My story isn't original

Has the agent read the story, or is s/he just basing this pronouncement on what you've said about it?

If it's the former, is there a way to keep the core of the story but put a new twist on it?

If it's the latter, I'd take it with a huge grain of salt. Maybe you just weren't able to convey what makes your story unique-- particularly if it's the characters or the writing rather than a whiz-bang premise it's easy to convey in an elevator pitch.

"A detailed guide for revision"? Is this something tailored to your work, or something they give to everyone? If the former, that's huge! And if he gave you a list of other people to query, that's huge too. No agent wants to be known for referring crap to their friends, so he seems confident this book will get placed somewhere if he's given that level of feedback.

Besides, this is one agent's opinion. They all have tastes just like the rest of us. I wouldn't give up on this one (but great that you're writing your next one too). Query the agents he's suggested.

For what it's worth, NO story is original. Every kind of storyline out there has been done...the trick, if there is one, is to do yours better with a twist that will make it seem fresh. None of my stories could be considered unique, yet they've sold. (Although not as widely as I'd like...story of my life).

As examples:
Twisted--gender-switch
Catnip--transgenics
Picture (Im)perfect--romance...but this time, it's a romance between a straight cis guy and a transgender girl
Star Maps--aliens on Earth

And so on. It's great that this publisher gave you a detailed list of revisions...most publishers won't go to those lengths. And yes, every publisher is different. One may reject a story as being trite (not saying yours is, just saying) while another will like what they see. Keep trying!!

You should be feeling good because an agent read your work and made detailed comments on it. That your story is not unique is not surprising; few stories are unique. It more a matter of how to tell the story than the basics of the story, and some plots come up again and again and do well, and I mean in addition to Romance novels. One example is The Prisoner of Zenda by Anthony Hope; George McDonald Fraser used the same plot in Royal Flash, and The Mad King by Edgar Rice Burroughs also has the same plot and resolution. That is an example where the novels closely parallel each other, but most novels are similar to others.

There are no new ideas, and no one agent or editor is the sole arbiter of what is good or bad about your story.

Now, if you copied something well-known, you might have an issue, but if it's a good story that happens to follow some standard, familiar tropes, that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's possible it's just not what this particular agent is looking for.

Write from your own mind with your own voice, and don't worry too much about trying to make it completely original, and never worry too much about feedback from one person, no matter who that person may be. If it was good enough to get an agent to spend that much time on it, even if they didn't bite, you're doing well.

If the story has much of YOUR heart in it, then in that sense it IS original. There is only one you! All of our stories have certain cliches in them I think. It's hard for them not to, because our experiences as human beings are naturally similar, you know?

What I wouldn't give to have an agent read my work

Sounds like you're off to a strong start at the very least!

I've been told that before too. It reminds me of the saying that there are only truly a handful of original stories, and that all others are just different telling's of them.

I immediately thought of this quote from Neil Gaiman:

"The one thing you have that nobody else has is you. Your voice, your mind, your story, your vision. So write and draw and build and play and dance and live as only you can."

I think it's part and parcel to being a creator of any kind to worry about originality, but you got feedback and recommendations so I'll ditto what a good sign that is!

mike33phillip said:

I've been told that before too. It reminds me of the saying that there are only truly a handful of original stories, and that all others are just different telling's of them.

Click to expand...

That doesn't mean it might not be valid criticism, though. i find the glut of 'kids go to magical school' fiction that appeared after Harry Potter got big as a good example. 1: It's not a uncommon theme, so the initial wave was mostly publishers looking what they had similar in the slush pile, and so you saw a lot of different takes on that similar theme. 2: Then you had the catch-ups, who started work after HP was out, and those, even when the heart might be in the right place, tended be incredibly derivative, because they were trying to directly ride on Rowling's coat tails.

So if the story is good, but it hits a lot of the same beats as famous story X, for one reason or another, then there is something to be said about originality being a problem.

Keep in mind, though, that famous story X may not be original either. One of my most favorite books is 'The Light of Other Days' by Baxter/Clarke. There's a thread on SFFChronicles right now which reveals that this book is very similar in plot to a Damon Knight short story--to the point where the OP's description of the short story had everyone thinking it was the book.

