
Dorothy Parker famously (but probably not really) said, “I hate to write, but I love having written,” which is a sentiment I don’t largely understand or agree with in the broader sense, but certainly have experienced during a kick-to-the-nuts writing day where the words arrive with the effort of trying to do proctology on a stampeding horse while both you and the horse are blindfolded. But as it turns out, there’s a sort of third level to this notion, one altogether more troubling and ultimately even less understandable: “I hate to write, I hate to have written, I mostly just want to be published.” Or, “I really just want to have money.” Or, “I actually want to just use as few keystrokes as possible to make my computer barf up stolen artistic authorial valor onto the internet in the hopes of charging absolute rubes a couple bucks for the narrative puke I hastily urged into a book-shaped pile.”
What I’m trying to say is, I read that NYT article about author — sorry, “author,” with airquotes as pissily vigorous as you can make them — Coral Hart, a self-proclaimed ugggh “AI evangelist” who over the last year has made AI churn out over 200 novels across nearly two dozen pen-names.*
Reading that makes me feel so angry and so sad at the same time — some combination of fury and weary sorrow for which the Germans must have a word. It’s hard to even articulate my objection, I’m so grossed-out by that — I wasn’t even sure I could mount a cogent response to any of this that didn’t end up as just angry mouth noises and erratic gesticulations. (Which is better, one supposes, than geriatic ejaculations.) Mostly I just want to post a series of photos depicting the faces I’m making, which likely run the gamut of “trying to hold back my rising gorge” and “watching a lion eat a human baby” and “kill me kill me now all of time and all of technology and this is where we ended up oh god just go back in time and end it all before it ever began.”
So, instead, I thought I’d tackle one particular thing Coral Hart (which is itself a pseudonym, since retired) said, and it’s this:
“If I can generate a book in a day, and you need six months to write a book, who’s going to win the race?” she said.
Ahhhhh. What the fuck. Ahhhhhh. AHHHH. That’s not — that’s not how any of this works, Coral! But this smug “winner” attitude is the absolutely natural apotheosis of the Internet’s obsession with churning out content. Generic, shapeless, formless content — a slurry machine where you turn the pipe on and lorum ipsum diarrhea comes shooting out at maximum pressure. It is the natural outcome of a race-to-the-bottom low-price churn-and-burn self-publishing environment, to boot — it’s less move fast and break things and more move fast and make broken things, because who cares, dipshits will pay for it.
This is the equivalent of, “Well, if I can blow up a cow with dynamite in ten minutes, but you need three hours to butcher it, who’s going to win the race?”
But of course, in the quote — a quote which is itself a cocky, smug assertion of superiority based purely on speed — is buried a greater, uglier truth.
If I can generate a book in a day–
and you need six months to write a book–
She’s not writing anything.
And she knows that.
She’s “generating” it.
Intrinsic to this is, “ha ha, you dumbass, over there still writing books like an asshole, whereas me, I just use a computer to do it for me.”
Except, intrinsic to that is the reality that the computer didn’t make that stuff up either. You know who did? We did. Actual authors. Real writers! We wrote the stuff, the fascist techbro fuckwads stole what we wrote, and then ticks and leeches like Coral Fucking Hart are happy to drink the blood those monsters have already stolen from us. She is churning out 200 books a year not out of the ether, but by drilling into the ground and drawing up the juice of an infinity of other books**, all stolen, all turned to narrative petroleum to fuel her fantasy of being a real writer.
And that is a fantasy.
Because Coral Hart is not a real writer.
Coral Hart is an opportunistic vampire — a thief, a grifter, a lazy pick-me.
She’s not even a master vampire. No, the master vampires are the ones who built this plagiarism machine. She’s just a ghoulish neonate, a feral bloodsucker down in the sewers happy to feed on the blood-soaked fatberg formed in the tunnels by the elder lords.
She’s a “writer” the same way I’m a “chef” when I pull a frozen dinner out of the fucking microwave. Someone else did all the work and packaged it together. I just hit the buttons and set the time.
So, to remind you:
Writers who use AI —
Are not real writers.
And this comes after years, years where Authorial Discourse has worked very hard to build all these fences in order to define who gets to be a Real Writer — and up until this point, all those fences have been false, bullshit borders. They’re illusions. I’ve long said that the test is so, so simple: real writers write. That’s it. That’s what it takes to be a writer.
