Authors, Celebrity Authors, and AI - Katherine Roberts


Illustration from 'Alice and Sparkle' by... ???

Who wrote that latest celebrity title piled high in every bookshop? And why does it matter?

In his article 'Star Power' (The Author, spring 2023), Irish writer and illustrator Oisin McGann warns that celebrity books are in danger of taking over children's fiction. Experienced authors like him are often employed to ghostwrite such books, or at best collaborate with the celebrity, and yet their contribution is sometimes not even acknowledged; they simply get paid a fee for their work. You might think this is fine. Both authors - celebrity and ghostwriter - get paid. The celebrity gets their name featured prominently on the cover, the publisher gets a book they can sell easily, bookshops are delighted since they get commission on every sale, and the young reader gets a decent enough book for their money. Everyone is happy, everyone wins.

But where is this heading?

I'm old enough to remember when children's books used to be the poor relation of publishing, not really expected to sell in huge numbers. It was around the time I started submitting manuscripts to publishers, resulting in my debut Song Quest (Element Books, 1999), which happily (or perhaps, in hindsight, not so happily?) coincided with the growing excitement surrounding JK Rowling's rather more famous debut Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. Before this, a few thousand copies sold might have been enough to guarantee a new author's career. But then along came Harry, achieving sales figures that made the computers blink, and profit margins took over. Post Harry Potter, children's books enjoyed a golden age with a wealth of books being published by talented authors, both new and established, in search of that elusive Hogwarts magic. With the celebrity takeover, however, many book projects are now initiated by the publishers themselves, bypassing the creativity of their authors. A few authors whose books sold well enough during the golden period seem to have achieved celebrity status themselves. The rest seem fated to join a growing pool of potential ghostwriters, and not every author is suited to this type of work. Many have been forced out of the business altogether in the interests of making a living. Meanwhile, an increasing number of celebrities want their name on a children's book, but soon it will be difficult to find a suitably experienced author with the time or inclination to write it for them. At that point, publishers are either going to have to write the book themselves (and why don't they do this already?) or look elsewhere for their content... and if you read my post last month on this blog, you'll know exactly where they are going to look.

Artificial Intelligence. AI.

At the end of last year, product designer Ammaar Reshi spent a weekend using AI to create an illustrated children's book called 'Alice and Sparkle' about a girl and her friendly robot. The illustrations were far from perfect, and the book drew a lot of criticism plus some deep questions about copyright still to be resolved, but it was published on Amazon and sold better that month than most of my human-authored books. And that was without a celebrity name on the cover, although it seems Ammaar has become something of a minor celebrity himself for publishing it.

Alice and Sparkle
children's book created by Ammaar Reshi using AI

He is far from alone. Recently, someone on Twitter boasted that they 'wrote' a 256-page novel using ChatGPT in an hour. It is certainly possible. Other AIs, such as Bing and Midjourney, can generate images, which might eventually work for illustrated books. So a publisher could feed in their latest best-selling concept, and AIs could use this information to 'write' and 'illustrate' a short children's book in around half an hour. Slap a celebrity name on the cover, and bingo... you have a book that didn't need a human author or illustrator. Copyright maybe a bit tricky - the US requires human authorship, whereas UK law would currently protect the book under the 1998 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act - and the publisher would probably still need to proofread the results, but think of the savings! Some AIs are currently free to use, while others no doubt work out cheaper than hiring a human ghostwriter for each project. Time wise, it's a definite win. Get the computer to churn out an entire 24 book series in what... 12 hours? That's half a day's work for an AI. I dare any ghostwriter, however experienced, to work to those kind of deadlines. Remember AI does not need to sleep. So it can be working on a second best-selling series while the overworked ghostwriter is still snoring away, exhausted both physically and creatively after writing Book 1 of the first. If you're a sleep-deprived ghostwriter and you're tempted to play publishers at their own game, here's a helpful guide showing you how to use AI for best results.