So I think you need to be less concerned about the overall plot and more concerned about whether the details are different enough to make it a different story.

Thomas Vail said:

That doesn't mean it might not be valid criticism, though. i find the glut of 'kids go to magical school' fiction that appeared after Harry Potter got big as a good example. 1: It's not a uncommon theme, so the initial wave was mostly publishers looking what they had similar in the slush pile, and so you saw a lot of different takes on that similar theme. 2: Then you had the catch-ups, who started work after HP was out, and those, even when the heart might be in the right place, tended be incredibly derivative, because they were trying to directly ride on Rowling's coat tails.

Click to expand...

And it is worth noting that HP, while great, was not all that original itself. The moment I heard about I said "well, that sounds a lot like The Worst Witch".

If it makes you feel any better, most agents and publishers don't seem to want original ideas either. Every time I show this one novel I've been working on since forever to anyone who isn't in the business they love it...the minute an established author or anyone in the bizz sees it they shake their heads, unable to make anything out of it.

*Sarcasm alert*
After all, we all know anything labelled "epic fantasy" HAS to be about the same dull, done-to-death medievally world of men on horseback with well-trimmed beards and swords giving long winded speeches about freedom and the kingdom.

And it isn't "urban fantasy" if there are no hot vampires and/or werewolves. Otherwise, what goes on the cover?

And we all know good and well there cannot possibly be a story with the character development of literary fiction and the carnage of indie-horror. It just can't happen.
*end sarcasm*

In other words, more often than not agents are looking for something they can sell the most of and not what is very good. It has to do with "market factors" and not "artistic factors".

That's why there's always self-publishing.

HPhatecraft said:

If it makes you feel any better, most agents and publishers don't seem to want original ideas either. Every time I show this one novel I've been working on since forever to anyone who isn't in the business they love it...the minute an established author or anyone in the bizz sees it they shake their heads, unable to make anything out of it.

After all, we all know anything labelled "epic fantasy" HAS to be about the same dull, done-to-death medievally world of men on horseback with well-trimmed beards and swords giving long winded speeches about freedom and the kingdom.

And it isn't "urban fantasy" if there are no hot vampires and/or werewolves. Otherwise, what goes on the cover?

And we all know good and well there cannot possibly be a story with the character development of literary fiction and the carnage of indie-horror. It just can't happen.

In other words, more often than not agents are looking for something they can sell the most of and not what is very good. It has to do with "market factors" in not "artistic factors".

That's why there's always self-publishing.

Click to expand...

Pish and, if you will, tosh.

HPhatecraft said:

After all, we all know anything labelled "epic fantasy" HAS to be about the same dull, done-to-death medievally world of men on horseback with well-trimmed beards and swords giving long winded speeches about freedom and the kingdom.

And it isn't "urban fantasy" if there are no hot vampires and/or werewolves. Otherwise, what goes on the cover?

Click to expand...

You know, it's totally okay to just say "I haven't read anything recent in the genre I'm about to disparage."
No need to be coy.

EMaree said:

You know, it's totally okay to just say "I haven't read anything recent in the genre I'm about to disparage."
No need to be coy.

Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic. Of course there is SOME epic fantasy that does things differently, but they mostly come out of small presses and not the big five.

I am 150% pro-fantasy, but slowly becoming more and more anti-corporate publishing houses.

Corporate publishing is becoming for genre fiction what Michael Bay is for action movies.

Helix said:

Pish and, if you will, tosh.

Click to expand...

Ask around and you will hear the same thing: it is no longer about quality with the big six (now big five) but about "marketability."

More and more the best genre fiction is coming out of small presses.
One of my favorites, "The Etched City" by K.J. Bishop, could only of happened in a small press house, for example.

Books are becoming more and more like music, with the big five looking like Clear Channel and small press and self publishing looking like Sub Pop and 4AD.

HPhatecraft said:

*Sarcasm alert*
After all, we all know anything labelled "epic fantasy" HAS to be about the same dull, done-to-death medievally world of men on horseback with well-trimmed beards and swords giving long winded speeches about freedom and the kingdom.

And it isn't "urban fantasy" if there are no hot vampires and/or werewolves. Otherwise, what goes on the cover?

Click to expand...

