The hope of future literature will never be in the hands of artificial intelligence, but in our own hands.

Based on the analysis of hypertext and multimedia electronic reading, Yan Feng, a professor at Fudan University, further pointed out that this reading method itself is a kind of reading pointing to the future. Yan Feng explained that the network is not special to the literary revolution, and its trend has been revealed in the past. People have always claimed that the study reading to be defended is linear, and the protagonist's fate is unique from beginning, development, climax to ending. However, looking at the history of modern literature, this model has been subverted. "In fact, linear realistic literature has fallen behind the times. In the 198s, it was all stream of consciousness, with uncertain endings and uncertain characters' fate," Yan Feng said. "This is actually a state of network. Isn't the literary form that Barthes and Foucault longed for now? "

on the one hand, artificial intelligence is really a great plan. But in the field of literary creation, artificial intelligence is not feasible. Artificial intelligence can provide some instrumental help for literary creation, but human stories have to be written by human beings themselves, so that they can be written ups and downs and spread through the ages. I don't believe that things written by artificial intelligence will last forever. As Liu Cixin said in his short stories, artificial intelligence has written all the poems, but unfortunately, artificial intelligence can't find out which poem is the most beautiful.

On the other hand, artificial intelligence can help people do many things, but it can't learn human taste. Literature is unique because of human taste. Human beings can distinguish beauty, ugliness, nobility and hypocrisy through the edification of literature, and this feeling is summarized from millions of years of human experience. It is almost impossible for artificial intelligence to experience these emotions in just a few decades and hundreds of years.

Therefore, I don't agree with Professor Fudan that the way out for human literature lies in oneself, not in artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence can provide instrumental help for human literary creation, but the future of human literary creation is in human hands.