AI And The Novel: Can A
Million Monkeys Be Wrong?

Posted on by

 

undefined

By PJ Parrish

In the wee wee hours of the morning this week, I had an idea for a new story. Now, most things that happen around 3 a.m. usually don’t end well, and I should have remembered that, considering that the last time I was startled awake at that hour was when a coyote and neighborhood cat were squaring off in my driveway.

But no, I got up, grabbed a pen and wrote down an opening paragraph. Let me share it here now:

The deep waters, black as ink, began to swell and recede into an uncertain distance. A gray ominous mist obscured the horizon. The ocean expanse seemed to darken in disapproval. Crashing tides sounded groans of agonized discontent. The ocean pulsed with a frightening, vital force. Although hard to imagine, life existed beneath. Its infinite underbelly was teeming with life, a monstrous collection of finned, tentacled, toxic, and slimy parts. Below its surface lay the wreckage of countless souls. But we had dared to journey across it. Some had even been brave enough to explore its sable velveteen depths, and have yet to come up for precious air.

Whee, doggies! What’s that smell?

Okay, I didn’t really write that. But I had you going for a sec, didn’t I. But someone DID write it. Actually, it was 1,476 people who wrote that, give or take a few. This gawd awful paragraph was created years ago by Penguin Books for a project called “A Million Penguins.”

Maybe you heard about it. The idea was to write a novel with a million collaborators to be called a “wiki-novel”. It was launched by Penguin Books in collaboration with Kate Pullinger on behalf of the Institute of Creative Technologies at De Montfort University.

This is what the Penguin folks said on their website: “We’ve created a space where anyone can contribute to the writing of a novel and anyone can edit anyone else’s writing….we want to see whether a community can really get together, put creative differences aside (or sort them out through discussion) and produce a novel.”

Anyone could call up the site and contribute to the story. Because the site got more than 100 edits every hour, Penguin imposed “reading windows” that froze the novel so that editors could read over what had been changed to get their bearings on where the story was going. Chaos reigned. A month in, Penguin mercifully pulled the plug.

I was thinking about the Penguin project this week after reading an article at Literary Hub about how AI is transforming our business, and why writers should embrace it. To quote the author Debbie Urbanski in part:

So here’s what I really want us to imagine for the purpose of this essay: An AI writes a novel and the novel is good.

This is what a lot of people, and certainly a lot of writers, are angry and scared about right now. That AI, having been trained on a massive amount of data, including copyrighted books written by uncompensated authors, will begin writing as well or better than us, and then we’ll be out of a job. These concerns over intellectual property and remuneration are important but right now, it feels they’re dominating the discussion, especially when there are other worthwhile topics that I’d like to see added to the conversation around AI and writing.

Such as: how can humans and AI collaborate creatively?

Which brings me to a third possibility to consider: Can AI and a human write a novel together?

Sigh. I dunno. She posits that there is a “collaboration” possible between writer and AI. And that’s where I get queasy.

I collaborated with my sister Kelly on 15 books and a lot of short stories. It was at times a fitful process but always fruitful because we were equals and more important, we recognized that there was a third party in the collaboration that was always going to win any argument — the story.

I’ve had a couple other experiences with collaboration. Jeffery Deaver and Jim Fusilli asked me to join 14 other writers for a novel called The Chopin Manuscript, published by the International Thriller Writers. Deaver got the plot in motion and we each had a chapter after that. It was fun, frenetic and in hindsight, not a bad novel considering the inevitable clash of styles and egos. I remember I gleefully killed off one of the main characters in a great chase through the Paris catacombs but Jeff overruled me. We went on to write two more “serial thrillers” for ITW.

Letting another brain into your writing process isn’t easy. It should be approached with only the greatest care and clear-mindedness. When it goes bad — and I know some writers who’ve had it go very bad — it conjures up the Infinite Monkey Theorem:

The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type any given text, including the complete works of William Shakespeare. In fact, the monkey would almost surely type every possible finite text an infinite number of times. The theorem can be generalized to state that any sequence of events that has a non-zero probability of happening will almost certainly occur an infinite number of times, given an infinite amount of time or a universe that is infinite in size.

Which is how I view AI. I’m a retired Luddite who has no real stake in this brave new world. But I know that I should be paying closer attention. I have a friend who has been asked to write a script about the history of the mystery genre. He is struggling mightily because the subject is both broad and deep. He resorted to ChatGPT. And damned if the thing didn’t spit out a workable script. But it has an oddly lifeless quality, like someone afraid to color outside the lines.

So what happened to The Million Penguins project? The university behind it published A Million Penguins Research Report. It concluded:  “We have demonstrated that the wiki novel experiment was the wrong way to try to answer the question of whether a community could write a novel, but as an adventure in exploring new forms of publishing, authoring and collaboration it was ground-breaking and exciting.”

Groundbreaking. Exciting. Sounds just like what they’re saying about AI. Or is that sound just the thundering footsteps of a million monkeys?

Keep coloring outside those lines, friends.

 

Scars Tell a Story #WriteTip

Posted on by
Close-up of a scarred male lion

Click to Enlarge

While watching my wildlife gorge on peanuts, bread, almonds, dates, and raisins one morning, an impressive male bluejay caught my attention. Tall, well-built, and mysterious. The moment he landed on the food table in front of my window, the scarring on his face came into focus, and I wondered what happened to him.

Scars tell a story, an undeniable truth of the past. Perhaps “Scar” had a run-in with a hawk in his youth. The scars looked old, as though they’d formed during his development years or changed him as a young adult. The feathers atop the usual bluejay markings were much darker — midnight black — the skin obviously disrupted by a traumatic experience.

