copycat!

[maestrowork]

Something to think about:

Have you ever had an idea that you thought was just great? You even wrote the darn book, then you found out someone had already written something like that, published. Since it's simply impossible to read every book that is out there, how do you know you're not writing something someone's already done, before you spend 2 years on it?

Or does it matter? The old "there're no new ideas; only treatment and execution."

[CaoPaux]

Doesn't matter, IMO. The trick is to do it so much better that everyone forgets the "original". :)

[Nateskate]

That was my life's story. I had seriously considered writing in the 1980s after I got out of college.

I had actually written several books to completion. But having no typing skills, pre-word processor, I dreamed of the day I could pay someone to transcribe them.

When the children came, I got absorbed in their lives, and my dreams sat on the back burner. No word of lie, I have written three books that were never published, and eventually someone else got the same idea, and all three of them ended up becoming movies.

Other writers are bound to come up with your idea if you don't publish them first. Same thing happened with songs I wrote, although not as obviously. I heard several songs that were very similar to songs that I wrote, some with rather unique music lines.

[PixelFish]

Yes. Just this week, I bought a copy of a Neil Gaiman audio book, and he mentioned on the end interview that his next chidlren's book would be about a little boy who got lost in a graveyard and then ends up being raised by dead people. This is perilously close to a story I'd been working on since 1999, which was based on a childhood incident where my mother accidently left me locked in the Salt Lake City mausoleum. I used to wonder what would happen if she'd left me there....

Of course, I don't think Neil is copying me, nor am I copying him. We just happen to have pretty similar aesthetic tastes. But it is certainly making me grind my teeth, since I worry that once my story is finished that people will think I took the idea from him. (My better sense tells me that we will undoubtedly have different characters, themes, plot, etc....and if my story is good enough, then the rest of it shouldn't matter.)

[macalicious731]

Sure. I got mad at myself this afternoon while I was sitting in class. Came up with a great new idea for the next project after this current one is done. (Which was a big relief; ever since I got so involved with this one WIP I've been "dry" in the idea area.)
Anyway, I got to thinking about it a little more... I realized I was taking the plotline in the exact same direction of my current WIP, and starting blaming me for ripping off myself.

A thread like this was brought up a little while ago and someone (Mike?) rather brilliantly damned Shakespeare.

[arrowqueen]

Happens all the time. I think ideas float around the universe and end up in several different heads at the same time.

[James D Macdonald]

Ideas aren't -- and can't be -- copyrighted. There's no such thing as a "killer" idea.

Just tell the story in your own way.

[lissapup]

I actually liked 2 book series about two different girls with curly red hair who were trying to find their "thing"

[Nateskate]

For the most part I completely agree that a good idea is worth worth redeeming. In fact, you have countless copycats in Sci Fi and Fiction. And many of them work well because people like variations of the same stories.

That doesn't work in all Genre's especially when you are thinking cutting edge technology, and cutting edge medical issues. (Gene manipulation) That's because technology can outdate your own book very fast. In fact, right now, if you wrote the greatest book on someone whose phone was cut off, people would say, "Why didn't he just use the cell phone?"

A core story idea can end up past its prime in terms of freshness.

Example: Plague stories have their windows, because you can have too many of them. Each may be told well, but you also have to hit the market at the right time. That window opens and closes fast.

There may be a good spin on a Jurasic Park, but if it was actually like it, you were worse off, because it would appear to be a clone after the fact.

I had a medical (Mutating Virus) story that was fresh, and probably would have been popular when it was written just after 1980, because it would have tapped into everyone's fears of the AIDS virus. But a few mutating virus stories later and its a stale idea. That's just my feelinsg.

But in general, I do agree that some stories are redeemable, as long as you do them well.

[mr mistook]

A subplot of my current WIP has to do with this very phenomenon that I think every artist experiences where you see what you thought were your original ideas cropping up in the media.

In my book, there is a secret organization that spies on unpublished artists all around the country, siphoning off the best ideas and selling them to the highest bidders.

[James D Macdonald]

If the story is strong enough, the fact that people have seen ten thousand mutating virus stories won't matter.

Stories aren't about viruses -- they're about people.

Cut phone lines -- is this the time the person forgot to charge their cell phone? Are they in a 'dead' area? Did they leave the cell phone in their other jacket? If the story's moving fast enough just answer the reader's question a moment before he asks it, and continue. (Your explanation doesn't need to be detailed, or even likely -- just plausible. If the reader likes your story enough he'll buy it. It's that willing suspension of disbelief again.) Stories aren't about telephones. They're about people.

[mr mistook]

Stories aren't about telephones.










