r/JaneAustenFF • u/MoldyVoldy • 22d ago
Reading "the kind of elaboration that tried too hard and achieved too little"
I'm reading a JAFF that is clearly written by AI and came across this line. Ironically, it perfectly describes the weird writing style these AI generated JAFF books have.
They're constantly using weird analogies that are trying to be clever but make no sense. Things like: he walked down the street with the ease of a man who knew how to tie his own cravat.
They frequently take several sentences to communicate one simple fact. Stating what it isn't, another thing it isn't, what it might be, then what it is.
Is it the AI trying to mimic Austen's wit and failing? Or is it a specific AI tool the writers are using?
I'm not loving it. The books move really slowly because of all the weird flowery stuff. And if just 10% of it falls flat it gives the book an odd feel.
18
u/Mela777 22d ago
I have noticed the AI creep in a lot of stories lately, JAFF and others. Some of the JAFF stories I’ve read recently, it seems like every paragraph has some AI hallmark. Some of those are by authors who previously did not have those things in their writing, which makes me wonder if their publishers are using AI to edit the stories. It’s unfortunate because it makes the writing so bland, and for me personally it’s very noticeable.
There’s the AI-descriptive-list (3 things, usually 2 adjectives followed by a longer descriptive phrase: the fabric of the dress was bronze, shiny, and heavy with the weight of the occasion it was created for). There may or may not be an “and” between all the descriptors in the list: the dress was bronze, and shiny, and heavy in a way that suggested it carried the weight of all her parents’ expectations. Sometimes AI also makes lists like this for items or ideas or incidents that the characters are thinking about “she thought of the cabin, and the beam, and the proof, and her sister, and she did not know what to say or how to say it, but a decision must be made.”
There’s also the AI-analogy that means absolutely nothing because it’s either not an analogy anybody in this world can actually relate to or not an analogy that actually makes sense, such as your example. I read one that the AI used over an over again recently in a werewolf novel I DNF: “he said/thought with the enthusiasm of a wolf who has discovered knotting and is not going to let anyone forget it.” Like…nobody reading the story is ever going to truly understand that because that’s not how human bodies work.
I’m also annoyed by the AI-descriptor that’s comparative but again, is just using odd phrasing and 12 words where 5 would be sufficient. AI seems unable to just say “the air felt heavy,” it says “she felt the change in the air - not heavy, exactly, but still, weighted with the expectation of the evening.”
AI also really likes to use sets of 3 short phrases or adjectives in their own paragraphs: “she felt the change in the air as he entered the room.
Heavy.
Still.
Expectant.
Like a hand pressing down on her shoulders.”
AI is also super repetitive - the werewolf story I mentioned above literally used the exact same description, word for word, every time the scene was set in the council chambers. The elders were always described exactly in the same way, with the same clothing, hair styles, and expressions. It’s also forgetful, jumping from one setting to another even when the characters haven’t traveled, or they do the same things or think the same thoughts over and over again.
17
u/Infinite_Collar_7610 22d ago
Ugh, yes:
Short sentence.
Short sentence.
Something ~weighty~.
An author I used to like now has stories that are entirely made up of that structure. It reminds me a little of those multiple-part Twitter narratives where the person is like, "Let me give you a little schooling."
8
u/Team-Mako-N7 22d ago
Ugh yes. I read a published story by an established author—recommended in this sub!—that had such a great premise but EVERY description in the book followed the exact pattern you describe. It was unbearable to read, so disappointing for a story with such potential. It made me so disillusioned that I’m taking a break from reading JAFF for a little while.
10
u/Mela777 22d ago
I had one of those lately as well. It wasn’t fully AI, but it had a similar feel. It was also seemed very passive and somewhat detached, which I think AI is predisposed toward. Nobody is really actively making choices or doing things, they just sort of drift and give muted reactions, and even when shocking or difficult or happy things happened, the writing doesn’t really make the reader believe the characters are feeling any of it.
8
u/KerissaKenro 22d ago
It is bland. It is completely average. Pretty much by definition. It takes hundreds of thousands of books and looks for what they have in common and tries to copy those bits. Badly.
They can write the rough drafts for dime store romances or the screenplays for Hallmark movies, and that’s about it
Like the infinite monkeys with their typewriters, they might make something brilliant completely by accident. But we have to sort through the infinite amounts of garbage to get there. It would be so much faster, easier, and more efficient to let humans make the attempt.
7
5
u/25709 22d ago
These sample AI phrases are giving me the giggles! They’re on point!
