AI novels are a relatively new phenomenon within the literature community and are rising in popularity. They appear in advertisements everywhere, with their AI-generated book covers and classic trope titles, for example, The Chosen Luna: Alpha’s Unwanted Daughter.
Now, while they are popular, there are two big questions: are they good, and despite being AI, are they still valuable? While deciding if a story is good is entirely interpretive, there are qualities that indicate whether a book is structurally well done.
In a good book, there are three main elements that must be well executed: the hook, the plot progression and the conclusion. The hook is what catches the reader’s attention; it is an interesting trope or an inciting incident that sets up the reader to want to read the rest of the story.
The first chapter then acts like a pilot episode, giving readers a sense of whether the novel is worth their time and investment. Because of this, it needs to be engaging, as it establishes expectations for the rest of the book. By utilizing these popular tropes and character archetypes, they pull readers into the first few chapters.
While AI is particularly good at the hook of a novel, it is the chapters after the exposition that start to show problems.
The issue begins when we get to actual plot progression, which is the rising action, or the “middle” part of the story. This is where all the build-up to the climax happens and is the toughest part for a writer to make interesting. However, the rising action is essential, as the climax is not exciting if there is no built-up tension.
This is where AI starts to crumble in quality, as it cannot maintain a cohesive, fluid narrative. Each chapter on its own is not bad, perhaps the plot progression makes sense and can be satisfying to the reader, but when the chapters are put together within a long-term narrative, it becomes repetitive and exhausting.
Each chapter follows the same formula, and there is no deviation, leading the chapters to feel like the same problems and information are being presented repeatedly. Eventually, watching the main character make the same mistake with no sign of growth becomes unsatisfying and causes the reader to lose interest.
A key part of the rising action is getting readers to emotionally invest in the main characters, keeping readers invested in what is happening to a character is what keeps them engaged with the story. AI does not do this well.
While at first you may feel for the main character, AI does not develop a character beyond their initial role. There are no human qualities, no uniqueness within the character themselves. Characters are often reflective of their creator, whether through speech patterns, reactions or small quirks; there is something in them that only their author can give to make them feel real. When the author is not human and has no qualities of its own, what does that do to the character? It makes them feel inhuman, prevents the reader from understanding their actions and creates a story that feels “unnatural.”
Finally, there is the conclusion.
In any work of fiction, there must be an overcoming of obstacles that the main characters have worked toward. This typically occurs after the climax, in the falling action, where characters tie up loose ends and determine what comes next. It is when villains receive their just desserts or when the main love interests finally confirm their relationship.
However, while AI understands the structure of a good conclusion, it follows it too rigidly. The characters’ problems are suddenly resolved within a single chapter, and the solutions are often so simple that the reader is left unsatisfied.
Overall, while AI is effective at hooking readers, it struggles to keep them engaged. These stories do not provide real satisfaction and reinforce the idea that AI is not suited for long-form storytelling. Even the elements that can give a weaker story value, such as the unique style or perspective of the author, are absent in AI-generated works.
What remains is a structurally familiar but ultimately unfulfilling story, reinforcing that while AI can replicate the form of a novel, it cannot recreate the originality, emotional depth and authenticity that make literature truly worthwhile.
Contributed Graphic/Jay Mahood
