Latest
Joel Salomon: The Truth About MoneyReddit Is Putting Up a Login Wall. Wikipedia Won’t Be Far Behind.Victoria Chemko: The Body Is the First TechnologySir Patrick Stewart: A TributeA Yale Economist Says We Won’t Be Missed. He Forgot the Bread Line.Walter Koenig: A TributeAI Has Paid Off Outside Tech. Apollo Is Reading the Wrong Scoreboard.I Don’t Post Bad ARC Reviews. I Send the Author a Note.The Little Red Book of Stuff That Works!Your Kids Are Your Own FaultGrow a PairYou’re Broke Because You Want to BeIt’s Called Work for a Reason!No Time for TactShut Up, Stop Whining, and Get a LifeWilliam Bessette: AI Enablement and Child Welfare TechnologyFree Book Planning ToolsWhat’s New at The Writing King: Week of October 18, 2026Ghostwriting by the Numbers: Timelines, Word Counts and the First CallPromising Young Woman (2020) ReviewBillions for AI, Pennies for the Plumbing: AI Companies Should Pay to Keep PHP AlivePHP2Shell: AI Found a 22-Year-Old Crack Under Your Website in Two DaysPetrov Day: The Officer Who Didn’t Believe the ComputerKindle Unlimited Is Now Kindle+. AI Audiobooks Just Joined the BuffetWhen to Quit Writing a Book: I’ve Abandoned Dozens, and I’d Do It AgainMo Gawdat Says the AI Dystopia Starts in 2027. Read the List, Skip the DatesThe Society of Authors Signed an Ethical AI Charter, Then Ran From It in Eight DaysChina Is Using Bots to Fan the Data Center Backlash. The Backlash Is Still Real.Getty Images Filed for Bankruptcy. Can You Prove You Licensed Your Book’s Images?Fluff Words: Cut Them From Your Prose, Keep Them in Your DialogueWhere Are the Independent Bookstores and Public Libraries Worth Visiting in Tampa Bay? Author Richard Lowe Profiles 44 of ThemWhere Can Writers Learn Storytelling From Movies? Richard Lowe Publishes 1,226 Film and TV Reviews With Writing Craft NotesWhere Can You Hear Founders and Executives Tell Their Own Stories? Richard Lowe’s Leaders and Their Stories Publishes Every Unscripted Interview With a Full TranscriptWhat Should You Know Before Hiring a Ghostwriter? The Writing King Publishes 57 New Answers, Including What to Do When It Goes WrongAuthor Richard Lowe Publishes Eight Volumes of Enemies of You, a Researched Series on the Forces Working Against Ordinary AmericansThe Jackal (1997) ReviewThe Day of the Jackal (2024) ReviewYour First Novel Is an Apprentice Piece: What Beta Readers and Editors Can’t FixWhen the Cloud Gets Bombed: What the AWS Data Center Strikes Teach About BackupsHuman-Written Book Labels Are Gatekeeping With a FeeThe Enshittification of Microsoft Office: Why I Switched to a Free CloneGlobal Encryption Day: The Padlock Every Writer Depends OnWriting Your Worst Moments in a Memoir: Show the Evidence, Skip the VerdictHow to Register a Copyright for Your Book (and What Doesn’t Count)Your AI Chats Aren’t Private: Deleted ChatGPT Logs in CourtI Joined the Science Fiction Book Club 30 TimesThe Board Seat Scam: A 419 Letter in a Business SuitCitations in a Memoir: Endnotes, Footnotes and Fair UseThe Stores That Still Care: Publix, Walmart, Aldi, Best Buy and the RestThe Grocery Store Plan: Why Every Store Starts With Flowers

Why AI Works for Books

This is a series about writing books with AI, and most of it covers what the tool does badly and how to fix it. So I’m starting with the opposite, because it’s true and hardly anybody in the argument will say it plainly: AI is a useful tool for writing books, and used well it saves a working author a lot of time and a lot of misery. I use it, and I wrote this series partly to defend using it well. I won’t apologize for that, and you shouldn’t have to either.

The trick is being precise about what it saves, because the hype and the backlash have both buried the answer. The hype says it writes your book. It won’t, and the rest of this series shows why. The backlash says it only produces hollow garbage and no real writer would touch it. That’s wrong too, and it costs honest authors real time. I’ve got no patience for either camp. AI is bad at writing your book and very good at the jobs around the writing, the ones that eat your hours and your will.

Does AI really kill the blank page?

The most expensive moment in writing a book is the one before there are any words. The blank screen, the cursor blinking, the chapter you know you have to write and cannot make yourself start. Every writer knows that moment and most of us lose hours and sometimes days to it. It is not laziness. Starting from nothing is genuinely hard, and the hardness is not the part of writing that makes the book good.

