Questioning my own originality

[Benjamin Clayborne]

This is true. And I disagree that there hasn't been much originality since the 1600s. I think there has been a great deal of it, in fact. You may have some basic elements at the core of various stories, but there is a lot of room for originality in the layers that you build upon those base elements.

I would say that most of the room for originality is reinterpreting old story elements in light of cultural/historical developments. The Social Network is a wonderfully original movie, even though the themes it deals with (ambition, betrayal, desire for acceptance) are as old as time, because it manages to so perfectly mirror our perceptions of the events depicted.

 

[Steerpike]

I would say that most of the room for originality is reinterpreting old story elements in light of cultural/historical developments. The Social Network is a wonderfully original movie, even though the themes it deals with (ambition, betrayal, desire for acceptance) are as old as time, because it manages to so perfectly mirror our perceptions of the events depicted.

Yeah, I think the elements are established, and it will be hard to create a story that doesn't, at its most basic level, consist of elements that have been used in the past repeatedly. But as you say there is a lot of room for originality in how one presents those elements. In Fantasy, I think that extends to a lot of the details of world-building, magic systems, and the like, where you can have a lot of room for original input, even though the themes you are dealing with in your story are timeless.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

You know what really sucks? Inventing a riveting story full of your own creative ideas you have spent tons of time figuring out the particulars of... only to see the exact same plot (or your witty lines) used on a rerun episode of Legend of the Seeker or Star Trek Deep Space 9. Damn. I've been mostly influenced by the events of my life.... but can even my experiences be wholly unique? Not a chance. So roll with it, and when you get done, go back and look at the details and ask people you trust for an in-depth critique. If you tell them of your fears, you will influence their opinions, so just let them read your work and see if anyone notices the connection to something else. That should give you your answers. I've had people critique my work and found out some of my names were similar to things I've never heard of, and knowing that allows me to change it later if I want something more unique.

Been there! After spending a year writing a story which, in part, involves the MC going back in time and meeting his future wife during her childhood, I thought I did something really cute that hadn't been done. The characters had this brother-sister-like relationship, and I was proud of how original I was with that piece of the story.

Then "The Time Traveler's Wife" became famous.

I stopped worrying about "originality" after that. Good lesson for me!

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

Yeah, I think the elements are established, and it will be hard to create a story that doesn't, at its most basic level, consist of elements that have been used in the past repeatedly. But as you say there is a lot of room for originality in how one presents those elements. In Fantasy, I think that extends to a lot of the details of world-building, magic systems, and the like, where you can have a lot of room for original input, even though the themes you are dealing with in your story are timeless.

The other thing I always try to remind myself of is that most readers haven't read and seen everything. So what if your story has a similar plot to a previous book? As long as it's not outright plagiarism, people will enjoy reading it, and you usually have the advantage that your writing style can be more current and therefore more palatable stylistically. I'm rereading Pride and Prejudice now; it draws the characters wonderfully, but the prose takes a lot of work for me to parse. I'd probably enjoy the story a lot more if it was written in a prose style that's easier for me to read. (I do realize that some of the love of the book is because of its prose style, but eventually a line has to be drawn between preserving the author's words, and making the story intelligible. If it's a colossal amount of work to get through, is that really better than having the character and story preserved but the words more accessible?)

For most writers, I don't think the goal is to be utterly original; I think the goal is to write something that a substantial number of people enjoy reading. If that's the goal, then trying to be utterly original isn't even on the radar. Not everything people read has to be a life-changing book; people need periodic infusions of entertainment, even if it's something they've more or less read before. Nobody would expect every meal to consist of things you've never eaten before, nor is it reasonable to expect that all entertainment is completely new.

 

[Lorna]

I've found the more I read I find likenesses of ideas that I thought were 'original' in nearly every book. I guess there's only a fixed number of ideas / structures out there, it's how they're put together into a new and exciting whole that constitutes the originality.