Nathan Bransford, Author


Tuesday, April 21, 2009

On Concepts

One of the reasons that the agents for a day missed some of the actually published works is that the queries did not demonstrate wholly original concepts. They possibly sounded like they had been done before.

But here's the thing about book concepts: originality is (somewhat) overrated.

There have been millions of books written in the course of human history. Before there were books there were plays, and before the were plays there were stories told around the campfire, and before there were stories around the campfire there were aliens who implanted DNA in our cave men ancestors that made us tell the same stories again and again. (It's true, I read it on Wikipedia).

About once a generation a Mary Shelley or H.G. Wells or Tolkien or S.E. Hinton comes along to invent a new genre basically from scratch. Odds are you're not that person (although if you are, I want to meet you).

All the rest of the mortals on the planet, even our best writers, are working within fairly established genres and tropes.

There were detective novels before George Pelecanos, there were dragon and boy stories before Christopher Paolini, there were wizard school books before J.K. Rowling, there were mistaken guilt stories before Ian Mcwan's ATONEMENT. What sets these writers apart is a unique take on an established trope. And ultimately that comes down to execution.

What is a unique take on an established trope? It varies from book to book. Sometimes it's been done before, but never with such beautiful writing. Or maybe it's been done before, but never for kids. Or maybe it's been done before, but never funny. Or maybe it's been done before, but never in combination with something else.

The shorthand for a unique take is that it's like this, but also like this. It's X meets X. It's different, but not too different.

This isn't because the publishing industry just wants what's already popular. (Ok, fine, partly it's because the publishing industry wants what's already popular -- you can "blame" that on readers who finish a book, love it, and want to read something else like it.)

But it's also because it's very nearly impossible to be wholly original. Even when new genres are invented they tend to use classic story arcs that have been around for millennia -- the coming of age story, the great man with a fatal flaw, the hubris tragedy, the celebrity memoir. When new genres are invented they just place these stories in a new world.

Unless it is truly out there, pretty much everything is a fresh take on an existing trope. It really does need to feel fresh, but that's not the same as being completely original. The originality is all about how it's done, not what it's about.






211 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   1 – 200 of 211   Newer›   Newest»
Bane of Anubis said...

Oh so true - I'm currently writing a story Ibut thought somewhat original - when I described it to my mother, she says "oh, that reminds me of book [x]" - well, I do some research and it turns out book x (which I'd never read or heard of, but was one of those long ago children's classics) was written in 1872... not sure if that's a good or bad thing, but it turns out that I am writing it from a different angle :)

Flavio Q Crunk said...

That's the same thing Don Maass said when I met him. I asked him how writers know when a specific genre is "full".
He said it doesn't matter how full it is, if your stuff is good, it will sell.

Martin said...

Well said. I think it's very easy for writers to mistake "fresh take" with "invent something new from scratch". We need a glossary! But make sure it has a fresh take, will ya?

Will Entrekin said...

Who said there are no new ideas, only new ways to tell them? I tend to agree; even Shakespeare wrote from sources.

king said...

Do you really want to use Paolini as a positive example? Really?

Nathan Bransford said...

king-

I went there.

Professor Tarr said...

My problem is that I can't truly figure out what genre best describes my stuff. It is as if Yann Martel had his tiger mate with Frank Norris' Octopus in the eyes of Upton Sinclair's Carpenter using the setting of John leCarre, while the props come from John Irving with a dose of Dickens, the phrasing comes from Anne Rice and the action straight from Stephen King... all chopped up by Samuel Beckett and narrated by Albert Camus...

I guess Literary is the best way to describe that mess...

L.C. Gant said...

This is so true. To be honest, I don't think I would want it any other way.

The reason we keep recycling the same basic stories over and over is because we can all relate to them. They speak about things that define the human experience--love, hate, birth, death, rebirth, etc.

If you do something that's completely out in left-field, you set yourself up for failure by telling a story your readers can't relate to at all. And no writer wants that. I know I don't!