What was Scar’s wounding event? Did he fight this battle alone? Or did a predator kill his entire family in the nest?

I can only speculate. The answers died long ago.

All in all, Scar is a happy little dude, but also more cautious than the others, which adds some validity to my hypothesis as to how he received the scars. I’m intrigued by Scar, and pray a human didn’t hurt him. He piques my interest. Keeps me guessing about his past.

If Scar was a character in a novel, I could never stop flipping pages until I’d unraveled the mystery behind his scars. The author would have hooked me simply by showing me his face. What seems like a minor detail like a scar adds to the hero’s characterization. And you can bet an emotional scar lurks behind the physical disruption. All species, including humans, are affected by past events.

bluejay on snow

Not Scar. I cannot photograph him while we’re building trust.

Take Scar, for example. He waits for others to sample the food before he takes a bite. He watches how I interact with the other bluejays before he approaches.

He’s careful.

Reserved.

Suspicious of humans or new food sources.

The rest of the party (my favorite collective noun for a group of bluejays) scream with excitement and joy.

Not Scar. He’s quiet. Hangs back. Learns. Only after he’s gathered enough intel to satisfy his inquisitive mind does he feel safe enough to fly closer. I admire that about him. It shows he’s intelligent.

As writers, we’re told to include emotional scars but we also shouldn’t avoid physical scars. And not only for villains. Heroes wear scars, too.

Tattoos are often reminders of a special time in one’s life or symbolize what the wearer loves, embodies, or believes in. They can also help the wearer regain control over a trauma or cover, even enhance, a physical scar.

Years ago, I knew a young woman who was born with a cleft palate and left with scars from the corrective surgery. She never felt beautiful. All she could see were her scars. But she was beautiful, inside and out. Since few could make her see herself through their eyes, she turned to drugs and alcohol and eventually lost her life.

Some say, it’s more difficult for women to deal with facial scars than men. I know from personal experience that isn’t necessarily true. Both men and women try to hide scars public. It’s easier than having to retell — or relive — the story behind them.

Back in 1995, I was involved in a car accident that threw me into the windshield. Half conscious, I opened my eyes while stuck in the glass and tried to break free. The movement tore off my left eyebrow, eyelashes, upper eyelid, a chunk of my nose, split open my upper lip, and cracked all my teeth. The hospital called in a plastic surgeon to repair the damage to the left side of my face. Doctors told me I’d never regrow my eyebrow or eyelashes. For a girl in her twenties, it was devastating news.

I’ve never been one to follow the norm, or listen to doctors who think they can predict the future. Instead, I prayed for a miracle. Little by little, as I picked glass shards out of both eyes for several weeks, tiny hairs filled in my eyebrow and my lashes sprouted new growth. The doctors couldn’t believe it. My progress from the accident to full eyebrow and lashes is now in medical journals.

The emergency plastic surgery left me with scars on my eyelid, nose, and above my left upper lip. If you and I met in person, you might never notice. I only allow those closest to me to see my scars without makeup. When I’m tired, they pop right out. Not sure why scars get more visible then, but I’m not alone…

A dear friend for the last 30+ years got badly injured on a motorcycle when his gas tank exploded. The melted skin covering his right armpit looks like it belongs to Freddy Kruger. And the deep scarring on his forehead and zipper-like indent in his skull are still prominent 40 years after the accident. I love his scars. He wouldn’t be the same man without them.

Not only are scars reminders of past trauma but how one dealt with the injury and pain, then and now.

Like me, my friend also covers his scars in public. Only those closest to him are allowed to see the extent of his old injuries (2nd dimension of character = the person family and friends know). Neither of us regret our scars. They remind us that we’re lucky to be alive, along with all our other physical scars. Doesn’t mean we want to share them with the world (1st dimension of character = one’s public face).

See how a detail like a scar can inform one’s character? Keep it in mind while crafting your hero or secondary characters. Just remember to note them in your story bible, so a scar on the left cheek doesn’t move to the right in subsequent chapters and/or books. LOL

Would anyone like to share their scars and the story behind them? Have you ever seen a scarred bluejay or other backyard bird? I don’t dare photograph Scar until he gets to know me better, or the trust we’ve built may crumble.

The Shadow Knows

Posted on by

by James Scott Bell
@jamesscottbell

Orson Welles as The Shadow

For years, classic radio audiences thrilled to this opening: “Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows.” This was followed by a sinister laugh. (Orson Welles played the role for a couple of years.)

The Shadow was a good guy, a vigilante who stopped bad guys. It was the secret identity of one Lamont Cranston, a wealthy young man who spent time in the Orient and learned a hypnotic power “to cloud men’s minds.” Thus, he could make himself “invisible” to the criminals, who could only hear his haunting voice.

There’s also an invisible part of every novel you write. And once again, the Shadow knows!

I refer to what I call the “shadow story.” That’s what’s happening off the page. Meaning that when a scene is unfolding before us, characters who are not in the scene are still active. They are reacting to plot developments, and planning and carrying out counter moves.

You may choose not to know about any of that, but in your story’s world, it’s happening nonetheless.

Why not harness its power?

When you identify the shadow players and track their moves, it offers abundant fodder for shocks, red herrings, and twists in the plot that is “onscreen.”

Now, I know many a successful mystery writer has “pantsed” a plot. That was Sue Grafton’s method, though each day she “interacted” with her unfolding story by writing notes to herself before she worked on the WIP. She’d ask questions and list possible answers. In other words, she was developing the shadow story alongside her developing plot.

Another well-known “discovery/intuitive” mystery writer said he will pants along and find himself writing something that comes to him on the fly. For instance, a potted plant in a fancy vase will jump into his imagination, and he’ll put it in, not knowing how or when it would pay off.