This isn't the impression I've gotten from looking at agent's manuscript wish lists.

https://twitter.com/search?q=#mswl fantasy

http://mswishlist.com/mswl/fantasy


Look, I couldn't get anyone to take on the first novel I'd been working on forever either. I loved that book and those characters, and got some good feedback from critiquers and beta readers, including some industry pros. But for whatever reason, no one I queried loved it enough to take it on. It sucks, but sometimes (most of the time) the book we loved and got encouraging feedback about is simply not good enough, or maybe agents and editors have seen too much lately that's in the same vein, and it doesn't stand out from the pack enough.

There seem to be a number of recent fantasy authors who write books that aren't set in the middle ages. Have you heard of NK Jemisin, Saladin Ahmed, Ken Liu, Django Wexler, Brian McClellan, Mary Robinette Kowal, Kate Elliott, Elizabeth Bear, Nnedi Okorafor Malinda Lo, Kameron Hurley, Sarah Monette (also writes as Katherine Addison), Aliette De Bodard, Cindy Pon, Naomi Novik, Zen Cho? This is just scratching the surface, and I believe these authors are all signed with large imprints. Actually, I'm having a harder time coming up with recent breakout authors who write in medieval-European-type settings.

I've even been told that the kinds of settings you mention are saturated right now that it's especially tough for someone who does want to write in a medieval-ish setting or who has an UF book with vampires or shape shifters.

I'm the first to complain (privately) when I read about a huge deal for a book in my category that sounds exactly like 10 other popular books. There are formulas that sell, no doubt. But I spent the past year reading ARCs in my category (YA), mostly from the Big Five, and let's just say that I read a lot of weird and risky stuff. It's generally not the risky books that get the biggest deals, but they keep getting published, because most agents and editors genuinely love books and don't want to read the same books over and over. That's my admittedly biased take.

Anyway, back to the OP, "not original enough" could mean a LOT of things, some of which are fixable and some of which aren't. Subgenre? Premise? Style? Tropes? There's also a certain subjective factor. I've seen people on message boards proclaim that they will NEVER EVER read/watch another story about someone who has a psychic connection with a serial killer, because it's such a tired, hackneyed, awful premise. And ... if you squint, that's my book's premise. I was willing to take the risk because I hoped I was going somewhere different with it. It still shocks me a little whenever someone calls the book "original," but I think that perception is all about execution.

Look at how many times Gone With the Wind has been copied. Beulah Land comes to mind. And thousands of others I've read and can't put a title to. The first sentence in Sweet Savage Love is almost exactly the same as the one in GWTW.

Roxxsmom said:

This isn't the impression I've gotten from looking at agent's manuscript wish lists.

https://twitter.com/search?q=#mswl fantasy

http://mswishlist.com/mswl/fantasy


Look, I couldn't get anyone to take on the first novel I'd been working on forever either. I loved that book and those characters, and got some good feedback from critiquers and beta readers, including some industry pros. But for whatever reason, no one I queried loved it enough to take it on. It sucks, but sometimes (most of the time) the book we loved and got encouraging feedback about is simply not good enough, or maybe agents and editors have seen too much lately that's in the same vein, and it doesn't stand out from the pack enough.

Click to expand...

Once upon a time there was a man who made a bunch of musical and artistic mischief with his friends. He never in a billion years would have gotten a major record deal, so instead he and his friends set out to start a label of their own...and a whole new form of music in the process. His name was Genesis P-orridge and his band was called "Throbbing Gristle." His idea was to make music made from noise given form and he called it "industrial music."

Was their music awful? Depends on who you ask. Would it have been taken by a mainstream label? No way. Was it still enjoyed by countless people and changed the landscape of popular music forever? Indeed it was.

Same with novels. Just because is not taken by a major publisher, it doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't a fantastic work. It could just be that it isn't what the corporate world of New York thinks will add to their bottom lines.

Just as the rise of cassettes, which were easy to record on and distribute without the need for massive equipment to press records, changed the way music was listened to, the rise of ebooks is changing the way people read. I honestly don't even think I ever want a deal with a major publishing house after the horror stories I've heard about editors changing everything and all the pressure and the rest. I would rather sell half as much and own my work and write what I want to write than "sell my soul" to New York.