Mira said...

I agree with this. Very well said.

When we talk about story, I always start thinking about archtypes and the 'hero's journey.' Joseph Campbell.

I think stories are a way for us to work out how to deal with archtypal situations. There are different ways to tell those stories - and that's where genre comes in - but at the root, there are probably about 12 different stories (I made that number up. I would actually bet that someone has come up with an actual number and listed the types of stories. Maybe Joseph Campbell did.) that are being told over and over again in different ways.

In terms of selling - people like the familiar. It speaks to them, feels comfortable and secure.

But they like new things because they are entertaining.

So, publishers want the familiar combined with the new.

Dara said...

I know when I first started writing back in high school, I had the misconception that everything new had to be original.

Then I learned otherwise and was rather relieved :)

Still, it can be difficult to come up with a "fresh take" on an existing trope, but that's why we all have to keep writing until we find that story that will grab readers.

Justus M. Bowman said...

Great post.

Lisa Schroeder said...

Agent Holly Root said similar things in her definition of "high concept." Readers like a twist on the familiar.

Here's the link, in case you didn't see it:

http://waxmanagency.wordpress.com/2009/02/06/recipe-for-success-high-concept/

SeaHayes said...

Nathan,
All true, and yet this is what makes writing a query so daunting. There are no truly original ideas, only new ways to tell different stories. The query must, in about 250 words, get across the plot and the author's different take on the subject. I find writing a 100,000 word novel so much easier than writing a 250 word query. But if you can't master the query, no one will read your take on the story. AAARRRRR...

Niki Schoenfeldt said...

Wow. That's all I can say. I am amazed at the results. Although I did not participate, I have been keeping an eye on things. I never thought being an agent was an easy job. And as a reviewer, I totally agree that each story is subjective. All I can do as I search for an agent is hope I am not among those submitting bad queries and worse stories. Thanks for the insight.

Terri Nixon said...

I think it was Polti who drew up a list of about 30 (?) possible plots. Will have to look into that one but something's niggling in the back of my mind about that.

csmith said...

It is finding a new slant on an old tale that makes things really interesting. I'm starting to see writing more and more like architecture, the more constraints you are aware of, the more creative you become within those constraints. Sort of like pruning a tree. Ah, rambling, so moving swiftly on...

Very interesting (and rather encouraging) post.

Thanks Nathan

Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist! said...

good point, Nathan, never thought about concept vs originality in that way before.

Kristen Painter said...

There are really only two plotlines anyway:

1. Someone takes a journey.
2. A stranger comes to town.

And if you really want to boil it down, those are two sides of the same coin.

Terri Nixon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Terri Nixon said...

Messed up my last post - meant to include the link: http://changingminds.org/disciplines/storytelling/plots/polti_situations/polti_situations.htm

It's 36 plots.

reader said...

Thanks for this, Nathan.

That makes sense. Execution is everything and that is the one thing that is unique to each writer.

I feel better now. And also worse, as I constantly seem to have the execution that no one seems to want. Ugh.

(Along the same line, your concept thoughts are true in other media as well; movie critic Roger Ebert says a movie isn't WHAT it's about but HOW its about it.)

Anne Dayton said...

If only it weren't so tough coming up with the interesting twist for the familiar story. That'a harder than most people give credit for.

Great post!

Marilyn Peake said...

Absolutely agree.

Mira said...

Anne Dayton - honestly, I'm not sure that a new twist is required. I also think if you just write it really, really well, that's entertaining enough.

I say, just write the book that's inside you.

That's really all you can do anyway, isn't it?

Let genre and all that work itself out after you've written the book.

Natalie said...

There are stories that just speak to us as humans—must be that alien programming. Using an "established" plot isn't unoriginal. It's smart. These stories work, they'll always work. We connect with them every time.

And if the new twist on them is done well enough, we don't even realize it's been done before until after.

Alex Green said...

