AI vs. the greats: you be the judge

"I'm channeling Jane Austen" pen from Totally Jane Austen

There are many lists of the greatest opening lines in literature. I made a short one of my own for this exercise: How would AI render these lines?

The original greats

1. "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife." — Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice

2. "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way -- in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only." — Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities

3. "Call me Ishmael." — Herman Melville. Moby-Dick

4. "There was no possibility of taking a walk that day. We had been wandering, indeed, in the leafless shrubbery an hour in the morning; but since dinner (Mrs. Reed, when there was no company, dined early) the cold winter wind had brought with it clouds so sombre, and a rain so penetrating, that further out-door exercise was now out of the question.” – Charlotte Brontë, Jane Eyre

5. “All this happened, more or less.” – Kurt Vonnegut Slaughterhouse Five

6. "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen." — George Orwell.1984

Claude's take

First I asked Claude, and this was its response: Here are my reimaginings, each trying to capture the spirit while finding a fresh angle:

---

1. Pride and Prejudice "Every woman in a poor household knows that a wealthy bachelor nearby is less a blessing than a problem to be solved."

(Flips Austen's irony to center the women's perspective rather than society's assumption.)

---

2. A Tale of Two Cities "The age was a contradiction — so perfectly balanced between glory and ruin that historians would later argue for centuries about which it actually was."

(Distills Dickens's famous parallelism into a single, drier observation.)

---

3. Moby-Dick "My name doesn't matter. What matters is that I survived."

(Keeps the casual confession but shifts the weight from identity to fate — hinting at the survival that frames the whole novel.)

---

4. Jane Eyre "Winter had made prisoners of us all, and I was already more confined than most."

(Condenses Brontë's physical detail into something that immediately signals Jane's deeper captivity — social, emotional, familial.)

---

5. Slaughterhouse-Five "Most of it is true."

(Vonnegut's genius was compression. This out-Vonneguts Vonnegut.)

---

6. 1984 "The day was ordinary in every way except the one way that mattered."

(Replaces Orwell's specific wrongness — the clocks striking thirteen — with a creeping, unspecified dread, making the reader lean in rather than jolt.)

I won't comment on each of these, though have to say that I am very much amused by the hubris demonstrated by Claude in claiming it "out-Vonneguts Vonnegut" with its rendition and that what it did to Jane Austen's height of perfection should be considered a crime by anyone who cares about language and rhythm. 

Grok opted to modernize the lines

In my prompt to Grok I didn't dictate what direction to take with the lines. I merely prompted it with this question, "How would you revise these opening lines?"

Interestingly, it gave me a whole extended preamble before launching into it. Plus it justifies inserting an em dash in the revision while also using that punctuation quite a bit in its commentary on its changes.  I've copied the whole response except the final paragraphs asking about my intent below:

These are some of the most iconic and frequently celebrated opening lines (or opening paragraphs) in English literature. They appear near the top of almost every "best first lines" list compiled over the years (such as the American Book Review's influential 100 Best First Lines from Novels, and various literary rankings from Penguin, Forbes, and others).Your selection is excellent—it's already a strong, canonical sampling that captures irony, paradox, mystery, atmosphere, understatement, and dystopian unease. Revising them "better" is tricky because they are masterpieces precisely because of their original wording, rhythm, and historical context. Any change risks losing what makes them timeless.
That said, if the goal is to modernize, shorten, sharpen for contemporary readers, heighten impact, or adapt for a different tone/genre (e.g., social media, a parody, a retelling, or a punchier hook), here are some thoughtful revisions with explanations for each:

