If members of TNBW are going to start relying on AI to do reviews, I think I'll bow out.
Me too. I think Dirk summed up this thread accurately, though. It's more about the (debatable) use of the A-eye tool. Feels like a homogenization of writing would be the result of "written by A-eye" stories.
Just to note, I submitted my five part series with 6 different pdfs: 1 for each book (at 100 words summary each) and another for the entire series (in 500 words). It was interesting to see the difference. There were several instances in the 100-word summaries where some details weren't accurate. Additionally, while it named some characters, it never once mentioned the name Gulliver. Some part of that may have been affected by adding "and the further travels of Gulliver" to the title after I had already made the pdfs. Maybe I'll run it through again and see if it notices.
I should also mention that it didn't give the last book, (a novel at 103,000 words) and imo the whole crux of the biscuit, the attention it deserves. For me, the denouement is a large factor in determining how good I think a story is. (I weigh the style of writing heavier than the storyline. It can have a crap ending if the style carries me. I'm looking at you, Tolstoy. See also: Bukowski, whose endings were just another day in his life.) A-eye doesn't value the denouement with any amount of preference (or, shall we say, emotion).
Also of note: I resubmitted Book 1 by itself and it referenced details from the other books! That's kinda unnerving. It's A-eye-and-ear, in actuality, by definition, I guess.
Anywho, I'm just collecting snippets and putting them together with some suggestions from a pro on the site and editing (read: muddling) my way through to some sort of perfect query letter for two books (Street of Rogues, a 3-volume memoir which includes Tropical Cancer, and the Noble Book of Lindsay the Tall &...). Sad to note: I've actually worked longer on the 'perfect' query letter for Street... than I have on the book.
And I'm totally with all of us here on this thread; the idea of stylistically homogenous books generated by an average of "norms" is horrifying -- Orwellian, even. I like to think, in my optimistic way, that creative, unique, and ground-breaking writing will continue to find a place with courageous publishers.
Carry on,
whatta
