Like many writers, I raised a skeptical eyebrow when told about it ChatGPT and literary abilities, when they tell me of my future disintegration in the face of the Earth as a writer.
That unstoppable technological development, we know, what He drags in his net both plastic and silver fish, we know. That he is fond of paradoxes, too: more the hyper connection, more the isolation, more the Tinder, more the sexual recession, more the human welfare, more the destruction of the planet. We know that nothing is free.
But What will it contribute and what will it take away? iterate the ChatGPT?
It is difficult to predict. When we enter the artistic field, the grains of sand become quicksand. The obvious question is: Will ChatGPT be able to create real literature? This brings us to an unsolvable question, to a starting square where the pieces of the Greeks and those of the Romans and those of the cave painters. What is the art? Does it imitate life, create beauty, move, wake up, ahead of its time, is it memory? We have no idea, that’s why we keep creating.
We can predict that artificial intelligence soon you will be able to create (soon already) predictable novels, made of stereotypes and clichés, novels that will shortly be attributed to ChatGPT. Because if a machine can do it, why would someone write it?
Perhaps this will bring something positive: the substitute writers and literary blacks and imposters will disappear. Being optimistic, in the future, only writers will be writers, the rest will be ChatGPT. Can artificial intelligence win a literary prize? Of course, but let’s not be afraid that this has already happened, how are the cars? Books written by programmed people create a product with money, fame, ego or anything else outside of literature, the entity that summons them and pursues them above all the former.
But also it might happen that ChatGPT would create quality literature, who was ahead of his time, if only by chance (as automatic poetry sometimes returns us poetic discoveries) How are the bots? In this way, a kind of collective literature should be created, done by all of us, something that is not very different from what we were doing, from the way we write based on what we read, stretching in time that literary . the thread left by our ancestors.
In any case, it is the person who would validate the result, the person to whom it should be directed. If literature was never in a closed book, but in what happens when a writer turns from the mind to the text, when a reader imagines from the text to the mind, we can conclude that literature is not in danger. That ChatGPT will be a useful tool but never literature in itself.
That as long as the human continues to ask themselves about what has no answer, what is death, what is art, it will continue to be the only source of literature.
