Maroc - NEWSDAY.CO.TT - A la Une - 17/12/2025 08:01

Is a robot calypso monarch possible?

THE EDITOR: I find myself agonising over whether it’s still worthwhile to put pen to paper (forgive me, but “finger to keyboard” lacks elegance) to comment on the use of AI in calypso. The horse may already have bolted, but the subject still merits discussion – if only from an academic standpoint. With TUCO opening registration for the 2026 national calypso competitions last week, two questions arise: (a) Can the use of AI be stopped? (b) What would such a development mean for calypso; that is whether desirable or not? To tackle the first question, I consulted someone far more tech-savvy than I am. He explained that an AI-generated calypso is almost impossible to detect. Once an artiste edits or rearranges the lyrics, there is no reliable technical method to prove AI involvement. He further noted that calypso already operates within familiar thematic lanes – politics, social commentary, humour, making AI-generated pieces even harder to distinguish from human work. As a result, unless TUCO mandates explicit disclosure (and relies on artistes’ honesty), any attempt to police AI use will be speculative at best. The desirability of AI in calypso depends, however, largely on its application. There are legitimate benefits. Young artistes or newcomers may lean on AI for brainstorming, structuring, or refining lyrics – much like using a rhyming dictionary or seeking guidance from a more experienced writer. AI could also help preserve older calypso styles and boost productivity during the hectic Carnival season. But these benefits must be weighed against the potential harm. Calypso is not simply rhyme and melody; it is a cultural, political, and social expression rooted in lived experience – something AI cannot truly replicate. Over-reliance on AI risks eroding craftsmanship, authenticity, and, most importantly, originality. Competitions that reward depth and creativity are compromised if a participant can outsource those qualities to a machine. No competitor should feel comfortable earning points for originality when the work is not their own. Based on the foregoing, I cannot say definitively whether the harms outweigh the benefits. But I can say with certainty that the widespread use of AI in calypso composition is inevitable. Just as AutoTune and digital production became standard in soca, AI will become normal in lyric-writing. The real question before TUCO, therefore, is not whether AI will enter calypso, but how the organisation intends to safeguard the art form while allowing room for technological evolution. A practical option may be the creation of a separate category for AI-assisted or AI-generated compositions. This would protect the integrity of traditional competitions while giving artistes the freedom to experiment without concealing it. At the very least, TUCO should require entrants to disclose whether AI was used in the drafting or composition process. While such a rule would depend heavily on honesty, transparency, however imperfect, it is better than doing nothing. And doing nothing risks slowly diluting one of our most treasured cultural expressions, to the point where, one day, we might find ourselves crowning a robot calypso monarch at Dimanche Gras – a development that would make me very uncomfortable. What about you? CLAUDE A JOB via e-mail The post Is a robot calypso monarch possible? appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.