22/05/2026
There is a type of background work happening right now that I do not think enough people are talking about.
Especially amongst creatives using AI.
From the outside, it can look like everyone is suddenly producing endless courses, offers, captions, frameworks, products, and content at impossible speed.
And technically, they are.
But there is a difference between using AI to generate output and using AI while still retaining creative authorship.
Those are two very different experiences.
For example, I have been building the full four-stage Artistic Notes clarity pathway:
• the free entry point
• Something’s Off
• the 30 Day Clarity process
• and the full Clarity Edit
Could I have built this faster?
Absolutely.
If I allowed AI to fully take over the writing, structure, tone, positioning, and delivery, I probably could have produced the entire thing in a fraction of the time.
But that is not the type of work I want to create.
I review everything.
I question the flow.
I restructure sections.
I test whether the process actually supports the way real people think and learn.
I remove generic language.
I refine tone.
I examine whether the framework genuinely solves the deeper problem underneath the visible one.
That takes time.
And I think many thoughtful creatives are currently experiencing a strange kind of disorientation because of this.
You are using AI.
You are moving faster than you used to.
But it still feels slow compared to what you are seeing online.
And sometimes that can create the feeling that you are doing something wrong.
But often, what you are actually doing is retaining discernment.
A lot of AI-generated content right now is surface-level.
It sounds polished, but it is not deeply considered.
It is often built for speed rather than integration.
The information may technically be correct, but the delivery does not flow naturally because nobody slowed down enough to think about how people actually receive information.
Some people are not even fully reading the material they are publishing.
They are generating.
Packaging.
Posting.
Moving on.
That is a completely different workflow from authored creative practice supported by AI.
And I think it is important to acknowledge that authorship itself is labour.
Reviewing is labour.
Refining is labour.
Thinking is labour.
Discernment is labour.
Emotional calibration is labour.
Deciding what not to publish is labour.
That invisible work still counts.
What helps ground me personally is remembering what this process looked like before AI.
I remember spending six months building one course.
I remember taking a year to gather research, study audiences, analyse competitors, sit in forums, test ideas, and slowly shape something useful enough to share.
AI has absolutely reduced the time.
It just does not always feel like it when you are still choosing to remain present inside the process.
And honestly?
I think there is value in that.
Because the goal for me was never to remove myself from the work entirely.
The goal was to remove enough friction that I could think more deeply, create more sustainably, and build with greater clarity rather than greater speed.