In a world of people trying to be the literary equivalent of Beyonce, I will be happy to be the literary equivalent of Black Flag or Bathory.

There seem to be a number of recent fantasy authors who write books that aren't set in the middle ages. Have you heard of NK Jemisin, Saladin Ahmed, Ken Liu, Django Wexler, Brian McClellan, Mary Robinette Kowal, Kate Elliott, Elizabeth Bear, Nnedi Okorafor Malinda Lo, Kameron Hurley, Sarah Monette (also writes as Katherine Addison), Aliette De Bodard, Cindy Pon, Naomi Novik, Zen Cho? This is just scratching the surface, and I believe these authors are all signed with large imprints. Actually, I'm having a harder time coming up with recent breakout authors who write in medieval-European-type settings.

I've even been told that the kinds of settings you mention are saturated right now that it's especially tough for someone who does want to write in a medieval-ish setting or who has an UF book with vampires or shape shifters.

Click to expand...

I've been told the opposite. I've had one agent I met at an event say that all the things that make this one setting I have unique basically has to go if I want it to stand a chance. And most of those authors still write a variation of the past, like Saladin Ahmed in medievally Arabia (reminds me of an old D&D setting) and Cindy Pon's China-like world.

NOTHING AGAINST THOSE AUTHORS! Don't get me wrong. They are all talented and there are only a handful of authors I will openly mock, but what they write just isn't unique enough for me.

The bottom line is art should come first and if some company doesn't want to pay for the art, one can always sell it themselves.

Take my "literary splatter novel", that is as much about ethics and family as it is about a demonic hero who eats souls and tears his opponents apart in graphic detail. By its nature it is NOT going to be picked up by any major publishing houses, but I still like it and I will DIY it. I would advise the OP to do the same if they really believe in their art.

It took a long time, but the DIY ethic is finally getting popular among writers, and that is a good thing. Who needs to appease the whims of the gatekeepers when one can just tunnel under the wall?

HPhatecraft said:

Once upon a time there was a man who made a bunch of musical and artistic mischief with his friends. He never in a billion years would have gotten a major record deal, so instead he and his friends set out to start a label of their own...and a whole new form of music in the process. His name was Genesis P-orridge and his band was called "Throbbing Gristle." His idea was to make music made from noise given form and he called it "industrial music."

Was their music awful? Depends on who you ask. Would it have been taken by a mainstream label? No way. Was it still enjoyed by countless people and changed the landscape of popular music forever? Indeed it was.

Same with novels. Usually if there is one that is not taken on it may well still be a fantastic work. It could just be that it isn't what the corporate world of New York thinks will add to their bottom lines.

Just as the rise of cassettes, which were easily to record on and distribute without the need for massive equipment to press records, changed the way music was listened to, the rise of ebooks is changing the way people read. I honestly don't even think I ever want a deal with a major publishing house after the horror stories I've heard about editors changing everything and all the pressure and the rest. I would rather sell half as much and own my work and write what I want to write than "sell my soul" to New York.

In a world of people trying to be the literary equivalent of Beyonce, I will be happy to be the literary equivalent of Black Flag or Bathory.




I've been told the opposite. I've had one agent I met at an event say that all the things that make this one setting I have unique basically has to go if I want it to stand a chance. And most of those authors still write a variation of the past, like Saladin Ahmed in medievally Arabia (reminds me of an old D&D setting) and Cindy Pon's China-like world.

NOTHING AGAINST THOSE AUTHORS! Don't get me wrong. They are all talented and there are only a handful of authors I will openly mock, but what they write just isn't unique enough for me.

The bottom line is art should come first and if some company doesn't want to pay for the art, one can always sell it themselves.

Take my "literary splatter novel", that is as much about ethics and family as it is about a demonic hero who eats souls and tears his opponents apart in graphic detail. By its nature it is NOT going to be picked up by any major publishing houses, but I still like it and I will DIY it. I would advise the OP to do the same if they really believe in their art.

It took a long time, but the DIY ethic is finally getting popular among writers, and that is a good thing. Who needs to appease the whims of the gatekeepers when one can just tunnel under the wall?

Click to expand...

For the love of god, stop digging.