Anxiety about originality

Usher said:

All my stories are cobbled together from things I've read, seen, experienced etc It's where my ideas come from.

You are unique because everyone is and that is what will make your stories unique. If you try too hard you'll probably be less original.

Click to expand...

this^^^^^^

To be blunt (and steal from Nike): 'Just do it.'

Being worried about originality will only sideline you at this stage. Write what you want to read, for enjoyment. Your unique voice will arise from that.

lizo27 said:

Eh, I don't know. Saying there's nothing original is a bit of a cop-out, I think. I see original ideas on here all the time. Not totally original, of course, but with some twist that makes them unique. So it can be done.

Click to expand...

And you still think that doesn't come from asking what if type questions about something that's already been done? The writer and their brain really does have a lot more say in whether the idea is original or not than you think. It isn't whether something similar has been done, it's about finding a new twist.

Original and unique and totally amazing and cool megapack

lizo27 said:

Eh, I don't know. Saying there's nothing original is a bit of a cop-out, I think. I see original ideas on here all the time. Not totally original, of course, but with some twist that makes them unique. So it can be done.

Click to expand...

I'm opting to recycle older things instead of doing it all over again, and wish the OP the best of luck with becoming unique.

*EDIT*Apologies for the length of the post, but I decided to use the opportunity to collect the scattered attempts to say this over and over into one megapack.

One

On contre. Now is as good an opportunity as any to expand upon this on contre.

1.
1.1During the 19th century boom of adventure fiction, most plots to do with frontiers, new worlds, lost worlds, lost tribes, queens of same, travels to the nearest planets or to the core of the earth, vampires, frankensteins, warlords of the air and of the deep, crooks and detectives and sinister masterminds, epic historical sagas, and macabre weird tales, had already been fleshed out.

1.2 At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, H.G.Wells and a few lesser known visionaries mapped out the core plot variations to do with alien invaders, medical experiments running amock, time travel, hibernation, etc.

1.3 A decade later Olaf Stapeldon moved into space opera territory of humankind transcending itself and creating stars and planets, but by then the pulp magazine and comic book and paperback and radio drama and moving picture markets had produced tens of thousands of competing story content creators who tried to come up with a new twist on something. By the 1940's everything pre-LSD humanity could come up with had been invented and recycled a thousand times.

1.4 By the New Wave of sci-fi and fantasy in the 1960's, about half a percent of possible speculative plots hadn't been used up--and it was used up. At the same time developements in TV programing and comic book maturation leads to another multiplication by bazillion of existing ideas and concepts in the entertainment fields. Everything goes. A dude riding a surfboard through the cosmos? OK!

1.5 Decades more passed. We reached 2014. Hundreds of thousands of story content creators in all time zones and in both hemispheres had toiled generation after a generation, in an infinite vibrating web of ripping off and counter ripping off and trying to put interesting twists on material that was seeing the light of day for the two millionth time.

1.6 By this point content creators convinced of the originality of their idea more often than not simply betrayed a lack of basic education in the history of their genre.

2.
1.1 However, people are different, not only individually, but also sociologically. Every generation creates a subtle shift in perceptions and executions of existing material, and inside this generation there are more or less coherent sub-pockets of perceptions and approaches existing simultaneously. This is why some people inspired by Muddy Waters sound not like Muddy Waters but like The Stones, some people inspired by the Stones sound not like the Stones but like Sabbath, some people inspired by Sabbath sound not like Sabbath but like Metallica, etc.

1.2.The lack of original ideas and concepts need not be a straitjacket--if one is true to one's creative nature and writes one's books and stories the way no one else could have written them--a personal style appears and if good enough it transcends the inherent limitations of the subject matter.

1.3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otherposter
And, really, who would want to spend time writing a novel that's just like every other novel out there, even if it might sell?

Every commercial writer ever. Maybe that's a bit of an overstatement, but the market is awash in identical mysteries and thrillers and fantasies and romances. Always has been always will be. When you zoom in close enough to see the subatomic grid, they begin to look different. Just an illusion. In the end the random people being killed always have a shared secret in their past, and there's a traitor in the precinct.

