Slow Pacing
AI helps summarize large amounts of data, and I recently used this ability to help create a document I call a book proposal. It contains all the technical information to publish: the ISBN, Amazon ASIN, publication date, number of pages, blurb, short summary, medium summary, and detailed summary. Except for the book blurb (which AI had no part in), I do not show any part of it to the public.
Creating a short summary is challenging because one must condense many plot points into a few sentences, whereas a long summary can span many written pages. But this is where AI is supposed to shine. So, I was about to upload my unpublished book and then had a frightening thought: “If I did this, AI would have a copy of my work and use it for training/plagiarism.”
I decided to test my fear. In 2014, I wrote a business plan for a startup that went nowhere. (Ten months of my life I will not get back.) It had hyper-specific concepts that were visible only to three people. I uploaded the document to ChatGPT and asked for a short summary. It did a fantastic job, and then I “started a new conversation,” which, in theory, would delete the document.
The next day, I asked ChatGPT about items mentioned in the business plan, but it did not include any of my concepts. I then searched online for quotes without success, which seemed to confirm that the risk of plagiarism was minimal.
With some apprehension, I uploaded my unpublished book and asked for a one-sentence summary. The results were great, and I then asked for a one-paragraph summary. Also, great, but when I asked ChatGPT for a detailed summary of each chapter, it failed spectacularly. This surprised me because it should have been an extension of the short summary.
My plot revolves around the main character meeting six people over 13 chapters. ChatGPT identified the fifth person in the tenth chapter as the book’s main character. Completely crazy, but an important lesson about AI’s limitations.
Still, I used (with heavy self-editing) the short and medium summaries for my book proposal and spent 6 hours creating the long summary. I did one more thing before “starting a new conversation.” “Give an honest review of this book.”
This frightened me because AI is an uncaring machine, like a chainsaw, and my ego is fragile. Fortunately, ChatGPT liked the plot, but it had a standout problem: “slow pacing.”
I sat back, wondering what it was complaining about. So, I asked, “Provide examples of slow pacing,” and ChatGPT pointed out lengthy descriptions and what I like to call bridge scenes, which are transitional segments between big scenes.
My beta reader (mother) commented on the first draft of my first book that it had weak descriptions, lousy connections between concepts, and poor flow. I have since worked hard to correct these flaws, but this complaint raises a question: Did I go overboard?
I decided another experiment was necessary. So, I found a site with non-copyrighted, well-regarded books and downloaded three. Then, I changed the title/author/character names and asked ChatGPT for “an honest book review.” You guessed it, it complained that two had slow pacing. Ahh, it was not me.
I then asked ChatGPT to “improve the pacing” of one. It happened to be Great Expectations by Charles Dickens, and wow, the result was brutal. All his wonderful sentences became choppy messes; there was no flow, and every description was slaughtered. The overall length went down by 30%. It was like Charles Dickens wrote a book on meth. Dang!
Funny side story: I called this book “Bill’s Big Adventure.”
I did not understand why this ugly fix would be desirable to anybody but ChatGPT, “thought” that it had made a wonderful improvement. So, I took a walk, and it hit me. Who are the big users of AI, and what are they using it for? Kids generating text messages. Ahh. That kind of “document” requires lightning-fast pacing, and even one extra word looks radically out of place. It all made sense, but revealed a problem.
It is clear that the next generation demands fast pacing, but I have been working my fingers to the bone to slow it down. Is there a happy medium? I would argue no because it is a true/false kind of situation. Turn on the lengthy descriptions for a charming book, or turn them off for instant rewards.
I have gone too far down this path to suddenly change. It has been a painful process, marked by nasty reviews, angry comments from editors, and the pain of discovering my own flaws. Plus, I have been writing for a specific audience that enjoys a good, but slow, read. This market is shrinking as adults age and young people grow up.
So, it seems my work will have a slow pace, and there is nothing that can be done. Meaning, ChatGPT is the canary in the coal mine. Well, I have learned in life that one must find a path and stick to it, yet know when to give up.
This happened a few months ago when I helped a friend start a business. It began fantastically, but we had incompatible approaches, and I removed myself from the project. Still, I put in maximum effort. Fun side story. The business floundered, which means my decision was sound.
The publishing space is already shrinking fast, and I now understand that modern readers dislike slow pacing, which taught me that my road to successful publishing just got a lot longer.
And of course, there is another problem. I am in the planning stages of a young adult book series. Obviously, these readers demand fast pacing, and it is clear I do not have that skill. It gets worse. My idea is a kid’s diary, resulting in long descriptions—yeah… nice marketing plan.