That's just... such a quotable quote. :)

[maestrowork]

I see dead cell phones.

[Nateskate]

I agree, and I'm sure that in the case of your story there is going to be a market for it. And in the case where you are already a multi-timed published author, that is more true, because people already value you, and you have credibility. Those who love your books will always give you the benefit of the doubt.

Stephen King can do a version of Jurasic Park or even Hunt for Red October, as can a number of other great writers, because people know they are going to put one heck of a spin on it. So, an established writer has an advantage. Their fans already know it will not be a clone, but something unique.

There is room for a great story. The situation is not the same for an author who is not established. If I were to take my book that sounds like someone elses and submit it to an agent, the responce would likely be a rejection, because they'd have a preconceived notion. "Who are you that we should take this risk?" Now, even if you had an agent accept it, you'd have publishers who would reject it for being too much like..."

So, from what I've seen, there are two sets of rules. (You can correct me if you think I'm wrong. But it is based on responces I've heard from other people who were in that position. And perhaps they simply didn't know how to Query their product??? Who knows?) But from where I sit, there appearss to be rules for established writers and different rules for new writers.

An established writer has a market (their fans) who will buy their books, and publishers know that. Will they take that risk on a novice? My question is primarily whether there is a market, and how much of a market you can expect.

The other thing is the value of a media push behind a work. That is the difference between an obscure cult novel, and a best seller. So, if it is similar to another work, somehow it has to be presented as a completely new spin.

[Writing Again]

One thing is guaranteed:

Same plot: Same characters: Same environment: Twenty-seven writers: No two will tell the story exactly the same.

Tell your story your way: Everything else will take care of itself.

[maestrowork]

Nate, I think best selling authors copy themselves all the time. Some genres and subgenres churn out similar stories over and over. Certainly, if there's a market, there will those stories...

I guess some of my questions come from the writer's perspective. How original you want to be? I think we all hope to have an idea so unique that nobody has it (the "killer idea") but as Uncle Jim said, there's no such thing -- not anymore. Everything is kind of a variation of something else. It's like when you have an idea so "unique" and you're so passionate about, then you find out someone has already done it -- there's that "thud, thump, phlat..." in your heart.

There are two sides of this story. Yes, it's how to tell your story and your characters, all that stuff -- stories are about people. On the other hand, an agent or editor only gets to see what your "idea" is sometimes. Sometimes they ARE looking for similar stuff: "Oh, a Jurassic Park-type story? Great." Sometimes they're not: "Oh, a Jurassic Park-type story? Been there, done that. Pass." But it's all at the "idea" level, until you intrigue them enough to actually request and read your chapters and synopsis, then the full ms... So yeah, there's that initial hurdle for an unknown author. It seems like everyone is racing to find the next big thing with the next big idea (I'm sure everyone is looking for the next Dan Brown and the next Da Vinci Code now). And if you do write that "killer virus" story, it may meet that "hohum" sigh....

[EGGammon]

Yeah, I think writing is all about taking a "general idea" and creating your own story around it. Look at all the teen killer movies. General idea: "Killer stalks teens, kills a bunch of them, until we find out who did it" but each film has a unique story around it. And look at the many shows and novels that play on the "good vs. evil" general idea. No matter how unique the story is, there's always going to be people out there who think the person is copying the likes of Harry Potter, Charmed, Buffy or whatever it may be. And look at all those cheesy Lifetime movies. General idea: "a woman goes through something horrible and overcomes it at the end" but each movie has a different story around it. One woman may overcome bulimia or anorexia or a cheating husband or a brutal rape or loss of a loved one. And soap operas are the same way: "Love Triangles" or "a Serial Killer" or "Who's the Daddy?" storyline. Soaps take those general ideas and make them their own, creating their own story around it.

Point is, everything comes from a "general idea" and a unique story is created around it. We can't escape being accused of stealing our ideas from someone unfortunately. My novel series has a "battle between good and evil," a completely unique story, but I'm sure if it ever gets published, there'll be someone out there claiming I'm a HACK and I stole the idea from Harry Potter or Charmed or Buffy or some other book/show.

And about the using of an idea several times in different ways, I do that a lot. There are a couple WIP that I put to the side that start with the same thing, but venture off in entirely different directions.

[maestrowork]

I'm not talking about general idea, though. Let's pick one: woman suffered from breast cancer and came out triumphant. Let's put a spin to it: her husband is an alcoholic, her son handicapped, etc. etc. So you add layer upon layer, only to find that people have done the breat cancer of the week movie with an alcoholic husband and handicapped children... suddenly your idea is old news, and all is left is how well you tell your story -- how personal can you make it. But to someone else, they may roll their eyes and say "oh, no, not another breast cancer story with abusive husband..."

