A waxy.org investigation published on 20 June 2026 alleges that the original illustrations in The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows were removed and replaced with AI-generated images.

The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows is a creative project by writer John Koenig that invents new words for feelings English doesn't have a name for. It started as a web series and YouTube channel, then became a book. The illustrations — hand-made photo-collages — were a central part of the project's style, not just decoration. Each image was linked to a specific emotion Koenig had named.

The investigation claims that someone removed these original illustrations entirely and swapped them with images generated by AI software. If this is true, it happened without asking or crediting the people who created the original artwork.

This is called "AI-model laundering." It means taking AI-generated content and inserting it into existing human-made work to make it look like the human creator made it. The existing project provides the reputation and audience, while the AI replaces the creative effort that built both.

This is different from using AI to make something brand new. When AI creates new work from scratch, the debate is about where the AI learned from and whether that's fair. What happened here is more like fraud — swapping verified human artwork with artificial copies inside something already published. The legal issues are clearer: if done without permission, it violates copyright and artist rights.

Image-checking tools already exist. They can mark images with information about where they came from, detect if an image has been swapped, or identify whether something looks like it came from an AI model. But publishers don't routinely use these tools when they release books, either on paper or online.

Right now, there's no easy, reliable way for readers or publishers to verify that an image in a published book is actually the original artwork the author intended. With software, you can track every change; with traditional publishing and pictures, you can't.

Koenig's book is a useful example because it's not a big corporation's product. It's a small, personally identified creative work with devoted readers. If the illustrations were swapped, the damage goes directly to Koenig and to the unnamed artists who made the original collages. This matters because the replacement was cheap and easy, but the cost to the creators is high.

The investigation doesn't say who did the swapping, and no publisher or other responsible party has publicly responded yet. The claim is based on comparing the original images to the current ones; if you want to judge for yourself, you can read the full investigation.

One thing is clear: AI-generated images are now good enough that swapping them in is possible. Whether someone actually did it here remains an open question. It's a story worth following as more information comes out from Koenig, his publisher, or the original artists.