
I had a pretty good day Tuesday, although it was not my day of choice. A family member is having windows in their house replaced, and as a retired person, I was available to be the one to sit at their house as the project proceeded.
It was, partly, a day lost, for me—when it’s pretty and sunny outside, I want to be out there, preferably rolling on a bicycle or tricycle. My old hips and knees make distance walking problematic, and I’m also very slow as a biped. It’s so much more pleasant for me to roll along when I want to enjoy this good Earth where we evolved and are hard wired to enjoy the breezes, sunshine and sights.
But it was also an opportunity. For my house-sitting sojourn, I took along a book I’m slowly reading (“Hollywood, Ending” by John Green), and a laptop computer. My idea was to alternate three things: doing Duolingo lessons, writing blog posts and reading.
It was a pleasant plan, and, frankly, it worked. Except I did a few Duos and then passed on to writing and stayed there the whole time except for short strolling or meal breaks. I processed and posted photographs, which was related to blog writing, for me, and then wrote three posts: One about the midterm election, one about enjoying the fall light and one about recent fall trike rides.
Writing, editing and posting those turned into about a six-hour project, which constituted the bulk of my house-sitting time.
And it was a good day. I enjoy writing. I basically have two creative outlets—like Paul Simon, I have a Nikon camera although mine is digital so there’s no Kodachrome. I make photographs. And I string together letters.
Even as I enjoyed the day, I was mildly disturbed by a post on social media. One reason the day worked for me is that although the laptop I was using has recently had trouble getting online, that day it worked. It’s a pretty severe handicap for a writer whose main outlet is his three blogs to be unable to reach the internet. And it’s not just the failure to post that’s an issue with being off-line—I use Google and Wikipedia all the time, verifying, for example, the spellings of places or names and also double-checking dates.
Anyway, back to the social media distraction. I hope you appreciate that I was too distracted to stick with the distraction.
A former colleague at the university where I taught posted about how student in one of their classes had watched a movie and were to write reflections on it. The students didn’t have access to each other’s written reflections, yet too many of them were way too eerily similar, starting with basically the same sentence in the same form and covering the same themes.
It’s no surprise what’s going on. If you pull up the same free AI online tool and enter similar prompts, that AI model is going to spit out pretty much the same stuff.
For the current professor, that was understandably disheartening. Students would rather take a shortcut and have AI do their writing than actually dive into a topic and think about it. They’ll pay thousands of dollars to attend a private college, and then do everything they can to avoid the hard slog of actual learning.
Well, it’s partly because they’re just aiming for the grade and the degree and don’t buy into the possibility that a mediocre grade may be worth it if it brings some growth.
And while I understand their point that it’s a discouraging time to be a college teacher dealing with AI because students won’t do their own work, I feel there is another aspect to the tragedy that saddens me. I understand that writing is like any human skill. It comes easily to some, it’s harder for others. Some enjoy the joy of self-expression, to others it’s just a waste of time.
Yet that’s where our humanity lies—in our capacity to create new meaning, visually, literarily or even in our objects, objects that include art and utilitarian tools.

Six or seven million years ago, we broke off from our close cousins and lived on our own path. We didn’t “pursue” our path because evolution doesn’t work that way—we just started walking on the ground and using our arms to throw and our hands to chip away at stones because that worked. The path we are on was found and formed through accidents of environment and biology.
But anyway, subsequently the hominids became weird great apes—losing most of their hair, flattening their faces, shortening their arms and becoming bipeds. Along the way, we developed clothing and spears and guitars and quill pens and, eventually, computer keyboards. Our flat faces partly evolved to give us oddly flexible sound-making machinery in our heads and throats so our vocalizations could grow more varied and complicated and language could be born. Again, not because we wanted poetry, but the capacity to exchange data with a complex symbolic system proved advantageous for us.
Advantageous and satisfying. Along with learning to teach each other more complex knowledge via speaking, drawing and writing, we learned to creatively lie. Before writing there were oral epic poems and songs.
So it makes me sad that students use AI to craft their narratives because, in effect, they are giving up the ability to craft sharable ideas in writing. If Chat GPT answers the question, the questioner gains little to nothing. Not just in skills and knowledge, but in the reward of creating something original.
I don’t know if the wider world will ever read or appreciate the fruits of my Tuesday labor. Here it is Wednesday, and I’m up to the same pattern, spending my time writing a blog post. But I know some others will read my words, and I have the pride of knowing they are my words, mine alone, nothing strung together by a computer program.

Sure, it’s much, much slower than using AI. It’s like me walking. But slow walking benefits this old sack of bones (as does riding person-powered bike or trike, for that matter), while riding in a car may get me there faster but also fatter.
To me, writing means both what the author intended and what an audience decides it means, and for a special small subsection of crafted words, that can become a wonderful shared experience. Maybe it’s what John Green gets from his fiction and nonfiction books. Before it finds an audience, or even if it doesn’t find an audience, the first benefit of writing is to the writer.
I had to think these thoughts, organize them and then write these words. And, true, I indirectly used AI, too—I googled some terms in this post, and MS Word kept tapping me on the shoulder when my strings of letters weren’t quite correct—but I still expressed myself, not anyone or anything else.
I can’t explain the satisfaction that writing gives me, but it does a lot to lift my mood and make me feel more fully human. Sure, I can understand that a good writer may use AI as a cheap editor that can speed the writing and proofing process—but that AI habit is a bit dangerous if it becomes students tapping simple queries into a machine that will spit out quick pablum for them.
That seems, to me, to lead to no joy for those students. And nothing human.







































































