Self-editing using AI

[Andreas_Kreuz]

As budding writers, we often feel like we're not ready to approach an editor. Or maybe we haven't reached the point where an editor can really dive into our work yet. So, what if we used AI to get some early feedback?

AI? I hear you say, is that not prohibited on Literotica? It is, and for good reasons.

But what if the AI acted more like a coach? A tool that points out weaknesses in your writing and challenges you to improve it yourself, thus the wording will still be your own writing.

You can achieve this with a specific prompt directive, such as: "Do not, in any case, suggest alternative wording or phrases." The AI will follow this rule, focusing on what should be improved rather than rewriting your work.

Once this is established, you can ask for feedback on specific, abstract concepts in your writing:

• "Where is the style too choppy?"
• "Where do you find clichés or overused metaphors?"
• "Can you identify any plot holes?"
• "Is the fantasy setting believable? Are the characters and plot consistent with that setting?"
• "Are the characters portrayed consistently throughout the story?"

The AI might respond with feedback like:

• "These two scenes could benefit from a more elaborate transition."
• "Your dialogue here feels unnatural and sounds more like information dumping."
• "You're using too much passive voice in this section."

It won't tell you how to rewrite anything. That part is entirely up to you. And this is where the real learning and practice happens.

However, there are caveats. AI models are often trained on vast amounts of "flowery" or over-the-top prose, so they might guide you towards a style that's full of clichés or opulent, irrelevant details.

Never follow AI advice blindly. Always ask yourself, "Do I really want this?" For example, the AI might suggest a transition is needed, but maybe you intentionally jumped from one scene to another for a jarring effect. Or maybe it flags passive voice, even though it might be a deliberate style choice, as in 'Pride and Prejudice'.

Finally, remember that an AI’s basic programming is to please you. If you don't prompt it correctly, it might praise even poor writing. On the flip side, if you ask it to be "harsh," it might find fault everywhere.

Writing prompts to get truly valuable feedback from an AI can be tricky, but when used as a coach—not a co-author—it can be a useful tool.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

No.

 

[Venefica]

I strongly doubt that AI can achieve that.

I tried to play a texadventure RPG with co-pilot, Gemini and ChatGPT (exactly the same to test them) and all AIs prodcued plotting holes and severe logic mistakes.

 

[yowser]

Anyone who expects AI to improve their creative writing deserves what they get.

 

[StillStunned]

If you can prompt an AI, why can't you prompt yourself? Do you have such a low opinion of your own understanding? Do you really think that a machine has a clearer idea of what you want to achieve than you do?

Or are you so afraid of doing the work? Guess what, that's part of the writing process. Sure it's nice to have an editor, but an editor is basically someone who looks at your story in a particular way. If you can write prompts for an AI, you can use those prompts as a list of points to look for in your own editing.

And guess what? Do it once or twice, and you'll be better at it than an AI could ever be. And you'll keep improving, as a writer and as an editor.

 

[Andreas_Kreuz]

The problem with self-editing, is that in my head I have the consistent image of the scene, but when I write it down, it is something else. And when I read it, I do not recognize what is missing or wrong.

Then the AI is very patient and always available. I can rewrite a passage and ask, what effects these changes have. I can do that 10 times and learn from that. Something I would not be able to understand just by myself.

 

[HordHolm]

You're going to get push back on this, just because of the nature of the beast. Generally in the AH, we want the work to be the product of our own imagination and effort, and AI is seen as a short cut. Cheating.

Which I understand. I'm a teacher, and the minute yet another 20 year old asks me if they can use AI on an assignment I start to feel my eye twitch like Inspector Dreyfus. That being said, I understand the attraction - maybe it will highlight something you can't see, just like an editor or, more pertinently, a beta reader would see? @StillStunned makes some very good points in relation to this. I want to add one more, and it isn't only in relation to AI, but is perhaps particularly a risk of AI: it makes everything the same. It will suggest the same structure/characterisation/resolutions. It will be bland. Humans can be bland, too, but with AI it's baked in.

 

[AwkwardMD]

The central premise of "I need this because I can't learn to edit" is faulty. You have identified blind spots. LLM-driven AI is not the solution.

 

[EmilyMiller]

The problem with self-editing, is that in my head I have the consistent image of the scene, but when I write it down, it is something else. And when I read it, I do not recognize what is missing or wrong.

Then practice and train yourself to be more critical. If you struggle, leave the work aside for a week and do something else. This is a key writing skill. Depriving yourself of it will only hold you back.

Then the AI is very patient and always available. I can rewrite a passage and ask, what effects these changes have. I can do that 10 times and learn from that. Something I would not be able to understand just by myself.

