Interlude: Scenic Routes, Uncomfortable Truths, and Impressive Writers
I was recently contemplating a road trip and mapping out potential routes to get from the northern to southern part of California. I was considering two routes:
The direct route: the fastest and easiest drive through the central part of the state, which is a freeway, relatively flat, and agricultural. This route is known to be boring.
The scenic route: the longer and harder drive along the coast, which is full of narrow roads, winding corners, and steep dropoffs. This route is known to be iconic.
So the options were to take the direct route to get to my destination as soon as possible (~6.5 hours), or take the scenic route to enjoy the journey to my destination (~8.5 hours).
Although I was excited about the idea of getting to my destination 2 hours sooner, when I weighed the options, I realized that the trip was not only about getting to my destination. It was also about the experience I could have on the way there.
The easiest and fastest way wasn't better. I would miss the experience of driving the scenic route. And there's value in that experience.
I think the same may be true of writing with AI. AI tools can generate text quickly, but wrestling with words gives us experience—it builds our skills and sharpens our thinking. Although wrestling with words may not be as enjoyable as a scenic drive, there's value in the struggle and experience of writing.
I'm not suggesting that AI has no place in our writing. Sometimes the direct route is the right choice, and AI tools can help us on that route. But sometimes we need to take the scenic route. The struggle to find the right word, to structure a clear argument, and to untangle a complex idea is where we discover what we actually think.
So the next time you sit down to write, consider taking the scenic route. The experience is worth it.
Now onto this week's round-up...
Round-up
Reading
The uncomfortable truth an explosion of papers reveals about authors’ access to data
“A rapidly increasing number of published articles rely on analyses produced via the TriNetX platform. . . What has received less attention is what dashboard-based research means for author responsibility and accountability. . .If this kind of dashboard-based research is acceptable, we would argue that reporting standards need to be updated to more clearly state how the data were handled and the analysis was performed. This should be transparent to reviewers, readers and editors.”
Who is responsible when AI helps to write science?
"Authorship in science is an earned status: it recognizes a scholar’s contribution to a paper and signals to the research community that they are a competent and responsible scientist. What is at stake in potentially recognizing AI as an author is not simply who gets credit for a text, but how scholarly writing is deemed accountable and trustworthy."
Women make up less than one-fifth of last authorships in influential journals
"What the data do show is that among the ten journals in the Nature Index with the most authorships in 2025, eight did not improve their rate of female first authorships by more than four percentage points in the span of a decade. And six of them had women make up less than one-third of first authorships in 2025."
Watching
If You Wouldn't Say It, Don't Write It
"But I think it often happens that when people sit down to write, they think they have to do a lot of writing with a capital 'W.' You know, like fancy words they would never use or weirdly convoluted expressions they would never [use]...The one thing...I tell my students is read it aloud. If you wouldn't say it and if you can't get it out of your mouth, there's a good chance that it shouldn't be on the page. Don't use words that you would never use in conversation because, you know, who wants to read that?"
Quote
“The most impressive writers are the ones who don’t try to look impressive.” - Joshua Fields Millburn
Thank you so much for reading.
Warmly,
Crystal
