On September 21, 2024, the first allegations surfaced that Thélyson Orélien’s novel 'C’était ça ou mourir' had been produced by an artificial intelligence. The claim spread quickly, prompting reactions from literary institutions and the media. Orélien, a Canadian-Haitian writer known for a work rooted in migrant experience, found himself at the centre of a controversy that questioned both his craft and his integrity.
For two weeks following the accusations, Orélien remained silent, withdrawing from public appearances and leaving France. The silence heightened speculation, with some interpreting it as guilt and others as a need to gather a considered response. During this period his Canadian publisher halted promotional activities for the book.
On October 13, 2026, Orélien sent a text to the Agence France-Presse, ending his silence. In the message he addressed the AI allegations directly and spoke about plagiarism, marking his first public comment since the controversy began.
The decision underscored how seriously the institution treats concerns about originality and the role of technology in literary creation.
Orélien stated unequivocally that no sentence in his book was created by a machine. He declared, "They say that C’était ça ou mourir was written by an artificial intelligence. That is a slander and a heresy. I have used tools here and there for research (...). But no sentence of this book was created by a machine." He repeated this denial in several formulations, insisting the narrative and prose were entirely his own.
While rejecting the AI claim, Orélien formally apologized for plagiarism, acknowledging his responsibility for what he called unacceptable errors. He admitted to having copied texts of recognized authors after his arrival in Canada, describing those acts as mistakes that violated academic and literary standards.
Orélien maintained that he wrote the novel himself, beginning in 2017, and that the work sprang from his own wounds and those of fellow migrants. He said, "This novel, I wrote it myself. It comes from my wounds and those of other migrants. This wound of exile that one does not heal from. This novel is its fruit, it is the fruit of my work, it is my creation."
Following the accusations, Orélien’s publisher in Canada decided to pause all promotional efforts for 'C’était ça ou mourir'. The hold on marketing reflected the publisher’s caution amid the unfolding debate over the book’s authenticity.
The Académie Goncourt removed Orélien from its list of nominees for the prestigious prize after the allegations of AI use emerged. The decision underscored how seriously the institution treats concerns about originality and the role of technology in literary creation.
In his statement, Orélien also acknowledged past plagiarism committed during his youth, attributing those early errors to inexperience and eagerness as a fledgling writer. He framed them as lessons learned, distinct from the current controversy.
Orélien explained that while he denied using AI to generate any prose, he had employed digital tools for research purposes, particularly to look up foreign idioms. He stressed that these tools assisted his work but did not write the text for him.
To bolster his defence, Orélien referenced the 99.9 percent reliability of Pangram software, a figure he cited to suggest that any detection of AI involvement would be highly trustworthy if it existed. He used this statistic to argue that the absence of AI‑generated content was supported by reliable analysis.
He noted that the first draft of the novel ran to 300 pages and that he completed it in 2019, having begun the manuscript in autumn 2017. This timeline was offered as evidence of his sustained, personal effort over several years.
Orélien reiterated that he had lived in Canada since 2010, after leaving Haiti that same year and moving to Quebec. He presented this background as integral to the migrant perspective that informs his writing.
He pointed out that three weeks passed between the initial accusations and his public response, a period he used to reflect and prepare his statement to the press.
Responding to the broader implications of the debate, Orélien said, "They have not only come to contest my quality as a writer but my humanity." He framed the criticism as an attack on his person, not merely on his work.
Despite his denial of AI use and his admission of plagiarism, the discussion continues among critics, publishers, and literary prizes about where the line lies between research assistance, original composition, and unacceptable borrowing.
The author insists he wrote the book himself, accepts responsibility for the plagiarized passages, and maintains that no artificial intelligence contributed to its sentences.