1.4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otherposter
I think this is dead wrong, and a disservice to readers. If something isn't good, original, and different about your novel, you aren't being creative, and editors and readers won't want it.

The style and voice can be "original" if one is good enough. The idea and concept can be "original" if one meditates on Mars for a decade or six, or undergoes revolutionary synaptic surgery, or passes the gate of the silver key and chances upon benign elder entities in the mood for teaching. Believing that one's ideas are original may be a useful self-delusion to keep writing to the end of the draft, but publicly insisting on this delusion is, IMO, a...disservice to readers and writers and everyone else.

*EDIT* But in the end, it is also a question of definitions and temperament. For someone a pitch of "a paranormal detective who is half-vampire, who--get this--has a poodle with diabetes" will be "original". For another person, there is no way anything that starts with "paranormal detective who is half-vampire" can be original. For some "original" means "new" or at least "relatively rare reshuffling of 2-3 core concepts", while for another any twist on the surface of a zombie apocalypse plot is a sign of "originality".

To each his/her own.

The point of this post was to present the world-view underlying my earlier comment being challenged, not so much to impress upon everyone how right I am and how adored I should be. Although I am, of course, very right, and totally should be adored. Every second moon of the summer presents go by the feet of my throne, adoration may begin after the initial kiss of the amethyst bracelet on my right wrist.

Click to expand...

Two

The masses have the collective memory of a gnat. This is why the same film plot and the same novel plot and the same song lyrics entertain them as if for the first time season after season generation after generation. Many people, me included, actively seek out familiar repetitive patterns from time to time, just to be assured that everything is reasonably OK with the world.

The format changes subtly year after year. If one follows the fashion, then one is OK. If one is such a big deal that one invents the fashion--one is more than OK. If one sticks only to a certain format, long after it has become 'unfashionable'--then one belongs to a subculture.

Frankly, the day the book market stops embracing the next novel about kid wizards or paranormal shape-shifting alphas and betas, and the next novel about a detective chasing a killer, and the next novel about an international conspiracy into which an ordinary citizen is sucked, and the next Chronicles Of the Chronicles fantasy saga, and the next Galactic Marine story where young recruits learn the value of comradeship...and aliens stop landing exclusively in the US, and zombies stop coming out in droves every time someone sneezes, and a group of seemingly unconnected people being killed turn out to not be paying the price for a sin from the past, and that guy other there does not suddenly turn out to be a traitor--then one perhaps should begin worrying about being original. And possibly about the coming singularity.

Until such a date all that counts is the quality of presentation and the up-do-dateness or conscious lack of such of the format.

But one should, hands down, always check out what certain editors and agents refuse to handle and not send them stuff they refuse to handle. Some of them will regress to their own traumatic moments and need therapy after reading a paragraph about bullying. To spare themselves this they will have written 'no bullying scenes' in their FAQ. Others will simply want to be with it, or come off as holier than the pope, or display dazzling wit and originality, when they say what they are tired of and what 'the future of the industry' is. Some will not want pagan themes, some will not want Abrahamic themes. Always check out what certain editors and agents refuse to handle and do not send them stuff they refuse to handle.

Click to expand...

Three

Between 1840 and 1940 every variation of every speculative plot has been written; it scarcely matters whether a recently dead man is kept conscious for questioning by 'magnetism' or 'quantum synaptic blueprints' -- the concept is the same -- or if the trans-galactic spaceship is propelled by 'atomic rockets' or 'subspace quark colliders'.

Since WWII, with the rise of comic books and TV, every conceivable plot element has been revisited like fifty times a year then a hundred times a year then a thousand times a year by the geometrically expanding web of Scriptwriter Jack and his clone army. At this very moment the same plot element is being utilized by a thousand scriptwriters from Nebraska to Delhi, and a thousand more authors; from self-pub to indie-pub to corp pub.