So the more details you add to your ideas the more "frustrating," if you will, it becomes when there's a story already out there having the same elements. Then suddenly you find yourself thinking: OK, maybe I need to make the illness lukemia instead, and the husband is a serial killer and the son a closet homosexual... etc etc.

Variations.

Edit: fixed glaring errors... it was early!

[Nateskate]

I guess some of my questions come from the writer's perspective. How original you want to be? I think we all hope to have an idea so unique that nobody has it (the "killer idea") but as Uncle Jim said, there's no such thing -- not anymore. Everything is kind of a variation of something else. It's like when you have an idea so "unique" and you're so passionate about, then you find out someone has already done it -- there's that "thud, thump, phlat..." in your heart.


Well, I defer then to uncle Jim's wisdom. I could have been entirely wrong and perhaps it was a mistake for me to give up on the stories I wrote. I had just heard of people being rejected on the basis of "that's already been written and there won't be any market for another." Perhaps it could be the prejudice of an agent.

But that's water under the bridge for the time. I'd have to go back and re-read my own stories, and edit them, and bring them up to date, and it just seems easier to me to go with something that is fresh and new to me. That's one of my quirks. It's easier to write something new.

[Elizabeth]

This kind of thing happens all the time. I got a rather bad taste of it myself with a comic book that just came out recently, called WILD GIRL (it's by Leah Moore, Alan Moore's daughter). The premise is EXACTLY (and I mean EXACTLY) like a thing I've been brewing in my noggin for about three years now. I was going to call my version URBAN JUNGLE. I don't know Ms. Moore, so it's not like she "stole" my idea

I stomped around about it for a while, then I just got back to work on my current project. What else can you do? The only thing I can really do is keep my mouth shut and keep workin'.

I've never been one for blabbing ideas -- I come from that school of thought that talking about the project siphons off all the energy you could be using to write the damn thing. Which is exactly what I should have been doing. While I was sitting there thinking about it, she was doing it.

Serves me right. Less talk, more rock!

[triceretops]

Created a novel 15 years ago that had piloted, robotic dinosaurs. It was called Dinothon. Years later a dang cartoon comes out with the same thing then toy line follows. Damn their bloody eyes, says I!

Triceratops

[Thekherham]

Even though I think I am writing a novel that no one else could possibly be writing, somewhere out there, among all the writers in the whold wide world, there may be someone who has a similar idea.

[preyer]

my 'creating god' story was cut short by a movie (which i don't remember the name of) coming out just as i was writing it with a similar idea (in this case, the movie starred al pacino about creating a perfect pop-star made digitally. this was on the cusp of the digital age in movies and i tried to capitalize on it, but i was just too slow even at my fastest).

anyway, i have a friend who used to own a video store. i asked her what rented the best and she said porn (of course) and 'b' movies, which surprised me. apparently, people love that stuff. i imagine it's the same with pulp fiction (not the movie, lol).

and certainly there's nothing one lick original about ancient conspiracies hidden in artwork. that's an idea i'd started a hundred times but never got into it. i always thought it was a cheesy idea, especially after (attempting) to read an old book by manly palmer about the *philosophy* hidden in art, not something so scandalous as conspiracy. (as an aside, it was a book i don't think folk outside the masons were supposed to have access to. but it was old, and it'd found its way into a garage sale for a couple of bucks. my version was, i think, the fifth edition, but previous editions only were printed in, at most, about runs of 500 and as low as a 150. i'd tell you the name of the book but then i'd have to kill you. the masons and all. you understand.) but, i mean, good gawd, conspiracy in art was the premise behind 'hudson hawk' for cryin' out loud....

still, i imagine there are degrees to which you can copy something accidentally. some things are just *too* similar, characters or not. 'romeo and juliet' is going to be told a million more times, which is fine because that's an universal theme, whereas cloning dinosaurs, well... ain't. i'm sure there's room for yet another evil land baron of the old west, while the market for young love on a sinking ship might be a little threadbare, heh heh.

it's disheartening finding your idea has already been thought of. i don't care how you rationalize it, it sucks. correct me if i'm wrong, jdm, but didn't you write a book called something like 'school of wizardry' that pre-dates harry potter? that's the flip-side of the issue, eh? writing a book with a good premise then having that premise (it doesn't matter how supposedly masterfully done 'potter' was, i thought it sucked from start to finish) 'borrowed' and it go blockbuster would somehow stick in my craw, i think, lol.

that's why for 'wishville' i did an internut search and found an album recorded by someone i'd never heard of. i think i'll stick if that's all i can find. it's about the future, a detective, and a genie, and if it's been done already, i'd be surprised someone else thought the combination worthy enough to charge ahead with. it doesn't matter, though, 'cause my book's better, that i guarantee, and i'll get over the idea that i'm not a creative genius quick enough (by now, i've come to the realization that not everything i think of is pure gold just because i thought of it, lol).

it probably behooves people to research their idea and then decide from there if the market can stand another tome about new england cat racing of the early 1800's.

