by James Scott Bell
@jamesscottbell
National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo) began in 1999 as an informal way for writers to accept a challenge: Write a 50,000 word novel in a month. It grew into a non-profit organization, and at its height had hundreds of thousands of writers participating world wide. I was one of those writers. I found the challenge infectious, even joyful. Some critics found it “ridiculous” to think that most writers could come out with a competent novel in a month. But that missed the point.
It was mainly about exercising your writing muscles, learning discipline, and even coming up with a story that you could later whip into shape. It also fostered a supportive and community spirit.
Of late, however, the revenue needed to keep it going just wasn’t there. And now the interim director has announced that NaNoWriMo has come to an end. See her statement here.
You can find what other TKZers and commenters have to say about it, both pro and con, by putting “NaNoWriMo” in our search box. You might start with this one.
Another factor is that NaNoWriMo faced significant blowback last year, as described in this article in the New York Times:
For over 20 years, writers around the world have participated in National Novel Writing Month, or #NaNoWriMo, as it’s known online. The challenge is simple: Write 50,000 words in the month of November. Well, as simple as writing 50,000 words can be. (That’s 1,667 words per day, for those of you doing the math at home.)
Of course, using a generative artificial intelligence platform, like ChatGPT, could make those words go by much quicker. But is that really ethical? In the spirit of the event? Good for the craft of creative writing in general?
These are some of the questions that fueled a heated debate this week among writers, editors and others in publishing who fear the creep of A.I. in their industry. It started with a statement from NaNoWriMo, the nonprofit organization that coordinates the writing marathon every year. It ended — though perhaps there is more to come — with resignations, a lost sponsor and plenty of prickly feelings in what is meant to be an uplifting community.
“NaNoWriMo does not explicitly support any specific approach to writing, nor does it explicitly condemn any approach, including the use of A.I.,” the organization wrote on its website at the end of August. To fully condemn the technology, it said, would be “to ignore classist and ableist issues.”
“For some writers, the decision to use A.I. is a practical, not an ideological, one,” the statement continued, noting the “upfront cost burdens” in the publishing industry as well as the challenges that writers with different mental and linguistic abilities may face. “The notion that all writers ‘should’ be able to perform certain functions independently is a position that we disagree with wholeheartedly.”
More:
Online, the reaction to the statement from many writers was swift and critical. The organization later updated its blog post to emphasize that it was speaking in broad terms and that it was “troubled by situational abuse of A.I,” but it appeared to do little to assuage writers’ concerns.
Multiple writers, including Daniel José Older and Maureen Johnson, announced on X that they would be stepping down from NaNoWriMo’s writers board.
According to Ms. Johnson: “It was a way of encouraging people to sit down and set aside a block of time to learn to build writing muscle by drafting, by writing badly, by getting over self-doubt and boredom and writer’s block….What I saw in their statement was the opposite of that.”
One of the comments on the article said:
Allowing ChatGPT in National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo) is a nuanced issue. On one hand, using ChatGPT can aid in generating ideas and overcoming writer’s block, aligning with the event’s spirit of creativity and exploration. On the other hand, the challenge is meant to push writers to develop their own narratives and discipline. Extensive reliance on AI might undermine the authenticity of personal effort and creativity that NaNoWriMo aims to cultivate. Ultimately, while using ChatGPT for brainstorming or assistance can be valuable, it’s crucial that participants maintain their own creative control and write the bulk of their novel to stay true to the event’s goals.
This twist was added:
This comment generated by ChatGPT in response to the query, “Should authors participating in National Novel Writing Month be able to use ChatGPT to write their novels? Please answer in 150 words or less.”
I can’t speak to all the ins-and-outs of the controversy. Suffice to say, I much enjoyed doing NaNoWriMo. I even used it to form the foundation for two novels that were eventually published. But most of all it gave me a good jolt of writing energy. I loved the feeling of exhilaration mixed with fear and trembling, what that “eccentric Frenchman” Phillipe Petit must have felt as he walked a tightrope across the Twin Towers in 1974.
There is much value in that for the writer. So what’s to stop you from designing your own NaNoWriMo? Nothing, except perhaps accountability. To solve that, you could put the word out to family and friends. Or you could get with a writing pal or two and do it together.
And if a whole month seems too long, two weeks will do it. Instead of completing a 50k novel, think of it as a 20k start of a novel. That works out to a little under 1.5k words a day.
Or set whatever goal you like, so long as it is a real stretch. How many words can you comfortably write a day? Multiply that by three, and off you go!