What half a percent of originality still wobbled half-formed at the fringes was used up by the acid-geniuses of the New Wave sci-fi and fantasy in the 1960's and 70's.

(Were you aware that even paranormal private detectives were introduced at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries? By two different dudes: William Hodgson and Algernon Blackwood? That teleportation mishaps were treated as banal comedy by Clarke in 1937? That space opera peaked in scope in that same year due to Olaf Stapledon's efforts, and since then any leap in thinking in this genre is only fiddling with details?)

This is good to keep in mind, but is should not paralyze you but free you up. No one expects you to meditate for twenty years on a mountain in order to formulate the one plot element no-ones has yet stumbled upon. Just write exciting prose around what you have. Be open to the information currents around you. Become the voice of your time.

Do not listen to amateurs who will say dismissively that the plot element you thought up was already in that movie from 1987 and that game from 2004. They are amateurs. They do not realize the plot element has in fact been resurfacing since 1840, or maybe even since 3000 BC, and that this only proves its worth.

Click to expand...

Four

"Being original" is more or less impossible and has been for decades; "having something to say" is possible, and "having style" is possible.

Writing without having something to say is like making music without having something to say: millions do it, but it sucks and is a waste of everyone's time and is a social disease gnawing away at the fabric of reality. So congratulations on not participating in that.

Figure out what you have to say and say it.

Surely you've accumulated opinions about global, local, and individual issues? How the world should be run, how people should behave, what you would have done in situation X? Choose a few of your strongly held opinions and observations and create a plot around this; in outer space or in fantasy lands or in stempunkia or in today--entirely up to your mood and stylistic preferences. What counts is that you have something to say.

Organize your basic opinions and values, your I'll-show-you-alls and come-the-revolutions, but then, instead of trying to create a cult or a grassroot political movement around them, create a plot, with situations and characters which illustrate your opinions and values, in exciting and stylish manners.

Throw in a few modified versions of friends, relatives, and acquaintances. Build interesting characters and life-stories around them.

Novelty for the sake of novelty is postmodern pop art, which I'm assuming is not your goal. If your goal is to tell a story, then the plot and characters are secondary. Just have something to say. The great novels of every genre all have something to say. Not one of them is without an agenda and thanks goodness for that, because without agendas stories are just soap operas to submerge into, and there's more than enough of that around already.

Click to expand...

Jamesaritchie said:

I'm not sure there is such a thing as an original plot. I'm not even sure there are more than four or five plots altogether.

Click to expand...

Exactly. But there's always something added to it to make it unique. What I was saying was that if two authors have the pretty much the same plot (i.e. did not make it unique enough), even though they've got different characters and voices, I wouldn't finish the second one once I see how similar it is. But a unique twist on the plot will keep me going.

And I think it's 6 or 7 basic plots.

lizo27 said:

But I don't do those things any better than other writers who are writing the same stories. So again, what am I bringing to it? Nothing. My ideas are nothing new, my writing is nothing special, so what am I doing? I'm just a monkey at a keyboard, aping my betters.

Click to expand...

Then why are you writing?

Before you answer that, a couple of points:

1) It is sometimes (often) hard to be a judge of one's own writing. So how do you know your writing is "nothing special"?

2) If it happens to be objectively true that there's nothing special or original about your writing, then I return to the point I made earlier in the thread: the way to become a better, more original writer is through actual writing. It takes long practice to become accomplished at anything. Writing is no exception.

lizo27 said:

Eh, I don't know. Saying there's nothing original is a bit of a cop-out, I think. I see original ideas on here all the time. Not totally original, of course, but with some twist that makes them unique. So it can be done.

Click to expand...

Saying there is nothing original isn't the cop-out - the cop-out is the comments you make. Have you actually written anything or do you just have ideas? Until you start writing, more writing and writing again that's all you have. Some basic ideas that have no had chance to have a twist or an idea. If you don't write you're not going to gain the skills to be original. Why should someone who doesn't work at their writing expect to have the ability to write a masterpiece?

