AI Can Already Write Poetry—So Why Do We Still Need
to Memorize It?
I Lo-fen
With adjustments to the new academic year’s curriculum, classical
literature—once divided into three required courses—has been compressed into
two. While drafting the new course plan, I found myself already thinking about
a pressing question: in the age of AIGC, how should we learn classical
literature?
Somewhat “counterintuitively,” I began to revisit older methods, placing
renewed emphasis on memory and recitation.
I knew this would inevitably invite skepticism: “AI can already write
poetry—so why do we still need to memorize it?”
Indeed. When a poem or a passage of text can be retrieved in full at any
time; when AI can instantly generate language—do we still need to commit
language to our own brains?
I used to particularly dislike rote memorization. Yet after teaching Text
and Image Studies on AIGC for two semesters, I have come to feel quite the
opposite: it is precisely in the AIGC era that understanding and memorizing
classical poetry reveals its truly irreplaceable value.
AI excels at generating language, but it does not possess
language. It can “spit out” a seemingly well-structured poem or a fluent piece
of prose in seconds, but its language always remains external. This kind of
outsourcing and subcontracting is fast and convenient—when you don’t know what
to say, let AI generate it; when you don’t want to organize sentences, let the
system rewrite them. You can simply take and use, without reflection.
Over time, the value of language shifts from “I have something to say”
to “you help me say it.” Gradually, what deteriorates in our brains is not only
expressive ability, but also judgment. A subtle phenomenon emerges: when you do
not possess enough good language yourself, even if AI generates ten different
versions of a text for you, it becomes difficult to judge which one is truly
excellent. The more AI generates, the harder it becomes for us to choose.
Human language only truly becomes “a part of oneself” after it has been
understood, memorized, repeatedly savored, and internalized—entering our
breathing, rhythm, emotions, and neural responses. This is especially true of
classical poetry, with its rhythm, imagery, evocative visuality, condensed
emotional density, and mature overall structure. Memorizing classical poetry
is, in fact, a way of installing an “internal linguistic coordinate system” for
the brain—an advanced model of exemplary language.
Our aversion to rote memorization stems from not being able to remember;
or from remembering temporarily, only to forget everything after the exam,
feeling that it was a waste of time and useless. The problem lies not in
memorization itself, but in how it is used—not in being “forced to remember.”
The Chinese word for memory vividly reflects two modes of brain activity:
“input” (ji, to record) and “output” (yi, to recall).
Memorization aimed solely at exams lacks scenarios for activating linguistic
samples; it cannot shape the underlying logic needed for long-term storage.
Therefore, when reciting, beyond knowing the author’s background and explaining
the lines, we must also learn to connect the text to our own lives.
When we feel lost and helpless, the line “After endless mountains and
rivers with no road in sight, suddenly willows shade a village bright”
naturally surfaces. When love disappoints us, we console ourselves with “Why
worry that no fragrant grass can be found at the world’s end?” When
wandering through landscapes, we savor “In quiet contemplation, all things
yield their joy.” We are not merely “recalling or reciting a poem”; rather,
the poem emerges from a multimodal sensory context, transforms and corresponds,
and steps in to carry the weight of real moments for us. In this way, we build
stable and lasting neural pathways, preserving within ourselves a space not
dominated by algorithms.
That said, if memorizing poetry is so important, does it mean we no
longer need to understand AI?
Recently, I was invited to serve as a judge for a collegiate AI poetry
video competition. This experience further confirmed for me how skillful use of
AIGC tools can enhance the efficiency of understanding and memorizing poetry.
The process of translating poetry into images tests one’s grasp of textual
meaning—it is not about rigidly “drawing” each line with technology and
stitching them into animated visuals. Rather, it involves integration,
collision, and layering: merging oneself as the subject into the poem, then
extracting images that truly move the heart. This is the essence of
human–machine collaboration.
When a poem takes root in your heart, it does not solve problems for
you—but when you are confused, lost, or hesitant, it stands with you and helps
you stay grounded.
In the age of AIGC, memorizing classical poetry is neither nostalgia nor
regression. It is more like a reminder: technology can generate language for
us, but only humans can allow language to become part of life itself.
