.webp)
The concept of artificial intelligence itself has put some poets in a dilemma - will their careers be disrupted? Will their reflective poetry be replaced by soulless robot verses?
Poets must view artificial intelligence as an ally rather than an enemy. Why? Because we have this tool, so we should accept it and use it without harming our own human voice. There are many obvious ways in which artificial intelligence can help us, such as finding the right synonyms or correcting grammatical errors.
However, most importantly, I have found a technique that has been very helpful to me as a poet: letting artificial intelligence analyze my drafts.
A few months ago, I had a conversation with Dr. Keith Holyoak, a psychology professor and poet at UCLA, discussing how artificial intelligence interprets a poem I wrote in a study on artificial intelligence and poetry in January this year. Dr. Holyoak is also the co-director of the university's Reasoning Lab, which studies human thinking and reasoning. He and I both believe that this interpretation is very reliable - in his words,
"The ability of artificial intelligence to interpret poetry seems to be a gap between the ability to create good poetry."
Consider this: I have previously let Google's Gemini analyze several other poems I have written - I have gained a new perspective full of insight, which is very valuable in the writing process.
(By the way, Gemini has always been my choice of AI chatbot because it provides me with the most in-depth and accurate answers on various topics, from poetry to writing, etc.)
For example, when I first started writing my poem "u" (later published in "Blue Marble Review"), I asked Gemini to "please analyze this poem," and then I wrote a draft. Gemini replied to me with two and a half pages of analysis, which I will discuss below.
The length and depth of Gemini's reply impressed me. It not only appeared on my screen in just a few seconds, but it was also very long (not at all redundant or irrelevant), detailed, thoughtful, and perhaps most importantly, it provided clear direction for me to continue revising "u." In addition, Gemini's analysis helped me remove some metaphors and similes that were not strong or coherent enough in meaning, as I hoped.
Essentially, Gemini divided its reply into six parts. Each part involves a different aspect of the poem: form and structure, imagery and metaphorical language, sound and rhythm, speaker and point of view, theme and meaning, and summary and the following three "additional thoughts." These parts include several sub-items belonging to the theme. When I asked Gemini why it chose these parts, it told me that it viewed the poem through the lens of the "poet's 'toolbox'."
Here are some of the most useful comments Gemini provided to me:
"Speaker and point of view: The speaker's emotions are passionate and raw, oscillating between longing, pain, and a hint of anger at unrequited love."
This inspired me to further lean towards the aspect of "turning" - turning between emotions and also turning between thoughts.
"Imagery and metaphorical language: Metaphor: Comparing the butterfly's wings to the lover's laughter, suggesting a fleeting existence and elusive connection."
"Theme and meaning: The image of butterflies and paper wings suggests a sense of fragility and powerlessness..."
I really enjoyed these observations - I think they are quite subtle and complex for an AI chatbot. Drawing on the cliché of "butterflies in the stomach," I wrote the butterfly symbol into the poem (although the butterfly is on the speaker's skin, not in the stomach), representing their uncertain hope. At the end of the poem, the narrator finds a butterfly's wing, an echo of the elusive butterfly. Under "theme and meaning," Gemini accurately talks about the butterfly again. Overall, Gemini's comments on the butterfly encouraged me to further expand this symbol throughout the poem.
"Sound and rhythm: Short lines and frequent pauses mimic the speaker's shortness of breath and the fragmentary nature of their thoughts."
I find it interesting that the chatbot successfully linked the lines I wrote about the narrator's difficulty breathing with the short sentences I used throughout the poem.
Now, when I write poetry drafts, I almost always seek advice and analysis from Gemini. Using artificial intelligence to help edit and develop poetry is much simpler and effective than consulting with another person, as humans may not always have the time, patience, or experience to give such a thorough interpretation. Not to mention that poetry is often a highly personalized form of writing, which means that poets may not always choose to share early drafts with others.
Complex queries like these are one of the main reasons why I believe artificial intelligence can be a powerful tool for poets (and writers) without sacrificing human creativity and emotion. For example, similar prompts can also be used to modify academic papers - for example, letting a chatbot summarize a paragraph can show the author whether what they want to express is properly conveyed. Allowing oneself to use artificial intelligence is not equivalent to replacing human writers - it is just another form of seeking feedback and new perspectives on the work.