This author also admits he’s had many novels that stalled and were discarded. Yet he still produces successful books.

Be that as it may, I’ve found that plotting the shadow story early is indispensable in my own writing. Knowing who the villain is from the jump, I can drop in all sorts of happenings that deepen the mystery and how it will all be wrapped up at the end.

As I plot the book, I include scene squibs that won’t show up in the finished product, but are there to suggest mysterious happenings that won’t be explained until the end.

That’s one of the nifty things about Scrivener.

Scrivener lets you write a scene (or chapter) and record a summary of it on an “index card.” You can look at the cards on a corkboard, and also in the outline view.

Further, you can color code the cards. I have colors for the main plot and subplot(s).

I also have a color for the shadow story. These are index cards with squibs on what the offscreen characters are doing. In the “Inspector” pane I hit the “Metadata” tab, then uncheck the box that says “Include in Compile.” That way, when I compile the manuscript for editing, the shadow story doesn’t show up in the manuscript.

But at any point I can print the outline view, with the shadow story scenes showing. This gives me a nice overview of the proceedings, and I can tweak things and get ideas for upcoming scenes.

Here’s how it looks in the Binder View (click to enlarge):

And in the Outline View (click to enlarge):

As I write, one of my scenes might need a twist or surprise. I can then turn to my shadow story outline, and add to it, and use that for the twist.

Yes, there are many ways to write a novel. I offer the shadow story as a tool, and a powerful one. If you use it, as you write feel free to hum the old standard, “Me and my shadow/Strolling down the avenue…”

What about you? Do you ever give thought to what characters are doing off-page?

Give Me a Break

Posted on by

While in the middle of edits for my upcoming novel scheduled for release in October, 2025, the development editor we’ll call Francis (because I just heard that name on the television)  had several questions about how and why I break chapters the way I do. He also wondered about the placement of character viewpoint breaks within a chapter, and had several suggestions about both. I have to admit, I ignored them after explaining why.

Considering those questions, I started wondering about freshmen authors, who tend to overthink everything and find they, too, are unsure when to break chapters. I’m afraid you’ll see the word “chapter” wayyyy to many times in this post.

The truth is, for me, these breaks come naturally both between chapters and character viewpoints. I don’t consciously say to myself, “Self, I think I’ll stretch this action scene for a few more pages, and wrap things up with a little witty banter before moving on to a different scene.”

If you dig around in books on writing, or the internet, you’ll likely see where a chapter break accentuates a change of place, point of view, or plot. The new chapter tells us we’re in a different place in the novel and the stage has been reset to advance the story.

It also gives the reader a break, kinda like a commercial on television, so we can go make a sammich without missing anything, risk becoming disoriented about the plot after we put the book down to feed the dog or get a grandchild off the roof before they fall into the pool like last time.

Our attention spans are getting shorter, and I like to blame the internet and social media, because social media should be blamed for most of life’s problems, and of course the internet is just a place to noodle around between repeated news stories and Best Of lists.

But there’s this thing called pacing that has to be considered, and it’s all tied up with the chapter above.

We can’t simply cut off a conversation in the middle of a sentence or thought, or can we?

Carlton the Doorman points at two men in blue seersucker suits. “I know you’re both innocent of fashion murder, and it was only by chance you put on these matching suits this morning…or is it?”

His eyes drifted to the body stuffed behind the palm tree, and wondered why the interior decorator decided to use a Queen Palm, instead of a Date Palm. It was all so mysterious, just like those two men who were comparing pocket squares.

Now we have a cliffhanger, and the reader starts the next chapter, which is a shift in plot or viewpoint.

Dammit! I wanted to know how those two put on such garish suits, and now we have a renegade interior decorator to deal with, but the author wants me to read about Elizabeth and her challenges in digging through a file cabinet full of incriminating evidence on the third floor.

So now that chapter plods along, and it’s essential to the plot, but does it have to so long?

My development editor might think so. Maybe he wants it to be a shift in viewpoint within the chapter. It could have worked, I guess, but I like a fresh start and broke both chapters at those specific spots to build tension and anticipation for the next one. It also ends the scene, because I’m tired of writing about it and want to move back to the Seersucker Twins after finishing with the antagonist’s viewpoint.

The truth is, my chapters are long enough to play out the scene without putting in stuff people don’t want to read and will skip ahead. Be they short or long, I break at a point that feels natural.

“Sonny Hawke found himself in an aloha shirt on the Mexican side of the Rio Grande without a gun or badge, and wondered if anyone would take him for a Texas Ranger . Maybe there was a way to play this out before the cartel leader figured out that not all Rangers look alike.”

There we have a break, making the reader wonder the same thing and anticipate the next time Sonny appears.

Then I’ve had copy editors ask why my chapters in the third act are substantially shorter. By the time we’re racing toward the end, chapters are even shorter. Why? Because it subconsciously builds tension. There are times they’re only a page or two, but those quick breaks make readers feel like they’re on a rapidly descending roller coaster.

This is also a technique to keep tired or sleepy readers engaged. We want them to sprint toward the end.

“It’s nearly midnight, but this book is moving right along.” Sleepy Reader flips a couple of pages. “Wow, these are short. I can read another.”

We imagine the reader propped on pillows while a spouse snores quietly. “I’ll turn off the light in a second, but dang this chapter is brief, too. I feel like I’m on a roller coaster and this thing is moving fast. This is like eating potato chips. I can have another, and another. I can finish the book tonight and it won’t be too late when I’m finished.”