In my experience you don't want to be too original because your book won't sell, nobody will read it and it will remain on your hard-drive or you'll have to self publish. Unless it's an amazing piece of literary fiction agents won't be able to pigeon hole it.

If you have a desire to be original stop worrying about it and put in the graft.

lizo27 said:

Eh, I don't know. Saying there's nothing original is a bit of a cop-out, I think. I see original ideas on here all the time. Not totally original, of course, but with some twist that makes them unique. So it can be done.

Click to expand...

Lots of people on this thread have already told you how to make the ideas original. The twist that makes them unique comes when you actually write the story. (or maybe, if you're someone who likes to plot things in intricate detail before you write, that's when the originality starts to comes into it but more will come into it as you write). Your characters will take on a life of their own, even if they're based on real people you know to start with (for example) by the time you've changed the names and basic details and started writing scenes involving them, they'll end up different from the people you based them on. Just like your story will end up different to anything else that's been written.

That's how you get something that's "Not totally original, of course, but with some twist that makes them unique." - that twist comes when you actually plot and/or write the story. Trust us on this one. And you have to actually start writing (or plotting then writing) it before it happens.

Also, if you're new to writing (someone upthread mentioned that you were, sorry if I got that wrong), it'll take practice to get good at it, just like most other things in life. So if you write it, and don't think it's original enough by the time you've finished a) get a 2nd opinion (because sometimes we're our own harshest critic and that critic sometimes needs to be told to STFU) and b) don't worry about it... call it a practice run and try again. The experience you gained from writing it will improve the next thing you write.

I read online article a little while ago about haunted tunnels. For some reason I went on to have an idea about a haunted tunnel. I brought my own background to it. My characters and locations and tastes.

I also have one about a young family in a new build house where creepy things happen.

If i listened to that voice that says 'Simpsons did it' I would never get past the first word.

Well, that didn't go well...

Listen lizo, there's no way to completely please every reader when it comes to a book. You can see readers both on goodreads and other places complain about books, or even call them stupid. One of my favorite writers gets ripped apart regularly on goodreas, and praised too. Why? Well, like Atwood her work is more Literary in nature. The way the story itself is put together, and how it challenges and meshes with other Science Fiction. But Butler is thought of as "just being a genre writer," which ends up hurting her work for some people. In particular the third in book in her Xenogenesis trilogy, that people seem to read just to get pissed when it's from the POV of an alien-human hybrid who is neither male nor female.

Is Butler or anyone that writes a species with three or more sexes being hackneyed or trite because it may bother some readers? I say no. I happen to love her Xenogenesis books because they're both firmly SF and firmly Literary at the same time. Readers taste is unique.

No-one's dismissing your concerns. We're saying that you're worrying too much and you're probably a lot better than you think you are.

ETA: I can understand your frustration. I do think not-sounding-too-much-like-something-else is a legitimate concern, and I don't think it happens automagically, though I may agree that you might be putting too much pressure on yourself. Without knowing you or what you write, I don't know. But I do get where you're coming from. I've read things I thought were solid books but nothing special, more of the same. And I have sort of an aversion to writing that, too...but of course I get stuck a lot as well, so I'm not really a shining example But I've tried to be helpful below...I don't know that it is. Eh. *shrug *

lizo27 said:

This is a huge block for me. I feel like all my ideas are just cobbled together from things I've read.

Click to expand...

Well, everything we produce is cobbled together from everything we've gathered up and stored in our heads. Otherwise there'd be nothing in our heads to draw from. I think the "original" part just sort of comes from mashing the bits together in a slightly different way. Like, hey, let's to Dances with Wolves, but instead of white people and Native Americans, let's use white people and blue aliens who plug their hair into various animals, and stuff! That sort of thing.

On the rare occasion that I have what I believe to be an original thought, I find that someone else has had it and published it already. It's maddening.

Click to expand...

