A little chat: Thoughts on AI

10 May 2026

I used AI this morning, not to edit, mind you, and not to write. Everywhere, every day, people with access to the internet are doing the same. Growth is so great worldwide that statistics will change dramatically before the week is out. And if you think you’re not using it, think again. Google something this morning? You likely got the lowdown from an AI-generated response to your question. But can it replace humans yet? Artists? Writers? Editors? And how do I feel about this wondrous tool that we’ve welcomed into our daily lives, for many, without even realising it?

Well, sure, AIs are capable of generating images, pumping out stories and detecting plot holes in writing with minimal prompting. They can rewrite poorly written reports, pick you up on your grammar and detect spelling errors or inconsistencies. They can also, reportedly, hallucinate. Yet they can’t be human. In the process of writing this morning, I Googled how AI works. The AI-generated response told me that it uses algorithms (I had heard this before). It said it analysed “vast amounts of data, identifying patterns to make predictions or decisions rather than following explicit, pre-written rules”. Artificial Intelligence outputs reveal a capacity to analyse an enormous vault of files and extract and rebuild what is required. This is not imagination or a reflection of what it is to be human. Not a reflection. Not even an observation. But it is extraordinary.

Do I hate AI? Not at all. Am I interested in editing AI-generated fiction? Also, not at all. I use AI, but my words and my edits are my own. If using a platform such as Grammarly helps an author prepare for the next level of editing, then sure. Daily writing encouragement? Systems building to maintain creative momentum? Sure. And is AI not the greatest contribution to productivity since the introduction of machine-powered production? Quite possibly yes. But is productivity always the goal? The answer’s a flat no. Maybe a “yes” for money; “no” if you’re looking for imagination, depth of experience, deep, rich thought processes and problem solving.

I’m interested in what people can produce. In art, I want to see what was created over time, over thought, coffee, experience and dreams. It’s a messy palette, paint in your hair and washing brushes.

And the same goes for what I edit, and what I read. I want humans to be directly behind the work. I want to collaborate and battle over narratives and plots. I want chapters reworked after a good sleep and I want to get into the details of how words affect the weight and meaning of a sentence and how grammar can be manipulated to achieve an outcome. I want to hear my author. I want their nuance to be uniquely theirs. And I want them to want me – to have an editor who understands them and can look them in the eye and explain choices and grammar and character flaws. And the differences between hyphens, en dashes and em dashes and why we can use “and” at the beginning of a sentence.

AI-generated books are out there. There’s no stopping that. But it shows. They’re like plastic diamonds – almost pretty but there’s no real depth or individuality. And you just know. At this point in time, part of my role as an editor is to encourage human vision and imagination. It’s not art for art’s sake; it’s art for the sake of human legacy, for the legacy of expression and experience, learning, love and imagination. And so, I say, write on, good people. Write on.

A little chat: Copyeditor or Proofreader?

April 2026

When I first communicate with a client, my goal is to establish the level of editing they need. For new authors, this isn’t always clear. The process is unfamiliar, and there are questions: are they ready for a copyeditor, or a proofreader? Or do they need something else, such as a manuscript assessment or developmental edit.

The key is understanding the stages of editing. A manuscript usually goes through several stages before it’s ready for publication.

The first step is often a manuscript assessment, which looks at the work as a whole and considers its overall potential. From there, a developmental edit may help address larger issues such as structure, plot, narrative and character.

Most of my work sits at the next stage: copyediting. By this point, a manuscript’s big picture issues have usually been resolved and the focus shifts to the writing itself. I work through the manuscript line by line, refining the language so it is clear, consistent and true to the author’s voice. I check for issues such as redundancy, awkward language, and errors, while also creating or adding to a style sheet, which can be referenced by anyone who works on the manuscript from that point on. If I notice issues that would be brought up in a developmental edit, I’ll flag them too.

A proofread, on the other hand, is needed as a final stage, just before publication. This is a careful check for typographical and punctuation errors, often with reference to the style sheet created during the copyedit.

If you’re unsure of where your manuscript sits in this process, I’m happy to take a look and help you decide on the next step.