Original ideas?

Nolita · Apr 25, 2007

Personally I don't jump on anyone for being inspired. I honestly believe completely original ideas are few and far between. Nevertheless I have a question.

I believe my novel(in progress, still on the first chapter even, keep changing my mind), is science fiction. It's set in the future in a fictional place(but here on Earth, just a place as yet unbuilt). Also, part of the story involves current technology as it may be used in the future. That's where I have some confusion.

So is it still, for lack of a better word, original work, if you use a piece of technology in your story, and it exists, both in real life, and in literature, but you take it to your own place, and uses?

Oh, I better explain. Okay, so my story, it's set in the future(I haven't chosen how far yet, but safe to say at least 40 years into the future). I'm exploring possible uses for cryogenics, cloning, and genetic engineering. While all that's going on, there is some evolution and de-evloution to boot. Yes I know, technically, evolution, or de-evolution for that matter, normally takes millions of years. However, a mutation can speed things along, right? Since it's fiction, well...

So am I worrying over nothing? Or have these things been explored enough already? Mind you, the road forks and I'm taking the road less travelled.

herdon · Apr 25, 2007

First, there is no such thing as de-evolution. Things simply evolve. It doesn't mean they get better, it means they change.

Second, sounds fine to me. Pretty standard sci-fi stuff. I believe Heinlen dealt with evolutionary differences on a different planet in a book -- Starship Troopers if I recall right -- but in that story people did not evolve as quickly on that planet as on Earth because it's sun did not give off as much radiation.

Oliveman · Apr 25, 2007

Hey Nolita! I shared your concern, too, when I started out on my book. I used dreams to make my work definitive, but that is by no means an untouched topic.

The important thing of all important things regarding writing an original work is make your take on a topic original. Bring things to a new light, base them on values that need to be emphasized, on considerations that have gone unconsidered. You are not writing about such THINGS in your story as genetic engineering, what you're really talking about is human nature, and how that manifests itself when such things become easy and available in the future. Set up some central themes... stake out your ground for this novel, and attack it with a decerning eye for Truth. Fiction, after all, is about bringing our own reality to a better and clearer understanding.

Again I tell you that to make your work original, play off the fact that you are original, you are capable of original ideas and theories about our reality around us, and can shape in a setting that is readily available a story that brings us to a realization about the world- changes the way we look at things by presenting sides to a conflict, and showing what emerges from such forces meeting.

If you need any more help, drop me a message. I'd be happy to talk with you about your book. ^^

Chasing the Horizon · Apr 25, 2007

There is no such thing as an original idea, just an original story. Put your time into creating a good story, good world, and interesting characters, rather than worrying about how many times the same premise has been used before.

When I first started writing I worried about making everything original too. Then people started asking if I'd gotten various elements from blah blah book or blah blah movie. No, I've never seen that movie, never read that book. Turned out my 'original' ideas weren't so original after all. Now I just concentrate on writing the best unoriginal book I can.

Inkdaub · Apr 25, 2007

Havlen said:
First, there is no such thing as de-evolution.

Until Nolita writes about it.

Chasing the Horizon · Apr 25, 2007

De-evolution was in Star Trek TNG episode. They used the word and the concept.

(Like I said, no such thing as original ideas)

Nolita · Apr 25, 2007

Thanks for putting my mind at ease guys. I'm new to writing with the intention of completion. The real goal is to finish, and hope that any style I can muster will shine through.

Hope To The Horizon said:
De-evolution was in Star Trek TNG episode. They used the word and the concept.

(Like I said, no such thing as original ideas)

I must have watched that episode and forgot about it. I was a TNG junkie when the show first aired. Doesn't surprise me though. What's really funny, is I was thinking about the band "Devo", when the word popped into my head.

I suppose the information on evolution and de-evolution will come in handy though. Not so much in the writing of the novel, because I'm not even sure if I'll use those terms, I just know I'll describe the changes the people and animals have gone through. Still, I'll know to really stop and think about it, before submitting queries(if I even write anything worthy of submission).

In the meantime I'm agonizing over the word "infotainment system", I know that's not original. I know that's where we're all headed, and a few people already have them. It just felt daft typing television, when it's clear the television/entertainment system as we know it, is going the way of the dinosaurs, and fast. Well, the way of the dinosaurs for people who unlike me fully believe there isn't a small group of brontosaurus type creatures living in the Congo.

I almost went the Dr. Seuss route. Then I realized I would have to explain what the completely made up word means.

Oddsocks · Apr 26, 2007

So is it still, for lack of a better word, original work, if you use a piece of technology in your story, and it exists, both in real life, and in literature, but you take it to your own place, and uses?

Sounds like that would be an original application of an existing idea, which is perfectly fine, and about as original as you can really expect.