1. Original (Austen): "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."Revised: "Everyone knows a rich single guy is desperate for a wife."
   • Why? Strips away the Regency-era formality and irony to make the sarcasm immediate and bite harder in modern English. It keeps the core joke but lands faster. (A very common paraphrase in pop culture.)
2. Original (Dickens): "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times..." (the full long antithesis paragraph)Revised: "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times—wisdom and foolishness, belief and doubt, light and darkness, hope and despair. We had everything before us, nothing before us. In short, the era was so much like today that its loudest voices insisted it could only be described in extremes."
   • Why? Condenses the famous repetitive structure without losing the poetic parallelism or the sly comparison to "the present period." The original's length is part of its grandeur, but a tighter version can feel more urgent today.
3. Original (Melville): "Call me Ishmael."Revised: "Call me Ishmael." (Honestly, almost untouchable.)
   • Why? It's perfect—three words that are mysterious, direct, and unforgettable. The only "revision" people sometimes joke about is adding context ("Call me Ishmael... before the white whale ruins everything"), but that defeats the point. Leave it alone.
4. Original (Brontë): "There was no possibility of taking a walk that day. We had been wandering, indeed, in the leafless shrubbery an hour in the morning; but since dinner... further out-door exercise was now out of the question."Revised: "No chance of a walk today. We'd already trudged through the bare shrubbery that morning, but after dinner the bitter wind brought such dark clouds and driving rain that going outside again was unthinkable."
   • Why? Modernizes the language ("trudging" instead of "wandering," "bitter wind" for atmosphere) while preserving the gloomy, confined mood that foreshadows Jane's isolation. Shortens slightly for pace without losing the voice.
5. Original (Vonnegut): "All this happened, more or less." Revised: "More or less, all of this actually happened."
   • Why? Flips the order slightly for a drier, more skeptical tone that aligns with Vonnegut's wry style. It keeps the casual dismissal of strict truth—perfect for a semi-autobiographical, time-jumping war story—but makes it feel even more offhand.
6. Original (Orwell): "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."Revised: "A bright, cold April day—and the clocks struck thirteen."
• Why? Tightens it for punchier rhythm while keeping the single, chilling detail that signals something is deeply wrong (military time + dystopia). The em dash adds a subtle dramatic pause.

Again, I won't comment on each of these but point out that the Austen line definitely is degraded in the revision and that the  flip of the order in the Vonnegut actually weakens the impact of the sentence.

ChatGPT's take

What fascinating is that while the other two generally tended to write to make their revisions more concise, ChatGPT seems to go in the opposite direction. It opted for more verbose sentences than the originals, acting rather in the manner of people who get paid by the word or students who are desperately trying to pad their essays to meet a minimum word count. That is most glaring in its rewrite of the opening of Moby Dick, adding on a completely extraneous phrase to its paraphrase, though it also does it for Vonnegut. That's quite a contrast to Claude's boast about its rewrite of that author's sentence.

I copied what it delivered exactly:

Here are creative rewrites of each opening, keeping the spirit but shifting voice, tone, or era.

---

1. Pride and Prejudice — Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen

Original:
“It is a truth universally acknowledged…”

Rewrite:
Everyone knows—or at least everyone says—that a wealthy bachelor cannot possibly be content on his own.

---

2. A Tale of Two Cities — A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens

Original:
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…”

Rewrite:
We lived in an age of dazzling promise and staggering ruin, of sharp minds and reckless folly, of fierce devotion and stubborn doubt. Hope bloomed even as despair took root. Everything seemed within reach, and yet nothing felt secure. Some swore we were ascending toward glory; others were certain we were rushing toward catastrophe. In many ways, it was an era disturbingly like our own—so extreme that it refused to be measured in anything but absolutes.

---

3. Moby-Dick — Moby-Dick by Herman Melville

Original:
“Call me Ishmael.”

Rewrite:
You may know me as Ishmael—at least, that will do for now.

---

4. Jane Eyre — Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë

Original:
“There was no possibility of taking a walk that day…”

Rewrite:
A walk was quite impossible that afternoon. Though we had roamed the barren shrubs for a time that morning, the sky had since darkened into a heavy gray, and a thin, relentless rain rode in on the winter wind. With such weather pressing at the windows, any thought of venturing out was firmly dismissed.

---

5. Slaughterhouse-Five — Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut

Original:
“All this happened, more or less.”

Rewrite:
Most of what follows occurred—give or take a few distortions.

---

6. 1984 — 1984 by George Orwell

Original:
“It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.”

Rewrite:
The April air was sharp and sunlit, but something was off: every clock in sight had just chimed thirteen.

---

Not everything new is improved  

You know how brands sometimes introduce "New and Improved" versions of their products that actually make them worse? It doesn't have to be as blatant as New Coke was, just some loss of flavor or diminished texture. That's how the AI rewrites strike me. 

So there you have it: three different generative AI takes on some of the most memorable sentences ever penned in English. In this instance, I'd have to say that ChatGPT performed the worse -- unless your goal really is to add to your word count. If all you need to do is paraphrase something, that can work for you. But you definitely lose the impact of the rhythm and wording born of human skill and talent.