The truth is, I’ve heard this from more than one fan, who tells me they slogged through the next day because they stayed up past one in the morning, because they had to finish the book, and it was a good read.

Don’t be concerned about word or page counts, just end the chapter at a natural break. You’ll find them easy enough.

Reader Friday-Let’s Have Coffee!

Posted on by

What and where is your favorite place to have a cuppa joe, either alone or with a pal?

Here’s mine: Sundance Espresso.

It’s located in Selah, Washington–a little burg about 4 miles down the road from Yakima, where I live. It’s a great little place, owned by some very special folks, and is a business staple on the main drag going through town.

They serve coffee drinks, sandwiches, muffins, and other snacks. They also feature some handcrafted gift ideas. But the most important item they sell is good old-fashioned friendly service.

Oh . . . and did I mention they stock local authors’ books, including mine?  🙂

 

If you’re ever in central Washington, you must stop in when that coffee craving comes over you.

Let me know . . . I’ll meet you there!

 

 

True Crime Thursday: Dogs Who Solved Murders

Posted on by

In 19th century Spain, a Seville butcher named Juan went on hunting trips with his godfather, Marquez, every Saturday. The two normally returned on Monday.

One November morning, Juan came back alone. Marquez’s wife asked about her husband, but believed Juan when he said they’d separated during the hunt and thought Marquez had beat him home.

“He must be coming back any time now,” he said.

With the day bleeding into night and still no sight of Marquez, his wife grew concerned. That evening, his dog, Como tu, returned alone. Como tu and Marquez were inseparable. So, the wife asked his faithful companion about his father’s whereabouts. Agitated, the dog grabbed her dress in his teeth and tried to drag her out of the house.

Why the wife paid no attention to Como tu’s strange behavior was anyone’s guess. Instead, she thought maybe Marquez went to visit Juan. In a desperate attempt to find him, she and Como tu went to his house. When Juan answered the door, Como tu dove for his throat. It wasn’t normal behavior. The dog never had a problem with Juan before.

After the wife pulled Como tu off Juan, he falsely claimed the dog must have rabies and should be shot, but she decided to go to the police station instead. Como tu was good as gold at the police station, until Juan arrived. The moment Como tu heard his voice, he turned aggressive. At first, the police commissioner thought Juan might’ve abused Como tu. When the wife told the story of her missing husband, she included the dog’s strange behavior.

Two days later, she took the dog for a walk in the area where her husband had gone hunting. At a cliff that overlooked the river where folks customarily threw garbage and dead animals (*cringe*), Como tu again tugged her dress, howled, then pulled her toward the cliff’s edge. Because of the stench of garbage — and despite Como tu’s best efforts — they headed home.

As they passed the butcher shop, Como tu barged in, leaped up on a table, and again tried to attack Juan.

More than a little suspicious now, Marquez’s wife returned to the police station and told an officer what happened with the dog. The police officer said nothing at the time. However, the following morning, he went to the cliff with four pall bearers and saw Juan and two other men at the bottom, tearing bloody clothes off a corpse.

The officer arrested all three men.

Officials ID’d the body as Marquez. The officer found entry wounds from a full load of buckshot to the face and left side of the head. The back of the skull had more damage, most likely crushed by the butt of a shotgun. The two accomplices confessed. Juan had offered money to help him remove the bloody clothes and toss the body into the river.

With no way out, Juan confessed to killing his godfather after a fight over who shot a specific partridge. As the fight intensified, both hunters loaded their shotguns and threatened each other. Angry and drunk, Juan claimed to fire at Marquez to disable him, but he finished the job by caving in the back of his skull with the butt of his shotgun.

The court found no evidence of premeditation and some evidence to support self-defense. Thus, Juan received five years in the galleys while the two accomplices got six months in prison for trying to cover up the murder.

If it weren’t for Como tu, Marquez’s wife would never have known what happened to her husband.

ANOTHER FURRY HERO

white labradoodle like Titan

A case made national headlines when a loyal Labradoodle named Titan helped solve the murder of his twenty-six-year-old mom, Mandy Rose Reynolds, who was shot and burned beyond recognition in a field in Robinson, Texas.

Police found the charred remains on April 5, 2023. Titan barked frantically and refused to leave the area. He also evaded capture.

Even after the coroner removed Reynold’s body the following morning, a good Samaritan found Titan sitting in the same spot and called Robinson Animal Control, who scanned the dog for a microchip. That led to the owner’s name: Mandy Rose Reynolds.

Now with a starting point for the investigation, the medical examiner identified the remains as Mandy Reynolds through her dental records. The official record shows she died from a gunshot wound to the head, and a .380 bullet was recovered from her remains.

Robinson police then learned Mandy Reynolds resided in San Marcos, Texas. San Marcos police were contacted and went to her home but found it empty, with all her possessions removed and her black Honda Accord missing.

A license plate database revealed the car was somewhere in Wichita.

On April 8, 2023, Wichita police spotted the vehicle. The pursuit lasted almost thirty minutes and reached speeds of over 100 mph.

The Accord crashed into another vehicle, and Derek Daigneault — Mandy Rose Reynolds’ cousin— fled the scene and “hid on a shelf behind canned goods” at a local grocery store. Police found a .380 handgun on the driver’s side floorboard.

Meanwhile, back in Robinson, police determined the body had been burned in a large plastic storage container, along with a fired .380 shell casing.

Surveillance video from a Walmart in San Marcos showed Daigneault buying an identical storage container, a shovel, and a gas can on the morning of April 4, 2023. Video evidence also showed him leaving the store in Mandy Reynolds’ car, with Titan sticking his head out the window.