NeuroFizz · Apr 26, 2007

I would suggest you look into evolutionary theory because it is way more than a mutation here and there. There are reasons why it takes millions of years, and those reasons are difficult to by-pass, even in your genre. Rather than use evolution (or de-evolution), you may want to just rely on the mutations without trying to carry them through to reproductive fitness or selective advantage and all of that other stuff. Now, if you have a captive breeding program for your humans (or other organisms) it could accelerate the process.

In our society, modern medicine has largely cut into evolutionary change since people with genetic situations that wouldn't let them live to breeding age centuries ago can now do so and pass on their genes. Also, a mutation that could offer advantages in hunter-gatherer societies (or other societies) may not mean squat in our current society. If you play with some of those things in your world, you might just strike on something that is unique.

But, I also agree with others. What is unique about a story is how the characters are developed, how they react to unusual situations and various types of challenges. This is why new novels continue to thrill us even though there are a very restricted number of plot types.

Marlys · Apr 26, 2007

Evolution is defined in anthropology as change in gene frequencies. On a small scale it doesn't take anything like millions of years, although it can take that long for accumulated changes to create something very different from the source material (like birds from dinosaurs). But depending on environmental pressures, change can happen fairly rapidly.

Humans couldn't sprout wings within forty years from now, for instance. But a disease could come along that could wipe out everyone on Earth except those with a genetic immunity to it. And those survivors could have a number of other traits that were inherited along with the gene that saved them--it could be linked to something real like eye color, or something more-or-less invented like telepathy.

You're early enough in the writing process to do a bunch of research to help shape your story before the ideas get too set. If you want someone to explain evolution to you, a good bet would be to call up your local university's Anthropology department, and ask a professor if there's a grad student teaching assistant who could help you out if you bought lunch (the prof might volunteer, but is likely too busy, while starving grad students are always up for a free meal). The advantages are that they're used to explaining evolution in simple terms to undergrads, and unlike a book or online forum, they'd be right there in front of you if there were specific ideas you wanted to bounce off them.

Best of luck with it.

Jamesaritchie · Apr 26, 2007

Devolution

There's the word "devolution", which often is used with the same meaning as your word "de-evolution. Giving the word this definition was once frowned upon, but I even hear scientists using it today.

The dictionary gives the definition as The process of declining from a higher to a lower level of effective power or vitality or essential quality.

But the word is also used for what is also called "retrograde evolution," or "degeneration."

Havlen is right. Any change, even one for the worse, is still evolution, but I see no reason at all not to consider a reversion to a state of lower intelligence or weaker physical state as de-evolution. Such a change would be referred to this way, no matter what protests occurred.

What is it they say? Mutations happen every day, but almost all of them are bad, and only one in a million will be passed on.

At any rate, I doubt you'll write about anything that hasn't already been explored many times. The question is always what can you bring to it that makes it fresh, and how can you say it in a way that will make readers see old things in a new light. This is what's important.

NeuroFizz · Apr 26, 2007

Evolution is a process and a result is a change in gene frequencies. I'd suggest you get a biological definition of the process from an evolutionary biologist who actively works in the field. It is way more complex than is being presented here, so if one wants to work it into a story, it would be wise to fully understand it all.

Gene mutations in viruses and bacteria will be much faster than anything seen in humans, but the original post hinted at human evolution, not that of microbes.

Oddsocks · Apr 26, 2007

I remember reading something recently in NewScientist about evolutionary throwbacks - the reappearance of traits that have been 'evolved out' at it were. I think they believed tails in humans might be an example of this - like there's still some of the information for that kind of thing in the organism, even though it isn't usually expressed, and sometimes a mutation can lead to its being expressed again.

Is this relevant? I can't remember all the details of it, and I don't know what issue it was.

Nolita · Apr 26, 2007

Thanks again everyone,

I'm on page 4, which doesn't sound like much, but considerring the longest thing I ever wrote before was a short story, and much of my time so far, I've used on characters, and formatting(I still have to tweak that, but I want to get the first draft out first, once I've spewed all that out, the rest should be somewhat easier right?), well, it's a lot, for me, but I recognize it's just a wee bit for most folks.

Right now, I really just want to write a first chapter that hooks and holds a reader. I'm trying to keep it at a good pace, so that by the end of this chapter, a reader won't just want to read the next chapter, they'll have to. That's one of the things I like in a book. Especially if it's sci-fi, fantasy, or horror. I like to feel an urgency to keep reading. I don't mean that adreneline's perpetualy pumping, but that the quiet moments are letting me get to know the character(s) better, so I just have to keep reading. I'm not sure if that makes sense to anyone besides me.

At any rate, I'm still naive, about many things, but at least I own it, and I'm trying to learn without becoming jaded(very tricky). For example, I really didn't realize what a big can of worms I was cracking open with my questions. It's okay though.

