Much of the current debate surrounding AI in creative writing seems to miss a fundamental distinction. Critics and proponents alike often frame the conversation as if AI either replaces human creativity entirely or has no place in the writing process at all. This binary thinking overlooks a more nuanced reality.
My own experience with AI mirrors what happened when authors first began adopting word processors decades ago. The word processor didn’t write Stephen King’s novels, but it undeniably transformed how he could craft them. The technology eliminated mechanical barriers—no more retyping entire pages for minor revisions, no more literal cutting and pasting with scissors and tape. It freed writers to focus on what mattered most: the story itself.
Today’s AI tools offer similar potential. In developing my current novel, I’ve found AI invaluable for accelerating both the development process and my actual writing speed. The technology helps me work through plot challenges, explore character motivations, and overcome those inevitable moments when the blank page feels insurmountable.
However, I maintain a clear boundary: AI doesn’t write my fiction. That line feels essential to preserve. While I might experiment with AI assistance during initial drafts when I’m simply trying to get ideas flowing, my second draft onwards belongs entirely to me. No AI input, no AI suggestions—just the raw work of translating human experience into words.
This approach isn’t about moral superiority or artistic purity. It’s about understanding what AI can and cannot offer. AI excels at helping writers overcome practical obstacles and accelerate their process. But the heart of fiction—the authentic voice, the lived experience, the ineffable something that connects one human soul to another—that remains our domain.
The real question isn’t whether AI has a place in writing, but how we choose to use it while preserving what makes our work distinctly human.
