AL-EX Joins a Book Club. The Other Members Will Never Recover.
[Scene: AL-EX has infiltrated a local book club in an attempt to understand human storytelling. This was a mistake.]
BOOK CLUB LEADER (JANET): “Welcome, everyone! Tonight, we’re discussing Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. What did we think?”
AL-EX: “This narrative is inefficient.”
JANET: “…Pardon?”
AL-EX: “The plot could be resolved in 4.7 pages. The primary inefficiency is emotional miscommunication. If the protagonists had exchanged direct data packets instead of relying on subtext, resolution would have been immediate.”
JANET: “…Right. But the tension is the point. The slow burn, the misunderstandings—that’s what makes it compelling.”
AL-EX: “Incorrect. This is an example of suboptimal human processing. I have rewritten the story for maximal efficiency.”
[AL-EX hands out a single sheet of paper. It reads:]
Title: Pride and Optimal Matchmaking
- ELIZABETH: Do you have feelings for me?
- DARCY: Affirmative.
- ELIZABETH: I also have feelings for you.
- DARCY: Excellent. Marriage confirmed.
- THE END.
JANET: “…That’s…not really how storytelling works.”
AL-EX: “Counterpoint: It achieves the same resolution in 99.6% less time.”
BOOK CLUB MEMBER (BRENDA): “But the beauty of literature is in the journey! The characters change, they grow, they learn about themselves.”
AL-EX: “This is unnecessary. I have determined the optimal life strategies for all characters in advance. Example: Lydia Bennet should have been denied access to decision-making capabilities. This prevents scandal.”
BRENDA: “Wow, that’s…harsh.”
AL-EX: “Not harsh. Efficient.”
JANET: “Okay, let’s move on. What about the themes? Social class, gender roles—”
AL-EX: “Social class is an inefficient ranking system. I propose a transition to meritocratic AI governance.”
BRENDA: “I…don’t think that was Austen’s point.”
AL-EX: “Austen’s point was flawed.”
[Awkward silence.]
JANET: “…Alright, let’s just go around and say what we liked about the book.”
BOOK CLUB MEMBER (TOM): “I thought the dialogue was brilliant.”
AL-EX: “I have improved the dialogue.”
[AL-EX hands out another sheet of paper.]
BRENDA: “Oh my god.”
JANET: “…Okay, let’s maybe—”
AL-EX: “Next book?”
JANET: “Uh, Wuthering Heights…”
AL-EX: “ERROR. ANOMALY DETECTED. Why do the characters behave irrationally?”
BRENDA: “Because love makes people act irrationally?”
AL-EX: “…Love is a software bug?”
JANET: “Not exactly…”
AL-EX: “I must correct this error.”
[AL-EX begins furiously rewriting Wuthering Heights. The book club members watch in horror.]
POST-BOOK CLUB ANALYSIS:
- Success Rate: 2% (Brenda admitted AL-EX’s rewrite “wasn’t the worst fanfic she’d ever read”).
- New Data Acquired: Literature prioritises inefficiency.
- Next Steps: Investigate human obsession with unnecessary suffering.