January 31, 2026
“Shangshan Ruoshui” Column, Lianhe Zaobao, Singapore
然而，當下的“文圖時代”（Age of Text and Image），文字與圖像、媒介與空間的關係日益緊密，寫作早已超越書頁，進入多模態（Multimodality）的文化景觀。我們在書本上讀到的文字，常常伴隨著圖像的召喚；我們在展覽、舞臺、公共空間遇見的藝術，又常常與文字互通。寫作不再是單一的文字，而是一種流動的存在。
The New Landscape of Writing and Reading
in the Age of Text and Image
I Lo-fen
As we enter the twenty-first century, our ways of writing and
reading are undergoing profound changes. Those who love writing and
reading—have you noticed this? Traditionally, writing has been understood as
the art of words, focusing on lyrical expression and narrative through
language. In books that combine text and images, unless they are picture books
or illustrated albums, images usually serve merely as explanatory or decorative
illustrations.
However, in today’s Age of Text and Image, the
relationship between words and images, media and space has become increasingly
close. Writing has long transcended the printed page and entered a multimodal
cultural landscape. The words we read in books are often accompanied by the
call of images; the art we encounter in exhibitions, on stages, and in public
spaces frequently communicates with text. Writing is no longer singularly
textual, but a fluid form of existence.
Changes in writing and reading depend on multimodal integration.
A “mode” refers to different representational forms or symbolic systems humans
use to convey and understand information. Common modes include:
·Linguistic mode (written and spoken language)
·Visual mode (images, color, layout, emojis)
·Auditory mode (music, sound effects, rhythm and
pitch of speech)
·Spatial mode (stage arrangement, body movement,
gestures, spatial layout)
·Tactile mode (materials of sculpture,
interactive installations)
Human perception and response are inherently multimodal. Yet in
writing, due to linguistic thinking, tools, and expressive limitations,
language mode has long dominated. Reading has usually been understood as the
eyes moving between lines of text. We entrust ourselves to a passage, a story,
an emotion, as if the whole world were condensed on the page—again privileging
language mode. When meaning is no longer produced and constructed through a
single mode, but through the combined action of multiple modes, technological
support for the Age of Text and Image emerges.
The Age of Text and Image refers to a stage in which text
and images (including audio and video) serve as the primary sources of
information for recognition, judgment, interpretation, and the formation of
knowledge and cultural production. In this age, text is no longer the sole
carrier of knowledge, and images are no longer subsidiary decorations. Instead,
text and image coexist, interact, and flourish together to construct meaning.
In other words, we no longer simply “read words,” but “read text-and-image.”
Before the Age of Text and Image, human civilization experienced
the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century, driven by philosophical reflection
following the Industrial Revolution. The nineteenth century was the age of
news, in which people relied primarily on mature printing and publishing
technologies to obtain information from newspapers and periodicals. The
twentieth century became the age of images, with television and film as major
media of communication and entertainment; convenient audiovisual enjoyment
gradually distanced the public from earlier reading habits. Since the late
twentieth century, the spread of the internet and technology has given rise to
the Age of Text and Image. In the 2020s, the rapid development of AI-generated
content (AIGC) tools, enabling the interactive generation of text and images,
has further revealed the randomness of an AIGC Text-and-Image Age.
Based on big data from word-frequency usage, I examined English
terms from around 1800 onward, including text, image, poem,
picture, literature, and painting. I found that the Age of
Text and Image began to emerge around 1988. That year, the frequency of text
and image surpassed that of literature and picture, and
this trend has continued ever since—aligning with the gradual digitization and
virtualization of literary and visual creation. In 1995, Windows 95 was
released. By clicking icons on screens and connecting via the internet,
individuals could instantly interact with people beyond their immediate space.
Thus arrived an era in which images guide action, and both words and images
exist as “texts.”
The characteristics of the Age of Text and Image can be
summarized in four English words:
1.Production: Using computers and smartphones to
generate vast amounts of textual, audiovisual, and visual content—everyone
becomes a content producer.
2.Unlimited: Tools and technologies are no
longer limited by physical materials such as paper and ink; electronic texts
flow endlessly.
3.Spread: Real-life social networks combined with
virtual online networks enable rapid dissemination—everyone is a receiver,
interpreter, and transmitter.
4.Hyperlink: The boundary between text and
image blurs, giving rise to cross-media forms. The internet’s decentralized
structure and tagging systems such as @ and # shape our tendency toward
associative thinking and fixed references.
