There’s still a quiet hesitation around AI tools in some writing circles.
Some people use them privately but avoid mentioning it. Others remove tell-tale formatting quirks or manually strip out em dashes in an effort to disguise assistance. A few dismiss the tools outright, as if using them somehow compromises craft.
That reaction isn’t new. It’s part of a long pattern that appears whenever a meaningful technological shift enters a profession. To be fair, early AI outputs could feel generic or overly polished. That left an impression. But tools improve. They mature. The real differentiator becomes not whether they are used, but how they are directed.
Skill still lies in judgement, refinement and editorial control: The writer will always be responsible for the outcome.
Resistance Is a Recurring Theme
When the typewriter became commercially viable in the late 19th century, many traditionalists preferred handwriting. Mechanical writing felt impersonal to them. Yet the typewriter improved legibility, speed and duplication.
Before that, the fountain pen unsettled those accustomed to quills. And quills themselves displaced earlier writing tools. Each innovation disrupted an existing norm. Each met resistance. Each eventually became unremarkable.
The pattern extends beyond writing. Navigation once depended entirely on sight, memory and experience. Then came the magnetic compass. Later, sailors adopted the sextant…and so on. Today, the use of GPS is almost universal. None of these tools eliminated seamanship. They increased accuracy and reduced avoidable error.
The same pattern repeats: hesitation, debate, gradual integration.
The Parallel Tradition of Better Tools
So, alongside resistance, a parallel tradition has evolved: Making the best use of the best available tools.
A navigator using a sextant was not cutting corners. He was improving precision. Likewise, a carpenter who adopted machine tools did not abandon craftsmanship: He improved efficiency. He reduced fatigue. He delivered cleaner edges more consistently.
What’s to be embarrassed about?
But just as he doesn’t surreptitiously smuggle his circular saw into the workshop under his coat, nor does he switch it on, drop it in the middle of the room, and hope for the best.
He measures first. He marks carefully. He sets the depth. He guides the blade with a steady hand. When necessary, he finishes the joint by hand to achieve the exact feel he wants. Power tools accelerate the workflow; they do not remove the need for skill.
AI in writing functions in the same way.
It can help generate structure, present options, accelerate first drafts, or identify weak transitions. But it does not decide positioning. It does not define tone. It does not understand your client’s lived context unless you guide it there. The writer remains at the helm.
AI as a Working Instrument
Used properly, AI can support:
- Idea exploration
- Structural organisation
- Draft development
- Editing passes
- Perspective testing
It shortens the mechanical stages of writing, but does not replace thinking. Yes, it is quicker. So are power tools. But speed is not the enemy of quality. Poor judgement is.
Handled carelessly, AI output feels flat. Handled deliberately, it becomes a collaborative instrument. Voice still comes through. Meaning remains intact. Intent remains human.
Efficiency, in this context, benefits the client. More time can be spent refining argument, sharpening examples, and improving clarity rather than wrestling with a blank page.
The Question of Embarrassment
The embarrassment some writers feel often stems from perception rather than principle.
There is a belief in certain circles that “real” writing must be entirely manual to be legitimate. Yet most modern writing already depends on layers of technology: word processors, spelling correction, grammar suggestions, research databases, cloud collaboration. AI is an extension of that progression.
Like any emerging technology, early versions prompted scepticism. Over time, familiarity tends to replace suspicion.
There is room for writers who prefer fully manual processes. Craft traditions persist in every industry. But history suggests that once tools demonstrate consistent benefit, resistance softens.
Few navigators reject GPS on philosophical grounds. Few tradespeople insist on hand-sawing every board when machinery is available.
Using AI Well
The important distinction is not whether AI is used. It is how it is used. Clear intent. Careful prompting. Critical editing. Personal voice layered back in. These determine quality. AI should be guided, questioned and refined. It should not be allowed to dictate tone or argument without oversight.
Click here, for a more detailed discussion of Ai in writing.
Time Will Tell
Technological shifts regularly provoke discomfort.
The typewriter unsettled traditionalists. So did the fountain pen. So did navigational instruments that improved precision at sea.
Over time, good tools become ordinary tools. A copywriter using AI responsibly is no more compromising their craft than a tradesman using power tools. Both are applying skill to available resources, to produce efficient, high-quality outcomes.
There is no need for embarrassment; this is simply a new tool to work with.