While I agree most writing is starting to feel the same, I don't think it's due to grammar programs. I think the problem runs deeper: strict "do's and do-not's" on things like purple prose, limited mass appeal of genres, and so on.

Really, homogenous writing stems from most writers feeling pressured to emulate others to the tea, or else.

I refuse to use Grammarly (or other grammar software) for this exact reason. I have a pretty good hold on grammar rules, and if I break them, it's intentional about 99% of the time. I get tired of even Word telling me that a sentence fragment is unacceptable; I created that sentence fragment on purpose. I understand the role that grammar software plays and definitely think it can be a helpful tool, but I also think it's one whose main goal should be to help the author improve their understanding of grammar so they can ultimately move away from those tools.

This is why I don't do everything that Grammarly tells me to do.

I actually tried one today. I'm still debating on whether or not it's helping my ass out as I'm not a native-speaker. I wouldn't even know if my writing felt 'organic' before that, my feedback is low anyways so here I am trying lots of things out.

I only use Grammarly for basic editing and spellcheck, but I always check the suggestions before I approve them. I read a quote that said something to the effect that the written word has rhythm and we should vary sentence length. (There was more to it than that) Anyway, I always try to think of the rhythm in my writing. Commas, for example, are used in music to tell singers when to breathe. I might add extra commas if my sentence needs more time. We had a work exercise where we had to edit a sentence to be grammatically correct. Most of the adaptations were technically correct depending on the circumstance. Programs don't know the circumstance or writing style.

Yes! I totally agree with this. I can stomach recycled plot lines to an extent because we culturally will recognize base stories like "Cinderella". But there are plenty of stories where the writers are essentially doing a "reaction" to the piece before and nothing new comes out of it, like any of the trending topics nowadays: vampires, werewolves, bears, mermaids, mafia, etc. (You get the drift)

I'm not well-versed in the novels department (neither specifically on Tapas nor in general), but I'd like to add my 2 cents from the comic perspective because I'm absolutely seeing a similar issue there too.

A huge "problem" with dialogue in particular is that a lot of people don't write how people speak, but instead either focus too much on proper grammar (causing every character to have the same bland voice) or take inspiration from things such as oddly phrased scanlations, creating a really awkward atmosphere in their work. I imagine this kind of thing can creep its way into novel narration too, and the "fault" my be found in a lot of sources.

Now I say "problem" and "fault," but in the end this is me speaking from my own perspective because personally I love writing that feels "alive" and "organic." For all I know the type of writing I dislike brings joy to plenty of people out there, and that's totally fine to me so long as there still are writers who stubbornly do their own thing.

I love The Interview so much haha. Underrated movie!

This is why I go through and individually choose which things get edited. Grammarly will offer certain suggestions regarding sentence structure and unless I see one I just really like I usually choose to ignore it. Punctuation issues and sentence fragments are primarily what I use it for anyway.

As a comic writer... none of this effects me (beyond spelling that is) XD in fact, comics have different workarounds to grammatical rules.

I can definitely attest to this homogenous writing problem. Honestly half the time I turn Grammarly off because I hate their suggestions, especially if I'm doing a dialogue-heavy scene and my characters aren't exactly "proper". I like @therosesword 's idea of writing "like myself", but when I do take inspiration I try to do so in terms of learning how to apply things to my writing. I've always loved the Douglass Adams quote "he flew through the air in much the same way that a brick doesn't", but all that did was make me mindful of just how much strength there is in thinking about how you can paint the picture in your reader's mind. If anything, we should be learning what tools we have at our disposal, not how other people use them.

I agree with you! I personally don't use these writing programs. I know that they can help with grammar and punctuations, but I think they remove that "special touch" your story would have. After all, it's your story, and in my opinion, when you use programs like Grammarly or ProWritingAid to "improve" your chapters, the style of writing you put in your chapters would just... fade away.

Honestly, I think your satisfaction with your chapters is more important than punctuations. If you write chapters without using any writing programs, it kind of makes you feel great, and you would get really motivated as well! (although I don't know if every author feels this way, but I do)

As you can see when you use these programs, the suggestions in Grammarly or any other writing software aren't quite accurate; what I mean by this is... they don't wholly understand your story. If you're focusing on something heavy and emotional on your story, they would still correct your grammar, but they can't help you highlight the impact you really want to bring to your audience. These programs can definitely help you with your grammar, yes that is true, however, they can't help you emphasize your story. They can improve your grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure, but they can't really help you with your novel itself, if you get what I mean.