Writers write.
And writers who use AI?
They’re not writing, are they?
They’re churning. They’re clicking buttons. They’re stealing. They’re plagiarizing.
But they’re not writing.
And they don’t even want to be writers. Because if they wanted to be writers, guess what? They’d fucking write! They’d want to write! Because writing, even on the worst day, the hardest day, is glorious. Even when the words suck and you break your teeth from grinding them so hard, it’s still a powerful, formative experience where you take all that you know and have been and have dreamed and are afraid of — you take all of that and you turn it into something else. You crystallize it. You coalesce it. You turn all this stuff that exists invisibly in your mind and make it visible on the page, inventing new people and new worlds and strange situations and you reach for revelations about love and hate and jealousy and all the ideas both big and small. You take nothing and you make something.
So powerful.
But AI acolytes don’t do any of that.
They wait for you to do it, sure.
Then they stick their greedy teeth in and tear off a piece.
The saying goes, why would I want to read something you didn’t even bother to write, but then we must also ask, why do THEY want to do it? Why does someone want to publish something they didn’t write, didn’t conceive of, didn’t edit, didn’t gestate, didn’t birth forth across amazing and frustrating writing sessions? Because it’s all just a get-rich-quick scheme. That’s it, revealed. Coral Hart gave up the game. She doesn’t want to write.
She just wants to generate, just wants to get paid, get that money, so fuck writers, fuck readers, fuck you.
Real writers don’t use AI.
That’s the red line.
* It’s unclear if she even makes much money at it, but she does make money teaching you how to make money at it, which is a profound irony and ultimately ends up being one of those get-rich-quick schemes where you see an ad in the paper telling you how to make all this money stuffing envelopes but what you’re stuffing the envelopes with is the exact same information you got about making money stuffing envelopes, which is to say you’re charging people money to tell them secretly that you’re scamming them and now they can scam other people too, an endless human centipede of shit being passed down the line, ass to mouth, mouth to ass.
** Note too the absolute gall she has to act cocky as fuck about this when she’s using Anthropic’s Claude, which was verifiably built on stolen books, including mine, and has been proven through a class-action suit!
Anyway!
Buy my books! A human wrote them! (Ahem: me.) Humans edited them. Humans designed them inside and out. Humans helped sell and market them, both at a publisher and at a bookstore. You could even gasp order my newest, my demonic novel, The Calamities, coming out in August. I’ll even, as a human, sign it and personalize it and tell you who your DEMONIC PROGENITOR secretly is. Do it. Preorder it. Make us humans happy, please and thank you.







Phil W. Bayles says:
Every time a person admits to using generative AI we need to treat them like they’ve admitted to picking their nose and eating it, or not washing their hands when they go to the bathroom. It’s not just annoying, it’s disgusting.
February 9, 2026 — 10:00 AM
Connie L Johnson says:
Some days I absolutely love you, Chuck. In a purely “Thank you for articulating my frustration” kind of way.
February 9, 2026 — 10:05 AM
Brian says:
But it doesn’t end at the writing. Now there are the audiobooks with the AI narrators and it’s not just an AI writer (generator) having the book AI narrated (robot spewed). Lately on Audible you can find books out of copyright being narrated by AI. So the person takes a perfectly good book, written by an actual author and legally, apparently, slap AI slop narration on top of it and try to make money off it. And Audible, as of now, doesn’t seem to have a way, or maybe will to stop it.
February 9, 2026 — 10:21 AM
Leslie Ann Aguillard says:
I so vigorously agree with you and my add own disgust and anger at the vampires of art and all manner of creativity using ai, I could spit type font balls. I am further distressed by classes who use ai for scripts… and though I would REALLY like to have money with which to live, pyramid schemes of deceit masking as creative skill and the people who seem to think it is okay, inevitable, the future, make me want to ….. well… I don’t want to commit that to this page.
February 9, 2026 — 10:22 AM
Heidi Wilson says:
AI just helped me very fruitfully with my book. I gave it elements like my characters, location, personal conflicts and said, “Make up a plot.” It did. It was nearly identical to the plot I was working with, which confirmed my suspicion that my plot was hackneyed and boring. Suspicion confirmed, I went back to brainstorming, experimenting, and trusting my instincts.
