"And if you find this man’s writing unworthy of the prize, then Granta’s mistake was trusting in a human to be the reviewer; had they employed an AI judge then his piece would have been rejected".
There is a possibility Murphy has got the wrong end of the stick here. My suspicion (based on the blurb one of the judges wrote in praise of the story) is that AI was used by one or more judges to evaluate the entries, and this is how a bad, AI-written story came to win the prize. No human reader has ever bought the notion that any kind of walking has ever made benches become men, and nobody will ever make me believe otherwise.
Men get wood. The 'picong' element here is to suggest that even the wooden bench would get an erection. If the padre is passing by and overhears you, he can say nothing. After all you may simply be stupid rather than lubricious.
Given that they had 7,000+ submissions, it’s quite possible (though I would like to think there were assistant editors somewhere doing an initial evaluation, i.e. humans reading the submissions at every stage). Are you referring to the blurb on the Commonwealth Foundation’s site?
I would like to think the same, and yes I am referring to the blurb on the Commonwealth Foundation’s site. There is something slithery about it… and guess what happens when you run it through Pangram?
100% AI generated. I wonder how accurate Pangram is for such a short excerpt.
Also, as Justin Murphy points out, there's something off about relying on AI detectors to evaluate writing while criticizing the use of AI to generate text.
(I realize that you did not use Pangram to evaluate the blurb).
Well done. These are fascinating questions. I completely agree that our reliance on AI to detect AI is one of the perverse ironies of the moment. I think Murphy is wrong about one thing, though: AI judges will award prizes to AI writing at a higher rate than human writing, and at an even higher rate to write written by the same AI model they use!
Thank you, Bécquer! I’m not sure about that. There is some evidence that even LLMs show bias for human-authored texts: https://arxiv.org/html/2510.08831v1
Oh, interesting. Perhaps AI writing algorithms are programmed slightly differently than their hiring counterparts. One can only hope! Here's what I was referencing: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.00462
These studies seem to contradict each other, but they are also looking at different genres: resumes vs. creative work. That opens space for so much more discussion! Really interesting. Thanks for that.
I appreciate that you took the time to annotate the story and are now offering this perspective. My references to “freedom,” “steadiness,” etc. are mostly a reflection on the level of abstraction in the story. I would have enjoyed it more with a greater amount of concrete detail. And I’m sure the similes can be connected to cultural context, but as a reader (and as a writer) my preference is for greater cohesion of imagery. I could go on here, but I’ll just say: our tastes are always shaped by culture (and education) and I thank you for your perspective here.
You are very polite- to a black man. I appreciate this. What I don’t appreciate is your utter failure to understand what this story was trying to say or what it might mean for people like the author.
Sadly, you have been so trained in programmatic stupidity. that you can no longer understand your own mother tongue- let alone anything Hispanic.
I believe the writer works in some high IQ field which I could not even begin to understand. The other point is that Trinidad- which wasn’t very much ahead of India back when ‘Mr. Biswas’ started his career in journalism- has become rich and has produced a plethora of great writers. Thus the author is writing for a more sophisticated audience.
I doubt a contemporary Indian writer could have attained such profundity with such an economy of means.
One other thing, us Indian Hindus take our religion for granted. We are condescending towards it. The Trinidadian worked hard to both retain & reform a heritage from multiple sources. The late Sir Wilson Harris’s books were even more layered. He had been a land surveyor in Guyana, & became, it seemed to me, the Jungian explorer of some submerged continent which connects all stories to each other.
Very smart as always Victoria! Just a note that any 100% attribution to either human or machine is impossible, no detection works like that; if they mean 99.9% likely to be AI generated, then perhaps.
Thank you! And good point on the level of certainty. When I ran my own work through Pangram, the detector claimed 100%. I’m sure you’re right, however. I’ve read that Pangram can produce false negatives but rarely false positives. I’m not sure of the actual percentage for the Granta story.
What if "Jamir Nazir" is not? The photo proffered as "his" is clearly a heavily editted mugshot of who knows whom.
What if this was a ruse to see how soon things would be discovered?
Sure, the text as is is third grade at best. But not the first time third grade "ethnic" writers are being tokenised as a useful addendum to the trajectory of "inclusivity" and "multiculturalism".
Meanwhile fantastic non-dominant ethicity writers are shunned and marginalised, to wit never given opportunity because they truly rock the boat, as just a few writers of dominant ethnicities still dare do.
I mean, I do not believe Dr Sharma Taylor is either dumb or olutright corrupt in this specific matter. Disinterested and shallow -- probably yes. Likely not aware the ruse was going on. Ah well...
Maybe I am just too decent to impute to others what I would never do. After all Taylor is primarily a lawyer not a writer, so if she is unqualified to judge belles lettres, she should at least be aware what cheating on purpose entails.
"And if you find this man’s writing unworthy of the prize, then Granta’s mistake was trusting in a human to be the reviewer; had they employed an AI judge then his piece would have been rejected".
There is a possibility Murphy has got the wrong end of the stick here. My suspicion (based on the blurb one of the judges wrote in praise of the story) is that AI was used by one or more judges to evaluate the entries, and this is how a bad, AI-written story came to win the prize. No human reader has ever bought the notion that any kind of walking has ever made benches become men, and nobody will ever make me believe otherwise.
Men get wood. The 'picong' element here is to suggest that even the wooden bench would get an erection. If the padre is passing by and overhears you, he can say nothing. After all you may simply be stupid rather than lubricious.
Given that they had 7,000+ submissions, it’s quite possible (though I would like to think there were assistant editors somewhere doing an initial evaluation, i.e. humans reading the submissions at every stage). Are you referring to the blurb on the Commonwealth Foundation’s site?