“Quicker, easier, more seductive”

 

[StillStunned]

There are books on editing, and on writing and plotting. They go into the elements that make a scene strong, and how to transition from scene to sequel, and build up the story towards the climax. Essentially they help you to identify where your writing is delivering.

I'm pretty sure there are summaries online. Look them up, make a list of "prompts" for yourself, and have it on hand as you edit. Better yet, have it on hand as you write.

Writing is a skill. It can be learned, and practised, and improved. We've all done it. We're still doing it. It's probably why we even bother.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

I start to feel my eye twitch like Inspector Dreyfus.

Hmmm mmmm .... Clous AI eu mmmm !!!!

 

[SkyBubble]

As budding writers, we often feel like we're not ready to approach an editor. Or maybe we haven't reached the point where an editor can really dive into our work yet. So, what if we used AI to get some early feedback?

AI? I hear you say, is that not prohibited on Literotica? It is, and for good reasons.

But what if the AI acted more like a coach? A tool that points out weaknesses in your writing and challenges you to improve it yourself, thus the wording will still be your own writing.

You can achieve this with a specific prompt directive, such as: "Do not, in any case, suggest alternative wording or phrases." The AI will follow this rule, focusing on what should be improved rather than rewriting your work.

Once this is established, you can ask for feedback on specific, abstract concepts in your writing:

• "Where is the style too choppy?"
• "Where do you find clichés or overused metaphors?"
• "Can you identify any plot holes?"
• "Is the fantasy setting believable? Are the characters and plot consistent with that setting?"
• "Are the characters portrayed consistently throughout the story?"

The AI might respond with feedback like:

• "These two scenes could benefit from a more elaborate transition."
• "Your dialogue here feels unnatural and sounds more like information dumping."
• "You're using too much passive voice in this section."

It won't tell you how to rewrite anything. That part is entirely up to you. And this is where the real learning and practice happens.

However, there are caveats. AI models are often trained on vast amounts of "flowery" or over-the-top prose, so they might guide you towards a style that's full of clichés or opulent, irrelevant details.

Never follow AI advice blindly. Always ask yourself, "Do I really want this?" For example, the AI might suggest a transition is needed, but maybe you intentionally jumped from one scene to another for a jarring effect. Or maybe it flags passive voice, even though it might be a deliberate style choice, as in 'Pride and Prejudice'.

Finally, remember that an AI’s basic programming is to please you. If you don't prompt it correctly, it might praise even poor writing. On the flip side, if you ask it to be "harsh," it might find fault everywhere.

Writing prompts to get truly valuable feedback from an AI can be tricky, but when used as a coach—not a co-author—it can be a useful tool.

That's pretty much what editors are for.

 

[SkyBubble]

The central premise of "I need this because I can't learn to edit" is faulty. You have identified blind spots. LLM-driven AI is not the solution.

Agreed.

 

[Rob_Royale]

I use ProWritingAid (subscription) which is an AI driven ap, when writing. I use it primarily to flag typos (lots) and comma mistakes. (Again, lots). When it flags a sentence as being wonky I look at it myself and try to suss out what the ap didn't like.
I've used it now for over a year, 16+ stories and not one has been kicked back for being AI written.

The flow of a story, the feel of each scene, the mood my descriptions are shooting for ... that's all stuff that I need to learn to self edit in order to get better at what I do. So it's never occured to me to ask an AI to do it for me.

I want a tool I can use to suit my needs, not a crutch I rely on. I have gotten better with my comma use, but I'm not perfect.

 

[iwatchus]

The general recommendation I have seen is do not let it change your words and do not listen to its actual suggestions (i.e., don't let it change your words via your fingers)

 

[crookedletter]

I think AI can be useful if you're trying to do something like fix a leak in your kitchen sink. Something for which there's one tried and true approach, and reams of information on the internet about how to go about that approach.

Good creative works are interesting in the way that they differ. The way different artists/writers/etc. get to more or less the same place by their own unique means. There are as many ways to say a thing as there are people to attempt to say it. AI by definition is going to hammer all the uniqueness out of your work. A work of fiction is not a leaky sink. Good writers know that; AI does not.

 

[onehitwanda]

I think AI can be useful if you're trying to do something like fix a leak in your kitchen sink.

Sink repair as narrated by LLM:

1. Open cupboard
2. Take can opener
3. Attach can opener to gerbil. If you do not have a gerbil, a hamster will suffice.
4. Glue hamster to leaking pipe, at the site of the leak. Use liberal amounts of wood glue. You may experience greater success if the hamster is on fire.
5. Close door
6. Open door some time later. The longer you wait the more likely you are to be successful.
7. Remove hamster

your sink is now functional! yay!

