Why Writers Disagree on Using AI for First Drafts
Why do some writers use AI to write their first drafts while others refuse to?
The difference often lies in how writers perceive their craft and role.
If writers view their role as primarily communicating ideas in writing, then having AI write their first drafts is acceptable. However, if writers understand their role as artistic self-expression, then having AI write their first draft is unacceptable.
Efficiency First: Writing as a Practical Task
If we view ourselves as primarily document producers, our job is to clearly express ideas in writing. The focus is on function. An example of this would be technical writing or many nonfiction books. Anything that speeds up the process or improves writing is seen as positive.
From this viewpoint, using AI to write a first draft makes sense. You can prompt AI with ideas and let it write the text. After some editing, a finished document can be published in a fraction of the time it would take without AI.
Crafting Words: Writing as a Unique Creative Artistic Process
On the other hand, if we view ourselves as artists seeking self-expression in our writing, our job is to reveal ourselves, our unique thinking, feelings, and viewpoints to readers through the prism that is uniquely us.
The focus is on personal crafting and making human connections with our readers. Writing isn’t just about communicating ideas; it’s about sharing a piece of ourselves with the world, an experience that an algorithm can’t replicate.
My role in writing my blog is an example of this. I want to communicate and connect with my readers as a person, not just share ideas. The same is true of the blogs I read. I’m not interested in reading an AI’s predictive text, even if the ideas came from a human. I want to read what other unique humans write.
We don’t want AI to write our first draft because we know it will not contain our unique way of organizing and expressing our thoughts. We feel editing will not effectively reveal ourselves because an AI-generated first draft will likely overly influence, channel, and constrain us.
An AI-Written First Draft Interferes With the Artistic Creative Process
In his book, The Creative Act: A Way of Being , Rick Rubin describes how he tried to help musicians produce their best, most unique creative work. Instead of having them listen to a demo of the music being played, he provided them with only the written music. He didn’t want them to be influenced by someone else’s performance; he wanted them to create their own unique performance of the piece.
He believed that their listening to the music being played limited their unique creative process. He explained, “The general principle is to be protective and limit people you’re working with from experiencing things that could interfere with their creative process.”
For me, an AI-generated draft interferes with and stifles creativity by setting a pre-determined framework that’s virtually impossible to escape. It becomes a constraint rather than an aid.
I find it virtually impossible to ignore the wording and organization of an AI-generated first draft. I can’t be uniquely creative with a draft in front of me. Instead of helping, it hinders my creative process.
Some argue that when they edit the AI-generated first draft, it becomes theirs because, in the editing process, they make it sound like them. I don’t see it this way.
If I edited an AI-generated draft to the point where it’s what I would have said if I’d drafted my own first draft, what would be the point of having AI do it in the first place? Editing an AI draft to the extent that it matches my voice, style, and organization would take as much or more time as writing it myself, defeating the purpose of using AI.
Set Your Agenda: Why AI Drafts Don’t Work for Artists
As artists of the craft of writing, we want to communicate our thoughts to our readers in a way that benefits them, but we want them to be our thoughts, our unique human expressions. We do not value an AI-generated draft’s efficiency and time savings because the product interferes with our creative process and does not reflect our unique selves.
Likewise, it doesn’t matter that AI might be able to do a ‘better’ job drafting text than we could. As artists, our goal is not primarily to produce ‘better’ text but to reflect our unique thoughts authentically. How we say things matters because it’s our unique way of expressing ourselves.
“We’re all different, and we’re all imperfect, and the imperfections are what makes each of us and our work interesting. We create pieces reflective of who we are, and if insecurity is part of who we are, then our work will have a greater degree of truth in it as a result.” Rick Rubin, The Creative Act
Like Rubin’s musicians, writers need the freedom to create without external interference, even if it’s from AI. True creativity thrives on unfiltered exploration.
When AI writes my draft, it sets the written agenda—not me. It’s important to me that my writing expresses my thoughts, expressions, and unique organization.
Giving AI Your Thoughts Does Not Equal Your Written Creation
It’s not enough to say, “I gave AI my original thoughts; therefore, what it generates is my unique creation.”
If you give AI your thoughts and let it compose the words, phrases, sentences, and organization to express them, it’s not your writing. It’s your thoughts and the AI’s writing. The writing doesn’t magically transform into ‘yours’ just because you supplied the thoughts and spend a little time editing it.
My wife plays the Celtic harp. If she gave AI some of her thoughts about the type of music she’d like to create and let AI compose the music and lyrics, could it be said that she composed the music? I think not. That would be true even if she edited the AI-generated composition.
If AI drafts your words, can you truly call the final work your own?
How to Use AI to Enhance Creativity Without Sacrificing Artistic Uniqueness
While it’s a mistake to let AI generate your first draft, I have used AI in several ways that don’t stifle my creative work.
• I regularly use AI to give suggestions for my blog post’s titles and section headings. I suck at drafting headlines and section headings, and AI often makes suggestions that are more useful and functional than my attempts. I consider my writing my creative work, not the titles that summarize my unique writing.
• I also use AI grammar checkers (Grammarly) to find spelling and grammatical errors. I tend to write in the passive voice, and Grammarly often suggests using the active voice to rearrange my wording. I’ll often follow the AI’s suggestions and rewrite the sentence, as it makes my writing more alive and straightforward.
• When I’m reasonably happy with my first draft, I’ll ask ChatGPT for suggestions on improving my blog post. I will accept and incorporate some of the suggestions into my post (typically in my own words), and I will reject others.
• Sometimes, I ask ChatGPT if I should include anything else in my post. I don’t practice this regularly. Typically, I have a draft post the length I desire and don’t want to add additional material.
If I feel my structure might be incomplete, I’ll ask AI for ideas of what I might want to include. If I decide to use one, I will write it myself, not use AI-generated text.
Finding the Right Balance Between AI and Creativity
AI is a remarkable tool, but as writers, we must remain intentional about how we use it. The choice to use AI in writing isn’t just about efficiency or functionality; it’s about what we value as creators.
If writing is about producing documents, AI can be a useful partner. But if we see writing as an art, a way to reveal our unique selves, having AI generate our first draft is a mistake.
For those of us who consider writing an art, letting AI generate our first drafts risks removing the essence of what makes our work unique: our voice, perspective, expressions, and humanity, told through our unique communication style. The words we write carry more than meaning—they carry our voice, our perspective, and our identity.
“What causes us to notice a piece of art is rarely the point being made. We are drawn to the way an artist’s filter refracts ideas, not to the ideas themselves.” Rick Rubin, The Creative Act
For me, writing isn’t primarily about efficiency—it’s about authenticity. AI can be a helpful tool, but only when it supports my creative process rather than replacing it. I see AI as a useful assistant—offering suggestions, catching errors, and expanding possibilities—while I remain firmly in the creative driver’s seat.