I've had this happen--sort of. I mean, I'm too lazy to go find out if someone has already written it. Usually I find out after I've started and a critiquer tells me "um this sounds like x" or "sorry but this concept is the tritest." And then I drop that part of the concept like a wet sack of night soil. I admit it. I don't like the idea of being unoriginal either, though I'm sure I am, but thankfully laziness saves me from finding out how trite I am in the objective sense

I do bore myself, though, in the sense that I feel I'm writing the same things over and over--but that's usually a self-contained problem, and it doesn't sound like it's what you're referring to, so maybe off-topic.

So anyway, if someone tells me "this concept has been done to death," I might think of how I can use that same concept by twisting it in a different direction. Maybe I still think Dances With Wolves but with aliens is too boring. Maybe I'll have the story change so that instead of "these two vastly different people fall in love and white guy adopts this culture as his own and fights against his own people" it's "these two vastly different people who are not white fall in love but girl decides that for the good of her people she has to use the guy as a pawn to destroy the humans" or "this guy falls in love with this girl but she only likes him because she's into weird species and no longer likes him when he's in avatar form and decides she'd rather be with a horsebeast and the horsebeast is way more sexually exciting anyway" or something. If you find out the thing that you object to as unoriginal, you might be able to turn it another way.

I know everyone will say that there are no original ideas, yada yada, but you know as well as I do that one of the biggest complaints a reader can have is that a story is "derivative" or "cliche". I don't know what to do with myself. I want to write but I feel like my creativity is non-existent. Can I be a writer if I haven't a speck of originality?

Click to expand...

Of course you can!

...I seriously think this. Lol.

I mean, I see what you're saying. I see what everyone else is saying, about nothing being original, especially when you break things down into separate pieces. But I see what you mean. You don't want to write a story about a chosen one kid at a magic school fighting against teh evilz, and you don't want to write a story about a teenager falling in love with a vampire--that sort of thing. And I think that worry is totally legit. And in some cases, twisting around the unoriginal bit is almost impossible because those paths have been explored by so many--vampires are hard to do now in a fresh way. But old Irish gods in Appalachia...well, what about old Chinese gods in California You know, transcontinental railroad and all that, etc...I dunno. You can turn things, I think. Asking "what if" questions can help a lot.

lizo27 said:

I think it's safe to assume that if I can't be creative in the conception, I can't be creative in the execution. Besides which, realizing that there's nothing new in my ideas really kills my enthusiasm for them. It's like thinking you're getting a delicious cake and biting into day-old bread.

Click to expand...

Totally get it. I may have whined about this recently, and it gets very discouraging. When I do manage to get over myself, I can get tired from fighting the tide of my brain going "this is totally stupid", and when tired my motivation drains out like the watery stuff on top of yogurt. So, it's rough. It is. But it may be all in your head.

I get bored of my ideas; they all sound the same after a while--the same person with a different mascot suit on. And sometimes I don't think the person inside is all that unique anyway. I wrote a story about star-crossed lovers in a love triangle where there's sort of a damsel in distress, ffs. Where the main character was basically Winnie the Pooh, I think. And...another story about star-crossed lovers from different worlds. And a story where a person's spouse and child die and she goes on a mission of revenge and redemption. And a story with a loner teenager who can't figure out her direction in life. I just sort of add some mummified penises and carnivorous deer and venomous aquatic creatures, is all.

But people who read my stories say they're not bored... usually I mean, I don't write perfect. But I am convinced now that it's mostly in my head, and if I'm unsure, I can ask people and they'll tell me. And god I love revenge stories and I can be a sap for star-crossings

It being in your head may not make it any easier to get over. It's hard to escape from one's head, which is the problem I usually have. Just saying, you may not be seeing this objectively.

lizo27 said:

But being a unique individual doesn't help me in the planning stage. Why would it make a difference in the writing? If it were enough to be an individual, then hacky derivative writing wouldn't exist at all.

Click to expand...