February 9, 2026 — 10:33 AM
Bobby Miller says:
Agree on everything…Reminds me of a certain piece I wrote…
https://www.bobbymillertime.com/p/ai-art-is-for-losers
February 9, 2026 — 10:49 AM
Narcissa Smith-Harris says:
I’m sure in this essay there was an and or a the I didn’t want to instantly go repeat to my nearest and dearest but few of those. I loved every word of this essay. As voracious reader of the genre the ghoul Coral Hart feasts on, the quality of humanity is especially important.
February 9, 2026 — 10:50 AM
Jen Doktorski says:
Yesss! To all of this!! Thank you! You are so on point — people who use AI to “write” are thieves. (Yes, I’m human and I used an em(ish) dash.) Real authors wouldn’t let AI write a book for them. Would real runners let AI generated avatars run the NYC marathon for them? Only if the goal is to have a meaningless existence. That’s a stupid endgame.
Writers of both fiction and non-fiction do the thinking and feeling that others are too afraid or too lazy to do. They kneel at well-curbs and go down rabbit holes and make themselves vulnerable so that they can form connections between themselves and the universe. Connections that resonate with readers viscerally and maybe, is some small way, make those readers’ lives better, even if it’s just for a few hours. I may be naive, but I believe eventually AI generated crap will benefit those who dedicate themselves to the art and craft of writing. It will make the good stuff stand out. True authors are the tortoises who will outlive, and outwrite, the Coral Harts. I mean, they’re not even proud enough of their work to use their real names. What does that say?
February 9, 2026 — 11:00 AM
Christine says:
I was just sitting here thinking of all the stories I’ve started and how hard writing is. But I would never ever choose to have ai write some shit for me Jesus Christ all we care about is selling each other shit? I hate it so so much.
February 9, 2026 — 11:08 AM
Rebecca Douglass says:
I agree. And not only is she not writing and isn’t a writer, what she is is an environmental disaster. Because generative AI is sucking down all our water (that very limited thing out west here) and power. So that she can flood the zone and prevent real writers from being found. As an indie writer, I doubly resent her, because she makes it even harder to get anyone to believe that a real writer, writing (if I say it myself) decent stuff, would be indie. And, of course, burying the real stuff under a flood of crap.
February 9, 2026 — 11:10 AM
Phoebe says:
AI “writing” is like bodily emissions masquerading as writing. Gross and smelly slop. I can barely read about folks engaging in the “generating” of stories…it pisses me off and saddens me. Thank you, Chuck, for speaking your mind.
February 9, 2026 — 11:19 AM
Michelle says:
This shit scares the crap out of me, not just as a writer, but a reader too. How are we supposed to find real content to consume if everything is a deluge of slop? As consumers, we don’t want it! This is garbage we never asked for. Like McDonald’s is cheap, but at least it tastes good. This is like if McDonald’s put raw sewage on a bun and said we’re going to like it because it’s the future, get on board or get off the tracks before you’re run over.
I’m also an artist and I’ve been having trouble sourcing real photos for reference. I can’t use psudo-reality art slop as reference because then my drawings will look more funky than the AI. Someone recommended using a prior 2022 filter in Google. Is that where we’re at? All art stopped in 2021?!
Keep up the awesome work, fight the literal machine, make readable human content, Chuck. Humanity depends on you!
February 9, 2026 — 12:00 PM
JM Celi says:
The other thing these “aren’tists” aren’t realizing is that they don’t know the craft. So even when they generate their slop, they won’t know how to tweak a three-act structure, hit story beats, resolve plot holes, payoff setups, etc. They don’t know what the slop will undoubtedly miss because they don’t know the craft. Because they aren’t writers.
February 9, 2026 — 12:10 PM
innerspacegirl says:
AI is nothing but word vomit.
February 9, 2026 — 12:23 PM
Gin Forest says:
“A ghoulish neonate, a feral bloodsucker down in the sewers” 🙂
Do you think we’ll go the way of the food industry, with processed chemicals passing as food filling most of the shelves, and then the real food having fancy certified labels on it to prove it’s actual food? Like, will we have special certifications on books that say, “Real Human Made”? I hope not. And yet, I don’t see a way out…
February 9, 2026 — 12:26 PM
terribleminds says:
To be clear, I think most food on the shelves is still real food in both the strictest sense and also a looser-defined sense — certainly a lot of food is the product of FOOD SCIENCE, and food science is not always concerned with our health and well-being as much as it is Selling A Product, but the stuff isn’t FAKE — you can eat it and it’s not gonna kill you. AI stuff is just hollow regurgitated slurry that stole other material to make itself — food at present doesn’t really do that. It’s not being stolen, processed, copied and extruded through a robot’s anus.