Related

Add a pinch of salt to creative claims for AI

Aim higher than SEO for your marketing content

How Thankful Should We Be for Generative AI?

Visit WriteWayPro.weebly.com  Like and follow on Facebook and on LinkedIn

"Learnings" explained by ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini

 I'm not at all a fan of the modern use of the word "learnings" in place of what could be called lessons or takeaways. I wondered what led to seeing this all-too-often in business communication. I  decided to see what I can glean about it from generative AI. 

ChatGPT

I started with ChatGPT and got the following response: 

📜 1. Historical origin of “learnings”

• Old English already had leornung (“learning, knowledge obtained by study”).

• “Learnings” appears intermittently in Middle English and Early Modern English, but mostly in the sense of knowledge or scholarship, not “takeaways.”

So the plural form is historically attested, but the modern meaning is new.

---

📈 2. When did “learnings” (meaning “takeaways”) take off?

Linguists and corpus researchers note that:

• The usage begins to appear in the 1970s–80s in fields like education, psychology, organizational development, and management consulting.

• It becomes much more widespread after the 1990s, especially in:

  • Corporate training

  • Agile/software development

  • Post-mortem analyses (“What were the key learnings?”)

By the early 2000s, it was common in business English; by the 2010s, it had firmly entered corporate jargon.

---

💬 3. Why was this term coined (or revived)?

Several reasons:

✔ 1. Jargon need in organizational development

Fields like management consulting, OD, and “lessons learned” methodology wanted a compact noun for:

“knowledge gained from experience, not just from instruction.”

“Lesson” felt too teacher-student oriented; “takeaway” too informal.

✔ 2. Influence of corporate and academic training culture

Training programs often talk about:

• learnings,

• key learnings,

• actionable learnings.

The plural makes it feel like a measurable, list-friendly deliverable.

✔ 3. Analogy with words like “findings”

Consulting and research language uses many “-ings” nouns:

• findings

• earnings

• savings

• outcomes (a parallel)

“Learnings” fit the pattern of a concrete output after an event or analysis.

✔ 4. Global business English spread

Because English is used by many non-native speakers in international companies, simplified or regularized forms often spread.
“Learnings” works grammatically for learners who think:

verb → noun with “-ing” → plural is okay.

---

🚫 4. Why do some people dislike it?

• For many native speakers, “learnings” sounds ungrammatical or like jargon.

• They prefer:

  • lessons

  • takeaways

  • insights

Style guides (The Economist, AP, etc.) often recommend avoiding “learnings” unless quoting business jargon.

Claude's take

I then put the same question to Claude and got this response written out in paragraph form rather than bullet format with two citations, albeit from the same source. Also note that it does not throw in emojis like the other two do:

Based on my search, "learnings" has an interesting history. While the word itself dates back to the 14th century and was commonly used through the 18th century (Shakespeare even used it in Cymbeline), it surged in popularity during the 1950s in business jargon and educational contexts CSMonitor.com.

The term wasn't really "coined" in the modern sense—it was actually revived. From the 1400s through the 1700s, "learnings" meant "lessons" or "instructions" and was perfectly acceptable. However, it fell out of common use in the 19th and 20th centuries.

When it resurged in the 1950s, it took on a slightly different meaning in corporate and academic settings, essentially as a synonym for "findings," "conclusions," "results," or "takeaways." This revival happened as business jargon and corporate speak were developing their own vocabulary.

Today, learnings is widely viewed as pretentious and useless business jargon CSMonitor.com, appearing on countless lists of annoying corporate terminology. Despite this criticism, it has become firmly established in business, academic, and scientific contexts. The irony is that people generally have no problem with "teachings" (what is taught), but "learnings" (what is learned) somehow grates on many ears.

So it wasn't so much coined as it was resurrected from older English and repurposed for modern business speak—which is perhaps why it feels both familiar and oddly wrong to many people.

Google Gemini

To round out the experiment, I also posed the question to Google Gemini, which is closer to ChatGPT in style of presentation. however, it fails to grasp how much some of us hate the term. This is its response:

The word "learnings," particularly as a plural noun replacing terms like "lessons" or "takeaways," saw a significant increase in use as a corporate and educational buzzword starting around the year 2000.

However, it's important to note that the word itself is not new.

🗓️ Timeline of Usage

• Middle/Early Modern English (14th - 17th Century): The noun "learning" meaning "a thing learned" (a countable sense) and its plural, "learnings," were in occasional use. Shakespeare, for example, used the term.