You open yourself up to queries that state "I'm the next Tolkien" when you say you want to meet these people. You know that right?

Mister Fweem said...

If what we read hinges only on originality, we're limiting ourselves severely. And, frankly, I've read some "original" works that were, when you get right to it, extremely bad as far as the writing went.

Take these two examples: Robert Aspirin's MYTH series, and Terry Pratchett's Discworld series. Both sound very familiar in a vary familiar genre: wise wizards help apprentices learn things, odd things happen in a fantasy world gone mad, et cetera. But both of these authors attack the genre with aplomb and create stories and characters that are fun to read. To reject them because Tolkein got to the genre first is unfair.

And it's Christopher Paolini, not Christian.

Enusan said...

I'm curious though. If execution is so important (And I agree that it is), how can one accept or reject based on a query, which is almost the opposite of execution? Is the simple fact of the matter that agents don't have time to be receiving partials of everything that gets submitted?

Kristi said...

Niki - it's so good to see a fellow critique group member posting here. If only there was an agent like Nathan who repped PB's! Good post as always, Nathan :)

Nathan Bransford said...

Thanks, Mister Fweem. Freudian slip.

Ian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Furious D said...

Thank Xenu that originality is overrated, it warms the hearts of hacks like me.

But seriously...

While I'm sure that there are still new literary frontiers out there, somewhere, there is still a lot of rich material to be mined from existing genre's, motifs, and themes.

Bane of Anubis said...

Enusan, IMO, a query is a microcosm of execution- if you can write one well, you can probably write well - the converse might not be accurate (i.e., a poor query might not be indicative of poor writing, though there's a greater likelihood), but when you're getting a boatload of queries a day, I'd imagine that you need this filter to afford yourself some time for extracurricular things like sleep and food (hence the whole BAAFAD concept).

Ian said...

Borges' El Aleph is totally original and utterly brilliant. Laurie Lee's "As I Walked Out One Midsummer Morning" is unoriginal yet equally brilliant. Make what you will of that. What I make of it is that a great writer will prevail, inshallah.

Onovello said...

Even Mary Shelley took an old idea -- the legend of Prometheus -- and reframed it to incorporate the science of her time. And that legend goes back to the Garden of Eden (Tree of Knowledge). Likewise, J.K Rowling took traditional fairy and folk tale themes and archetypes and reworked them in her series; and one can look back to Nordic myths and find the roots of Tolkien's quests. Over and over the best writers have found ways of taking old material and updating it, giving it new relevance.

That's a rare gift indeed....

Kat Harris said...

Thank you so much for this post, Nathan.

It has given me the courage to believe and carry on. You're wonderful.

Mira said...

Ian - I completely agree.

I've heard it said that J.K. Rowling borrowed alot from Camelot and the myth of King Author.

Tolkien and H.G. Wells borrowed as well.

Isn't there a saying that Plato said it all? Or another saying that everything is just a footnote to Shakespeare?

Samuel said...

Some writers are very explicit in using already established 'concepts' or stories: Bridget Jones' Diary and Pride and Prejudice; On Beauty and Howards End; Last Orders and As I Lay Dying.

It can work very well.

Rick Daley said...

Execution? Uh-oh.

Check me if I'm wrong here, but if we execute all the writers you won't have anyone to rep.

CindaChima said...

That's exactly what I tell teens when I do writing workshops. A common complaint I get is, "All the good ideas are taken. Every time I think of something, it's already been done."I tell them that they will put their own stamp on their story.
It's like quilting--give two quiltmakers the exact same fabrics, and they will create unique works of art.

Mechelle Avey said...

Straight from an agent's mouth: Retelling is selling. Got it.

Shakespeare Retold, a BBC television production, is a brilliant example of retelling the bard in a contemporary fashion.

It seems to me that the important point here is that it's not just retelling, it's retelling to a new generation, to a new audience, to that stranger who just got to town. That's why writers should care about the demographics of readers.