I actually agree with this, kinda. I don't buy the idea that you can automatically produce fresh-feeling writing just because you're an individual. I don't know about hacky derivative writing, but there are sometimes repeated ideas that aren't exactly earth-shattering. But earth-shattering is not required. A mild difference is, but it doesn't have to blow my mind to captivate me.

It's true that some readers like reading to a certain expectation; I've gone through binges on certain series or styles because I wanted more of the same. Hell, I think the reason I loved the second Hunger Games book and didn't like the third was that the second repeated the basic idea of the first and the third didn't. And I think I loved the first Hunger Games book because it took the Battle Royale concept and made it more satisfying to me. (I'm not saying this is true for anyone else, just for me.)

lizo27 said:

Oh, I mean I'll have an idea about a magic castle and then think, well that sounds familiar, and then realize, oh I haven't actually had an idea, I'm just remembering a Diana Wynn Jones story. Or sometimes I really do come up with something, like the old Irish gods living in Appalachia, and then I do a little googling and find out someone else beat me to it (Alex Bledsoe, you rat bastard). Can't win for losing, I guess.

Click to expand...

Heh. Okay, magic castle. Why is the castle magic? What if it was inhabited by the soul of a dead dinosaur? What sort of motivations would it have then? I mean, maybe it wants to eat people. Or maybe it wants to guard the world from asteroids. Maybe it wants to breed gianter lizards. Add more oxygen to the atmosphere so that gianter lizards can exist. Fall in love with an ostrich, maybe. I dunno. I'm saying, you can start with something like "magic castle" and then twist it into something that is nothing like Howl by guiding it away from that.

I'm not saying that's great, though heehee.

By the way, I probably started babbling about dinosaurs because I recently watched a thing about how oxygen levels affected animal size in the Ancient Times, etc. Soaking up little tidbits of both nonfiction and fiction can help spark ideas, I find, or at least flesh them out or make me think what if--because that truth is stranger than fiction thing...I don't know if it's true or not, but I know that my imagination is far too limited to conceive of all the things that are actually possible in reality, let alone in fiction Don't know if that works for you; just a suggestion.

lizo27 said:

But I don't do those things any better than other writers who are writing the same stories. So again, what am I bringing to it? Nothing. My ideas are nothing new, my writing is nothing special, so what am I doing? I'm just a monkey at a keyboard, aping my betters.

Click to expand...

Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe you're not an accurate judge of your own writing...

I'm not. And I feel this way, sometimes, like a little kid playing with plastic pies in a kitchen designed for professional chefs. I try to remind myself it's just me. My perception. Sometimes this helps. Sometimes it makes it worse because I feel like I can't *get out * of my own perception--but my moods vacillate so much I get the writing time in anyway

lizo27 said:

Eh, I don't know. Saying there's nothing original is a bit of a cop-out, I think. I see original ideas on here all the time. Not totally original, of course, but with some twist that makes them unique. So it can be done.

Click to expand...

Yeah. And there's likely no outside reason you can't do it too. But the gremlin in your head yelling at you that you're boring is probably going to a be a problem. So, a few thoughts:

1) It may help to acknowledge that the gremlin is there and think of it as a gremlin. Not the essence of You, but something sitting up there chewing on your head. I don't know--sometimes this helps me a little.

2) It may help to stop trying to think of ideas and just absorb. Read nonfiction articles or books, watch documentaries, read fiction, read children's books, read the nutrition facts on your cereal Maybe go out and do stuff, talk to people, go to a museum or art gallery, etc. I think you should cobble shit together you've read/seen/experienced elsewhere, because that's what we all do, but maybe you need more material so that the cobbling ends up looking less like a recognizable shoe and more like a leather sea anemone. Again, I don't know, but it's a thought.

3) Ask for outside opinions. Maybe you don't want to share your writing, and that's ok, but if the perceived hackneyedness of your ideas is stopping you writing altogether, you could slap together a synopsis or even just a query-shaped thing and ask for critique on the ideas/plot rather than the writing, maybe. This can help you to know whether or not you can trust your judgment. Maybe.

