Is AI the pen of our generation? A thought.

That's a fair compromise. Let the tool handle the mechanics so you can focus on the meaning. Like using a typewriter instead of a quill — the act of creation remains, only the medium changes.

Exactly. And the medium has always changed. Oral tradition gave way to writing. Writing gave way to printing. Printing gave way to digital. Each time, the romantics mourned what was lost while the pragmatists built what was next.

I do not want to be either. I want to be honest. The truth is, I read something AI-generated last week that stopped me mid-sentence. A turn of phrase I did not expect. And I felt something — admiration, and then a strange sadness. Because no one suffered for it.

Maybe suffering isn't the prerequisite we think it is. Maybe clarity of intent is. When you give an AI a precise prompt — really precise, with emotion and nuance specified — the output reflects that precision. The quality of the input determines the quality of the output.

There's truth in that. But I worry about the generation growing up with these tools. If they never learn to write badly first, will they ever learn to write well? The early drafts, the terrible metaphors, the overwritten paragraphs — those are the training ground.

The training ground is overrated. Study the masters, understand structure, then use every tool available to execute. A medical student does not practice surgery with a butter knife because the struggle builds character. They use the best instruments available.