Tim Boucher is a Canadian writer who has been toiling in obscurity for a couple of decades before hitting the wires recently with an odd achievement. He wrote 100 books in about 9 months. Not even the most prolific authors in history, such as L. Ron Hubbard and Barbara Cartland, reached that pinnacle. How did he do it?
The answer is he had a lot of help. That did not come from typical co-authors. His helper was AI – artificial intelligence. That is the wonderful “brain” that powers services like ChatGPT, the intelligence some fear will soon take over the world and possibly eliminate the human race if it feels we are in its way. Boucher may not be anticipating anything quite so apocalyptic from AI, but even he is concerned that it can be misused. If Nietzsche was right that God is Dead, killed by His own creations, then maybe AI will do the same to its creator.
Boucher hasn't become a totally passive observer to the books he writes. He favors science fiction and guides AI in his direction. His specialty is lore. Think of writers like Tolkien or Rowling. Their writing is built around fictional worlds, not real but consistently applied through a series of books. Boucher's 100 follow this pattern. They are not sequels or prequels, but are based on a common lore which ties them together.
It should also be noted that there are no great massive novels, no War and Peace among his books. They run 2,000 to 5,000 words. Additionally, they contain 40 to 140 images, also generated by AI. That's not quite a novel, maybe not even a novella. But, he does sell them, priced accordingly at $1.99 to $3.99. There are no best sellers here, and he depends on his day job, but it does provide a nice bonus on the side. I can't say whether his books are good or not. I haven't read them. I can't. I cannot read as fast as he writes. He told Newsweek it takes him about 6-8 hours to “write” a book, but has written one in as little as three.
AI is a wonderful tool. I determined that Hubbard and Cartland were particularly prolific authors by asking ChatGPT to list some. It took “Chat” just a few seconds. I have also asked “Chat” to write me some stories based on real people and it has willingly obliged. They weren't bad though I don't think they would qualify as great literature. They could compete with many pulp writers, though. AI can also create not-bad art and songs that probably match the quality of 90% of what you hear on the radio today. It will undoubtedly get better in time. It is all kind of creepy as it makes you wonder what that means for artists. But is it art if it is generated by a computer? And if not, what is it if it is better than what most “artists” create? Those are some difficult questions I don't know how to answer.
I think one place where AI still falls short is in creativity. ChatGPT gathers its answers from pre-existing data. It draws from what others created at lightening speed. Still, it is all derivative. Then again, most writing is derivative too, at least to some and usually a large degree. How much really is creative versus combining of what has came before, perhaps in new ways? Some people must be creating things that are truly new or else we never would move forward. Does creativity require, as my instincts tell me, a conscious mind, or will AI someday create things that are truly new?
I am certifiably old. High tech for me is knowing how to aim the TV antenna for best reception. Music came to me on the radio, AM no less. Books were always printed on paper. I will react to new technologies the way a young person does when you give them the keys to a car and watch what happens when they discover it has a stick shift. Still, I hope to hang around long enough to observe many more new advances of which I am in awe, but can only vaguely understand, and be able to remind the young how much harder life was for me and my generation.
