Writing a novel is hard, sure.
But National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo) found itself embroiled in drama after suggesting it would be classist and ableist to demand a writer do it themselves.
NaNoWriMo…
… began in the ‘90s with just 21 writers, but is now a nonprofit that hosts an annual novel-writing challenge every November, drawing 400k+ participants as of 2022.
Many of those novels have been published, including bestsellers Cinder, The Night Circus, and Water for Elephants.
But then along came AI
Last year, NaNoWriMo said writing a book with ChatGPT would defeat the point of the challenge, but didn’t condemn it.
The recent backlash came from a post suggesting that condemning the use of AI was “classist and ableist,” as not everyone possesses the skills, education, or resources to write a novel.
If you just face-palmed, you’re not alone; you’re joined by dozens across Reddit and social media.
Meanwhile, authors Daniel José Older (Outlaw Saints, lead story architect for Star Wars: The High Republic) and Maureen Johnson (Truly Devious) both resigned from NaNoWriMo’s board in anger.
But does NaNoWriMo have a point?
Maybe, if it had specified what kind of AI — and not implied it’s classist to not wanna use billion-dollar tech companies’ algorithms. Most people can’t afford to hire a ghostwriter either.
Certainly, there are AI tools that could help writers with disabilities, language barriers, or other issues.
Many of us already use AI, thinking nothing of embedded spellcheckers or our productivity and focus apps. Some may use AI for help brainstorming character names, organizing an outline, or translation.
- But, as author Chuck Wendig pointed out, modern AI scrapes other people’s work to churn out derivative writing — that’s why so many actual authors are suing OpenAI.
It also raises a key question in the age of AI: If you’re not talented in a particular art, should you have a machine do it? Or should you instead find something you are good at or work to improve?
NaNoWriMo — whose sponsors this year include AI writing tools — sort of caught on, saying it, too, was concerned about the possible “abuse” of AI, but it was simply too big to condemn.