Er, yet.
February 9, 2026 — 12:47 PM
Louis Darling says:
I bow at your feet for this rant, sir. Alas, I fear, it’s just howling at the moon.
February 9, 2026 — 12:47 PM
Holly Carter says:
Thank you for continuing to speak out (and write!) to bring attention to the erosion of creative expression posed by AI grifters. You’re shining daylight on the vampires trying to “drink your milkshake,” and folks are listening. You keep writing, and I’ll keep reading!
February 9, 2026 — 1:19 PM
Thomas Cleaver says:
I’m in favor of hanging, drawing and quartering people like Coral. In public.
February 9, 2026 — 1:33 PM
Lyse says:
Fuck AI indeed!! And fuck those humans who are riding in on stolen horses, pretending to be heroes. Fuck off. No one (and I really do mean NO ONE) needs your fake bravado bullshit and money-grubbing ways. This is the worst side of humanity. The side that’s so unbelievably lazy and greedy at the same time that they will leave it to thieving machines tell us how to think and feel. All to win a non-existent race (a fucking race??) to the top of a smug-as-fuck money pile. What?? Ugh. Makes me clench with rage. Because this is like a horrific global virus. It’s sucking the literal life out of us. Except we’re not wearing masks and agreeing on how bad it is. Some people are actually welcoming it. Welcoming the stripping of our humanity. Well, fuck AI and fuck the soulless humans using it too. Phew. I needed to get that out. Thank you Chuck for your “Fuck AI” posts. I need them and love them. And your blog. And I just preordered The Calamities and got the audiobook for The Staircase in the Woods. Humans for humans. Question. What do you say to people claiming AI boosts their creativity?? (I’m clenching again!)
February 9, 2026 — 1:40 PM
PaTrick says:
Complete side note, based on one paragraph I want to play in a Vampire (V:TM or V:TR) with Chuck. I think it’d be fun. This post riles up the anger for a continually oncoming freight train. But that one paragraph made me smile and just imagine a fun time.
February 9, 2026 — 1:46 PM
terribleminds says:
Would love to play those again someday!
February 9, 2026 — 2:31 PM
Henry Brandt says:
Well said/written, sir! Thank you.
February 9, 2026 — 2:33 PM
Gypsy says:
My take: writing is thinking. I’m sure you have multiple posts on this, so I won’t explain but if someone is generating books instead of writing them, they’ve handed over their thinking to a machine. They’ve handed over their unique autonomy (their individual brain thinking) to an algorythmic, probability-patterned, forced conformity/homogeny stamping factory that is barely a facsimile of human thinking really is like. And this machine is not a neutral thing, either – in addition to the stolen work and skill it’s built from, it’s a biased, non-inclusive, exploitative corporation attempting to shape our behavior AND THINKING for their gain, as well as control our personal and public resource use.
So who “wins”? The writer actually writing does.
The point of life is to live, to be your unique and messy self which is unlike any other on the planet in history or yet to come. Handing over what makes you “you”, a lot of which is your thinking, means that you are becoming “less” than you were and could be.
PS I wonder if that “author” has even read these books she generates. Most people do not read that many books a year. Not unless they love working with words and love to think. Just a thought.
February 9, 2026 — 2:44 PM
Allison says:
I saw this article too and was also blown away by the subject’s cockiness. The icing on the cake was when she and/or one of the other authors featured in the piece mentioned that they deliberately don’t label their books as AI because then they don’t sell as well–they’d rather treat their readers as dupes rather than allowing them to make an informed decision about whether to read something that’s AI-generated. I also really hate that this is happening in the romance genre, a genre I happen to like and one where readers are so frequently sneered at for enjoying supposedly formulaic stories, like they’re not smart enough to appreciate Real Literature. The article itself doesn’t quite go there but it feels like there’s an implication that this is happening in romance because romance readers aren’t discerning enough to notice that what they’re reading is AI slop. In reality, it’s probably happening in a lot of genres where there’s a lot of self-publishing but romance is the one that got called out partly because it’s so popular and partly because everyone already thinks romance writers and readers are already kind of dumb.
February 9, 2026 — 2:47 PM