You’re the best -Bill
March 11, 2026
Creating a short summary is challenging because one must condense many plot points into a few sentences, whereas a long summary can span many written pages. But this is where AI is supposed to shine. So, I was about to upload my unpublished book and then had a frightening thought: “If I did this, AI would have a copy of my work and use it for training/plagiarism.”
I decided to test my fear. In 2014, I wrote a business plan for a startup that went nowhere. (Ten months of my life I will not get back.) It had hyper-specific concepts that were visible only to three people. I uploaded the document to ChatGPT and asked for a short summary. It did a fantastic job, and then I “started a new conversation,” which, in theory, would delete the document.
The next day, I asked ChatGPT about items mentioned in the business plan, but it did not include any of my concepts. I then searched online for quotes without success, which seemed to confirm that the risk of plagiarism was minimal.
With some apprehension, I uploaded my unpublished book and asked for a one-sentence summary. The results were great, and I then asked for a one-paragraph summary. Also, great, but when I asked ChatGPT for a detailed summary of each chapter, it failed spectacularly. This surprised me because it should have been an extension of the short summary.
My plot revolves around the main character meeting six people over 13 chapters. ChatGPT identified the fifth person in the tenth chapter as the book’s main character. Completely crazy, but an important lesson about AI’s limitations.
Still, I used (with heavy self-editing) the short and medium summaries for my book proposal and spent 6 hours creating the long summary. I did one more thing before “starting a new conversation.” “Give an honest review of this book.”
This frightened me because AI is an uncaring machine, like a chainsaw, and my ego is fragile. Fortunately, ChatGPT liked the plot, but it had a standout problem: “slow pacing.”
I sat back, wondering what it was complaining about. So, I asked, “Provide examples of slow pacing,” and ChatGPT pointed out lengthy descriptions and what I like to call bridge scenes, which are transitional segments between big scenes.
My beta reader (mother) commented on the first draft of my first book that it had weak descriptions, lousy connections between concepts, and poor flow. I have since worked hard to correct these flaws, but this complaint raises a question: Did I go overboard?
I decided another experiment was necessary. So, I found a site with non-copyrighted, well-regarded books and downloaded three. Then, I changed the title/author/character names and asked ChatGPT for “an honest book review.” You guessed it, it complained that two had slow pacing. Ahh, it was not me.
I then asked ChatGPT to “improve the pacing” of one. It happened to be Great Expectations by Charles Dickens, and wow, the result was brutal. All his wonderful sentences became choppy messes; there was no flow, and every description was slaughtered. The overall length went down by 30%. It was like Charles Dickens wrote a book on meth. Dang!
Funny side story: I called this book “Bill’s Big Adventure.”
I did not understand why this ugly fix would be desirable to anybody but ChatGPT, “thought” that it had made a wonderful improvement. So, I took a walk, and it hit me. Who are the big users of AI, and what are they using it for? Kids generating text messages. Ahh. That kind of “document” requires lightning-fast pacing, and even one extra word looks radically out of place. It all made sense, but revealed a problem.
It is clear that the next generation demands fast pacing, but I have been working my fingers to the bone to slow it down. Is there a happy medium? I would argue no because it is a true/false kind of situation. Turn on the lengthy descriptions for a charming book, or turn them off for instant rewards.
I have gone too far down this path to suddenly change. It has been a painful process, marked by nasty reviews, angry comments from editors, and the pain of discovering my own flaws. Plus, I have been writing for a specific audience that enjoys a good, but slow, read. This market is shrinking as adults age and young people grow up.
So, it seems my work will have a slow pace, and there is nothing that can be done. Meaning, ChatGPT is the canary in the coal mine. Well, I have learned in life that one must find a path and stick to it, yet know when to give up.
This happened a few months ago when I helped a friend start a business. It began fantastically, but we had incompatible approaches, and I removed myself from the project. Still, I put in maximum effort. Fun side story. The business floundered, which means my decision was sound.
The publishing space is already shrinking fast, and I now understand that modern readers dislike slow pacing, which taught me that my road to successful publishing just got a lot longer.
And of course, there is another problem. I am in the planning stages of a young adult book series. Obviously, these readers demand fast pacing, and it is clear I do not have that skill. It gets worse. My idea is a kid’s diary, resulting in long descriptions—yeah… nice marketing plan.
You’re the best -Bill
March 11, 2026