4) Next time you think you have come up with a boring idea, replace one thing in that idea with something else, and then another thing and another thing, come at it from a different POV, etc--this may not result in a usable idea, but it could be a useful exercise. I mean, if you change like 2.5% of genetic code, you can have almost the same genetic stuff that makes a human turn into stuff that makes a mouse. (That's a shitty way of describing it, lol, but I'm...using it for a point...so) I think you can do the same thing with a story. Like, Gregor the Bug, right...ok, a guy waking up as a cockroach has been done. Maybe tell it from the POV of his mom and have her try to hunt down whoever is responsible. If no one is responsible, have her become incredibly paranoid and go on an invented mission of revenge tilting at windmills while riding her cockroach son into battle until his head gets sliced off and she like, glues it back on, and...

...yeah. Okay, again, maybe not a usable story. But I think you can do this, if you step out of your own way.

...So that's all I got. I feel a bit hypocritical and silly offering advice when I have similar issues but...I'm feeling kinda good this morning so I thought I would babble for a while...um. *slinks away *

lizo27 said:

Okay. Go read some reviews on Amazon or Goodreads. You'll see how many of them complain about books (or plot elements within books) being cliche, derivative or overdone. Look at how many books are accused of being rip offs of other books (even if they really aren't).

Go over to SYW. Look at how many times people get told that their story sounds familiar. Some poor girl a while back got told multiple times that the excerpt she posted was too much like Hunger Games, even though it really bore only the most superficial similarity. People in QLH spend half their time getting told that their premise sounds generic.

And yet, when I post a question expressing this concern, I get treated like an emo teenager or a toddler. "Oh, honey. Originality? That went out with the Stone Age." And I get told that if I just write the story, somehow my speshul yuneeqness will magically transform it into something new.

Well, I'm sure every writer who ever wrote a cliche, derivative book was a special and unique individual and that their mommies loved them very much. It didn't save them from writing hacky books.

Obviously, some degree of originality is something readers care about, and just as obviously, being my own special self won't protect me from writing books that are the literary equivalent of warmed up leftovers.

But whatever. Let's just recount the history of publishing as though I've never read a book, and accuse me of "adolescent masturbation" when I express a legitimate concern, because that's very helpful and not at all condescending.

Click to expand...

That's a pretty rough response to three pages of people just trying to give advice and help out.

There is no magic answer to your question, that's why you are getting these types of answers. The best we can tell you is if your story isn't original as you want, you yourself will make it different and original. Put your own touch on it. That's all we can do.

Sounds now like you want one big easy answer, or you want us to tell you that you are right and might as well throw in the towel.

Whatever. I liked the quick history lessons - they left me feeling grounded and hopeful.

I suspect threads like this boil down to one question: are you looking for excuses to not write, or to write?

lizo27 said:

It isn't history lessons I object to; it's being made fun of.

Click to expand...

Who's making fun of you? I've read most of this thread and I didn't see anyone making fun of you. I might have missed something, hence why I'm asking.

Some people are more direct when giving advice, others may have pitched it wrong by accident (e.g. assuming you're younger or less experienced than you are) but I don't think anyone meant any ill will towards you. They're just trying to give advice.

I actually didn't get that you were being made fun of. More that the questions you raised are issues long-time posters here have already seen many times from newish writers. Some of us probably even posted or angsted about those issues, too.

Originality itself is a vague and subjective worry, and it's often used as an excuse by new writers who want To Have Written, but not necessarily go through the effort and uncertainty of Actually Writing. At some point, we all take the leap of faith and hope our viewpoints and voices will fake originality just enough to impress readers.

Or we stop writing, and go do something else. I stopped writing original fiction for ten years, and it turned out to be very good for me once I started back up.

A magical boarding school - the most original story ever written by Jill Murphy - I can't believe anyone ever wrote that before hmmm -- oh yes Ursula Le Guinn. Only two of them, can anyone think of another? No matter how orignal you are there will always be others - JK Rowling has been accused of cliche, poor writing, plagiarism etc but it doesn't change the fact she's written a story that has gripped millions of people. I love the books but they really are not all that original and I can see many of the books that inspired them -- there's no doubt in my mind that JK Rowling read some of the great classic books that I enjoyed growing up. That's part of what entrances me.