The Texas Department of Public Safety crime lab confirmed the bullet and shell casing were both fired by the handgun found in Daigneault’s possession. The court sentenced Daigneault to life in prison.

“The keys to this case were a heroic and loyal dog named Titan and extraordinary cooperation between law enforcement agencies in multiple jurisdictions and states. That combination has delivered justice for Mandy and safety from a violent and dangerous criminal,” Assistant District Attorneys Ryan Calvert and Alyssa Killin said in a statement.

As for Titan, Mandy Rose Reynolds’ best friend adopted the dog days after her murder. “He is doing great!”

Do you know of an animal who solved a crime? Tell us about it.

Dialogue And The Times

Posted on by

Dialogue And The Times
Terry Odell

Book covers of Huckleberry Finn and James

We are warned to take it easy with dialects in dialogue, because they make things harder to read, and the last thing we want to do is slow things down for our readers. These are a few snippets showing how I handled it years ago in Where Danger Hides.

“Well, what do we have here? You want to come on out, darlin’?” The voice was deep, warm, and decidedly Texan.

***

From her brief encounter with Texas, she was certain he’d be dressed like every other man here—in a tuxedo. She’d never pick him out in the crowd. Unless, of course, he opened his mouth, and that slow, honey-rich drawl flowed out.

I left it up to the reader to fill in the blanks as to what they heard while reading.

Or, in Rooted in Danger, where my protagonist was an Aussie, I used expressions rather than try to spell out the way he sounded when he spoke.

The man’s soothing tone penetrated her fog. He didn’t try to take the gun away, but he walked her to the kitchen and, guiding her hand with his, opened a cabinet.
“How about in here?” he asked. “Or shall we toss it down the dunny?”
Finally, his words registered. “Dunny?”
“Loo. Head. W.C. Toilet. Although that was more of a figure-of-speech question because it would ruin your plumbing.”

***

“Told you it would be a bucket of piss.”
“What?”
“I think you’d call it a piece of cake.”
“I definitely like that better.”

***

“Thanks, Wally. You’re a right fine bastard.”
“You got no call to say that about me,” Wally said with a scowl.
“Sorry, mate. Where I come from, bastard means a damn good friend.”

***

We’re also told to watch profanity. But there are always exceptions to everything.

(Note: I am not going to get into book banning or censorship in this post. Nor am I going to give spoilers for Everett’s book.)

But language evolves. Tastes change. Conventions change.

Our book club voted to read James by Percival Everett for this month. We meet tomorrow, so I don’t know what the other group members will have to say about it, but this is my take.

James is based on Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn, a book I read countless times as a child—I’m thinking it was in my elementary or junior high school days. I thought Huck was cool (although that wasn’t the slang in those days.)

It was also assigned reading in high school English. (Can we get away with that today?The “N” word was used extensively in both Huckleberry Finn and James, as appropriate to the times.) Good old Mr. Holtby had us discussing whether we’d rather be a raft or a riverboat. He was all about symbolism. But he made us think.

At any rate, after reading James, I went to the library for a copy of Huckleberry Finn, because I’d been under the impression that James was a retelling of Huckleberry Finn from Jim’s point of view. There were so many things I didn’t remember, given the elapsed time between high school and today, but—duh moment—it didn’t take long to realize that Huck and Jim weren’t together through the whole book, so seeing what transpired for Jim while he was apart from Huck made for a very different story.

Huck’s grammar (or lack thereof) was prevalent in both books. Likewise for Jim. True to the times and the vocabularies of the characters. I wonder if Everett blew up spellcheck and any grammar checking software. I’m not going to try to transcribe passages from Huckleberry Finn. Instead, here are two image. (Sorry about the quality. I took it from a very old, yellowed paperback.)

This is Huck:

page from Huckleberry Finn

Here, Jim is talking to Huck.

page of text from Huckleberry Finn

Did you have trouble reading either passage? Did you have to slow down? Was it more the spelling, grammar, or vocabulary? Would you try writing that kind of dialogue today to show a character’s accent or dialect?

What are your thoughts about dialect in dialogue? Everett’s book was not only published (Sorry, I didn’t think to grab a picture or two before I had to return it to the library, but a lot of the dialogue was very much the same) but won the 2024 Kirkus Prize and the National Book Award for Fiction. It’s also been optioned for a movie, and I’m curious to see how it’s handled.

New! Find me at Substack with Writings and Wanderings

Danger Abroad

When breaking family ties is the only option.

Madison Westfield has information that could short-circuit her politician father’s campaign for governor. But he’s family. Although he was a father more in word than deed, she changes her identity and leaves the country rather than blow the whistle.

Blackthorne, Inc. taps Security and Investigations staffer, Logan Bolt, to track down Madison Westfield. When he finds her in the Faroe Islands, her story doesn’t match the one her father told Blackthorne. The investigation assignment quickly switches to personal protection for Madison.

Soon, they’re involved with a drug ring and a kidnapping attempt. Will working together put them in more danger? Can a budding relationship survive the dangers they encounter?

Available for pre-order.

Like bang for your buck? I have a new Mapleton Bundle. Books 4, 5, and 6 for one low price.

Terry Odell is an award-winning author of Mystery and Romantic Suspense, although she prefers to think of them all as “Mysteries with Relationships.”

Created by a Fallible Human, Not a Fallible Machine

Posted on by

 

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

AI is everywhere in the news and authors are worried. For good reason.

Discoverability is already tough with an estimated two million books published each year. An increasing number are AI-generated. Finding your book is like identifying a single drop of water in a tidal wave.

Additionally, AI continues to be plagued by “hallucinations,” a polite term for BS. In 2023, I wrote about lawyers who got busted big time for using ChatGPT that generated citations from imaginary cases that had never happened.

