Feeding Books Into AI Risks Creating a Cultural Void
Get the Culture newsletter
Daily culture — film, music, books, the trends and ideas worth your attention. Free.
- The author, a San Francisco–based science journalist and science fiction writer, argues that feeding cultural works into large language models and disposing of the originals risks replacing authentic cultural history with auto-generated reconstructions that future generations cannot reverse-engineer with confidence
- The piece opens with a fictional scenario set 800 years in the future, in which students in a graduate seminar on the 'Void Ages' can only study fragmentary media reconstructed from probabilities, because their ancestors fed culture into 'word-guessing models' and threw away the source texts
- The author draws a direct parallel to the Bronze Age, an era when global civilizations were transformed but left almost no written records to explain what happened or why — a comparable documentary catastrophe the author says we are now reproducing voluntarily
- Citing the 2020 pandemic, the author describes turning to Samuel Pepys' 350-year-old diaries as a lifeline; Pepys documented London's 1666 plague in granular detail, including how to hide cheese while fleeing and the red crosses painted on quarantined doors, demonstrating the irreplaceable value of first-person human writing
- The piece argues fiction uniquely captures an era's anxieties and biases — citing George Eliot and H.G. Wells as writers whose 19th-century works survive not just as literature but as records of how people psychologically navigated rapid industrialization
- The author distinguishes supporting generative AI for code development and big-data analysis from using it as a substitute for human writing, arguing the technology and human-authored culture serve different functions and cannot replace each other
- The core claim is that discarding originals severs connections between present, past, and future humans — the loss compounds beyond any individual work of literature to erase the lived record of a specific era
Why it matters: The essay reframes the generative-AI debate from capability to preservation, asking who bears responsibility for the historical record when training pipelines make originals feel expendable. Writers, publishers, libraries, and archives are the stakeholders who decide what is ingested versus archived, and the author argues their present-day choices will compound into a multi-century documentary gap comparable to the Bronze Age.
Ask SkimNews