In fact, as I consider your premise, Nathan, the admonishment (too strong?) is not should we retell. It is how? To whom? What should we understand about the structure of the story we want to retell? What are the transcendent elements? What are the cultural elements (the parts that should be overhauled to reflect the now)?

In retelling, are we concerned primarily with a generation's culture markers? Are we revitalizing a story based on ethnic rhythm and perception? Are we updating a story to reflect thematic changes?

Hmm. And then there is the question you raised of concept. High concept and retelling are not the same thing unless the foundational concept was already high concept.

Anyway, you've given us a starting point. Retell and sell. Got it.

Ian said...

Mira, I have great repect for people who completely agree with me. For that reason I have made a small contribution to your group story. I hope you like it.

jimnduncan said...

Well said, Nathan. It's one of those notions that bears repeating to writers on a regular basis. Readers don't need original. They just need well written stories with interesting people doing interesting things in interesting places. Emphasis of course is on the well written part.

richfigel said...

This is really true in the movie and TV biz: they want "familiar, but different."

In fact, most agents and managers have their repped screenwriters pitch dozens of loglines (one or two lines that sell the concept) before writing the script, then tell the writers what they think has the greatest potential.

But it seems in the book world, most writers don't test their concepts with agents until after they've written their first draft... or is that just for unpublished writers?

Seems to me if you're going to spend months or years working on a project, it would be a good idea to try pitching the concept in writers groups or to friends first -- or agents and publishers if that's possible.

Elaine 'still writing' Smith said...

Oh,the great debate:the twenty story plots, or the more simplified seven?

Mira said...

Ian - why did a shiver of terror run through me at those words?

Then I carefully, cautiously, tenatively, carefully went and looked at the group story.

That was funny. :-)

Solvang Sherrie said...

Good post. I guess since most stories aren't original, that's why so many agents and editors now say they're looking for a unique voice?

Nathan Bransford said...

(oops, posted that before I was ready).

Solvang-

Yes, exactly. Voice is part of execution, not concept, and it really can be a unique and original way to tell an old story.

Ian said...

Solvang Sherrie. What a brilliant name! All I could think of was Ian and to be perfectly honest it wasn't even my idea in the first place.

Mira said...

Alex, you made a really good point.

Nathan,

You said:

"Odds are you're not that person, although if you are, I want to meet you."

Okay. Thanks.

I'd like to meet you too.

Because oddly enough, I am creating a completely new and original genre.

I'm thinking lunch maybe.

Someplace air conditioned.

Scott said...

Great post, Nathan. Personally, I prefer authors who go into a story that they're passionate about with the very idea to bring something new. In fact, I'd argue that the "something new" should be the initial spark behind the passion.

What I don't care for are lazily rehashed plots involving make-weight characters that don't try and say something about the time in which they're born. Even if you're writing historical fiction, we all have a pulse of zeitgeist coursing through our veins, and we should effort to replenish it as often as we can by truly experiencing life.

If we do, it will come through. And your readers will never recognize your story as anything other than its own creation, connected to their world and their lives.

Mira said...

I'm just kidding of course.

I realize that was an unrealistic request.

Really. I'm asking for the impossible.

Hardly any restuarants in the City have air conditioning.

I'll bring a picnic lunch to your workplace. I assume there's air conditioning in your building.

Kia said...

It kills me that S.E. Hinton wrote The Outsiders when she was only 16.

Gwen said...

I just wrote a blog entry about this a few days ago. Somebody who read the first three chapters of my book said 'have you read this other book...?' I flipped out because I love that book and thought maybe I inadvertently plagiarized even though I started planning my books before I ever read that book. Turns out our books are operating on the same theme, but with much different worlds/characters/etc.

I think the whole 'this reminds me of...' phenomenon is a fact of psychology. We have schemas for just about everything, and it's a lot more work to create a new schema, so when we encounter something novel we try to cram it into existing schemas. I would guess the 'seen this before' response wouldn't have bypassed the published authors if people would have gone in with the assumption that it's probably not the same, even if it seems like it on the surface, but it's really hard to break out of that, especially when you're not aware you're doing it.

