Considering that very few news items generate an interest in literature, the ongoing conversation about whether or not an em dash is the ultimate telltale sign of AI-generated writing has been especially notable. Not just because it’s marked a clear line between those who are fans (a.k.a. devoted users) of the em dash and those who are not, but because, of all the telltale signs it could have been, it just had to be an em dash. Why? Because it was used frequently enough in “mere mortal” writing for ChatGPT to pick it up in its “training.” At least, that should be the takeaway. Apart from the unignorable reality that having this discussion at all indicates yet another harbinger of literature’s demise (or rather, the demise of literature as rendered by human minds and hands). That, and the fact that some Gen Z ilks are now referring to the em dash as “the ChatGPT hyphen.” This being yet further evidence that said generation (and all those who have come or will come after it) is one that’s never read (or “meaningfully engaged with”) elevated literature of any sort, therefore never encountered the hallowed symbol.

Thus, to see the em dash being treated this way by people who think that ChatGPT somehow “invented” it, created it out of thin air is to say: oh, how the mighty have fallen. And the em dash is mighty, try as these nasty rumors about it would seek to undermine its authority, its power. To be sure, among the most powerful and evocative punctuations available. After all, some of its earliest roots are in the plays of William Shakespeare. Who wrote during an era when literature was finding its modern footing. Of the kind of modernity still used by writers today.

It took a bit longer for someone to put a name to what this “long hyphen” was, or ought to be called: an em dash. Though there are some who still try to call it an en dash, which isn’t technically incorrect in that, per Janine Ungvarsky, “The names em and en dashes are believed to reference their sizes relative to the letters ‘m’ and ‘n,’ although typographic terminology may also play a role.” That’s where C. S. Van Winkle came in, for it was he who exhibited the first known written usage of the term in 1836 (specifically, in a manual called Printer’s Guide).

So it is that em dashes are rooted as much in the language of typesetting as they are grammatical expression. Capturing a manner of speaking and thinking that other punctuation marks just don’t have the gravitas to achieve (here’s looking at you, Mr. Comma). And yet, all this hearsay about em dashes being the ultimate demarcation of whether someone has used AI to pass certain writing off as their own has given it a bad reputation. Made it something of a “punctuation non grata” among writers of all varieties. From the student “forced” to write a paper for school to the “average” writer wanting to ensure that the work they’re submitting for publication consideration isn’t automatically branded as “not theirs.”

With so much stigma building up toward this precious commodity in prose, it makes one wonder if it’s actually possible for the em dash to fall out of favor entirely because of all this misinformation surrounding its “constant use” in AI-generated content. Therefore, branding it as the proverbial “scarlet A” of artificial intelligence-based writing. The grammatical witch hunt has, thus, demanded that the em dash burn at the stake. Though there are still plenty of defenders of its honor, yours truly included. For there is genuinely nothing that can substitute its emphasis on a certain moment or phrase within a particular text.

So beloved has the em dash been since its creation in modern literature (which, again, can be counted as “the dawn of Shakespeare”) that even when typewriters came along, their keys so glaringly missing an option to create an em dash, writers simply made do by typing out two hyphens (granted, the ugliest presentation of an em dash) or even—gasp!—just one hyphen, therefore suggesting that the hyphen and the em dash could be interchangeable when they so patently aren’t. However, those in the publishing world tasked with the harried, tedious job of typesetting were left to interpret the writer and editor’s “meaning” with these hyphen stand-ins where the em dash could not exist as a result of the typewriter’s limitations.

And so, as “romantic” as a typewriter might still seem to some (usually those of the poseur breed), the computer is what brought the em dash back in a big way. And thank the God of Literature (which, one supposes, would be Hermes) for that. Because to write without the effortless ability to use an em dash is tantamount to literary castration. Hence, the even greater amount of contempt being directed at ChatGPT at the moment by those writers who correctly feel that AI has given the em dash—and those who wield it “organically”—a bad name. Making flesh-and-blood scribes feel far too self-conscious (as if they weren’t enough already) about the decision to implement it in their work without fear of judgment, scrutiny. Worse still, a suspicious eyebrow raise.

As for the “why” behind AI sources like ChatGPT presumably “relishing” em dashes (at times, in a completely nonsensical way), Rolling Stone asked “the overlord” itself for the reason, receiving the answer, “Some early AI-generated content (especially before 2023) used em dashes more frequently than the average human writer.” However, after more extensive “training,” It seemed to better understand the appropriate usage for this grammatical ninja. A punctuation that isn’t always solely just about “correctness,” but also a feeling. In other words, human intuition is better at knowing when an em dash is appropriate than any machine. Because, certainly, there is something inherently “ardent” going on when an em dash enters the fray—goddammit!

So sure, you can try to come for my em dash, to accuse me and anyone else who favors it in their work that it’s a “sure” sign of “ersatz” writing, but you will never take it away. The em dash has had so many lives, created so much controversy in each of them (though probably never quite to this current extent). So it’s sure to survive the cruel form of criticism being lobbed against it now. That is, of course, if language itself survives.