Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Adam Nathan's avatar

I then asked AI to look at the same set of stories and the story it wrote and give me an appraisal.

What the AI Got WRONG:

Too neat: Your stories have messiness, moral ambiguity, unresolved tensions. This is a Hallmark card. Compare to "Philadelphia Freedom"—"that's when I thought maybe I had been"—which ends in devastating uncertainty, not resolution.

Explains everything: The man returns to conveniently explain his entire motivation, complete with the meet-cute origin story ("woman from my office"). Your narrators rarely get this closure:

The illustrator never learns why Bowtie climbed or who the redhead was

Chester never explains if the birds were real

Lauren never understands what happened in the van

Jeffrey never knows what Steiner was composing

False profundity: Lines like "bearing witness to things that shouldn't be said out loud" are trying too hard. Your actual profound moments come through radical specificity: "You couldn't take that feather away from me for all the return postage in the world" or "Palm, palm, palm he's saying."

No edge, no failure, no shame: Your narrators have flaws, bitterness, jealousy, complicity:

"I was invisible. I was like her office boy. Jimmy Olson"

"I ain't your soft apple"

"I stuck one up there after Springrose now"

Philip's "reindeer horns"

David the usher is a saint with perfect emotional intelligence. He has no wants, no failures, no moments of pettiness.

The marriage ending: Too happy, too resolved. Your stories end with:

A feather kept for 60 years (ambiguous treasure)

Ashes and pigeons (transcendence through destruction)

"maybe I had been" (devastating ambiguity)

A balloon floating down (bittersweet grace)

Torn letters and wax paper (pathetic waste)

This ends with "Congratulations" and a satisfied narrator. No ache.

Lacks physical detail/embodiment: Your narrators notice:

"Not a muscle on him either"

"Her tits were spilling out of the tube top"

"Yellow bearded man with deep-set eyes as sunk and shady as the corner of a boxcar"

"Thin blonde hair starting to recede"

David never describes what The Appointment looked like beyond "maybe forty." No bodies, no smells, no textures.

No class tension: Your working-class narrators have complicated relationships with the people they serve:

The illustrator wants the redhead but knows he'll never have her

Frank Andersen plays power games with Chester

Jeffrey resents Steiner's weakness

David has zero resentment toward his customers, the dying theater, Suit. No economic anxiety despite losing his job.

The reveal is comfortable: When your characters learn the truth, it costs them:

Frank learns he was Chester's soft apple (shame)

Jeffrey realizes he broke something (guilt)

Philip discovers três continentes (devastation)

The illustrator sees Bowtie succeed (envy and admiration)

David learns The Appointment were grieving widowers and feels... what? Validated? There's no emotional cost to the knowledge.

Too much stated theme: "You stand in the back. You watch. And when someone needs you, you're there." Your stories never state their themes. They enact them. The AI is writing a Moth story, not a literary short story.

Missing the wound: Every one of your narrators carries a wound:

Lauren's "that's when I thought maybe I had been"

Herman's Miss Stimson leaving

The illustrator's feather and invisibility

Frank's "Yes, he did" about the miracle

Philip's humiliation

David has witnessed something beautiful and feels... fine about it? There's no wound that caused him to need this job, no wound from doing it, no wound from the encounter.

Dialogue is too clean: Your dialogue is messy, overlapping, half-finished:

"Sure, Lauren, sure Lauren"

"Goddamnit. Listen."

"You know quiet has its jazz, too"

The AI's dialogue is complete sentences with proper attribution. Nobody talks over anyone. It's scripted.

No idiolect: Your characters have specific speech patterns:

Mickey's "Now, listen. Here's the rub."

Bonecrack's profane fragments

Lauren's defensive run-ons

Laszlo's pretentious precision

David sounds like every NPR narrator ever. No regional markers, no class markers, no personality in syntax.

The Deepest Failure:

The AI understood your structure (observer narrator, years of watching, delayed reveal, meaningful object) but missed your moral vision: that bearing witness is complicated, that observers are complicit, that watching changes the watcher, that grace and cruelty can be the same act.

David watches and remains unchanged. Frank watches and becomes Chester's soft apple. The illustrator watches and keeps a feather for 60 years. Lauren watches herself and realizes "maybe I had been."

The AI created a story about your themes. You write stories that enact them through flawed people making compromised choices. That's the difference between competent and devastating.

Rona Maynard's avatar

This really unnerved me. It’s pretty good. Less sharp and more sentimental than your own work, but I can’t trash it. I need to revisit the real Adam Nathan to see exactly how it compares.

16 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?