By Sky Pinkett
Staff Writer
For those in the creative writing world, November is a particularly exciting month. National Novel Writing Month, better known as the quirky moniker NaNoWriMo, sees thousands of writers, old and new, try their hand at writing a 50,000-word manuscript in 30 days.
Starting as a nonprofit organization in 1999 with 21 participants, now with over 400,000 participants across continents, NaNoWriMo has helped foster a creative space where amateurs and professionals can push themselves to their limits without the extra expense of a writing retreat.
It is an ambitious endeavor that gets the creative juices bubbling with excitement each year. But what happens when an international writing organization beloved for fueling originality and creativity publicly supports the use of AI in writing? A controversy, it seems.
In early August of this year, the organization released an unprompted statement on its Zendesk page concerning the use of AI in creative writing. The post, which has since been revised, originally claimed that condemning writers for using AI was ableist and classist.
As many of us who are chronically online know, those two labels are among an abundance of buzzwords that are often used (and misused) to stir the pot. In this case, according to Wired, NaNoWriMo’s logic behind the rhetoric is that not all writers have the privilege of hiring a human editor, and that “not all brains have [the] same abilities,” and may “require outside help or accommodations to achieve certain goals.”
On the surface, the organization’s reasoning doesn’t seem too far-fetched. It’s true that not all writers have the means to go about traditional methods of editing and publishing. It is also true that some writers face unique challenges due to neurological limitations.
However, it is important to note how many artificial intelligence programs work. AI operates solely on the data that is fed to it. Any information found on the internet, including published work by established authors, is used to inform the data that AI produces. This means that there is a high likelihood that whatever writing AI generates is taken from pre-established work.
We would call that plagiarism here at the College.
This is where NaNoWriMo’s comments begin to take on a dangerous edge. With this statement, the organization, whose sole job was to nurture a space for writing along with all the integrity that comes with it, has basically endorsed plagiarism.
Many writers affiliated with NaNoWriMo found other issues with the organization’s statement. Writers such as Daniel José Older and Cass Morris have stepped down from Nano’s writers board with Older calling the organization’s words “vile, craven, and unconscionable.”
“Your heinous re-configuring of language used to fight actual injustices into a shield to cover your transparently business-based posturing is unforgivable,” Older emailed to Nano’s board.
Author of the fantasy series “The Kingston Cycle” C. L. Polk, who also identifies as disabled, found Nano’s take on AI particularly offensive, saying, “NaNo is basically asserting that disabled people don't have what it takes to create art when they trot out the lie that scorning AI is ableist.”
It seems that the organization intentionally used real issues such as classism and ableism to make their stance on AI seem above reproach, almost as if they knew their statement would be controversial to begin with.
For the most part, AI isn’t entirely condemnable. Using it as a tool to check spelling or grammar is something we have all taken advantage of on a school paper or two. However, there is a major difference between using it as an editing tool versus using it to take the place of the writer. Supporting the latter goes against NaNoWriMo’s entire existence.
Since the backlash, Nano has since released an apology for its comments but the damage has already been done. Many writers have since cut ties with the organization and sponsors such as Ellipsus have pulled their support.
It’s a shame because the whole idea NaNoWriMo is built off of is a positive and fun challenge that fosters community among writers and has led many to finish full fledged manuscripts.
I think a reassuring thought to keep in mind is that the NaNoWriMo organization doesn’t have a claim to the NaNoWriMo challenge. Many (including myself) who aren’t official members of the organization still look forward to November as a time where wills are tested and writing tools are put to work, and there’s no reason why this ambitious undertaking ever needs to end.