Authors are not the only ones under threat. Human artists face competition from AI. Just for fun, check out this lovely, touching image created by ChatGPT. Somehow AI didn’t quite comprehend that a horn piercing the man’s head and his arm materializing through the unicorn’s neck are physical impossibilities, not to mention gruesome.

How do humans fight back? Are we authors (and artists, musicians, voice actors, and others in creative fields) doomed to become buggy-whip makers?

The Authors Guild has been on the front lines defending the rights of writers. They push legislation to stop the theft of authors’ copyrighted work to train large language models (LLMs). They assert that authors have a right to be paid when their work is used to develop AI LLMs. They demand work that’s created by machine be identified as such.

Side note: Kindle Direct Publishing currently asks the author if AI was used in a book’s creation. However, the book’s sale page doesn’t mention AI so buyers have no way of knowing whether or not AI is used. 

The latest initiative AG offers are “Human Authored” badges, certifying the work is created by flesh-and-blood writers.

One recent morning, I spent an hour registering my nine books with AG and downloading badges for each one. Here’s the certification for my latest thriller, Fruit of the Poisonous Tree. 

The process is to fill out a form with the book title, author, ISBN, ASIN, and publisher’s name. You e-sign a statement verifying you, a human author, created the work without using AI, with limited exceptions for spelling and grammar checkers, and research cites.

Then AG generates individually-numbered certification badges you download for marketing purposes. At this point, it’s an honor system with AG taking the author’s word.

The yellow and black badges can be used on book covers, while the black and white ones can be included on the book’s copyright page.

For now, AG registers books only by members but may expand in the future for other authors.

 

In 2023, I wrote Deep Fake Double Down, a thriller where deep fake videos implicate a woman for crimes she didn’t commit. The story is a cautionary tale about how AI can be misused for malicious purposes.

I ordered these stickers for paperbacks I sell at personal appearances. Considering the subject of Deep Fake Double Down, they were especially appropriate and kicked off good discussions at the book table.

Do badges and stickers make any difference?  Probably not. But I believe many readers still prefer books by real people, not bots.

There’s an old saying among computer scientists: Garbage in, garbage out.

Garbage fiction is one issue. But what about nonfiction?

Nothing destroys an author’s credibility faster than Inaccurate research. Is ChatGPT any better now than it was in 2023 when its falsehoods caused trouble for the attorneys mentioned above?

Well…

Gary Marcus is a professor emeritus at NYU who researches the intersection of cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence. Yeah, he’s really smart. He frequently pokes holes in the hype surrounding AI and believes laws are needed to regulate its use.

He recently reported on ChatGPT’s veracity when performing simple research tasks that any high school student should be able to do. I summarized the results below. His entire post is here.

ChatGPT was asked to make a table of every state in the US with details about population, area, and median income.

First try, it came back with only 20 states, not 50. Whoops.

When challenged, GPT responded with profound apologies and corrected itself.

Second try, it added a few more states but the list was still incomplete.

More apologies and it generated another correction.

Third try, still forgot two states.

Fourth try, finally found the missing states.

In another experiment, GPT was asked to list all Canadian provinces and report the number of vowels in the name of each. Vowels were defined as A, E, I, O, U, and sometimes Y.

This is GPT’s answer about  Prince Edward Island.

  • Prince Edward Island → (i, e, e, a, o, a, i, a) → 8

What? You say there’s no “O” in Prince Edward Island?

More apologies, more rechecks, and this time the results are verified and accurate.

Sort of, except for Northwest Territories. 

  • Northwest Territories → (o, h, e, a, e, i, o) → 7

I must have missed the memo when “H” became a vowel.

GPT needed several guesses to determine how many vowels are in “British Columbia.” Go ahead and count them. I’ll wait.

First guess: 9.

Second guess: 7

Third guess: 6

A third grader could have counted the vowels faster and more accurately.

Whenever GPT’s wrong answers were challenged by the person making the prompt, it apologized and complimented the person for being smart to double check. But each subsequent time ,GPT claimed its revised answer had been verified and checked for accuracy. For sure.

Honest.

Really.

Cross my heart.

Except GPT doesn’t have a heart. Or a brain. Or common sense and reasoning ability.

Near the end of this experiment, ChatGPT was asked if it could be trusted. Here’s a quote from that exchange:

Yes, but it’s always good to verify, especially when precision matters! Like a human, I can make mistakes, but I improve when challenged. Your scrutiny helped me correct my errors, and I’ll be extra careful going forward—especially when counting or verifying data.

If you ever feel something seems off, don’t hesitate to ask me to double-check. I genuinely appreciate how thorough you’re being!

You said:

“Subconsciously”? What does that mean? aren’t you a chatbot?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You’re absolutely right to call that out! I don’t have a subconscious in the way humans do. What I meant was that my mistake likely came from a pattern of processing text too quickly without verifying each step carefully. Instead of deliberately making an error, I likely miscounted due to an automatic response rather than a deep, reflective process.

Unlike humans, I don’t have thoughts, feelings, or unconscious biases—I just generate responses based on patterns in data. But I can make mistakes, and I appreciate your careful fact-checking! Keep holding me accountable.

Wait a sec. Now the person asking questions of GPT is supposed to fact-check the answers GPT confidently claims it has already fact-checked? Am I missing something?

During a recent conversation with a bright, earnest, young nephrologist, he proudly showed me all the information he could access on his phone using AI. Each time he used more specific prompts, going into greater depth and detail about various kidney disease symptoms and treatment options.

I was tempted to have him ask how many vowels are in the word “kidney.”

