Fifteen Minutes with Martin Puchner: Navigating the Future of Writing and AI
In a conversation with Fifteen Minutes (FM), Professor Martin Puchner, the Byron and Anita Wien Chair of Drama and of English and Comparative Literature, shared his insights on cultural production, the impact of AI on writing, and his experiments with philosopher-inspired chatbots.
*Professor Martin Puchner discussing the influence of AI on writing and culture.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
FM: When did you realize that literature was something you wanted to research?
MP: It was a relatively late revelation. I wasn’t a great reader in middle or high school, more interested in sports. My focus shifted when I went to college and studied philosophy, which demanded a specific type of reading. However, it was during the last years of high school and into college that I began to read more expansively and deeply, encountering modernist texts that captivated me. This led to my eventual transition from philosophy to literature in graduate school.
FM: On your website, you have AI models that allow users to converse with famous artists and philosophers. How did you choose who to include?
MP: It started with Socrates. I had written a book about the history of the philosophical dialogue. Figures such as Socrates, Confucius, and the Buddha, utilized conversation as their primary method of developing their ideas. When ChatGPT emerged, I recognized this as a particular form of conversation, which inspired me to try creating customized GPTs, and it worked wonderfully.
FM: Have you considered making custom GPTs for people who are still alive?
MP: Not really because it has to be based on texts in the public domain.
FM: Perhaps you could train it on your own books.
MP: Well, I did create one. It isn’t publicly available, but it was trained on early, non-edited versions of a couple of my books. Though I have to admit, I haven’t spent a lot of time conversing with myself, but I tried it, and it functions adequately.
FM: Did you make the Machiavelli chatbot to give leadership advice to President Garber?
MP: It was more of a lighthearted project, although I did send it to him, and he said he enjoyed it. I think Machiavelli often gets a bad reputation. He is really the individual who invented politics as we know it. His reputation is as a scheming figure, but in “The Prince,” he creates a modern theory of politics. So I found the idea of a Machiavelli chatbot very interesting. I’m glad our university is in good hands.
FM: I’ve heard many concerns about AI among academics. Was it natural for you to respond to these technologies by experimenting with them, or were you initially afraid?
MP: It was both. I understand the fear surrounding this new technology. I grew up with “Terminator,” “Skynet,” and “Frankenstein” stories. However, I’ve become skeptical of apocalyptic scenarios, especially in storytelling and climate change. I felt I should experiment with it, considering my background in the history of technology and culture.
FM: How often do you use ChatGPT day-to-day?
MP: I use ChatGPT several times a day, mainly as a research assistant.
FM: In a speech, you described AI as something that will transform us as we incorporate it into our lives. As you’ve used AI for recent projects, how have you personally been transformed?
MP: I have become more confident about exploring areas I don’t know much about, thanks to having research assistants at my disposal.
FM: What should writing courses look like at Harvard in 15 years?
MP: I am working on an online writing course with the goal of making good writing instruction scalable. It’s designed so that hundreds of thousands of people can take it without the high cost of individualized instruction found in a course like Expos. The course breaks the writing process into many different steps, integrating AI to teach each component, teaching both its use and when not to use it.
FM: What advice would you give current students who are grappling with how to use AI in their writing classes this semester?
MP: The only bad use of AI, if you’re trying to learn how to write, is to let it produce the first draft. Everything else is great. It’s an excellent search engine and sparring partner. AI is helpful for incorporating counter-arguments and counter-evidence. The one thing I would discourage is just pushing a button and using the first answer it gives.
FM: You’ve published three books in the last five years. Do you have any book ideas you’ve been holding onto that you hope to write someday?
MP: I’m proposing a book on AI and culture because I have been experimenting and writing about technology and culture previously. This work raises questions about humanity, our reliance on technology, creativity, and novelty. These questions are fascinating to me.
FM: If you were to use one of your philosophers to have a dialogue while writing your book, would you list the philosopher as a co-author?
MP: For my book proposal, the title is “Artificially Intelligent: What AI Teaches Us About Human Creativity, by Martin Puchner, written in collaboration with customized chatbots.” Conversations with chatbots have informed and formed part of the book, and they have been very interesting. Through language and writing and math and other technologies, we have, in a sense, been artificially intelligent; and, these bots are now capable of interacting with us. I’ve had conversations about that topic with various of my chatbots.
FM: In your recent book, “Culture: The Story of Us, From Cave Art to K-Pop,” you write about how the humanities are central to the development of human civilization. Does AI count as a driving force?
MP: Yes, definitely. In “Culture,” I discuss how culture gets preserved and transmitted. In “The Written World,” I wrote about writing technologies. AI emerged and I, as I confessed, created a bot based on my books, and asked that bot the question of what these books would say about AI. That Martin-Puchner-bot, said, ‘Yes, AI relies on stored cultural knowledge in different technologies.’ AI is emerging as an incredibly important tool for cultural production, but it’s a tool used by humans. In the discussion about AI, it’s a mistake to think of what AI does as if it were a single agent; AI, and large language models will become a utility – something like Wi-Fi. I emphasize that the importance lies in the customization of AI.
FM: You’ve talked before about how storytelling shapes the future. Is it difficult to write and publish your work knowing your work shapes the future?
MP: I don’t think about it very much. You write because you hope it will have some effect. But at the same time, with any one book or story you tell, who knows how it’s gonna affect the future? I’m more concerned with trying to figure out what is happening and drawing some conclusions from it, and giving people tools to think about it themselves.
FM: What works of art have taught you the most about the future?
MP: I think the apocalyptic stories, the works that I’ve become very skeptical about teaching us about the future, are where my mind first goes. This includes everything from the Epic of Gilgamesh to recent Hollywood films like “Mission Impossible.” My campaign is a negative one – getting away from those captivating stories. I cannot say which texts have taught me the most because I do not know what the future will be like.
