Should fiction writing challenges allow AI?
National Novel Writing Month is saying A-OK
If you need any proof of how polarizing artificial intelligence is in creative fields, look no further than the National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo, for short). Run by a literary non-profit for the past 25 years, the challenge has motivated over 500,000 amateur authors and scribes worldwide to write an entire novel within the 30 days of November, with a minimum of 50,000 total words.
But in advance of this year’s challenge, NaNoWriMo posted their position on AI in a statement that rocked the literary community. It seemed to condone writers using text generators like ChatGPT to write their novels, on the grounds that prohibiting the technology would be classist and ableist by excluding participants without access to human editors to review their work, or who may not be privileged with the same function, education or language proficiency as their peers:
“NaNoWriMo neither explicitly supports nor condemns any approach to writing, including the use of tools that leverage AI.
”To fully condemn the technology, it said, would be ‘to ignore classist and ableist issues.’
“For some writers, the decision to use AI is a practical, not an ideological, one
“The notion that all writers ‘should’ be able to perform certain functions independently is a position that we disagree with wholeheartedly.”
In a direct response to their statement, NaNoWriMo lost a sponsor. Writing software company Ellipsus felt blindsided by the new allowance for technical assistance:
“At Ellipsus, we’ve always stood firmly for the power of human creativity. From the very beginning, our mission has been to support, amplify, and inspire writers and collaboration. We strongly disagree with NaNoWriMo's recent statements regarding generative AI.”
Further criticism arrived from disabled writers like Laura Elliott, who took offence to being declared incapable of writing a novel:
“Oh as a disabled writer I am fucking furious about this.
“Disabled writers do not need the immoral theft machine to write because we lack the ability to be creative without plagiarism.
“Encouraging AI is a slap in the face to all writers and this excuse is appallingly ableist.”
My grain of thought
I find it fascinating how AI is dually characterized as both a malevolent thief that steals creative property from its originators, but also as a benevolent donor that gifts people without resources the means to produce ambitious creative products they otherwise could not achieve. The debate around NaNoWriMo isn’t just about AI—rather, it’s about who is entitled to create, with respect to the level of privilege they are afforded.
Most of us creatives have experienced a sense of struggle, feeling hampered by a lack of resources. In many cases, these obstacles and lack of means create innovation and more resourceful creative output. But if some creatives were given a leg-up—in this case, by the means of a text generator—could valuable new works emerge that would otherwise never have been realized? I am looking forward to the results of the NaNoWriMo challenge this November, and the conversations that follow.