Scholarlink

<p>The author, in the conventional sense, was already fragile; but within an AI-mediated literary ecosystem, the instability of the idea of a singular author stands further decentered. What is at stake is not the “death” of the author, but the redistribution of the functions historically assigned to it. In AI-mediated writing systems, intention, coherence, responsibility, and origin no longer align. The “author” in this sense is less a subject than a site of passage between a sequence of operations, each inhabited by different forms of agency. The displacement of purpose, which is projected through the prompt, changed through probabilistic creation, and reassembled through actions of reading, selection, critique, and revision, is crucial to this reconfiguration. The prompt operates as a site of meta-authorship, relocating writing from inscription to instruction and structuring the conditions under which textuality emerges without determining it in advance. Within this iterative loop, the subject oscillates between roles of a prompter, a reader, and a critic. I propose a <i>sympoietic author-function</i>, a form of collective, relational authorship that decenters the human without complete erasure. The paper further outlines an <i>ethics of sympoietic authorship,</i> shifting the question from ownership to responsibility within distributed networks of creation, emphasizing process transparency, relational accountability, and interpretive responsibility.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Who is the muse? Prompt writing, AI poets, and the sympoietic author-function

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月16日

查看全文
  • Vipin Chauhan

摘要

The author, in the conventional sense, was already fragile; but within an AI-mediated literary ecosystem, the instability of the idea of a singular author stands further decentered. What is at stake is not the “death” of the author, but the redistribution of the functions historically assigned to it. In AI-mediated writing systems, intention, coherence, responsibility, and origin no longer align. The “author” in this sense is less a subject than a site of passage between a sequence of operations, each inhabited by different forms of agency. The displacement of purpose, which is projected through the prompt, changed through probabilistic creation, and reassembled through actions of reading, selection, critique, and revision, is crucial to this reconfiguration. The prompt operates as a site of meta-authorship, relocating writing from inscription to instruction and structuring the conditions under which textuality emerges without determining it in advance. Within this iterative loop, the subject oscillates between roles of a prompter, a reader, and a critic. I propose a sympoietic author-function, a form of collective, relational authorship that decenters the human without complete erasure. The paper further outlines an ethics of sympoietic authorship, shifting the question from ownership to responsibility within distributed networks of creation, emphasizing process transparency, relational accountability, and interpretive responsibility.