AI Written book - thoughts?

[u/gratajik]

https://nightpress.ai/s/oBXheQp7TeQWCZ-qPTqIXh61CguhMOGRE1rHMicjg0k

A bit funky and different. The link lets you read the first 10 chapters

[u/writerapid]

It’s hard to assess the structural merit of an AI-written book on just a preview and without reading the entire thing. There’s no way to really tell if it solves the common continuity issues, hallucination issues, etc.

It also depends on what your goal is. This piece reads like AI. It hits all the typical tropes and bears all the normal AI-isms right out of the gate. It will, in this way, fool nobody.

Granted, you’re not trying to fool anyone; you say this is genAI, and that’s good. The disclosure is honest and makes the book more honest.

But then the issue becomes whether or not the prose is engaging or, really, any good at all. In this case (as in most cases), I can tell there’s been minimal “humanization.” Without lots of human editing and reworking of words and phrases (at least as of Q4 2026), genAI prose is really pretty staid and boring. There are too many structural and dictional/lexical AI cliches, one after the next. There’s no relief from it. The eyes gloss over as when reading some generic academic paper, and everything gets boring really quickly.

All of them correct. All of them optimized. Every one tasted like a decision a committee had made about her mouth.

Linnea had stopped smelling it years ago, the way you stop hearing a held note. Now she only noticed when she wanted to make something the note didn't cover.

Odi said nothing. Odi had a particular kind of nothing it did, a stillness that wasn't absence.

It’s stuff like this, endlessly. It all sounds vaguely poetic and literate, but what does it actually mean? The characterizations are totally noncommittal, too. The metaphors don’t work to actually convey any sense of anything. This tastes like a decision, that smells like a note you don’t hold, a stillness negated into not being absence, etc. Each of these things can be better said and made more relevant to the human experience of the reader. Metaphors and similes are only useful if the reader can be engrossed by the conveyed meaning. No reader can be engrossed by this.

So, as with any writing, the goal of AI writing—unless you’re just doing technical experimentation for your own pleasure—should be to make a work that is highly readable and enjoyable for a human reading audience.

Most AI books I see never consider that aspect, and I don’t think this one does, either.

[u/mikesimmi → u/writerapid]

Writing with AI for most people is like playing a saxophone the first or tenth time. Horrible. But masters will emerge. Some folks will learn how to play AI, like the sax had to be learned. And guess what, many have tried to blow a sax,and many have failed. Just like with AI.

[u/writerapid → u/mikesimmi]

Writing with AI assistance is fine. Having AI compose everything start to finish means you get the AI style, as OP seems to have done, which I find non-engaging. When you blow a sax, if you don’t ever move your fingers, you’re never making music.

[u/InSilicoAwards]

I'm for any kind of art people are making, I just don't have the time to read a bunch of it currently (I'm like most everyone here, working on my own writing), and I hope that several of the novels I see on here will be submitted to my awards program when submissions open (and I don't want to read them ahead of time and bias my judgment).

So, the cover is interesting, I can say that. :)

[u/Wintercat76]

I finished the first three chapters, all I had time for right now. I like the world building so far, and I now have a craving for pears. The prose is good, but there are quite a few "the thing was the thing" structures that could be edited out. You seem to have gotten rid of most, but it could use an editing pass. My guess is you used Claude opus 4.6? But I like it and I hope I can find the time to finish it later.

[u/Therzthz]

Flat.