The time has come. The critical implications of AI usage in creative writing have finally entered the novice novel-writing sphere. And while this integration isn’t out of pattern with the pervasiveness of AI tools in other spaces, the way things are unfolding within the NaNoWriMo community is proving especially controversial.
Before I continue, I feel it’s important to share my personal stance on using AI in writing.
It’s complicated.
I believe there’s something inherently wonderful about human creativity, that our minds and imaginations generate incredible stories and infinite possibilities. (I mean heck, we created AI tools in the first place.) That said, I don’t think artificial intelligence should be used to write full novels, generate short stories, or compose poetry. AI tools pull inspiration from existing human work on the internet, essentially stealing tones and ideas from real-life authors.
On the flip side, AI can be used as an effective grammar corrector, to help organize a writer’s thoughts into a clear outline, or for initial research. The NaNoWriMo debate touches on a few of these, but essentially, I think AI should be a regulated assistant, not the driver behind a story’s wheel. This is, of course, my personal opinion, and you are more than welcome to your own on the topic.
Okay, now that you know where my biases stand, let me break down the situation.
What is nanowrimo?
NaNoWriMo stands for National Novel Writing Month. The organization is “a 501(c)(3) nonprofit that believes in the transformational power of creativity. [They] provide the structure, community, and encouragement to help people use their voices, achieve creative goals, and build new worlds — on and off the page.” Their goal is to encourage participants to crank out 50,000 words during the month of November, crafting (in theory) a semi-coherent first draft of a novel.
A combination of strict scheduling, online tracking, writing workshops, and other resources provide the grounds for NaNoWriMo’s overall structure, supporting authors around the world in conquering the writing challenge. And it’s popular. In 2022, over 177,000 writers joined the community hoping to achieve the final word count.
This same community is full of controversy, and NaNoWriMo has plenty of struggles hidden behind its benevolent goal, but we’ll get into that.
What was nanowrimo’s aI statement?
This was the organization’s original post. No longer available on their site, the statement was as follows:
“NaNoWriMo does not explicitly support any specific approach to writing, nor does it explicitly condemn any approach, including the use of Al… We fulfill our mission by supporting the humans doing the writing.
We also want to be clear in our belief that the categorical condemnation of Artificial Intelligence has classist and ableist undertones, and that questions around the use of Al tie to questions around privilege.”
The statement continued (taken from the recreation in Washington Post):
“To condemn AI, the organization said, ‘would be to ignore classist and ableist issues surrounding the use of the technology,’ noting that issues around the use of AI “tie to questions around privilege.’ The group argued that ‘not all writers have the financial ability to hire humans to help at certain phases of their writing,’ and that for some writers, AI is a practical solution, rather than ideological.
‘Not all brains have same abilities and not all writers function at the same level of education or proficiency in the language in which they are writing,’ NaNoWriMo wrote. ‘Some brains and ability levels require outside help or accommodations to achieve certain goals.'”
How did the community react?
Naturally with any debate regarding AI, people have very strong opinions. Many in the writing community saw that statement as a direct support of AI usage, and believe it defeats the physical and mental challenge of writing 50,000 words on your own. Fantasy and young adult fiction writer Daniel José Older stepped down from the NaNoWriMo Writers Board on Tuesday, with many other authors, like Marie Lu, issuing statements criticizing NaNoWriMo directly:
The other piece of this puzzle isn’t surrounding the use of AI period; it’s about the implication that AI combats ableist and classist perspectives.
If NaNoWriMo wants to claim that AI effectively helps level the playing field for writers of different abilities or skill levels, they undermine the talent and grit of all writers, regardless of their skill level, ability, or financial situation. Not to overly insert myself, but not everyone is meant to be good at writing. (The challenge doesn’t require your 50,000 words to be award-winning anyway.) Just like how not everyone is meant to be a good cook, or a strong athlete, or a math whiz, human beings have a range of individual talents, and using AI as an excuse to close the talent gap discourages individuals from relying on their own abilities.
A WIRED article on this subject featured “C. L. Polk, author of the Hugo-nominated fantasy series The Kingston Cycle, who identifies as disabled ‘along multiple axes,’ [and] called NaNo’s stance ‘bad fiction.’ Polk took to Bluesky to condemn the nonprofit’s stance, 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.’ The author added, ‘Saying that disabled people need unremarkable and unoriginal writing is a pile of horsesh*t.'”
Other participants claim that “NaNoWriMo’s stance that poor and disabled writers should use AI in order to write well and succeed is disgusting. And calling critics of AI ableist and classist is truly bizarre.”
So basically, the community reacted fiercely and angrily, pushing NaNoWriMo to respond and readjust.
What is Nanowrimo saying now?
In light of the backlash they’ve received, NaNoWriMo issued an updated statement. As of September 6th, 2024:
“NaNoWriMo neither explicitly supports nor condemns any approach to writing, including the use of tools that leverage AI. We recognize that harm has been done to the writing and creative communities at the hands of bad actors in the generative AI space, and that the ethical questions and risks posed by some aspects of this technology are real. The fact that AI is a large, complex technology category (which encompasses both non-generative and generative AI, applied in a range of ways to a range of uses) contributes to our belief that AI is simply too big and too varied to categorically support or condemn.
We made mistakes in our initial expression of this position.”
This post links to a letter the organization wrote to their community regarding their statement.
“Taking a position of neutrality was not an abandonment of writers’ legitimate concerns about AI. It was an acknowledgment that NaNoWriMo can’t maintain a civil, inclusive community if we allow selective intolerance. We absolutely believe that AI must be discussed and that its ethical use must be advocated-for. What we don’t believe is that NaNoWriMo belongs at the forefront of that conversation.
We apologize that our original message was unclear and seemingly random. Our note on ableism and classism was rooted in the desire to point out that, for people in certain circumstances, some forms of AI can be life-changing. We certainly don’t believe those with concerns about AI to be classist or ableist. Not being more careful about our wording was a bad decision on our part.”
They urged community members to be patient and kind in sharing their concerns and to expect more detailed information from NaNoWriMo in the coming weeks.
What does this mean for nanowrimo 2024?
Who knows? With critics voicing their concerns and long-time NaNoWriMo supporters, writers, and sponsors pulling out of their relationship with the organization, there will likely be significant struggles this November. It’s a scary symbol of what the overall writing community could be diminished to if creatives continue to allow AI debates to eat away at what is meant to be a diverse, intelligent, and creative network of authors.
It’s devastating to see such a resilient organization with an incredible mission cave in on itself due to backlash from its own community. As a writer myself, I hope NaNoWriMo and its participants can find a way to reconcile and continue encouraging the next generation of novelists.
Final thoughts
At the end of the day, AI is an undeniable presence. We can’t ignore it, but we can regulate it to some degree. Do I think NaNoWriMo’s initial statement was the best? No. But do I think the community may have reacted a tad harshly? Yes. What should have been a productive, respectful conversation about generative technology turned into a word war that’s harming a once-safe space.
We should continue to encourage productive conversations regarding AI and writing, and its impacts on various communities. How you use AI is ultimately your decision, but I urge your choice to be an informed one.
I’ll leave you with this quote from NaNoWriMo’s stance on AI a year ago:
 “If using AI will assist your creative process, you are welcome to use it. Using ChatGPT to write your entire novel would defeat the purpose of the challenge, though.“