I would like to think the same, and yes I am referring to the blurb on the Commonwealth Foundation’s site. There is something slithery about it… and guess what happens when you run it through Pangram?
100% AI generated. I wonder how accurate Pangram is for such a short excerpt.
Also, as Justin Murphy points out, there's something off about relying on AI detectors to evaluate writing while criticizing the use of AI to generate text.
(I realize that you did not use Pangram to evaluate the blurb).
Well done. These are fascinating questions. I completely agree that our reliance on AI to detect AI is one of the perverse ironies of the moment. I think Murphy is wrong about one thing, though: AI judges will award prizes to AI writing at a higher rate than human writing, and at an even higher rate to write written by the same AI model they use!
Thank you, Bécquer! I’m not sure about that. There is some evidence that even LLMs show bias for human-authored texts: https://arxiv.org/html/2510.08831v1
Oh, interesting. Perhaps AI writing algorithms are programmed slightly differently than their hiring counterparts. One can only hope! Here's what I was referencing: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.00462
These studies seem to contradict each other, but they are also looking at different genres: resumes vs. creative work. That opens space for so much more discussion! Really interesting. Thanks for that.
"Sita moved quiet as if sound were taxed" is objectively terrible and it manages to get worse from there. Who is judging this stuff?
Agree! I used to read slush for a lit mag (years ago) and this would not have made it to other editors.
I too approached the story with two different types of bias-
1) against smart young people with MFAs shitting on their rural ancestors
2) against smart young people who use AI to expose the shallowness of the slightly older smart people who run literary magazines.
I was wrong. This is an excellent story- at least for ‘emic’ readers.
https://socioproctology.blogspot.com/2026/05/jamir-nazirs-excellent-story.html
I may mention, even a very good critic- like James Wood gets VS Naipaul wrong because he doesn’t have the necessary cultural background.
https://socioproctology.blogspot.com/2026/05/james-wood-naipauls-sampratti.html
I appreciate that you took the time to annotate the story and are now offering this perspective. My references to “freedom,” “steadiness,” etc. are mostly a reflection on the level of abstraction in the story. I would have enjoyed it more with a greater amount of concrete detail. And I’m sure the similes can be connected to cultural context, but as a reader (and as a writer) my preference is for greater cohesion of imagery. I could go on here, but I’ll just say: our tastes are always shaped by culture (and education) and I thank you for your perspective here.
You are very polite- to a black man. I appreciate this. What I don’t appreciate is your utter failure to understand what this story was trying to say or what it might mean for people like the author.
Sadly, you have been so trained in programmatic stupidity. that you can no longer understand your own mother tongue- let alone anything Hispanic.
Your ‘taste’ is coprophagic.
Mine isn’t- vide https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hindu-Borges-Literary-Socioproctological-Investigations-ebook/dp/B0FFZSW2X5/?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=CyI1W&content-id=amzn1.sym.5e81eabe-938d-4936-a067-ca199f0f9913&pf_rd_p=5e81eabe-938d-4936-a067-ca199f0f9913&pf_rd_r=260-3495035-3833941&pd_rd_wg=zKZwg&pd_rd_r=b0dc5056-a104-42b0-9fa3-4999597be2b2
I agree that the soteriological undergirding of the story is very abstract indeed. Like the ancient Jain novel, it can be understood in terms of the combinatorics of ‘karmic obstructors’. https://socioproctology.blogspot.com/2013/01/umaswati-on-right-cognition.html
I believe the writer works in some high IQ field which I could not even begin to understand. The other point is that Trinidad- which wasn’t very much ahead of India back when ‘Mr. Biswas’ started his career in journalism- has become rich and has produced a plethora of great writers. Thus the author is writing for a more sophisticated audience.
I doubt a contemporary Indian writer could have attained such profundity with such an economy of means.
One other thing, us Indian Hindus take our religion for granted. We are condescending towards it. The Trinidadian worked hard to both retain & reform a heritage from multiple sources. The late Sir Wilson Harris’s books were even more layered. He had been a land surveyor in Guyana, & became, it seemed to me, the Jungian explorer of some submerged continent which connects all stories to each other.
Very smart as always Victoria! Just a note that any 100% attribution to either human or machine is impossible, no detection works like that; if they mean 99.9% likely to be AI generated, then perhaps.
Thank you! And good point on the level of certainty. When I ran my own work through Pangram, the detector claimed 100%. I’m sure you’re right, however. I’ve read that Pangram can produce false negatives but rarely false positives. I’m not sure of the actual percentage for the Granta story.
I am always delighted to experience your mind at work, Victoria!
Thank you! And: the feeling is mutual, querida @Erika Morillo
What if "Jamir Nazir" is not? The photo proffered as "his" is clearly a heavily editted mugshot of who knows whom.
What if this was a ruse to see how soon things would be discovered?
Sure, the text as is is third grade at best. But not the first time third grade "ethnic" writers are being tokenised as a useful addendum to the trajectory of "inclusivity" and "multiculturalism".
Meanwhile fantastic non-dominant ethicity writers are shunned and marginalised, to wit never given opportunity because they truly rock the boat, as just a few writers of dominant ethnicities still dare do.
I mean, I do not believe Dr Sharma Taylor is either dumb or olutright corrupt in this specific matter. Disinterested and shallow -- probably yes. Likely not aware the ruse was going on. Ah well...
Maybe I am just too decent to impute to others what I would never do. After all Taylor is primarily a lawyer not a writer, so if she is unqualified to judge belles lettres, she should at least be aware what cheating on purpose entails.