French literary organisers withdrew Thélyson Orélien’s novel C’était ça ou mourir from the Goncourt longlist after anonymous allegations that artificial intelligence generated the book. The Canadian-Haitian author denied the claim, citing racial bias, while technology platforms and literary critics disputed the reliability of the detection software.
The Académie Goncourt removed the critically acclaimed debut novel from its selection following online claims that the text was almost entirely
written by automated software. Published in France by Grasset in August, the work had already sold approximately 35,000 copies, secured the Prix du roman Fnac, and seen translation rights sold in more than 20 countries.
Origins of the AI Allegations on Platform X
The controversy began on 21 September 2026, the exact day the book won the Fnac prize. An anonymous account on X named Balance ton Claude—which possessed fewer than 100 followers—claimed that excerpts from the manuscript returned a 100 per cent AI probability when tested through the detection program Pangram, which the account described as by far the most accurate software available, citing a false-positive rate of 0.0041 per cent. The initial post accumulated more than three million views by Tuesday.
Subsequent reporting identified the person behind the anonymous handle as Samjuel Fitusi, a columnist for the newspaper Figaro and an author of an essay targeting modern social trends. Fitusi stated on his own account that he initiated the campaign out of concern that artificial intelligence would lead to the disappearance of reading and writing, despite describing himself as a techno-optimist.
Contrasting Results Across AI Detection Tools
The reliance on Pangram drew immediate skepticism from French media outlets and technology researchers who tested the same passages through alternative verification programs. Agence France-Presse ran excerpts through the InVID-WeVerify tool—co-created by the agency—and concluded that the text was very likely written by a human. Other detectors produced starkly conflicting outcomes, with Winston AI, detecting-ai.com, app.its-ai.org, detectgpt.com, isgen.ai, copyleaks.com, and ghostbuster.app offering varying assessments.
| Detection Tool | Assessed Probability |
|---|---|
| Pangram (via Balance ton Claude) | 100 per cent AI |
| app.its-ai.org | 100 per cent AI |
| InVID-WeVerify | Very likely human |
| detectgpt.com | Opposite of AI-generated |
| isgen.ai | Opposite of AI-generated |
Experts noted that detection programs often struggle with regional dialects, Caribbean rhythms, and stylistic repetitions. Some applications also flag human-authored content incorrectly or miss text that has undergone editorial revision. Critics also pointed out that these tools rely on standardized languages like English or French rather than correctly interpreting Caribbean dialects.
Thélyson Orélien Rejects Claims and Cites Racial Bias
Orélien, who was born in Gonaïves, northern Haiti, in 1988 and later relocated to Montreal where he worked as a journalist, strongly defended the authenticity of his work in an interview with Libération. The 38-year-old author argued that the attacks targeted his cultural background and distinct phrasing, pointing to racial intolerance.
The writer explained that his manuscript relies on traditional Haitian and Caribbean language patterns. The imagery, repetition and rhythm are his own, he noted, adding that he and his publishers were assembling documentation to prove his authorship. His original Montreal publishing house, Boréal, stated it had taken note of the allegations without taking them lightly, while maintaining intact confidence in the work. Grasset also defended the author, calling the allegations atrociously injurious to a writer with an exceptional life story and describing the work as original and powerful.
Academic Action and Plagiarism Revelations
While initial attention focused entirely on automated generation, the Académie Goncourt pointed to additional factors in its withdrawal decision. The Paris-based literary organisation cited convergent analyses from trustworthy investigators alongside separate discoveries of plagiarism involving the author.
Independent analyses by journalists and researchers pointed to earlier instances of plagiarism for which Orélien was allegedly responsible. Consequently, the academy stated that its withdrawal of C’était ça ou mourir was driven by the desire to preserve institutional integrity and send a clear message that it does not support or endorse the creation of texts generated using artificial intelligence.
Читайте также
