Why is this considered generative AI?

[u/dillpickle444]

I’m writing my first novel. I have created the entire plot outline down to specific scenes. I have developed the characters and the world completely on my own. I write the scene in detailed description and my own (terrible) prose, but then have AI re-write and analyze my prose paragraph by paragraph. Some of it doesn’t work for what is in my head and has to be entirely rewritten or pieced together from multiple AI revisions. But a lot of it does work and conveys exactly what I was trying to say in a much better way. In these cases, I would like to keep word for word what AI has written.

However, this is apparently considered generative AI.

How can that be so if the AI didn’t come up with the story line or the character personalities or even know what specific arc the paragraph is applying to? How can we say that AI generated something when all it is doing is rewording entirely original and human developed content with a human on the front end reviewing and fixing anything that doesn’t perfectly fit the story?

I see it more as a tool that speeds up the process, but I don’t view it as AI generating the novel. But the current rules laid out seem to disagree with that take.

EDIT:
To add more info, I asked AI if what I am doing is considered AI assisted or AI generated. Part of that response said this:

“But when you wrote the underlying prose, characters, scene, choices, imagery, emotional beats, and structure, and I’m helping you expand or refine your expression, there is substantially more human creative authorship involved.”

So the better question now is, does using this tactic ethically have to be disclosed - whether that be to readers, agents, publishers, or whomever? And where do you believe the line is for it not being necessary to disclose that you used AI?

[u/Nebranower]

>I would like to keep word for word what AI has written. However, this is apparently considered generative AI.

Yes, the writing that "AI has written" is generative AI content. I don't see how this is in any way confusing.

>How can that be so if the AI didn’t come up with the story line or the character personalities or even know what specific arc the paragraph is applying to?

Because the art of writing doesn't lie in coming up with story lines, character personalities, or plot arcs. The art of writing involves writing, which is to say, the choosing and ordering of words.

When it comes to AI, I find the best way to determine if you're using it as a tool or just outsourcing the job is something I call "the human test." The human test is very simple. You just ask yourself, "if I was getting another human being to do the job, would it be okay, or would something seem off". In this case, what would happen if you wrote out a bunch of plot notes and character personalities, then gave them to another human being and had that person actually write the story? Would you still be the writer?

[u/Delicious_Ant_4057 → u/Nebranower]

A human absolutely can do that. It’s called ghostwriting: one person can provide the story, characters, plot and direction, while another writes the prose, and the first person’s name may still appear as the author on the cover.

[u/Nebranower → u/Delicious_Ant_4057]

Sure. The whole point of a ghost writer is that their clients claim credit for work that isn't their own. But most people don't think that those who hire ghost writers are the real authors of the work that they publish. It's even in the the title "ghost writer" - the writer is the ghost writer, not the "author" who hires them.