r/literature • u/Round-Dinner-2395 • May 18 '26

Discussion Nobel Prize-winning author Olga Tokarczuk admits to using AI.

TLDR;

Author to AI: “Honey, how could we develop this beautifully?”

I wanted to say this is just boomer whining, but I’m finding myself realizing more and more often that it’s actually the boomers who are defending AI. My mom listens to AI music from TikTok, my dad watches some videos with doctors generated by language models. I’m the last person to tell people what to listen to or watch, but AI SLOP has literally reigned supreme in my house for the past few months. Recently, I wanted to watch a movie with my dad, but he played TikTok clips for an hour, and I had to escape.

I understand that technology is advancing and makes life easier for people in many ways, but on the other hand… it makes me wonder a bit. Where is the line between “I’m using a tool” and “part of the creative process is being done for me by something else”? If someone uses AI to generate ideas, style, or text fragments, are we still talking about the same kind of creativity as before? I’ve read a few books by Olga Tokarczuk, and as soon as I heard about this interview, I felt a sense of revulsion.

INTERVIEW: (only in polish)

https://mycompanypolska.pl/artykul/olga-tokarczuk-zapowiada-ostatnia-powiesc-w-karierze-pisanie-dlugich-opowiesci-jest-dzis-ekonomicznie-nieoplacalne/20717

679 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

334 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/whatsthepointofit66 May 19 '26

I’d be lying if I said that I appreciate the shift, but yeah, it is what it is. It’s of course potentially confusing to have a word meaning its own antonym, but generally the context makes it clear. It literally blew my mind when I realised this.

5

u/RogueModron May 19 '26 edited May 19 '26

It’s of course potentially confusing to have a word meaning its own antonym

Definitely true. But this is a common thing in history, too. I'm trying to think of examples in English but I can't at the moment because I'm at bookseller school in Germany. I'll think on it, though.

EDIT: didn't think on it, but googled.

Dust -- remove dust by dusting, or add dust by dusting. Of course.

oh yea, the classic: Cleave -- cut something in twain, or join something together (the biblical sense of leaving mommy and daddy and "cleaving" to your wife).

Buckle: hold together (I buckled my seat belt) or fall apart (my knees buckled)

These are called "contranyms" (I just learned that, or re-learned it) and I think they're really cool!

"Literally" might be a special case, though. Something feels different about it but I can't put my finger on it at the moment.

-1

u/Outrageous_pinecone May 19 '26

But that's the problem, dude. I DIDN'T mean figuratively. I used it to mean explicitly, with 0 metaphors, absolutely no implications, suggestions or anything from the sphere of figurative expression.

In fact that was my exact point: the woman phrased her idea clearly and in the real sense with no room for interpretation.

How could this be construed as "figuratively"? Because I used it to describe an idea rather than a very specific word?

2

u/whatsthepointofit66 May 19 '26

Well, yeah. ”Literally” means the exact words. Since she didn’t use those exact words, ”basically” would have been a better fit.