Oh and don't worry about discouraging me. I know that original ideas are very hard to come by. I'm just hoping for sweet inspiration

. Take some authors and film makers who are touted as being very original(by critics and fans), they aren't really. Clive Barker's early novels, and J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series are to me, obviously kissing cousins of C.S. Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia. While Quentin Tarantino, well, has he ever had an uninspired idea? Heck no! He borrows all the time, it isn't that he borrows, or even what he borrows, it's how he borrows, that's what leaves people in awe. Mind you, he knows just when to quit, I would have cast Shaq in Kill Bill: vol. 1, just to have The Bride walking around with a big footprint on her chest. Game of Death fans would love it, but it would alienate everyone else. Quentin knows what he's doing. Even John Woo borrows, golly, I'm going to stop talking movies now before I get sucked in, and stay here all night.

Is it better, I leave things vague? About my novel I mean, and only in this thread(can't imagine a vague novel being fun to read). There's a terrific conversation going on, and I'm liking the debate. I'm even enjoying some of the suggestions, though I'm not sure if I'll really need them just yet. It's funny, but yes the breeding population would be small, but not controlled, so much as isolated, because of events(which we don't see, but learn of through one of the characters' love of research(one of her character traits: She's a seeker of knowledge/facts). In fact, her quest for knowledge, is part of what inspires a love-hate relationship with one of the other main characters(he's a seeker of wisdom/truth, it may look like they're after the same things, but they aren't).

At any rate, I'm not sure, just yet, how much of the changes in the isolated group of people, a tribe really, and seperate from my main characters, are attributable to mutation. I faced it awhile back, they're not just mutants, they're inbred mutants. Maybe the orneriest kind of mutants. Whether their de-evolution(sorry, I still like that word, maybe I'll hate it by the time I'm finished with the first draft though), is scientific or figurative, it's for the better, but only for their circumstances. If you dropped them into Western Civilization, today, they would have to be institutionalized, for their safety, as well as for the safety of others, but for where and when they live, it's key to their survival.

Heehee, now I just wait for the, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and X-Files parallels to flow in. Yeah, I know, they're there. Still, it's not exactly the same, and I hope to inspire some measure of sympathy for their plight(it's tough to feel too bad for Leatherface, though he is a pitiful creature).

Nolita · Apr 26, 2007

Yes I'm procrastinating. Afraid that when I go back to writing, what looked so good when I minimized the window yesterday, will look horrible today.

Siddow · Apr 27, 2007

Nolita, finish the book. Worry about tweaking the science in the second draft. Get the story down now. Since it's your first novel, you're going to learn so much between now and the end. Go learn it, have fun with it, and accept that you'll most likely be re-writing that first chapter on the second draft. So don't spend too much time on it now. Get it down and move on.

The Grift · Apr 27, 2007

3 things

1) Good artists borrow, great artists steal.

2) Stop worrying about the science. Yes, your book is definitely sci-fi (or speculative fiction as they like to call it these days). You can tweak it enough in the second draft to be plausible. It doesn't have to be "hard" sci-fi, complete with tables and graphs and a character saying "Well, as you know, the denucleated ovums used in the earliest somosatic nuclear cell transfer cloning experiments led to shortened telomeres which in turn led to premature aging. That problem was solved by Dr. Newidea who was able to expand parthenogenesis to both sexes...At least until the militant branch of the Anti-Raelists set of a nuclear device in his lab. Speaking of nuclear devices, it was a stolen prototype of a thorium-based implosion weapon which was the first such weapon as the process for enriching thorium to the requisite weapons grade had only just been perfected..."

Yeah, you dont really need to do that.

3) Good luck! Have fun!

Rob B · Apr 27, 2007

Like a few others said, I'd also suggest getting it down on paper. You'll get all the editorial help you could ever ask for once you start sending it around. I can speak for no one else, but if I worried about any of my ideas, abject as they might be, ever being thought of or written about previously, I'd never compose anything I'd have much confidence in, related to its originality.

Many years ago, a well-published, major house, writer friend of mine, when we were discussing this very topic, suggested that there are likely no phrases which have not already been committed to paper--many times over. This put it all in perspective for me. It's then becomes a question of the order for all of the words in one's manuscript. And that leaves it up to each of us to determine.

Original ideas?

Nolita

herdon

What's up?

Oliveman

Chasing the Horizon

Blowing in the Wind

Inkdaub

wrapped in plastic

Chasing the Horizon

Blowing in the Wind

Nolita

Oddsocks

NeuroFizz

The grad students did it

Marlys

Resist. Love. Go outside.

Jamesaritchie

NeuroFizz

The grad students did it

Oddsocks

Nolita

Nolita

Siddow

I'm super! Thanks for asking

The Grift

Tom Swiftly's Favorite Adverb

Rob B