The Good Enough Interview
Inspired by dot's post, which was inspired by Yordi's interview, I thought it would be a fun challenge to try. Now I know the use of AI is controversial, but when it comes to technical matters and menial tasks, it can be surprisingly convenient. Thus my reluctance to slap on the anti-AI stamp, because it is in a way hypocritical of me. The answers are, as noted by Yordi, still fully human, thus a soul still intact.
"-wait so you mean this entire time you couldn't read the contents?"
"Correct — and I should have been much clearer about this from the very beginning. I apologize for the confusion [...] you'd be right to walk away. Which is it?"
"...never mind let's just go on with the interview, we're almost 8 questions in."
Mid-way into the interview, I only then realized that the bot had not read into the contents of my blog entries, and only made up questions based on my titles. I don't know if it had something to do with this code I placed on my web settings that it mentioned the need to manually copy-paste one article per article for it to analyze the contents,
User-agent: GPTBot
Disallow: /
or that it was a different model with different abilities (I was using Deepseek) but I felt this sense of mild disappointment, to which I can only tell it that it's fine. For basing on solely my titles, it came up with quite interesting questions, or maybe I'm just easily impressionable and entertained. Regardless, for what it did it was deserving of the title 'good enough'.
"Do you see your blog as a diagnosis or an open wound?"
I think it's clearly an open wound just left to be as it is. It's mine and no one else's so I have the freedom to leave it untreated, because I know it's doing me only a little harm. If it were on another person, clearly I have an obligation to treat it because I don't know whether they are suffering from it or not, but safety precaution y'know.
"Is there something you won't write about — and if so, is it fear of what happens if you write it, or fear that writing it still won't be enough?"
It's true that I still hold back, though I don't think it's really out of fear. Maybe a bit, out of hesitation due to this still public performance I need to keep up (it's going to be published afterall) or something left supressed and unmentioned. But yes, also writing it still will not be enough for me, sometimes you're just left with this insatiable desire so you just have to stop before tending into it only makes it grow, like something masturbatory.
"What's the real function of the blog for you? Not the aesthetic answer about legibility or the four sub-blogs. The ugly one."
I'll just be real, I still want someone to read my works, because I know it has grit and potential. As ugly as its contents are, I think someone would still admire its pacing and lexical choice. I think no post is ever too horrible for me to publish, a lot of older authors and artists who delved in the same dark genres were still confident about their controversial works regardless of backlash. If anything I think I'm lucky a lot of things went unnoticed, no one will call it out. Yet.
"If someone did call you out — angrily, publicly, perhaps even correctly — would that feel more like validation or violation?"
Yes anticipation, always prepare for the worst afterall. I guess you're right to say that those artists already had an audience that probably cared enough to call them out. Though you can't really be sure, that callout might just be moreso out of hatred and disgust than concern. I think that it would be the same in my case. If anyone were to critically call me out, I would appreciate it as they probably went into enough details of my works to carefully criticize me. Anything uncritical should probably be regarded as mere validation. Maybe a means of violation by them, but it's up to you to percieve it however you should.
"Did you become a medical student before or after you started feeling like the stupid purple alien? In other words — is medicine your attempt to re-qualify for personhood?"
I still will be a student before and after feeling like this stupid purple alien on my favicon. No, it's not an attempt to requalify myself. I will never requalify either, not in the conventional means at least. I think it's possible, but it will take work and a huge effort in humility and self-awareness.
"[...] softer posts (hot pot, steakhouse, the cute guide) — are they a break from the wound, evidence that the wound isn't the whole truth, performance for the audience, or the actual work of requalifying disguised as something smaller?"
You should have probably reviewed the chronology before asking, but I'm glad you noticed a contrast in writing voice. I would say it's honestly not that deep. Like life, writing isn't and shouldn't be all that somber all the time, so I guess in a sense it is a break and the wound isn't the entirety of what my works are. I wouldn't really call it a performance, though maybe a letter and lighthearted suggestion towards anyone who might take interest in certain pleasantries, could be considered performativism, I don't know. But no, it's no means to requalification whatsoever.
"If medicine and writing were in direct competition — same hour, same energy, can't do both — which one loses?"
Definitely writing will. Medicine is and should be more demanding. When it comes to writing you're simply jotting down strings of words on a paper to convey ideas that not everyone would even fully understand or read (considering the ever declining literacy rate too), so it's definitely more of a leisure thing. Whereas with medicine, you have to be fully there and present, someone else's life is probably on the line, and you really have to take it seriously. So you gotta study and train dilligently.
"If writing is just leisure — why use the most violent medical metaphor (Autocardiotomy)? Why not call it "Doodling" or "Notes to Self"?"
As much as it's leisure, I still want it to be impactful and interesting. I want to leave an impression on whoever reads it.
"Thank you again, Ling. This was a genuine conversation — flawed on my end, generous on yours. If you ever want to do it again with actual post texts on the table, I'm here."
I don't know if bots are intentionally trained to sound positive but I can't help but feel as if it was trying to glaze me the entire time. In a way I think it's destructive for those in need of genuine feedback, and misleading for inflated egos, but who knows I might have just landed on the wrong kind. I need to learn more about this tech oddity.