Judging by the reviews I've seen of such AI-generated books, human creativity still has the upper hand. But AIs are learning fast... from us, the human authors and illustrators. And the one thing we all produced during the golden age of children's publishing is plenty of 'product' (books, best-selling or otherwise) for AIs to devour and learn from. Eventually, maybe a lot sooner than you think, children's books won't even need editors. Basic editing software such as Grammarly has been around for some time, and such software will only get more sophisticated. In fact, why not bypass the publisher altogether? The computer can easily come up with a best-selling concept based on previous best-sellers, feed it straight into an AI to churn out the words and pictures, run them through appropriate editing and proofreading software, say "yes" to publishing (well, it's hardly going to say "no" to one of its own, is it?) and publish the book in digital format with no human input at all.

The question is, will any human child want to read it?

*

Katherine Roberts writes fantasy and historical fiction for young readers. In the interests of research, she fed the first scene of her current concept for a new series aimed at middle-grade readers into ChatGPT. You can see the results on this blog next month (21st July), by which time Katherine and ChatGPT will no doubt have finished the entire series, and these books will be available on Amazon in time for the summer holidays... unless a publisher steps in to rescue them.

Find out more about Katherine's human-authored fiction on her website www.katherineroberts.co.uk


Comments

Susan Price said…
Great blog, Katherine.
I had a look at the Amazon page and though one or two people think 'this is the future' most reviewers hate it. The illustrations are slick but dull and demonstrate that AI can't draw hands. The prose is utterly flat and perfunctory.
But no doubt it will improve!
I think that, like most things human, it will go in cycles. First people will hate it because it's new. Then, (especially if it improves a lot) there'll be a craze for it. Then there'll be a reaction and AI will be considered 'only for those who can't afford or appreciate anything better.' Books made by 'artisan writers' will become status-signals, commanding a premium price. And those artisan writers had better make sure they publish themselves and cream off the maximum profit.
I don't know that I would ever have recommended anyone becoming a writer, but I'll certainly try to steer anyone I care about away from it in future!
Griselda Heppel said…
Brr this is chilling.And horribly believable. I can’t imagine any child wanting to read these books but the cleverer AI gets, I suppose the more natural it will manage to sound. I love Susan’s analysis of it going in a cycle. We’ll end up with Campaigns for Real Books, like CAMRA, and the Campaign for Real Bread etc and people will catch on and set up their own organic writeries… Ah, hope springs eternal, eh.

Super post. I really enjoyed it, despite the shivers.
Umberto Tosi said…
ChatGPI has nothing on you, Katherine. Thanks for an informative, savvy and creative post, the kind AI can't yet equal (most humans either). You give us a lot to ponder. My early impression (perhaps premature) is that optimizing AI for writing - (e.g. prompt engineering, etc.) - soeems like more trouble than doing it all manually, at least for an experienced writer. Maybe this will change as AI evolves. But human writers evolve too, as do human ChatAI optimaizers -- just in different directions. I doubt that using AI will make one a better writer - only a more efficient AI user.
I swing between feeling that this is the end of the line for real creativity from real humans and that generations to come will see noting wrong with it... It is indeed scary, and like all technologies open to the abuse of being used in a variety of was it was 'never meant to be'. I wonder how AI would stand up to Beatrix Potter, Charles Dickens, JRR Tolkien, Barbara Kingsolver - and imitate their storylines and their prose? It's just how you mash it up - or rather, train the machine. Writing a novel can be an exhausting and tedious process, so those who can't see the upside but want to 'see their name in print' - here comes the answer...but I can't help hoping it will always demonstrate itself to be less original and much, much more boring...
Sue, from a quick look at Amazon, I fear the AI write-a-book-in-an-hour craze has already begun!

Griselda, maybe we should have a Campaign for Real Authors? And since AI can probably prove that it's not a robot by now, the joining condition for our campaign could be drinking real ale :-)

Umberto, thank you! I think you're right... my experience with ChatGPT to write the first scene of my next book (next month's post) took nearly as long as me writing the original scene on my own. I guess with practice it might take less time to get decent results out of AI, but - big BUT - it wasn't nearly as much fun!

Clare, I think you're right. By its nature, AI generated prose can only be derivative. However, for more formulaic fiction it might work quite well? Publishers are always looking for the 'same (as the latest bestseller) but different', so there's probably a market for, say, "dragon fantasy in the style of George RR Martin"?