AI takes over or people don't read? Or both? (Anne Rooney)

Photo: health.harvard.edu

In a sense, AI fiction is very like over-processed 
food as you don't know what's in it, it's entirely artificial 
and its production and consumption are exploitative

Well, which is it? Either, neither or both?
There is plenty of doom-saying around and no way of knowing which way the tide will actually flow. On the one hand, a recently published survey from Cambridge University revealed 51% of novelists believe AI-generated trashy fiction will damage their career and income. At the same time, other surveys have found that people aren't reading. The National Literacy Trust found that just one in three children aged 8-18 enjoy reading for pleasure.

Is AI going to churn out books for people who don't read them? 

 

The most at-risk group of novelists, it appears, are genre writers — those who write romance, in particular, but also thrillers and crime. These are plot-focused genres, and plot is the thing that AI is likely to be best at doing as it's just 'one thing after another', a series of external happenings. Obviously a plot is more than this: it relies on revealing a sequence that looks inevitable after the event but is not obvious in advance, in tying it to the psychology of the characters, in balancing plausibility and surprise, and so on. But a poor-quality genre novel is more plot than anything else, and so more likely to be achieved by AI than is, say, a literary novel of tortured psychological investigation. I am not dissing either of these; they are just different. 

When non-writers say they have an idea for a novel, the idea is generally a plot. They don't usually have a character they want to explore or a writing style they want to exercise, though those may be starting points for an established or accomplished writer. Putting a plot outline to AI and getting it to flesh it out is fairly easy for both the putative writer and the AI. Hence the proliferation of plot-driven AI so-called fiction. 

It seems likely, as many people have said, that the market will split into expensive human-authored books and cheap or free AI slop. Probably, some people will buy both, especially if they are not clearly labelled. If publishers see people paying £17 for a paperback by a real author, are they going to think they might as well charge that for their AI-produced books? Why wouldn't they? Principally because the sales will be so small. If you can sell 100,000 copies for £1 but only 1500 copies for £17, you're better off with the 100,000 copies (£100,000 v. £25,500). People will soon decide what they like and what they can afford. I will buy the £17 books when I can and read old books or borrow from libraries when I can't. 

Ah, libraries. Will they stock the AI-generated books? There are good arguments on both sides. If they are cheaply available, libraries can afford them. If people do want to read them, surely they should be avaiable? But if people want to read real books that they can't afford, isn't it the job of libraries to provide those? Libraries already have to make decisions about what to stock, which licenses to online magazines and journals to pay for, and so on. They do stock genre fiction. They don't buy subscriptions to cheap rags or fill their shelves with the cheapest trashy fiction (apart from anything else, the poor quality of the physical books means they will fall apart quickly).

If reading is declining, who is still reading? Is it the people like us (as in, readers of blogs about books —people who are genuinely interested and committed readers)? If so, won't we be inclined to favour human-authored books? If people (people in general now) find the quality of the books they get is deteriorating, will they just switch their attention to other platforms even more quickly? So the AI-generated books might accelerate the decrease in reading rates, to their own cost. This is another reason why we need really clear labelling. 

Readers should be able to buy a book (if they want to) that honestly reflects the experience of being human because it was written by a human. They should also be able to make a fair judgment about what they are likely to get. An AI-generated novel might have a coherent plot and a story you want to read, and you might not care that it doesn't reflect the genuine experience of being a human individual. But if you do care, you shouldn't be duped. If you buy books that disappoint you, you will stop buying books. If you buy books you know are produced by AI and they disappiont you, you might try buying a human-authored book instead.

Many, many markets divide by quality and cost. You can go to the deli and spend a lot on an artisan cheese or you can go to Aldi and buy budget 'hard cheese'. You can buy a top from Shein or go to Next or M&S and buy a mid-price item or you can go to a designer store or have something handmade by a talented craftsperson. We know people want to get what they are paying for. Look at the outcry when fraudsters stock their Etsy store with mass produced stuff at inflated prices. With honesty, we can keep readers buying books. Without it, AI will pour trash into a depleting market, undermining and disappointing everyone. 

 Anne Rooney

Out now, Arcturus 2025: The Essential Book of AI