Jamir Nazir's short story 'The Serpent in the Grove', which faced widespread accusations of being AI-generated, has won the overall Commonwealth short story prize. The story went viral in mid-May after being named a regional winner, with critics on X and Bluesky citing 'obvious markers' of AI use. The literary magazine Granta subsequently withdrew from its long-standing agreement to publish the Commonwealth winners.
Review and vindication
In response to the controversy, the Commonwealth Foundation conducted a review of all regional winners, examining drafts, time-stamped documents, and notes. 'We are satisfied with the testimonies of our writers and their confirmation that AI was not used in their writing,' said foundation director-general Razmi Farook. Nazir will receive an additional £2,500 on top of the £2,500 he won as the Caribbean winner. Judging chair Louise Doughty described the piece as 'an original, poetic and deeply moving story'.
Critics' concerns and AI detection
The story contains multiple 'not x, but y' constructions and lists of three, which some consider signs of AI use. Critics highlighted lines such as 'Sun on galvanise is a cruel instrument', 'She had the kind of walking that made benches become men', and 'Marsha lived two bends down … [she was] big in the way of women who never apologise to furniture'. Some social media users ran the story through AI-detection software; Wharton professor Ethan Mollick noted that 'Pangram flags at 100%'. However, the reliability of such software has been questioned.
Author's background and process
In a film released by the Commonwealth Foundation, Nazir cited VS Naipaul and Derek Walcott as significant influences. He wrote six or seven drafts and used speech-to-text software, explaining that he could only see three or four lines of text on his phone screen at a time, perfecting each line before moving on, resulting in a 'highly polished' story. 'This story began in my childhood in rural Trinidad,' he said. 'Each day, I walked to school past rum shops where cane workers and labourers gathered. I remember the voices, the laughter, the arguments and conversations that shaped village life.'
Reactions and broader implications
Initial social media reactions to Nazir's overall win were negative. One X user wrote: 'immensely disappointing and disheartening. it feels like they wanted to stick to their guns after the entire GenAI uproar. I might think twice now before submitting my stories here.' Farook stated that the foundation 'rather than surrender our judgment to AI-detection software, we asked our winners to show their working drafts, outlines, the evidence of an artistic journey. That software, it must be said, is not infallible: it returns inconsistent verdicts and, in doing so, corrodes the very trust on which a prize depends.' She added, 'When the machine's default voice is the metropolitan one, the writer who does not fit the expected mould is the first to fall under suspicion. The more startling her gift, the more her unfamiliar brilliance unsettles, the more readily she is accused of being a machine. A young writer in Kingston or Kolkata, in Kuala Lumpur or Kigali, must now prove not only her talent but her very humanity.' Nazir did not provide a comment in response to a Guardian request.
