Eddy’s review of A Cottage Near Lambton: A Pride & Prejudice Variation (Period-Authentic Dramas) > Likes and Comments

I have read very little that screams AI, but I confess I raised an eyebrow at the author’s forward insisting that she does not use it. Smacked of “the lady doth protest too much”. Since this is the first book of hers I’ve read, I was unaware of the controversy. Wish I’d researched her a bit more before buying my Kindle copy. I will certainly avoid her in future.

If this IS written by AI, it explains everything I found wrong with the book. If it is in fact NOT computer-composed, that’s actually worse. See my review, which I wrote assuming it to be a first novel by an aspiring JAFF writer.

I had never read this author before, and the prose seemed pretty nice at first. Then the repetition started; some sentence structures became repetitive, and it all had a slight AI touch to me. But the author said she didn’t use it, so I got confused.

I swear, I read at least five versions of “Mrs. Younge did something, but subtly enough that it wouldn’t seem deliberate.” And not to mention how vapid everything sounds.

I believe many times the crazy AI witch hunt is just a smear against poor writing and lack of editing; in my opinion true AI use has other signals which I didn’t find here.

I cannot determine AI use, or lack of, for sure, but what I can confidently say is that I despise the “common agreements” of the so called JAFF Community, which (in my view) coordinates to circulate free copies in exchange for unmerited, deceitful, and borderline corrupt 5-star ratings for their friends allt he time. This situation has got so bad that “good” ratings have become a moot indicator for quality on this platform.

I rated this book 3-stars; I enjoyed some parts, I was annoyed by others. I left an honest review and I hope the author can improve. I find “consensus” about use of AI by X author is problematic, because there’s no way the author can prove otherwise, other than pledging and grovelling in some weird humiliation ritual for an audience that already made its decision. I would much rather see some accountability from authors & publishers who push their loyalties as a marketing strategy to control reviews…

The style of this writing is too unique for it to be AI, which uses JAFF to learn its messy story lines and prose from. This book has a bit of fanfiction, a bit of Austen, and a lot of poetic literary fiction writers like Ondaatje. Since no one but silly Canadians like me reads Ondaatje, no bot would ever put them together.

Lit wrote: "I believe many times the crazy AI witch hunt is just a smear against poor writing and lack of editing; in my opinion true AI use has other signals which I didn’t find here.

I cannot determine AI u..."

Listen, check her other books and see how she repeats the same sentence words by words. some of her reviews are from her friends.
Read it again and count how many times she says " deliberate " and " quiet " and how many times she speaks of nothing but characters doing nothing but move their hands, step forward and so on.
Lastly, there are many many weather / setting descriptions that are hallmark of AI. Generic, bland.
Expect my review to be reported soon as all the reviews pointing this is AI so far. Check other her other books reviews, I am very far from being the only one who knows it's AI.
She has allegedly an " editor " yet the repetitions are legions.
AI writes very supercialy, it's all moody, "poetic". because it has nothing to say. There is never any deep dive into characters, motivations, feelings but those hollow words... it's decently written yet the details, technically speaking but it does make no sense. She has corrected many phrases people have called out for being AI, very specifically. For a reason. Every single time someone pointed a sentence that was AI, she changed it. Why?
The first chapter, when she started to publish this, was so AI that many people called her out... and then she changed it.... If this is was not AI, why would she if it was genuinely her own words?
If it was not AI, she wouldn't have to say anything or change anything but she does, constantly because people see thru it. Try for yourself, open CHATGPT, ask it to write a chapter and you'll see the MANY many similarities.
I don't understand how you can't understand how obvious it is.

Laurie wrote: "If this IS written by AI, it explains everything I found wrong with the book. If it is in fact NOT computer-composed, that’s actually worse. See my review, which I wrote assuming it to be a first n..."

Yes, it does. It doesn't feel right, there are many repetitions and inconsistencies that no human author would make.
It's moody, strangy well written but it says nothing.
It's how AI writes.

Suzan wrote: "The style of this writing is too unique for it to be AI, which uses JAFF to learn its messy story lines and prose from. This book has a bit of fanfiction, a bit of Austen, and a lot of poetic liter..."

Then you never used AI. You have no idea what you're talking about. Please open CHATGPT and try for yourself, with all due respect.
This is not unique, this is literally how AI writes, I am sorry to burst your bubble.
Try. For yourself. And if you're a writer yourself, how can you not see it? It's beyond me that people eat it up when the prose is so bland and superficial that no human experience has been put into it.

Anna wrote: "I had never read this author before, and the prose seemed pretty nice at first. Then the repetition started; some sentence structures became repetitive, and it all had a slight AI touch to me. But ..."

Not a slight touch. It's Ai, that's why it's so repetitive and there are SO many editing issues. Every single one of her books have the exact same issues. Don't you think it's troubling?
Because it's AI.
Do you know a single other author who uses the same sentences words by words every book? have the same editing issues? The same inconsistencies? Characters do things and then they contradict themselves, sometimes they wear a read dress and then a blue one the next chapter ( in another of her book ).
Again, that is what Ai does. It cannot keep up with the details.

This author never uses generative AI. I will never open Chat Goop because I am strongly opposed to AI. I've read AI books before and known, and read Timothy Underwood's and been duped. But honestly, why this witch hunt for a dyslexic author?

And Eddy...I've had ten books of my own traditionally published and I've content edited 36, half of the latter through a well-known publisher. I can claim to know voice pretty well. I've probably reviewed more books on the 'Zon and Goodreads than you've ever read. I was a top reviewer at one time until I was bullied out of detailed reviews. JAFF doesn't tend to be poetic. AI JAFF doesn't either. Educate yourself rather than wasting this poor author's time with your bullying.

Suzan wrote: "And Eddy...I've had ten books of my own traditionally published and I've content edited 36, half of the latter through a well-known publisher. I can claim to know voice pretty well. I've probably r..."

As I said, you have no idea what you are talking about. You're against AI yet this is AI and you're content, blissfully ignorant and happily defending AI. Isn't it ironic?
You have never tried it therefore you have no idea that it can write, nearly word by word like this "author".
I am not bullying her, she had many reviews calling her out with very founded examples removed all the time. Why don't you go and comment on the other people who points this is very likely AI in her other books as well? And don't forget Amazon and elsewhere. We are many to know this is AI.