It's just like what they say, no one knows your story more than yourself.

I use it as a back up check and ignore/double check whatever corrections it wasn't me to make that I don't agree with.

It really hates my fragmented sentences

Definitely suspect it's a case of writers reading what's popular in their genre and (knowingly or not) emulating it.

I do this too, though I read a lot more physical books than webnovels, and the variety of genres I read has done some kind of odd things to my writing... When I was writing my novel I noticed that it got sillier when I was reading Terry Pratchett, and more descriptive when I was reading Dickens. It still sounded like my voice, but it's hard to deny the influence of what you're reading, even if you're really not trying to emulate.

I can definitely attest to this. Weirdly though my tone seems to shift even between my short stories. I feel like the tone I'm going for changes my style very heavily, as does my mood.

Examples- These were written only a few days apart:

When traveling in Aphing, there is nothing more important than choosing a good tent. It should include a nice ground tarp, made from thick, sturdy canvas to keep the water and the mud from seeping in, and a strong structure that is light in weight for travel. The knights of Aphing often travel in groups, with heavier, four-walled tents to house multiple soldiers, and a much larger, much heavier tent for their commanders to sleep in luxury - often carried by the lowest-ranking soldier. This was often the cause of severe back pain for new recruits, but that was a sacrifice their commanders were willing to make. The nicest tents were spacious, well-insulated, and thick enough for a sharp dagger to get stuck in.

Forista’s tent was a sheet of canvas hung over a rope.

Compared to this entry for my lore series:

It is in the best interests of all those that pursue the secrets of the world, that one should start with that which lies in plain sight, for one cannot hope to understand the occult without first looking the world in the eye. This is where the knights fail in their quest for enlightened glory. Their shunning of magic and all that lies within it is blinding, and leads only to self-serving pretense. So too do the mages suffer, choosing to seek only that which they cannot see. The greatest blind spots often hide directly under one’s nose, and no amount of study will help those who refuse to open their eyes. Worse still is the Council of Magi, the grand wizards of the Great Shielded City of Stockholme - trapped by their own self-importance, and unable to see that their spiritual enlightenment is merely a method of self-congratulation. They seek knowledge only with which to scoff at those they deem lower, and their worship of the self will be their undoing.

Different tones, different styles, and honestly just a different mood from my perspective.

I never used this kind of program for English, but I had a trick to check the 'uniformizing effect' of such a program for French: feed it extracts of different styles I liked in classic literature (can be also done with good contemporary things obviously).
Seeing programs try to correct what makes you like the style of an author is a good way to realize, then detect why and when, this kind of program is overdoing its job.
I think they are helpful, but we should always remember we are the ones in charge.

I can see that happening in the same way that standard English classes enforced grammatical rules. But they were preparing us to write for mere communication; that is, to express ideas clearly. But writing fiction has a different target. It wants to paint images and entertain and sound like real life.

I use Word mostly & it seems to me that it hates it when I write dialog the way that people will actually speak. Partial sentences. One-word sentences. Numerous pauses & passive voice like nobody's business. I pretty much only let it remind me about mis-spelled words.

I don't think programs are making writing more homogenous, or that writing is more homogenous than it was 100 years ago anyway.

If you're reading a lot of cheaply written genre fiction (and most of web fiction is this), you are going to run into this issue just because the stories aren't written with incredible desire for ambitious prose in the first place. Literary fiction is just as well-written and riveting as it was in the age of Oscar Wilde and F. Scott Fitzgerald, it's just that those aren't the kinds of stories that hit it big with audiences anymore.

Yeah, I cant lay indifferences or lack of originality/creativity in writing on a program; that is on the writer and their approach versus who they are writing for.

I'm honestly not even sure if that's happening either. People are using Grammarly to fix grammatical weirdness or take their suggestions for style and the end result may not be good, but I imagine in many cases the original writing itself wasn't particularly good either. It's bland but it's not worse than it was.