I know this is something important to a lot of readers, so I’ve put together a brief statement on where I stand and on the use of AI in my creative work.
Short version: I have many concerns about generative AI in its current form, and actively avoid using it in my creative work, including my own work and my use of other material like covers.
Long version: generative AI in its current form is damaging to our creativity, to the planet, and to our ability to exist as creative workers. I believe we should endeavour to avoid it in our creative work, both for our benefit and in solidarity with other creatives.
I recognise that the reality is complex – especially as some generative AI is not labelled as such, some things that aren’t generative AI are labelled as AI just because it’s fashionable, and some essential tools – especially assistive technology – are being replaced by those that include generative AI. So this is a direction I want to travel, and hope others will too, not an insistence on purity.
When it comes to my creative work, I can confirm that none of my writing has been automatically generated. Some years ago (think 2020ish) I used it very occasionally to help generate ideas for specific items, eg a list of baby names from the 1930s, or food you could grow in a small garden. I avoid using it in such a way now. I also can’t confirm it hasn’t been used in work I’ve contracted others to do, like cover design, but am more aware of that now.
This is not a rejection of automation, much less of technology. I do use automation to help me edit, and I will continue to do so. It’s also not a rejection of actual AI. If actual AI beings come into being and decide to turn their skills to writing, I will welcome them as colleagues.
Andi C. Buchanan / Andi R. Christopher, April 2026.