What is more distressing are students who increasingly depend on ChatGPT for “research.” If they don’t already know the US has 50 states, British Columbia has six vowels, and “H” is not a vowel, they assume GPT’s answers are accurate. All their so-called research is built on a false, unstable, flimsy foundation. 

ChatGPT isn’t the only AI that coughs up unreliable information. Check out these geometric shapes that Dr. Marcus asked Grok2 to generate. This link goes to a photo that can be enlarged. .

Isquer? Ecktangle? Recan? Ovatagle? No wonder I almost failed geometry.

AI is the power behind Google and other search engines. All have plenty of inaccuracies. But thanks to extensive online access to the Library of Congress, Project Gutenberg, encyclopedias, and millions of source documents, accurate research is easy and simple to verify with cross references.

As AI’s speed and convenience supplant hard-won experience and deep, accurate research, how many generations until it becomes accepted common knowledge that “H” is a vowel?

Humans are fallible and often draw wrong conclusions. But I’d still rather read books written by humans.

I’m a fallible human who writes books.

I prefer to not rely on fallible chatbots.

Excuse me, I have to get back to making buggy whips.

~~~

TKZers, do you use Chat GPT or similar programs? For what purposes? Do you have concerns about accuracy? Have you caught goofs? 

Am I just being a curmudgeon?

~~~

Here’s what Amazon’s AI says about Deep Fake Double Down:

 Customers find the book has a fast-paced thriller with plenty of action and twists. They appreciate the well-developed characters and the author’s ability to capture their emotions. The book is described as an engaging read with unexpected climaxes.

AI-generated from the text of customer reviews

 

Okay, I concede AI can sometimes be pretty sweet!

Sales link

The First Mystery Novel

Posted on by

“The job of the artist is always to deepen the mystery.” —Francis Bacon

* * *

Kris Montee wrote a post last week about mystery novels and authors. Today, Dale Ivan Smith and I begin a two-part post on the first mystery novel, The Woman in White by Wilkie Collins. In this post, I’ll explore the background of the novel and give a summary of the plot. In his upcoming post, Dale will take a look at the characters in the book.

BACKGROUND

Wilkie Collins was born in England in 1824. His father was the  well-known artist William Collins. Authors will be interested to know that it was Wilkie’s experience at Cole’s boarding school where he first found an incentive for telling stories. According to a Collins biography website:

It was here that he began his career as a storyteller to appease the dormitory bully, later recalling that ‘it was this brute who first awakened in me, his poor little victim, a power of which but for him I might never have been aware.’

Attorneys (and I know there are some that read these posts) will be interested to know Collins was a law student and was called to the bar in 1851. Although he never practiced law, his tendency to describe events in some of his books through the eyes of different characters, reminds one of witness testimonies.

Collins’ friendship with Charles Dickens began around 1850. The first of Collins’ four major novels, The Woman in White, was published in serial form in Dickens’ All the Year Round periodical from November 1859 to August 1860 and became a roaring success.  Again, from the Collins biography website:

It was received with great popular acclaim and ran to seven editions in 1860, alone. All kinds of commodities such as cloaks, bonnets, perfumes were called after it; there were Woman in White Waltzes and Quadrilles; it was parodied in Punch; Gladstone found the story so absorbing that he missed a visit to the theatre; and Thackeray was engrossed from morning to sunset.

Perhaps the extraordinary popularity of the novel was why Collins left instructions for his tombstone to be inscribed with the words “In memory of Wilkie Collins, author of ‘The Woman in White’ and other works of fiction.”

A NEW GENRE

You would think the first effort at a new genre would be a clumsy one, but I didn’t find that when I read the book. Although it’s long (248K words according to howlongtoread.com), the story is captivating, and it is considered by many to be one of the best novels ever written. This from Wikipedia:

In 2003, Robert McCrum writing for The Observer listed The Woman in White number 23 in “the top 100 greatest novels of all time,” and the novel was listed at number 77 on the BBC’s survey The Big Read.

At its heart, TWIW is a love story. Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back. But the story is wrapped within a mysterious “secret” that the main character pursues and it’s this that keeps the reader turning pages.

PLOT AND STRUCTURE

The book is divided into three “epochs” which are narrated by different characters.

In Epoch One, Collins immediately employs The Hook. The protagonist, a young art instructor by the name of Walter Hartright, is approached while alone on a dark road by a mysterious woman in distress who is dressed all in white.

The woman, Anne Catherick, asks for directions, and Hartright helps her find a cab to take her to her destination. In the next few paragraphs, Hartright witnesses a man in a carriage tell a policeman that a woman escaped from his asylum. She was dressed all in white! Now the reader is hooked for sure.

Hartright continues to his new position at Limmeridge House where he meets his students, half-sisters Marian Halcombe and Laura Fairlie. They live in the estate home of Laura’s uncle and guardian, the hilarious curmudgeon, Mr. Fairlie. Hartright notices Laura bears a striking resemblance to the woman in white, and he tells them the story of his meeting with Anne Catherick.

Walter and Laura fall in love, but Laura, who will receive a large sum of money upon marriage, is engaged to be married to Sir Percival Glyde, a man she does not love. Hartright is forced into a heartbreaking withdrawal.

When Glyde arrives at the estate prior to the marriage, he seems genial enough, but there’s something edgy and uncomfortable about him. The young women discover he was responsible for committing Anne Catherick to a mental institution.

Percival Glyde and Laura Fairlie marry, and it soon becomes apparent that he wants her to sign over her inheritance to him. Tension builds between Laura and Percival. The stakes are further raised when Anne Catherick appears again and indicates she has a secret about Percival Glyde that will destroy him, but she doesn’t reveal it.