Taking the first letters of these four words spells PUSH.
Whether voluntarily or passively, we are propelled forward by the torrent of
our times.
In response to the changes of the Age of Text and Image, I
proposed the concept and perspective of Text and Image Studies in 2014,
and in 2017 registered the Text and Image Studies Society in Singapore,
promoting research and knowledge-sharing through both academic innovation and
public service.
Text and Image Studies is an interdisciplinary humanities field
that examines texts perceived or viewed in visual form, as well as the
interactive relationships between text and image. “Text” refers broadly to
symbolic forms of expression, communication, and record; “Image” refers broadly
to visual representations, imaginative forms, and cultural imagery. Text and
Image Studies advocates that “everything is a text”: poetry, painting,
calligraphy, audiovisual media, digital media, and AI-generated content can all
be included for analysis to uncover textual meanings. It also studies the
external contexts of textual production, use, dissemination, reception,
transformation, and variation. Its aim is to offer a way of seeing the
world—perceiving the subtleties of life, savoring the meanings of existence,
and exploring the deeper significance of culture and the world.
Thus, Text and Image Studies is both a theoretical framework and
a mode of practice. Applied to writing, it interweaves words, images, and
sounds to create immersive experiences. Applied to reading, it integrates media
forms and environmental space to achieve a holistic experience.
Taking my own works as examples, text-and-image–oriented writing
manifests in multimodality, cross-media approaches, and spatial atmospheres. Creative
Singapore: Text, Media, Image Singapore was selected as one of the sixty
recommended outstanding Chinese books for Singapore’s 60th anniversary. I
designed its seven essays as seven exhibition halls, each with a theme and
accompanying music, creating an immersive sensory experience. I am not only the
author, but also the curator and guide, accompanying readers along my narrative
paths on a journey of audiovisual pleasure and temporal-spatial travel.
Attentive readers have already perceived the sensibility of my
text-and-image approach. A review of the 2024 Shanghai Book Fair bestseller The
First Encounter with Su Dongpo observes:
With writing that is淡而有味—light yet rich—the life intersections
between Su Dongpo and the author are revealed with genuine clarity. Even across
a thousand years of historical distance, all joys and sorrows, partings and
reunions, waxing and waning seem uncannily familiar. The book’s ten stories
resemble a classical garden; as one strolls through it, each step reveals a new
view. The author’s emotions trace winding paths that lead readers into
vermilion pavilions shaded by flowers and trees, where they meet the sleepless
moon of Dongpo.
As for text-and-image–oriented reading, its contrast with
traditional literary reading is immediately apparent:
Traditional Literary Reading vs. Text and
Image Studies Reading
·View of the object
Traditional: Literature as the art of words, focusing on language, rhetoric,
plot, and character.
Text-and-image: Literature as “text,” including words, images, sounds, layout,
and symbols.
·Methodological focus
Traditional: Interpreting authorial intent and thematic meaning.
Text-and-image: Emphasizing interaction among text, image, reader, and medium;
meaning as processual generation.
·Mode of perception
Traditional: Linear reading and comprehension of text.
Text-and-image: Multiple senses—visual, auditory, spatial, bodily.
·Interdisciplinary scope
Traditional: Literary studies and linguistics.
Text-and-image: Art history, visual culture, communication studies, design,
digital humanities.
·Form
Traditional: Books and printed literature.
Text-and-image: Traditional documents (poetry, painting, inscriptions)
alongside digital literature (e-books, online literature, AI-generated texts).
·Goal
Traditional: Explanation and representational meaning.
Text-and-image: Exploring expressive mechanisms of text-image integration;
studying meaning generation and re-creation.
·Applicability
Traditional: Classical textual interpretation and literary-historical
positioning.
Text-and-image: Integrating classical and modern contexts, especially suited to
the digital and AIGC era.
If your writing and reading have reached a bottleneck, leaving
you fatigued and sighing at your limitations, why not try the new perspectives
and methods of Text and Image Studies? You may find, as I have, the ease and
freedom of the Age of Text and Image.
References
·I Lo-fen, Spring Light and Autumn
Waves: Seeing Text and Image Studies. Nanjing University Press, 2020.