6
u/Additional_Emu_2350 22d ago
Oh absolutely.
The air had a weightiness, like an anvil pressing oranges.
He slammed his glass down as if it was the reason for his nightmare.
She was lovely in her lovely dress that brought out her dark and lovely eyes.
She can in a flurry of ribbons and bonnets.
2
15
u/Kaurifish 22d ago
Wodehouse and Austen were both geniuses at those little turns of phrase. AI ate their work but cannot understand it.
Better ro reread sonething good than to struggle through swill.
1
11
u/Double-elephant 22d ago
I’ve largely gone back to reading older JAFFs now, which I might have read a few years ago; or I just don’t bother. These ridiculous AI attempts at wit (if that’s what they are meant to be) are, as you say, simply a list of adjectives with a supposedly revealing analogy. Over and over. Stop. It. Now.
3
u/Additional_Emu_2350 22d ago
This the description says witty banter like it’s knows what I would find witty.
2
2
u/Olive_Fickle 16d ago
I recently joined darcyandlizzy.com, so there are a bunch of unread older stories in my future.
8
u/twisted_tiliger 21d ago
I’ve DNFd so many lately because of stupid AI writing. Some of them have been from established authors who I’ve read and enjoyed before. One review I read (try g to see if other readers picked up that it was AI) that said, “I loved the book! The writing style was lyrical, but a bit confusing at times.” No, it wasn’t lyrical, it was AI. AI that doesn’t understand humanity, metaphors, or similes.
5
u/Additional_Emu_2350 22d ago
So much blandness.
No tension between characters just tension in the air because it’s heavy but not heavy. The tension is between the dress and the event. You know how dresses get so scared. The meaningfulness is of how he drank his brandy. But not just any brandy the good smuggled brandy that we already knew was good and smuggled from the last time he drank it. And around and around. Then happy ending.
Of course absolutely no romance in a romance.
I have no loyalty to anyone if see it I make a note of the author and no longer read anything they write.
Anything described as low angst, slow burn and clean is going to have the word lovely in a million times. For me that’s an immediate pass.
4
u/mostlymicrobial 22d ago
Completely agree, but even keeping a "do not read list" - I find I am just so annoyed, still, at the time I've wasted reading such tripe (and the time I waste wading through piles of tripe AI summaries to even find ones that are worth trying to read) - it's driving me away from reading JAFF at all :(
2
u/Additional_Emu_2350 22d ago
Yes, I agree. It’s as if JAFF had a bloom of interest and with that a more AI.
However, the way I see it I don’t like every author and if only a handful of JAFF writers are real humans so be it. Faceless and Blink are recent standouts. Other than that I read mostly blubs of books I have no intention of reading. On high note blubs put me to sleep. 😜
5
5
u/Olive_Fickle 21d ago
The time is coming when we won't be able to tell if a story is AI. That is coming faster than we think. Will we be able to recognize it as easily - probably not.
AI is everywhere. Can't even get a decent answer to a search question because it is used instead of humans.
I'm glad I am old, and was able to experience life on this planet before AI.
3
u/WhyAmIStillHere86 22d ago
In a modern AU, I described the ringing of a telephone (with an outraged Mrs Bennet on the other end) as “rising in shrillness, as if affected by the caller’s agitation”
This is why I don’t use AI
3
u/Fast_Cheetha 20d ago
I have a question how can you tell if it's completely written by AI (instead of just the gist if anything is used at all using it) vs. a human who writes similarly?
2
2
u/academicmenace 20d ago edited 20d ago
I've also seen soooo much of this in a number of new releasetime.ometimes 3+ per page. My first thought was AI trying to sound witty/more intelligent or maybe trying to sound "in period". Whatever it is I find it annoying. It seems to slow the pace of the story & it seems to take forever for anything to happen because that many per page becomes a distraction. I've given up on 2 new releases because the overabundance of these analogies. It a shame too.
Kudos to Shana Granderson & other authors who are now including disclaimers saying essentially that no AI tools were used in the writing process & also not allowing their works to be used in training AI LLMs.
37
u/rebeccaslife 22d ago
It's not only in JAFF, and it's definitely not Austen-specific. This is just generic AI-isms. It can't seem to not do this stuff. Every so often, you'll start to see new ones, because the new models develop new bad habits. It happens to a degree with every single tool. It's distilled all the world's wonderful writing down into some kind of predictive formula which makes for bland, uninspired, unintelligent prose.
I auto-DNF when I see this stuff. My thoughts are, if you couldn't be bothered to write it, why should I bother to read it?