Of course, no A.I. during this run. That would defeat the whole purpose, which is to exercise your head.
Sorry to see you go, NaNo. Thanks for the workouts.
Did you ever participate in a NaNoWriMo? Would you ever consider designing your own NaNo?
I heard of Nano’s demise but not the details. As I recollect, I formally participated once some years back but don’t think I finished a full 50k in a month.
Whatever the bones of contention, I’m thankful for the concept that Nanowrimo presented–to make that concerted effort to overcome roadblocks and write. Despite any scandal, that’s a benefit the organization instilled in a lot of people that I don’t think will rub off (enslavement to technology notwithstanding).
Agreed, BK.
Thanks for sharing the sad news, Jim. I hadn’t heard. Before I got published, I participated one year. The sense of community outshined the pressure of having to produce 50K words in a month. The biggest takeaway for me was knowing I wasn’t alone or crazy for chasing my dreams.
If writers use AI to write for them, it defeats the whole purpose. Thus, as beloved as NaNoWriMo is, perhaps it’s time to say goodbye. What a shame, though. Aside from fostering a sense of community, it’s a fantastic way to learn the discipline needed to crank out words week after week, year after year.
Yes, discipline, Sue, and the sense of community were both big aspects.
I gave it a shot one year. And yes, I did finish and got the badge. Didn’t work for me. It totally went against my writing process, and by following their rules, I ended up with a hot mess to revise before moving forward, since 50K words isn’t a full length book for me.
I found it more of a demanding boss than a creativity booster.
“Process” was not the point. You left that behind. And having a “hot mess” was sort of expected (agents and editors hated December and January, getting hit with NaNo manuscripts! )
Wow, Jim, I didn’t know about this. Sad but not unexpected. Nonprofits in many areas besides writing are in trouble b/c of increasing expenses and decreasing donations.
I tried Nano twice but both times life crises kept me from finishing. But the habit of consistently turning out words each day is the most valuable skill a writer can have. The exercise trains your brain to produce.
AI? That’s like hiring someone else to do your pushups.
“AI? That’s like hiring someone else to do your pushups.”
Brilliant take, Debbie! So agree with that…
Right you are, Debbie. It was an intense inculcation of a habit of writing a higher word count, which we all need from time to time.
I participated in Nano several times, winning three times. While I didn’t win the fourth, my novel Gremlin Night did come out of that “failed attempt”–I “only” wrote 30K that month.
I appreciated the sense of community, but felt Nano died when they allowed A.I. to generate a novel during the challenge. This week’s news was just the issuance of the death certificate, unfortunately.
Designing a personal Nano style challenge is something I’ve thought about. It could, like you suggested, a two week one to generate 20K as the start of a novel.
Or, it could be 30K (for example) to close out that novel. Second halves of novels, especially the final third, usually go much faster for me than the first half.
At any rate, recapturing our writing mojo with a Nano style challenge is a great idea!
It is so self-evident that AI defeats the whole purpose. The NaNo writing community certainly let that be known.
I’m going to set up my own mini-NaNo soon.
I haven’t participated in NaNoWriMo because November is a busy personal month for me. No need to add more stress to the equation. I do like the concept, though, and I know it’s been a positive encouragement for a lot of writers. I like your idea of a two-week challenge of 20K words. Maybe a NaNoWriWe would be better for me.
Reading the statement from NaNoWriMo, I don’t know what “classist and ableist issues” means. I also don’t understand the “upfront cost burdens” that were mentioned in the article.
Yes, one of the challenges was doing this Thanksgiving month! I always wondered why Nov. was chosen…and why not a 31 day month?
I’ve participated in three, beginning in 2007, with varying degrees of “success” – finished a full historical novel, nearly finished a PI based mystery, and crashed and burned on the third attempt at a thriller set in South Florida during WWII…
▪️The first had a (very) rough outline, since it followed the end of the War Between the States (or as Indiania refers to it, “The War for the Union”)…
▪️The second had plot points I tried to connect with some success…
▪️The third was just a hot mess because I had an idea, but not enough historical info on the area at the time… and I was trying to fill in my gaps, digging up what I needed as I needed it – all with a day job and a couple of middle schoolers…
Like Terry, I felt it too much a boss – maybe it was my OCD and refusal to just write without editing… and to scramble to make up the lost word-count when I got behind…
It also took a bit to recover from, even as I sit to work on things today – Not quite PTSD (no offense intended), but kind of a nagging voice that reminds me of a “failure” that nobody saw or cared about… except me, that is…
Yes, that’s definitely a reaction a chunk of writers felt about it. I didn’t finish a couple of times, but since no one came to take my car, I was happy with what I did.
