George R.R. Martin’s art team and publisher respond to A Feast for Crows AI artwork allegations

It’s been an interesting last week and a half in the A Song of Ice and Fire fandom. On November 4, Random House Worlds released A Feast for Crows: The Illustrated Edition, its lavish 20th anniversary re-release of the fourth book in George R.R. Martin’s beloved fantasy series. Immediately, fans started latching on to inconsistencies and oddities in the artwork, like a strange lack of House sigils, characters with vacant expressions, details at odds with the source material, and everyone seeming to favor blue clothing. That led to accusations that the artwork in A Feast for Crows: The Illustrated Edition was made using generative AI.

If true, this would have been more than passing strange, considering that Martin himself is currently part of an ongoing copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI, and has largely been viewed as a champion for creatives in the fight for better guardrails for how AI companies source the works they use for their extensive training datasets. Suffice to say, the outcry was loud and fierce.

Now, several people involved in the creation of the book have responded, categorically denying that any AI was used in the Feast for Crows illustrated edition. First, the art director for Martin’s Fevre River Packet Company, Raya Golden, took to the author’s Not A Blog with an update:

“My name is Raya Golden and I manage the art direction and licensing development here at Fevre River working closely with GRRM as his schedule will allow. But I alone am responsible for approving all the licensed art that accompanies our SOI&F book driven materials,” Golden wrote. “Recently there have been accusations floating around that the Penguin Random House’s illustrated edition of A Feast For Crows was produced using AI generative art.”

“To our knowledge and as presented by the artist who completed the work in question there was NO such programing used. While he is a digital multimedia artist and relies on digital programing to complete his work, he has expressed unequivocally that no AI was used, and we believe him.”

Golden added that the “official word from our office is, of course, that we DO NOT, never have and will not willingly work with A.I generative artists in any way shape or form.”

Golden is not the only one who denied the use of AI artwork in A Feast for Crows. Gizmodo reached out to publisher Penguin Random House, and they echoed her sentiments. “Random House is aware of the allegations, and we have spoken with the artist, who has assured us that AI was not used on this project. We believe the artist,” a spokesperson for the publisher responded.

So we have both Martin’s team and Penguin Random House denying that any AI was used in this book. What about the artist himself, Jeffrey R. McDonald? He also took to the internet to weigh in, sharing Golden’s blog post along with several piece of his own artwork.

“First I want to say thank you to all new followers and supporters. For the record I do not use AI,” he wrote. “This is the Mad King an oil painting on board.”:

“As noted in the link provided all images go through a team or director for approval. Some things are added, subtracted or redesigned in this process,” he added in another post.

McDonald also addressed one specific piece of artwork that had drawn much criticism, which seemed to depict a Christian crucifix on the wall in a scene where Samwell Tarley is punching the Nights Watch deserter Daeron.

“Now to answer the question about the ‘cross.’ Sometimes when illustrations get published, the size is much smaller in a book or magazine. So there is some compression of the image. This is NOT a cross but a wall sconce for a candle. This is a very minor piece of the composition and used for decoration and balance.”

A Feast for Crows artist denies AI allegations

So there you have it. A firm denial from artist Jeffrey R. McDonald, from George R.R. Martin’s art director, and from publisher Penguin Random House. That should make the case fairly open and shut.

However, I can’t help but feel a significant amount of damage has already been done. I have to note that both Golden and PRH’s statements shift the weight to the artist, and their belief that he is telling the truth that no AI was used.

And for what it’s worth, I do fully believe Golden at least. I interviewed both her and Martin at Glasgow Worldcon in 2024, and one of the things we specifically talked about was AI’s impact on various creative fields, including art. Golden is an artist through and through, and very firmly gave the impression that she does not in any way shape or form approve of the way generative AI has been ravaging these industries. I cannot imagine her knowingly signing off on artwork that utilized AI.

That said, I think the “willingly” is doing a lot of heavy lifting at the end of her statement. I haven’t once thought Martin’s team willingly went along with AI artwork, but that doesn’t rule out the possibility that some sort of AI tool got forced into the process either against their will or without their knowing.

I’m not prepared to cast doubt on McDonald either. There’s simply too much we don’t know about how this book was created as of this writing — and if AI was utilized, where in the process it came into play. But whether McDonald is telling the truth and the artwork in A Feast for Crows: The Illustrated Edition utilized AI or not, it represented enough a step down in quality from the previous three illustrated editions that it set off these alarm bells for many readers. Something happened with this edition behind the scenes, and I have a gut feeling there’s more to this story yet to come.

For now though, it’s good to have some sort of official word from Martin’s camp. We’ll have our ear to the ground for more.