• 1950s: The term saw an increase in use within academic and educational circles (often referred to as "edu-speak").

• Circa 2000: It became a widespread buzzword in business-speak (corporate jargon), commonly appearing in phrases like "key learnings" or "apply these learnings." This is when it really started replacing "lessons learned" or "takeaways" in project management and professional contexts.

---

🤔 Why Was the Term Coined/Revived?

While "learnings" is often considered unnecessary jargon by language purists, its resurgence and adoption in business contexts appear to stem from a perceived need for a different nuance than existing words:

• To Distinguish from "Lessons": The word "lessons" can carry connotations of being taught (as in a classroom lesson) or of something learned from a failure (as in "we learned our lesson"). "Learnings" is sometimes used to refer to insights or knowledge gained through experience or a process, often in a less painful or formal way.

• To Merge Concepts: In corporate and project environments, "learnings" acts as a shorthand to combine the idea of "things we've learned as a team" and "action items" or "next steps." It is intended to imply a list of actionable insights or points of wisdom distilled from an experience.

• Corporate Trend: It is part of a broader trend of turning verbs into nouns in corporate language ("What's the ask?" or "What's the solve?"). The plural "learnings" parallels other accepted plural nouns derived from verbal actions, such as findings and teachings.

Essentially, its modern rise is largely attributed to it becoming a recognizable piece of corporate jargon that differentiates the knowledge gained from the traditional, sometimes rigid, sense of a "lesson."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The information from all three is consistent, so we don't have the problem of AI hallucinations here. However, Gemini seems to ignore the fact that many people hate the use of this jargon, considering it pretentious, as Claude points out. It also omits that it's not recommended for use in publications, as per ChatGPT's citation. Perhaps that's a reflection of Google's own corporate culture and form of communication.

Related: https://writewaypro.blogspot.com/2024/06/a-new-generative-ai-comparison.html

How Thankful Should We Be for Generative AI?

 I thought I'd like to generate a picture of Jane Austen in context of an American Thanksgiving celebration for a holiday greeting post on the social media accounts I have associated with my Totally Jane Austen brand. I opted to use Google Gemini. 

Here's how it went: 

First prompt: Can you generate an image of Jane Austen celebrating an American Thanksgiving

Here's what it delivered with this message: 

"Here is an image of Jane Austen celebrating American Thanksgiving."

Second prompt included the portrait of Jane Austen that I referenced: Let's have fewer people, no signs, and a woman who is dressed like Jane Austen is in her portrait 

Second iteration came back with this: "Here is a Thanksgiving celebration with fewer people, no signs, and a woman dressed like Jane Austen in her portrait."

I attached the Jane Austen portrait again and wrote: "Nope you didn't do it. That's almost the same picture. Try doing it with Jane Austen herself looking like this."

Gemini then delivered this with the note, "My apologies, I misunderstood the previous request. Here is an image of Jane Austen herself, looking like in her portrait, celebrating Thanksgiving with fewer people and no signs." 

My response was to again attach the portrait with this prompt:  "That's the same picture again. Delete that and just put this picture of Jane Austen in a context of a table with turkey, etc."

Gemini then offered this monstrosity with this phrase "You are absolutely right, I apologize for the repeated image. I will generate a new image for you, placing Jane Austen from the provided portrait into a Thanksgiving setting. "

I then wrote:  "She's out of proportion to the people. Just take them out and get the proportions right."

Gemini responded with "My apologies for the scale issue. Let me correct that for you. Here is Jane Austen, in proper proportion, at a Thanksgiving table by herself." and delivered this: 

I wasn't thrilled with the results for several reasons but was tired of the back-and-forth, so I said, "It'll have to do."

Gemini's response: "I understand. I apologize that the image generations were not meeting your expectations and appreciate your patience with the process.

Is there anything else I can help you generate or create today?"

Related:

Aim higher than SEO for your marketing content

Conversation with Gemini

can you generate an image of Jane Austen celebrating an American Thanksgiving

Let's have fewer people, no signs, and a woman who is dressed like Jane Austen is in her portrait

Nope you didn't do it. That's almost the same picture. Try doing it with Jane Austen herself looking like this

That's the same picture again. Delete that and just put this picture of Jane Austen in a context of a table with turkey, etc.

She's out of proportion to the people. Just take them out and get the proportions right.

It'll have to do.