[Mistook]

Ever hear of the 'hundredth monkey' theory? No it's not the same as the theory of an infinite number of monkeys all set up with type writers, banging out babble until one accidentally recounts a work of Shakespeare.

The hundredth monkey theory explains why the telegraph was simultaneously invented by... like... four different guys across the globe. Similar patent disputes go for the telephone, the radio, televison, and every other significant advance in human history.

All forward thinking monkeys are grappling with the same problems on the cutting edge of monkeydom. If they've all learned to crack open clams with a rock, the avant garde monkeys will all be wondering, "How do I capitalize on the potential for eating ants?"

They all perform their whimsical experiments and a few hit on the idea of poking a stick into the ant-hill to draw out the juicy incects. Without any PR campaign, once the hundredth monkey thinks up this idea, it becomes universal, and suddenly all monkeys are poking sticks into ant hills, coaxing the silly arthropods onto their makeshift popsickle - ripe for the eating.

---

We are immmersed in pop culture, like it or not. Most of the ideas you'll have are ones that come to the mind of any attentive artist. The trick is to reach beyond the moment. School of Wizardry presaged Harry Potter, but a better be would have been to write the book about the Wizard School Drop-outs! Now that's an nice twist nobody's likely to write about - much to our detriment.

When you have a killer idea, assume everybody is just about to hit the same epiphany. Take it one step further, to really get the jump on things.

[James D. Macdonald]

In Hunt for Red October the sub was just the furniture. What was the story? Same with Jurassic Park. The dinosaurs were just the furniture. What was the story?

The story is the important part. The story is why readers go along with you. The furniture is ... furniture. Necessary, but not what makes a house a home.

[Jamesaritchie]

The one thing no other writer alive can do is to put you in their story. It's the individual writer putting his own views, his own life experience, his own take into a story that separates two stories with identical themes and ideas.

Generic stories seldom sell no matter who writes them, and when editors reject plague stories because there are too many coming in, what they are really rejecting is the generic idea, written in a generic way.

Stories are about people, and this is the one area where you can't be copycatted, if you do it right. Those other writers did not grow up with your friends, your neighbors, or with your life experiences, and if you use these things properly, the story will be unique, and editors will grab it, regardless of the widow dressing idea you use.

[Coco82]

I worry about this too somewhat, but I can't let it dampen my spirits. It just makes me more determined to get my book finished. I'm in college and one assignment was to write a short story, and I remember one guy saying because he worked in a video store he couldn't think of anything orignal so he didn't do one. We're so influenced by what we see but we cn't let it deter us.

[Fractured_Chaos]

I see dead cell phones.

Stop looking in my drawers, then! :tongue

[preyer]

sure, i've always said that characters come first, then the plot, but i get the feeling you guys are downplaying the plot too much. sci-fi isn't a terribly character-driven genre (at least that's the perception): it's the 'plot' that interests the readers more than long exposition about the hero's psychological motivations for wanting to be a space fighter, eh? for me, without those engineered dinosaurs, 'jurassic park' would be a movie with fairly cookie-cutter characters and sub-plots, which is what you get a lot of times with ensembles. honestly, the characters, at least in the movie, are pretty one-dimensional, two at best.

like i said, i agree with the spirit of what you're saying, characters come first, but to suggest that plot, that the impetus for the characters being what they are and doing what they do, doesn't matter is just flat-out wrong. those dinosaurs matter tremendously, as does the fact they're on a sub. or in space or a jet pilot fighting an alien invasion. indeed, what's the hardest part of writing a story, the plot or the characters? what dictates how the other is the more? if you took the characters from 'the grapes of wrath' and inserted them into the 1960's, if you did each character perfectly and gave them that character's reactions, you'd have a very different book, eh? your characters don't determine the plot, 'just' the theme, whereas the plot and setting determines which characters are appropriate, at least on average, no?

in the background is a movie playing, 'the man in the iron mask.' while this version features leonard di creepio, it reminds me of the great characters anyway. certainly, those character bases have been used a thousand times over, but they're worthless without the plot, especially them being men of action. i think they may be very frustrated in an asimov universe, heh heh.