(Excuse my psych nerdery. I can't help it!)

Auburn said...

Insightful post as usual, Nathan. As a writer and as a member of the publishing industry, it frustrates me to no end when I have to deal with a person's beleif that an author is or isn't good because of the 'originality' of their story, when what this argumentative person is generally saying in reality is that similar books of the same genre have been written. We know they have been written. We've read them. As you said, the key is a unique exploration of a subject in such a way that it feels fresh and new and interesting. The invention of the entirely new genre is an accident. A happy, happy accident.

Neil said...

Case in point is this "Pride & Prejudice & Zombies" thing. Fresh take on existing material, currently selling like sexy fruit in honey sauce here in the UK. And while I'm here, RIP J G Ballard. You dark little genius you.

Rachel said...

I think JK Rowling borrowed quite a bit from Star Wars, too. Not books, but definitely three of the coolest movies ever (the originals, I mean).

Scott said...

Well, Neil, there's "inspired by", and then there's "derivative". More or less rewriting an existing book to add zombies cause they're hot strikes me as "derivative". ;)

Ulysses said...

First of all, I don't think you're the first person to say this. Ha!

Second, for entertaining and informative reading, I suggest TV Tropes, which discusses story bits - plots, characters and character development patterns, and every-bloody-other thing. It's not limited to television, but includes a billion illustrations from literature, movies, comic books, and all other forms of story-telling entertainment. I doesn't take much poking around in this wiki to find that one's "wholly original" character/plot/device/concept is in fact, as old as dirt.

Truly, as Ecclesiastes said, "There is nothing new under the sun."

Ian said...

"It kills me that S.E. Hinton wrote The Outsiders when she was only 16."

Yes, but Albert Camus had written it already, so she probably just copied it as a school exercise, which neatly wraps up this thread, apart from the fact that there are still hundreds of other people, apart from ourselves, who want to get Nathan to be their agent so this thread will just run and run.

Neil said...

Scott -- I'm certainly not endorsing this "literary mash-up" thing, dude. Frankly I think it'll get real old real fast -- you know, Hamlet rewritten to include scenes of him battling zombies and all that -- but prepare for a slew of them, because this concept is selling. AND there's an argument that says this "PP&Z" book will introduce a whole bunch of readers to Austen when they otherwise wouldn't have touched her with a ten-foot wooden stake. Personally, I think the whole thing screams "transient fad". But I ain't no oracle.

Mira said...

Ian,

I'm not coming here to get Nathan to be my agent.

I'm coming here because I want to eat a good lunch.

But.

Really. Some people may want to add their thoughts to the topic. They may find it interesting. Even though someone said the same thing earlier in the thread, they want to say it in their own way, with their own slant.

Sort of on topic, right?

Anonymous said...

Ironically, my last rejection went something like this: "We enjoyed reading all three of your [requested] manuscripts and found them to be very unique and original. Unfortunately we didn't connect with the voices and didn't care about the characters as much as we would have liked."

Right. So my writing is unique and original but it sucks. I keep getting similar rejections so I guess I just have to accept that I'm an idea man and not an 'execution' man.

Maybe I'm just cranky about the fact that people who /aren't/ unique and original still seem to get published, even if their execution isn't that great either. Am I the only one here who feels like more is expected of me than others?

Anonymous said...

Don't color too far outside the lines.

Anonymous said...

Inventing a new genre is way out there. But what I thinkl is doable is to craft orginal plots/concpets within existing genres. Of course just having a unique plot is not enough--it must be well executed and conform to the expectations/tropes of that genre.

Anonymous said...

Originality is definitely not everytthing. How many times has the old cop-on-his-last-day-before-retirement-gets-into-the-case-of-his-life trope been used in both movies and books?!

Christine H said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scott said...

I hear you, