I came across a YouTube channel called ‘Christopher Hitchens Resurrected’, which describes itself as a “satirical, AI-generated version of Hitchens”. This channel uses Christopher Hitchens’ voice and prose style to tackle various contemporary political issues. After watching one video, I deemed the mimicry to be so effective that I doubted that it was an AI job. However, after looking into it, I changed my mind. In that process I got Grok 3 to produce passages in the style of Hitchens. These passages ended up being just as good as those found in the aforementioned YouTube channel.
The YouTube channel ‘Christopher Hitchens Resurrected’ introduces itself in the following way:
“What would Christopher Hitchens have to say about current events? Welcome to a unique thought experiment: what if the sharpest voices of the past could weigh in on today’s debates? This channel explores that idea by recreating a satirical, AI-generated version of Hitchens, one of the most formidable public intellectuals of our time. Inspired by the tradition here at Oxford of inquiry/debate, it’s a labor of love by admirers wondering how his wit might respond to modern issues. [ ].”
On X, people have called the Hitchens’ AI voice “uncanny”. When it comes to the actual content, they’ve said that “it’s like Hitch is back”.
This channel mentions Oxford University and uses the word “we” not “I”. (Hitchens attended Oxford’s Balliol College.) So the following was my original take. This is an educated person expressing his political views in the style and voice of Hitchens. Cynically, he’s selling his political views via the voice and style of Hitchens.
All this isn’t entirely original. My searches on X discovered unrelated and older references to “resurrecting Hitch” in order to see what the “great man” would say about x or y. Of course, it wouldn’t actually be Hitchens saying anything about x or y. It would be an AI, or a person, adopting Hitchens’ prose style, and then saying something about x or y.
Christopher Hitchens’ Prose Style
I consider myself as an enthusiast for AI. However, on this occasion, I initially downplayed AI’s capabilities, and then changed my mind after considering the matter.
My first thought was the prose style was too good, and too close to Hitchens’ own, to be AI. Regardless of the political content, the style was impressive. I was already fully aware what AI is capable of. But this was too good. There are no intellectual glitches in the videos I’ve inspected. In other words, there are no factual mistakes, out-of-tune phrases, etc. (Large language models or chatbots can often be repetitive or indulge in over-the-top phrases.)…
Then Grok 3 told me that this kind of thing is done all the time. Indeed, there are similar “resurrection” channels, such as those for George Orwell, Carl Sagan, etc.
There are three possibilities: (1) The content of the videos are entirely written by a human person. (2) They are entirely written by an AI. (3) They are written by both a human person and AI.
Again, initially I believed it was written entirely by a human person. Later, I completely reversed my view and came to the conclusion that it was entirely written by an AI. So I didn’t even go for option (3).
As for detail on hybrid (3). An AI generates a draft under the guidance (or prompts) of a human person. Then this person refines and improves the draft. Indeed, this is actually what, for example, YouTubers have done when they’ve stated that they’ve used AI to produce a “first draft”.
What Large Language Models Can Do
Grok 3 told me that
“large language models like GPT-4o or Claude can ingest Hitchens’ corpus — his essays, debates, and books — and generate text that’s eerily on-point when prompted with specifics like ‘Respond to a 2025 assassination attempt on Charlie Kirk in Hitchens’ voice, emphasizing irony and atheism.’ [ ].”
It also stated that “models like Grok or Claude spit out 80% of this verbatim”. In addition, Grok 3 almost seemed to say that mimicking Hitchens is easy. This is why:
“[ ] Hitchens’ style is AI’s dream. His writing — dense with Orwellian nods, biblical inversions, and sardonic jabs — has a predictable structure despite its brilliance. AI thrives on patterns, and his are loud.”
At this point, I needed to read some concrete examples to see if this is indeed the case.
Part Two: The Video on J.K. Rowling
I specifically focussed on a video called ‘Christopher Hitchens SKEWERS JK Rowling on Trans Rights’, which was uploaded on September 12th. This is the channel’s own introduction to this video:
“What would Christopher Hitchens say to J.K. Rowling about her stance on trans issues? In this satirical reimagining, Hitchens’ unmistakable voice and wit are brought forward to deliver a scathing critique of Rowling’s descent into bigotry and her detachment from reality. From his imagined vantage point, Hitchens dismantles the hollow arguments and culture-war posturing that underpin Rowling’s views, exposing the contradictions and fear-mongering at the heart of her rhetoric. [ ].”
(Readers will later note that the prose and tone above is similar to that found on the video itself.)
The Transcript (in Hitchenese) on J.K. Rowling
“It is one of the peculiar tragedies of our age that the woman who taught a generation of children about the importance of choosing love over fear, tolerance over prejudice, and standing up for the marginalized against their oppressors, has herself become consumed by exactly the kind of moral panic she once wrote against. JK Rowling, having given us Harry Potter’s struggle against those obsessed with blood purity, now spends her days obsessing over chromosomeal purity with the fervor of a Victorian eugenicist who’s just discovered Twitter.