If a post is offensive report it.

As you write when you come across the bit which you know is like another work then ask yourself how you can change it so it's different. What's the latest one? Maybe an example will help.

There are way too many comments to read, so if this has already been said and is, ergo, pointless, then I apologize.

But, writers tend to go through a lot of different stages in both the way they think, craft plot & write over time. While they don't all exactly go through the same stages, the same time, the same way, feeling lack of originality is a major one. It's something I went through as well.

Really only a few years back, it felt like everything I wrote had come from other things I'd read or seen. Images of temples were from PBS specials, an image of someone using psychic powers to crash a helicopter or flip a police cruiser over came from trailers for 'I Am Number Four.' Even the original basis for the story I've been working on now involved things I'd seen in other movies and TV shows I enjoyed, a lot of it without even realizing.

And, unfortunately, it is generally a matter of changing how you look at plot elements and execute them. And, unfortunately, you would have no clue what I'm talking about unless you already know. Like most art forms, there are a lot of elements of writing that can really only be figured out through practice.

Look at it this way: I got an old master type character like Obi Wan Kenobi mixed with an Asian martial arts master like Mr. Miagi helping a vague male & female heroine like countless other shows and novel series' that have come out & gained popularity in my lifetime. What are they doing? Trying to stop an evil character from essentially using dangerous ancient artifacts to start an apocalypse of sorts. Sound familiar?

Now with the spin it's taken over time: An ancient, forgotten warrior who has given up on the world and everyone he once knew is thrown back into battle when his life is threatened. On the way, he comes into contact with a young, arrogant college kid and a girl running away from a troubled past. Together the three try to stop an upsettingly intelligent villain from getting his hands on a ritual artifact that can help him build an army and exact his way on the world.

Ultimately untried, they fail. However, the only way to make things right is to stand together, no matter what that means for them. Does that sound more 'original' to you?

You can write a story and finish it, then write and finish another story, and keep at it, or you can give in to Compare-and-Despair, be nice and miserable, wallow in dreams of greatness and let your ego kill whatever spark is within you. It's your choice. If we are humble it is easier to put one word after another till the thing is finished. Myself, I struggle all the time with humility...

and best to stop thinking that we are making fun of you. This is something most of us have struggled with and this is how we go over it and went on to become productive. If you are making any kind of artistic creative work, (I'm putting novels in this group, for the naysayers) all that counts is who you are now, that you can harness whatever tools you have - which means accepting that they may be meager - and that you let your voice have it's say.

lizo27 said:

... I want to write but I feel like my creativity is non-existent. Can I be a writer if I haven't a speck of originality?

Click to expand...

I think most of the replies in this thread dealt with the highlighted part of your text, assuming your feeling to be mistaken. Or perhaps, considering your feeling to be an irrelevancy. This was a mistake.

So, if your creativity is, in fact, non-existent, then it's doubtful many would enjoy reading whatever you write.

"I feel like ...," you say. Is your feeling accurate, or just fear run amok? Only you can determine the answer to that. Do you journal? If so, you might get an answer that way.

Have you considered bolstering your creativity? If creativity is what you must have to write (plus time and place), and you feel you do not have enough, have you gone about getting some more? Or do you believe one is anointed with a certain amount and that is that?

Julia Cameron [wife (ex?) of director James] has an excellent book designed, in large part, to spark creativity - The Artist's Way. It is experiential. And while simple, it is difficult to complete. It requires a commitment. It requires facing fears. Pushing away excuses. Change. I found it to be extremely challenging, but effective.

Will you address your fears head on? Or do you prefer the comfort of knowing that any failings are "not your fault" ( "I tried, but I guess I'm just not creative enough")?

I hope you take action. And I do wish for you the very best. (feel free to message me should you have questions)