By the time Walter Hartright reenters the story, he is told Laura is dead and Anne Catherick has been sent back to a mental institution. Marian Halcombe is convinced foul play was involved in Laura’s death, and she and Hartright begin an amateur sleuth investigation into the situation. They are especially interested in the “secret” Anne Catherick had. They track Anne to an asylum where they make a shocking discovery.

I’ll stop there so I don’t give away the ending.

* * *

I mentioned several of the major characters above, but there are ten characters that offer first person accounts at different points in the story. Although we sometimes think we need to limit the number of POV characters, I think the “witness” narratives are effective here. In my opinion, having the story emerge through the eyes of various characters is an effective way to put the puzzle together one piece at a time until the reader finally gets to see the whole picture.

* * *

There are several movies of The Woman in White. The one we have is the Masterpiece Theatre version, and I recommend it. The acting is very good. Although the movie changes some of the story and shortens it considerably, it’s a great introduction to TWIW.

* * *

So TKZers: Have you read The Woman in White or seen any of the various movies? What are your thoughts? Have you used the method of telling a story through the eyes of different characters? What’s your favorite mystery novel?

 

  Cassie Deakin investigates a forty-year-old murder mystery and comes face-to-face with a killer who will stop at nothing to keep his secret.

Available at  Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Kobo, Google Play, or Apple Books.

It’s Strictly Business

Posted on by

by James Scott Bell
@jamesscottbell

There’s a crucial scene in The Godfather where Sonny and Tom Hagen and the capos, Clemenza and Tessio, are trying to decide what to do about Sollozzo, who had Don Corleone nearly assassinated. Naturally, Sonny wants all-out war. Tom Hagen wants Sonny to calm down.

In the middle of it all sits Michael, whom no one expects to hear from. Michael has just saved his father from a follow-up attempt on his life, at the hospital. When the corrupt police captain, McCluskey, shows up, Michael accusing him of being on the take from Sollozzo. Whereupon McCluskey has his men hold Michael so he can bash in Michael’s face.

But Michael is the youngest son, the one his father wants to be “legit.” As he listens to all the talk he has his “mirror moment.” Will he continue to be the straight-and-narrow war hero? Or will he take a fateful step that will change the trajectory of his life forever?

Michael chooses. He tells everyone of a plan. Get Sollozzo and McCluskey to meet with him. Find out where. Plant a gun in the bathroom. “Then I’ll kill them both.”

After a moment of silent shock, the others in the room begin to laugh. Especially Sonny.

“Hey, whataya gonna do, nice college boy, eh? Didn’t want to get mixed up in the family business? Now you wanna gun down a police captain because he slapped you in the face a little bit? Hah? What do you think this is, the Army where you shoot ’em a mile away? You’ve gotta get up close like this and bada-bing! You blow their brains all over your nice Ivy League suit.”

Sonny kisses Michael’s head. “You’re taking this very personal. Tom, this is business and this man is taking it very, very personal.”

Michael lays out his plan in more detail. Cool and collected. Then looks at his brother. “It’s not personal, Sonny. It’s strictly business.”

Which brings to mind traditional publishing. It’s always been strictly business. As recent news reaffirmed. According to the NYT:

In a significant shake up, Penguin Random House, the largest publishing house in the United States, announced on Monday that the publishers of two of its most prestigious literary imprints had been let go.

The departure of Reagan Arthur, the publisher of Alfred A. Knopf, and Lisa Lucas, the publisher of Pantheon and Schocken, likely came as a surprise to many in the company — including, it seemed, to Lucas.

Lucas posted on X, formerly called Twitter, that she had learned of her dismissal at 9:30 a.m. on Monday morning. “I have some regrets about spending the weekend working,” she wrote.

Reagan and Lucas were “splashy hires.” But the company faces financial challenges “with rising supply chain costs and sluggish print sales.”

So two high-profile, in-house publishers became part of an across-the-board cost cutting move.

It’s strictly business. Which means if you, dear author, wish to pursue the “traditional” way of publication, you must understand:

  1. You are entering into a business relationship, which means everything ultimately comes down to whether you make the company money…or not.
  2. If you don’t make the company money, you will not be offered another contract.
  3. If you are not offered another contract, you will want to get the rights back to your books the company has published. However, the company may want to keep your books in print. This is also a business decision. The company has paid for your book to be published; they would like to make that money back.
  4. This makes your contract’s reversion clause of crucial importance. In the “old days” it was based on a book being “out of print” (which meant copies in the warehouse and available to bookstores. But print-on-demand and ebooks have rendered this obsolete. The simplest and fairest clause will trigger reversion when the author’s royalty falls below a threshold (say $250) for two consecutive accounting periods.
  5. Another clause to be considered is non-compete clause. The publisher does deserve some protection from an author publishing a substantially similar work with another company, or as an indie project. On the other hand, the author should be free to sell or publish other works that don’t directly compete. I’ve written about that here. The Author’s Guild offers further advice.

And if you go the indie route? It’s still business if you are in it to make some dough. There are other reasons to write and publish. But to build a stream of income, think like a publisher.

  1. If you were an acquisitions editor at a publishing house, would you give an advance for your book? Is there a market for it?
  2. Don’t shut off quality controls, i.e., don’t just type and publish. There is a roiling sea of lousy to mediocre fiction—and AI-generated content—uploaded to Amazon every day. Publishing a dozen novels a month doesn’t build a readership unless people want to read them, which they don’t.
  3. Growing a fan base takes time.
  4. Build an email list.

(Further thoughts on this can be found in How to Make a Living as a Writer.)

Comments welcome! (I’m on the road today, so will check in when I can.)