There has been a push to evaluate English essays through online grading machines recently. Teachers would virtually have no role in judging student writing and only need to submit the essays to the site. The process is quite meaningless; the site would scan for plagiarism, check the writing formulas, and ensure that the structure is precise. Therefore, the process would be entirely based on the structure ­essentially without any focus on the actual content. As long as the grammar and vocabulary are correct, the student would receive a stellar grade. If grading machines were introduced, it would make writing essays much easier and save students a lot of time. However, such an innovation would be a major setback and an atrocity for our literary future.

The unique style of each student would disappear once online grading sites are instituted. Since the essays would be based purely on structure, the desire to articulate thoughtful and profound content will inevitably fade. ­Essays will not represent the student's voice; instead they will essentially become simple mathematical equations.

The inner core of true literature, an expression of the soul and innate creativity, would soon be forgotten. Writing devices would become vestigial. Why write a complex simile or metaphor when a simple sentence would suffice? Though essays based on a formula would make English class decisively easier, they would be detrimental to the student's inner growth and reflection.

The true purpose of writing is to form personal ­perspectives and personal identity. Such values must not be collectivized and disregarded. Once the formula becomes the most important part of an essay, each will sound same as the next.

Furthermore, essentially every subject is objective; math problems each have one answer, history has one story, and science has one solution. However, English takes on many forms with its many styles. People can view a story based on their own interpretation. In literature, you can say that 2+2=5 and that 1 is infinite. Grand possibilities only exist through writing, in which there is no defined right answer, but instead an opportunity to create something that is truly unique and phenomenal.

Scholars do not study great writers like Shakespeare for his formula of a play. They do not care the most about his structure of a love story. Instead, they care about how the story is presented, the emotions of the characters, and the creativity of the story. Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace is not a classic because it's formulaic. George Orwell's Animal Farm has not achieved notoriety for being simple or straightforward.

True classics are assembled with marvelous artistry, which online sites would cause to die. A successful movement to install grading machines would be a detrimental move toward uniformity. Great literature thrives on creative, progressive, and convoluted thoughts. Simply grading based on structure would destroy writing and make it truly objective. Literature without creativity is like a painting with no color or flamboyance; it loses its meaning, its dramatic nature, everything. To protect the sanctity of writing, these corrupt grading machines must be abandoned. The future of literature depends on it. If these ghastly machines become popular, the entire world will become one cliché.