Sweet porridge

There is no shortage of human-made literature. So why generate additional texts?

There is no shortage of human-made literature. So why generate additional texts?

Is artificial intelligence destroying literature? Or can it serve as an aid? Or even replace the human author? Enno Stahl no longer sees a market for man-made literature, but it will by no means disappear. Marcus Hammerschmitt warned that AI is not a tool like others, but that it fundamentally endangers creative writing. According to Kathrin Röggla, the promises of AI sound like imperatives. Hannah Wettig calls for a debate about reducing working hours through AI help, including in text production. A discussion about the value and meaning of human creativity.

AI-generated texts and literature have no relationship to one another and move in completely different spheres. The only thing they have in common is that they use words, language, just like an instruction manual and a novel are made up of words, but otherwise have no similarity. Art is created and an instruction manual is formulated. Nobody would seriously think of asking about the relationship between instruction manuals and novels, or about the tension between traffic signs and oil paintings. Of course, one can imagine that a painting depicts a traffic sign or that an instruction manual can be part of a literary text - one could even show traffic signs in a gallery if one comes up with a suitable concept, or simply as a joke, whereas paintings on traffic signs or literature in instruction manuals can only be acts of chance or anarchy.

A novel, literature, art, a work, a creation consists of elements such as the plot, the characters, the style, the choice of words, dialogues, monologues, scenes and so on. The details from which the artist puts his world together, what and how he tells and also what he doesn't tell, what he starts with, what he ends with, is a sum of decisions, conscious and unconscious, logical and illogical. All elements together create a literary work, a work that is more than the sum of the individual parts. In the end, the work, the unique creation, lies less in the printed than in the unprinted, because what really holds it together? Not the sometimes more, sometimes less exciting plot, the polished dialogues, the skillfully used metaphors, the atmospheric descriptions of nature. Rather, it is the spirit, the consciousness of its Creator, which reveals itself in the totality of all elements.

Revealed, but at the same time hidden behind the story, and while reading you chase after him - see what he saw, think what he thought, or you lose touch, understand nothing anymore, struggle through it, are annoyed until you are grabbed again a few pages later, and so on. When we read, we come into contact with the author's consciousness, but also with our own consciousness. An inner dialogue arises, an experience, a connection across ages, physical and metaphysical boundaries. Transcendence.

It gets bad and gets worse until everything is full of water, everything is broken, the whole city is flooded with mush, etc.

And maybe I'm wrong, but I would say that's why we read, or should read, or should read a lot more.

AI technology can achieve a lot, but it does not yet have consciousness, and then talent and a will and a mind would have to be added, and even if the technology develops to such an extent that a being is created that has all of this, why should it be given preference over human feeling, human consciousness?

Besides, it's not that far yet. It may be that with the help of artificial intelligence, provided it is fed with the appropriate data, fascinating texts are created, full of surprising images and original metaphors. It may be that a supposedly talented AI can, for a while, blind some people to the absence of an organizing, curating and creating consciousness. It may be that particularly superficial, undemanding, confused readers allow themselves to be dazzled or that certain affects can also be created through generic effects. But I don't know who could seriously want to be touched by a skilled AI. It would always just be effects, but not the metaphysical contact with another spirit, not the feeling of understanding and being understood, not the feeling of connection. AI texts are logic, statistics, probability and averages, there is space between the lines. The metaphors, the language, the plot, it all leads to nowhere.

There is no shortage of man-made literature or art of any quality. So why generate additional texts? Unless you are criminally inclined, a fraud, a cynic, very stupid or very desperate.

In September, allegations arose in France that the novel "C'était ça ou mourir" by the Haitian-Canadian author Thélyson Orélien was AI-generated - i.e. the novel was not a novel and the author was not an author. The author and his publisher Grasset initially denied the allegations, but this was contradicted by the results of the AI ​​testing program Pangram, which is considered to be highly accurate. These suggest that the novel is “almost entirely” AI-generated. In October, the publisher finally said that AI had been used to create the text. The book nominated for the “Prix Goncourt” was removed from this year’s list of candidates, the “author’s” reading tour in Canada was canceled, and whether “C’était ça ou mourir” will be translated into German for Rowohlt Verlag as planned is anyone’s guess.

Isn't the author Thélyson Orélien a kind of AI himself? So the creature of his bubble, a victim of his guild?

And another report caused a stir: Sam Altman (Open AI) and Dario Amodei (Anthropic) warned against AI in the UN Security Council. It is “a danger to all of humanity.”

The motif of humans losing control over their creations is an old one. Many stories, fairy tales and tales - i.e. literature - deal with the relationship between humans and a magical creature they have created or an object that gives its owner power. The creation of an artificial human also often plays a role. And in the past, just like today, after initial arrogance, megalomania and fantasies of omnipotence, people were frightened by what they had brought into the world, and they were afraid of the power and violence of their own inventions.

In many of these stories, people are no match for this power. He cannot tame his creation, which he initially arrogantly conjured up or wished for; it turns against him and becomes destructive. The wish-fulfilling machines, the artificial beings, the magical objects have names such as Frankenstein's Creature, Aladdin's Magic Lamp, Sauron's One Ring, the Golem, the pot from the fairy tale "The Sweet Porridge", nowadays Claude or Perplexity.

They are supposed to do the hard work for their master, fulfill his wishes, protect him, feed him, bring him everything at the push of a button, obey his orders and let themselves be switched off when the work is done.

At first everything goes well: the creature works, the work gets done. People take a deep breath, make themselves comfortable, let the being do more and more tasks, don't do anything themselves anymore and are proud of their power. But then it happens: a wrong prompt, a forgotten spell, a mistake in the system - and the thing goes crazy, everything goes wrong and it gets scary.

»Lord, the need is great! / The spirits I called / I can't get rid of them now."

The simultaneously brainless but independently working broom creature, the serving automaton, the breathing robot no longer listens and no longer stops.

It gets bad and gets worse until everything is full of water, everything is broken, the whole city is flooded with mush, etc.

At the moment of extreme need, rescue comes, and the crazy automaton is stopped by a higher power.

»Into the corner, broom! Broom! / Been there. / Because as spirits / Only the old master calls you forward for this purpose.

But these are all old stories. Who's afraid of AI these days other than a few paranoid nerds? Everyone uses AI, no one does anything themselves anymore. People even have their novels written by the AI, and if the daycare center across the street announces a flea market, then the flyer is also generated by AI. Maybe it's just a phase and the hype will soon be over and everyone will have had enough of the sweet porridge, the AI ​​slop under which our cities and villages are being buried.

No, not a phase. This is forever. You never get enough of it because the AI ​​learns and the porridge gets sweeter and better and you're so used to it. At some point you can't and don't want to tell the difference between the delicious porridge and all the rest. Who should pull the plug and why? Writing without AI? Reading without AI? Life without AI? Far too dangerous.

People are no longer afraid of using artificial intelligence. Instead, you fear using your own mind.

Ruth Herzberg is a writer and lives in Berlin. Her novel “Frequenzen” was published by Mikrotext in 2026.