Never participated, but always wanted to. I think fear kept me from it. And now the funeral’s over, I guess.
Using AI? I like what Debbie said above, “…like hiring someone else do your push-ups.” Perfect description in my mind. Or, you could say, “…like paying someone else to do your homework for you.”
But, designing my own? Now, that sounds intriguing for sure. It might just give me the impetus to push ahead with the story I keep saying I want to write, but so far, have only written a couple of chapters/scenes.
I’ll be thinkin’ on it. Happy Sunday! 🙂
Doing it on your own does require some sort of accountability. Writing with “fear and trembling” from time to time is good. Not good would be writing like that all the time. That’s why 2 weeks might be preferable.
I first participated in Nano in 2005 and it helped me get my first novel started and finished. I loved the sense of community, and the feeling that so many others around the world were participating in a crazy word frenzy.
Over the years, I tried a few times to participate, but none of the subsequent times had the same feel to them. In the last few years, I wanted to use Nano to help me finish my second novel, but the politics and wokeness kept me away. It felt as if, by trying to stay current and appeal to the most people possible, it strayed so far from its original intent that it wasn’t the same. Adding the AI factor was the nail in its coffin.
Perhaps if NaNo had stayed informal and never grown into a larger, salaried entity, things might not have devolved. Those early years were fun and invigorating, which is what I’ll rememember.
Years before NaNo, I had a clear month with no family obligations, major chores, etc., so I decided to see how much I could write. My life exploded with disasters like the universe spotted a weakness to attack. A veritable Murphy’s Law of writing. I never tried that again.
Ack! Timing is everything (and sometimes bad!)
I’ve been participating in NaNoWriMo for many years. At the beginning, I was never successful at finishing the 50,000 words, but about five years ago, I hit my stride and was successful every year since then. Each of those projects got filed and I left them to sit on the back burner until I was ready to work on them. But it helped because I finally had words on paper. I gave me a sense of completion. I could actually finish something. I’m going to miss NaNo, but I also know that I can do this on my own.
Joe, that’s a great account of the value of NaNo. Well done!
Nano always arrived at the wrong time. First of all it was November – almost the busiest month and year, — And I was always on deadline and in the middle of a story. I couldn’t stop and start another story. Besides, I was in the middle of my own Nano, trying to make my deadline.
I love Debbie‘s comment about AI push-ups. Speaking of, time to go to the gym.
Yes…deadlines, when they get real close, force NaNo upon us!
Interesting! Didnt know about this.
I never did Nano. Too cowardly, I think. But I should have because I am such a slow, anal writer that it would have really been good for me. (I KNOW this for a fact, having been a reporter most my life who was always under the tyranny of the deadline yet found every excuse in the book to squander time when writing a novel).
I get that AI can be useful. I recently used it for the first time on a non-novel project. It was good as a kick starter. But that wasn’t the point of Nano, was it? The point of Nano was, as you say, to get those flabby muscles moving fast and furiously. Sprinting, not just walking. And as Deb so aptly put it, you can’t hire someone to do your push-ups.
Or as you said, Jim: “It was a way of encouraging people to sit down and set aside a block of time to learn to build writing muscle by drafting, by writing badly, by getting over self-doubt and boredom and writer’s block.”
I don’t know why. But this saddens me today.
I agree, Kris. It was encouraging for a long time. Sad to see it go.
I can never start running or writing from a dead stop. There’s always a fair amount of preparation involved. Maybe that’s why NaNo never appealed to me. I would, however, be excited by a similar exercise involving everyone starting with a common premise/problem/challenge/whatever, ideas for the setting, a short list of characters and a couple suggested plot points along the way. Participants would write 20-25k words and at the end of the period we could marvel at how each of us handled the assignment; see where stories were the same and where they diverged. I think that would also stretch the writing muscles.
Absolutely, CR. Anything like that with a deadline and even competition would be a great exercise.
This is the first I’ve heard of this. I wanted to participate in NaNoWriMo, but fear got in the way. It’s too bad they allowed AI to ruin them. In my outspoken opinion, AI has no place in a writer’s life/toolbox. Using it is a form of cheating. In addition, it’s not ethical.
I loved Deb’s comment about AI and pushups. So true.