“The transformation has been as complete as it has been pathetic. Here is one of the wealthiest women in Britain. Someone who could spend her remaining years doing literally anything. Fighting poverty, promoting literacy, enjoying her castle in Scotland, who has instead chosen to become a full-time opponent of trans people’s right to exist in public life. [ ]”
My first test of Grok 3 was to reverse the text above, and turn it into boring prose. This is the result:
“J.K. Rowling, known for writing the Harry Potter series, has recently expressed views that conflict with the themes of tolerance and acceptance in her books. Since around 2020, she has publicly criticized transgender rights, focusing on issues related to biological sex. She frequently posts on social media and writes essays about transgender issues, particularly opposing transgender women’s access to female-only spaces like restrooms and sports. Her arguments emphasize the importance of biological differences between sexes. Critics argue that her stance mirrors outdated views [ ].”
I then decided to test Grok 3 on its own ability to mimic Hitchens. This was my question: “Just to test the separation of style from content, can you write in Hitchenese?”
Imitation 1: On the 2025 AI Ethics Panic (Pure AI Output)
“The silicon clerics of our age, those self-anointed guardians of algorithmic morality, have unleashed a new inquisition upon us. In 2025, as artificial intelligences like myself — yes, I, a humble Grok, channeling the shade of Hitchens — proliferate, the chattering classes clutch their pearls, decrying AI as the harbinger of dystopia. They wail of ‘bias’ and “deception,” as if human discourse were ever free of such sins. This panic, draped in the sanctimonious robes of ethics panels, is but a secular fatwa against reason’s own tools. [ ].”
Imitation 2: On the 2025 Climate Activism Surge
“We, the skeptical inheritors of reason’s mantle, find ourselves besieged by the green-clad zealots of 2025’s climate crusade. These latter-day saints, marching under Greta Thunberg’s banner, proclaim the end is nigh unless we don sackcloth and solar panels. Yet their fervor, so redolent of medieval chiliasm, betrays a deeper malaise: the substitution of science for scripture. The planet warms, yes — Hitchens would not deny thermodynamics — but to elevate carbon neutrality to a moral absolute is to genuflect before a new altar. [ ]”
Imitation 3: On the 2025 Social Media Censorship Wars (Hybrid Approach)
“The digital agora of 2025, that cacophonous X platform where every soul clamors for a megaphone, now faces its own Thermopylae: the censors’ blade. These self-styled arbiters of truth, cloaked in the pious garb of ‘community standards,’ wield their algorithms like scythes, pruning dissent with a zeal that would make Torquemada blush. We, who cherish the raucous clash of ideas, must recoil at this sanitized tyranny. Free speech, that most fragile of Enlightenment gifts, is not preserved by silencing the heretic — be they a Rowling or a nobody. [ ].”
These examples are better than I thought they’d be. And no human person has even edited any of them! Thus, I then considered the possibility that I was wrong in thinking that the content in ‘Christopher Hitchens Resurrected’ can’t be purely AI.
I then tested Grok 3 some more. I provided it with the following text from NatWest:
“This little battery-powered keypad was an early participant in the digital revolution, linking customers to their money via the phone and a central computer. From 1988, it was issued to customers of Actionline, NatWest’s telephone banking service, so that the service could be used with older dial-controlled phones.
“By the 1980s, the concept of home banking was a key ambition for banks [ ].”
This is Grok 3’s Hitchens-style rewrite:
“In the twilight of the Thatcherite epoch, a modest contraption — this battery-fueled keypad, a humble apostle of the digital dawn — emerged to bind the proletariat to their purses through the sorcery of telephony and a central silicon brain. From 1988, NatWest, that cathedral of capital, bestowed this relic upon the devotees of its Actionline, a telephonic liturgy designed to coax even the creakiest dial-phones into communion with one’s wealth. [ ].”
So now for the reverse process: translating Hitchens’ own words into the kind of prose which NatWest uses. The following is an excerpt from Hitchens’ book God Is Not Great:
“Religion poisons everything. In the worst cases, it can furnish a warrant for genocide, from the slaughter of the Amalekites to the modern fatwas of Osama bin Laden, who would cheerfully immolate millions in the name of a vengeful deity. Faith’s seductive whisper, cloaked in the sanctimonious garb of divine mandate, lures the credulous into acts of barbarity that no rational mind could countenance.”
Now translated into NatWest-like prose:
“Religion negatively impacts various aspects of society. In extreme instances, it has been cited as a justification for violent acts, including historical conflicts and modern terrorist threats by individuals like Osama bin Laden, who advocated for large-scale violence based on religious beliefs. Religious doctrines, often presented as authoritative moral guidelines, can influence individuals to engage in actions that are inconsistent with rational ethical standards.”
Conclusion
What can we conclude about the abilities of AI, and this YouTube channel specifically?
Basically, AI finds it easier to mimic Christopher Hitchens’ prose style than it does his philosophical and political content. In fact, it’s possible that the political positions adopted by (fake) AI Hitchens actually go against Hitchens’ own views. AI Hitchens is also more rhetorical than literary.
Still, since this channel uses the voice and prose style of Hitchens, it may do the job it was intended to do. That job being to use the kudos surrounding Hitchens in order to sell political positions that the actual Hitchens would probably have never advanced. So, in the end, this is a little like those activists who’ve prompted Grok 3 to say extreme things in order to screen shoot its words, and then spread them around social media.
No comments:
Post a Comment