are missing in the emotional spectrum I'm trying to capture on this album.

And then in the few days before those sessions, I'll read through all of it. If something seems interesting to me, then I'll take those pieces and further delve into them, either on my own or with co-writers in our writing sessions.

And that's how it starts to shape into something that has a form that a listener can take in.

So I am currently using my Traveler every day to heart-barf, as a way to create my source material for those [co-writing] sessions.

AC: I, not being a songwriter, had never thought of songwriting has having that same division as prose — writing or freewriting first, and then studio work as editing.

JP: I think every writer knows how different the feeling of creative brain and editing brain is. I really need to separate that process because I literally feel like a different person as an editor than I do as a creator.

I have to start by not considering who's reading it, who's hearing it, who it's for, what the melody is … I just have to put it there.

I think every writer knows how different the feeling of creative brain and editing brain is. I really need to separate that process because I literally feel like a different person as an editor than I do as a creator.

AC: So is that what drew you to Freewrite?

JP: Yes. And, I mean, I think part of the fun of being a writer is romanticizing the life of being a writer, too.

When I sit on the rooftop of a cafe in Lima, Peru, and write on Traveler, that is a different moment than being up there with an iPad — I was just in Lima on tour, and this is a real moment I'm describing.

I sat on this just spectacularly romantic gallery cafe rooftop in Barranco, this neighborhood of Lima, and as I'm sitting there and I'm writing, I start up a conversation with this group of people who look friendly sitting beside me, and they ended up being a choreographer and an artist and a dancer. And then they're like, “What's that you're writing on?” And I'm like, “It's a digital typewriter.”

And then I show them and they're like, “What are you writing?” And then I hand it over to them, and they're reading it on the rooftop. And then someone shows up with a guitar.

And there was this moment on that roof that I will never forget where there were like maybe 10 of us. And on one side, there was someone drawing a portrait of me, while I was kind of on the other side of the social dynamic, writing. And then everyone in the middle was laughing, drinking, talking. And it was just this symbiosis of both creatively representing the moment and being present in the moment.

It was life and art so intertwined on that Lima rooftop.

And if I'm painting that picture, like if I'm writing that scene in a movie, or I'm painting it to put it on a wall, an iPad is such a fucking eyesore.

AC: Are we going to get a song about that rooftop?

JP: Probably. The amount of journal entries that occurred on that rooftop is… The word-to-location ratio on that rooftop is probably higher than anywhere else in the world at this point.

AC: Last question: What's your #1 piece of advice for aspiring songwriters?

JP: Write as many bad songs as possible. If you spend a month trying to write a good song, I think you are less likely to get something that you love than if you write a bad song every day for a month.

I think bad writing is the soil in which good writing is allowed to grow. And if you don't have a pile of shit big enough, your good stuff can't grow out of it.

I think bad writing is the soil in which good writing is allowed to grow. And if you don't have a pile of shit big enough, your good stuff can't grow out of it.

AC: You heard it hear first, folks: Write more shit.

Find JP's music wherever you like to listen: Spotify | Apple | YouTube