This is the thing AI is best at, and it is not close. A rough, flawed, imperfect first draft of a scene, generated in thirty seconds, is a different psychological object than an empty page. You are no longer creating from nothing. You are reacting, cutting, fixing, arguing with something already on the page, and reacting is enormously easier than originating. The draft can be mediocre and still do its whole job, because its job was never to be good. Its job was to end the blank page, and it ends it instantly.

For a lot of authors, that alone is enough. I’d much rather a writer argue with a mediocre machine draft than lose a week to an empty chapter, because the week is gone for good and the draft costs nothing to throw away. A bad draft you can fix beats a blank screen you can’t start, every time.

AI generates faster than you can type

You react faster than you originate, and the machine originates faster than you type. Put those together and the whole cycle of writing, draft, read, react, revise, speeds up, because the slow step was never your editing, it was waiting on yourself to produce the raw material to edit.

This matters most when you know roughly what a passage needs to do but do not relish the doing. The connective tissue between two big scenes. The third paragraph of physical description you have written a hundred times in a hundred books. The recap of where things stand at the start of a chapter. This is the tedious, necessary, unglamorous prose that every book is half made of, and the machine drafts it in seconds for you to shape. You spend your real attention on the scenes that deserve it and let the machine rough in the rest.

That’s the prose I’d hand off without a second thought. Nobody ever bought a book for the recap at the top of chapter twelve, and a writer who spends a morning hand-building one has spent that morning away from the scene readers will remember.

AI makes experimenting cheap

Here is a quieter advantage that I think makes books better, not just faster. Experimentation in writing is normally expensive. To see whether a scene works better in first person, or opening on the argument instead of the arrival, or from the other character’s point of view, you have to write it, which costs an hour or an afternoon, so mostly you do not bother. You commit to your first instinct because testing the alternative is too costly, and your first instinct is not always right.

The machine drops the cost of trying to near zero. Show me this scene three ways. Now I open on the argument. Now I am in his head instead of hers. You read the three, and usually one of them shows you something your first instinct missed, and the scene gets better, not because the machine wrote it well but because cheap experiment let you find the right shape before you committed your real writing to it. The machine is a fast way to be wrong cheaply, and being wrong cheaply is how you get to right.

AI is a tireless second pair of hands

It’ll summarize your own earlier chapters when you’ve lost the thread of your own book. It’ll give you ten chapter titles and won’t get tired or hurt when you reject all ten. It’ll draft the synopsis and the back-cover copy you dread. None of that is the real writing, but all of it is work, and it drains the energy you’d rather spend on the writing. Offloading it is no more cheating than using a word processor was, and I don’t understand writers who treat it as a moral failing.

What is the catch with using AI for books?

Notice what every one of these has in common. They are all advantages at the drafting layer, the layer of raw material and momentum and tedious necessary prose. Not one of them is a claim that the machine makes your book better. It does not. It makes the work faster and less miserable, and it does that by being excellent at exactly the parts of writing you least want to do yourself.

And the parts it’s good at come bundled with parts it’s bad at, which is the catch. Left alone, the same machine that ends your blank page fills it with its own defaults: the inflated words, the tame scenes, the safe redemption arc, the facts it quietly invents. It takes back in revision the time it saved up front. Treat it like a tool and you’ll do fine. Let it decide what your book is and you’ll hand readers a book nobody made a real decision about, and I’ve got little sympathy for that.

The series comes down to that, and it needs saying before any of the criticism that follows: the criticism is in service of the upside. Everything after this article, the off-ness to name, the eight layers of tells, the prompting craft, the full method, exists so you can keep the real advantages of this tool without paying the hidden costs. Start with the next piece, why AI books feel wrong, which names the catch precisely, and the rest of the series teaches you to beat it.

About the Author
Richard Lowe, professional ghostwriter

Richard Lowe is a professional ghostwriter and author with 113+ books authored and 54+ ghostwritten. Before writing full time he spent 33 years in enterprise technology, including 20 years as Director of Computer Operations and Technical Services at Trader Joe's. He writes nonfiction, fiction and memoir, and works with executives and experts on books that build authority.

More about Richard Lowe →

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this blog post are solely those of Richard Lowe and are based on personal experience and research. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as professional legal, financial, accounting, or business advice. Always consult with qualified professionals before making important business or legal decisions. Richard Lowe is not a lawyer, accountant, or licensed professional advisor, and this content does not establish any professional relationship.

0 comments

No comments yet. Yours can be the first.

Was this useful?

Leave a comment