The NYT challenged both writer Curtis Sittenfeld and ChatGPT to create a “beach read” to see which one was better.
Readers voted on the short story prompts.
They requested beach reads about naps and redemption and tattoos gone wrong; puppies and sharks and secrets and white linen caftans; margaritas and roller coasters and mosquitoes; yearning and bonfires and women serious about their vocations.
Definitely a shouting at the improv group after a couple of margaritas vibe.
Anyhoo…
Curtis Sittenfeld’s story turned out to be a little goofy, a little unexpected, funny and poignant.
And honestly, ChatGPT’s version was so boring that I wouldn’t have finished it if it wasn’t for this contest.
Here are some things that Sittenfeld did and ChatGPT didn’t do:
✍ Started writing more than a week before he even knew what the reader-selected prompts would be. (He didn’t want to rush and get sloppy)
✍ Drove to the real place in his story to see what it looked and felt like.
✍ Included a real band he’d seen perform in the story.
✍ Got feedback on his first draft from several family members and friends.
✍ Wrote a first draft that was almost two times too long.
✍ Cut that draft but still asked his editor if he could exceed the agreed-upon 1,000-word length by about 200 words.
Something Curtis Sittenfeld didn’t do that ChatGPT did:
🤖 Wrote its story in 17 seconds.
ChatGTP is great at a lot of things but was its story creative? God, no.
But if AI ever starts doubting itself, challenging briefs and begging for more time, then we’ll all be in trouble.
The NYT challenged both writer Curtis Sittenfeld and ChatGPT to create a “beach read” to see which one was better.
Readers voted on the short story prompts.
They requested beach reads about naps and redemption and tattoos gone wrong; puppies and sharks and secrets and white linen caftans; margaritas and roller coasters and mosquitoes; yearning and bonfires and women serious about their vocations.
Definitely a shouting at the improv group after a couple of margaritas vibe.
Anyhoo…
Curtis Sittenfeld’s story turned out to be a little goofy, a little unexpected, funny and poignant.
And honestly, ChatGPT’s version was so boring that I wouldn’t have finished it if it wasn’t for this contest.
Here are some things that Sittenfeld did and ChatGPT didn’t do:
✍ Started writing more than a week before he even knew what the reader-selected prompts would be. (He didn’t want to rush and get sloppy)
✍ Drove to the real place in his story to see what it looked and felt like.
✍ Included a real band he’d seen perform in the story.
✍ Got feedback on his first draft from several family members and friends.
✍ Wrote a first draft that was almost two times too long.
✍ Cut that draft but still asked his editor if he could exceed the agreed-upon 1,000-word length by about 200 words.
Something Curtis Sittenfeld didn’t do that ChatGPT did:
🤖 Wrote its story in 17 seconds.
ChatGTP is great at a lot of things but was its story creative? God, no.
But if AI ever starts doubting itself, challenging briefs and begging for more time, then we’ll all be in trouble.