 

[StillStunned]

Sink repair as narrated by LLM:

1. Open cupboard
2. Take can opener
3. Attach can opener to gerbil. If you do not have a gerbil, a hamster will suffice.
4. Glue hamster to leaking pipe, at the site of the leak. Use liberal amounts of wood glue. You may experience greater success if the hamster is on fire.
5. Close door
6. Open door some time later. The longer you wait the more likely you are to be successful.
7. Remove hamster

your sink is now functional! yay!

Locate the swan neck. Swans are graceful birds that, in the UK, traditionally are the property of the monarch. Monarch butterflies are useful for bolting gerbils onto pipes.

Open the door and place your head inside. Make sure to wring the swan's neck first. Instead of a swan, you might also find a toilet duck.

 

[Andreas_Kreuz]

a risk of AI: it makes everything the same. It will suggest the same structure/characterisation/resolutions. It will be bland

I absolutely agree with that. The idea is to forbid it from suggesting anything.

 

[Andreas_Kreuz]

Sink repair as narrated by LLM

You see, you have AI narrate. And something technical that we know it is bad at.

 

[HordHolm]

I absolutely agree with that. The idea is to forbid it from suggesting anything.

The problem is, though, in your scenario:

You can achieve this with a specific prompt directive, such as: "Do not, in any case, suggest alternative wording or phrases." The AI will follow this rule, focusing on what should be improved rather than rewriting your work.

Once this is established, you can ask for feedback on specific, abstract concepts in your writing:

• "Where is the style too choppy?"
• "Where do you find clichés or overused metaphors?"
• "Can you identify any plot holes?"
• "Is the fantasy setting believable? Are the characters and plot consistent with that setting?"
• "Are the characters portrayed consistently throughout the story?"

The AI might respond with feedback like:

• "These two scenes could benefit from a more elaborate transition."
• "Your dialogue here feels unnatural and sounds more like information dumping."
• "You're using too much passive voice in this section."

It won't tell you how to rewrite anything. That part is entirely up to you. And this is where the real learning and practice happens.

In the imagined feedback you present the AI is absolutely making suggestions - if it tells you you're using too much passive voice, it is telling you to use active voice. It is telling the author to add a more elaborate transition. And why? Because it is trained in such a way as to prefer elaborate transitions, because that's what it mostly sees. Thus, it will always suggest elaborate transitions. And as more people write elaborate transitions as a result, it will increasingly suggest them, because that's what it increasingly finds when it trawls the net. It circles around, and eventually pulls us all down the plughole.

 

[Andreas_Kreuz]

Lets show an example. This is a text fragment written by me:

With a shrug, Michelle went to free Neil’s cock from his shorts and gave a slight whistle. She bent down and took his full size in one go, down to his balls; there she held, and did not move except for the muscles of her throat. Neil’s face was pure bliss.
‘Damn, way to go,’ Jessica thought, ‘How can she do this without gagging?’

Response from AI:

Your current scene is fast and feels somewhat detached because the actions lack an emotional or psychological anchor. A "shrug" from Michelle suggests indifference, but is that her motivation? Is she just a cold, sexual machine? Or is she so comfortable with this act that it's no big deal? The pace should reflect the emotional state. If it's a casual thing, a fast pace works. If it's meant to be a moment of significant power or intimacy, it needs to slow down to allow the psychological weight of the act to land. What's at stake here? It's not about Neil's pleasure; it's about power. Neil is a toy for Michelle to demonstrate her skill. You might want to deepen that.

I found this helpful, even though the fragment is minimal.

 

[SkyBubble]

Locate the swan neck. Swans are graceful birds that, in the UK, traditionally are the property of the monarch. Monarch butterflies are useful for bolting gerbils onto pipes.

Open the door and place your head inside. Make sure to wring the swan's neck first. Instead of a swan, you might also find a toilet duck.

I think they drew that from the Weird Sisters in the Scottish play.

 

[Andreas_Kreuz]

the AI is absolutely making suggestions

Your comments are really to the point. Yes, the AI is suggesting, albeit indirectly, because it uses its standardized view of creative writing as the goal. It can be avoided, but that requires a lot of fiddling with the prompts.

AI can help you to get from a poor or beginning writer to a mediocre writer. Beyond that you are on your own.

But in the above example, some observations were spot on and got deeper into the text than any of my human editors. These delivered insights, the AI can't.

 

[StillStunned]

AI can help you to get from a poor or beginning writer to a mediocre writer.

AI can help you get from a poor or beginning writer to a plagiarist.

If you want to become a mediocre writer, do the work.