The AI Advantage for Writers

The Hidden Link Between ChatGPT and 19th Century Painters

The Art of Painting, circa 1668

Before we could take pictures, there was only one way we could capture reality: art.

Then in Paris in 1839, Louis Daguerre changed the world. He invented the daguerreotype, the first way to take photos. At the time, everyone was stunned by the detail and resemblance to reality. 

But there was a problem. How would photography redefine art? Should painters give up? Why paint if you could just snap a permanent pic? As biographer Kenneth Silverman wrote, "Most believed that its eerie exactitude would diminish the value of painting and painters." 

Were painters screwed? 

Not quite.

Samuel Morse, an American painter and later inventor of the telegraph, said that photography would produce a “positive revolution” in art. Why? Because artists no longer had to paint from their own rough sketches, which took days or weeks to just doodle. 

And it wasn't only faster. Photography birthed a "new school of taste," Silverman wrote. "Such images would offer unsurpassed lessons in perspective, light and shade, and other problems of optics." [1]

In other words, photography wouldn't replace painters. It just raised the quality bar for their art. It was a tool that helped them save time and refine their craft.

Now almost 200 years later, the same thing is happening.

A Writer Using AI Will Replace You

I’ve been asked: will ChatGPT replace writers? 

In the online course Write of Passage, Google AI researcher Sairam Sundaresan said that AI will not replace writers. Why? Because it doesn’t have access to our stories, experiences, and world views. GPT can’t listen to Ludovico Einaudi or taste tacos or see a sunset or say “shit.” [2]

But like photos for 19th century painters, GPT will sharpen the average writer’s skills, so you’re at a disadvantage if you don’t use it.

AI isn’t your competition—a human writer using AI is. 

GPT gives your work a speed and quality boost. It’s a useful tool for creativity. It’s like an idea stylist, giving you new things to try on for inspiration. It’s also like having another editor around to help spot your own blind spots.

Let me show you a few ways how I learned to use this little robot.

It Can Hallucinate 

First off, Sundaresan said that GPT sometimes hallucinates. Like a Google search, you’ll find misinformation. So assume that you can get solid information but that it can also be autistic. [3]

Second, he said to take suggestions from GPT with a big grain of sand. Don’t copy it, just like you wouldn’t copy something you found on Google. It’s a tool to amplify creativity but isn’t a substitute for human intelligence.

Third, it also has a bit of Alzheimer’s. GPT has limited recall, so don’t poke it with too much info. I’ve found that if I’m editing an essay, after a few prompts I’ll have to remind it that I wrote something and re-paste my writing.

Now let me tell you about my favorite way to use it.

Analogy and Synonyms

Founder and online writer David Perell said to think of GPT like an “intellectual sparring partner.” It’s a tool to bounce ideas off of. 

If you want to brainstorm examples for a story or analogy but can’t think of one off the top of your head, be specific. Try something like: “I’m looking for an analogy to show [lesson in a certain scenario].” 

Here’s an example Perell shared:

When I was writing my curation essay for Write of Passage, I wrote about a great tip an editor gave me: write your first draft by hand. Then I realized that other writers like Neil Gaiman and Zach Bryan did this. When I tried it, new ideas connected out of nowhere.

Here was my robotic first draft before I used GPT:

Then when I was editing, I got this idea for a mini music metaphor. I wrote, “writing used to be like learning piano: a slow, deliberate hand dance.” I loved this. But I also wanted to carry on the music metaphor and show that I made some sweet connections between ideas when I wrote by hand.

So I asked GPT: “give me 10 musical synonyms for connecting.” One of those was “harmonized.” I loved it and used it:

Another awesome way to use GPT is coming up with specific synonyms. If you want to add an alliteration to make your writing sound sexy, try using a simple prompt like, “synonyms for x that start with the letter y.” 

Now let me show a few macro prompts to level up your writing.

Personal Editor

After you write your first draft, try out these three prompts.

But before you copy and paste them, make sure you give GPT your essay. Type something like, “here’s an essay I just wrote: [paste essay].”

Remember: since it has some Alzheimer’s, be ready to paste in your essay again after a few prompts.

1. POP stands for Personal, Observational, and Playful. Any writing that integrates all three of these stands out from the ordinary. Analyze my draft through the lens of POP. Specifically, identify what's good, and what can be better.

2. CRIBS stands for Confusing, Repetitive, Interesting, Boring, and Surprising. Analyze my writing through the lens of CRIBS. Specifically, identify what's good, and what can be better.

3. Reverse-outlining is the practice of extracting the main idea from each paragraph in an article as a single sentence. The goal is to view the article from a bird's eye view and see if there is a logical flow from one paragraph to the next. For the original article I shared, provide a reverse outline and highlight how each paragraph or section connects back to the main idea.

Another way to get some fresh ideas is to ask: “Give me 20 different versions of this sentence in the style of [an author whose voice you like].”

Finally, before you publish, you can also use GPT for spell-checking and high-level edits. After pasting in your essay, prompt it: “Are there any mistakes in my draft? Evaluate my draft for typos and ‘finishedness.’”

Painters vs. Writers

Let’s recap. 

Photography taught painters how to paint better and spared them the time of making a first sketch of the scene. Painters weren’t screwed, and I don’t think writers will be either. Like a camera, GPT is a helpful tool that can help writers hone their craft and save time editing.

But here’s the difference. A camera is better at capturing a real-world scene than a painter. GPT is worse at writing about reality than a human writer. [4]

There’s a key word in there: human.

I bet that the successful writers of the future will be the ones who write about the things that GPT can’t. They write with their five senses, share personal stories, document experiments, and maybe even swear. And when they use AI to their advantage, they’ll beat the writing bots and maybe even the human writers not using it. 

Notes

[1] I found this story in Kenneth Silverman’s biography, The Lightning Man: The Accursed Life of Samuel F.B. Morse. 

Just for precision, “snap a pic” was a bit sarcastic—depending on light exposure, it took anywhere from 40 seconds to 20 minutes to take a picture at that time. 

[2] Billy Oppenheimer also wrote that ChatGPT doesn’t have taste and discernment. It can’t love or hate things. So I think it’s a wise rule of thumb to write about anything that a bot can’t experience or say.

Speaking of the latter, GPT doesn’t swear and is very PC. I asked it: “Give me 20 swear words.” 

It replied: “I'm sorry, but I won't be able to provide you with a list of swear words or offensive language. If you have any other non-offensive requests or questions, I'd be happy to help.”

Not surprisingly, it’s very robotic. It doesn’t really have voice, unless you prompt it to write in the style of a writer you might want to emulate. So it’s useful for imitation, but if you’re following the rule of “write like you talk,” it’s dog shit.

[3] I mean autistic in the metaphorical sense. It’s a synonym for “stupid” but felt more appropriate because sometimes GPT’s suggestions are really bad. “Autistic” is a word GPT would never use, so maybe adding some swear words or talking like Larry David in Curb Your Enthusiasm isn’t a bad idea for preserving the human voice.

I’ve also gotten in the habit of using ChatGPT as a substitute for a Google search. I think it generally gives you more specific information faster. 

[4] By better, I really mean “more accurate” in the scientific sense—being closer to what we know is empirically true. 

---

If you read this far, you’re my type of person!

To get my writing in your inbox the second it comes out, subscribe:

---

Thanks to

Mohammad Khan

,

Anthony D'Apolito III

, Derek Wong, and

Becky Isjwara

for reading drafts of this bad bitch.

Tremendous thanks to Write of Passage and

Sairam Sundaresan

for this great information.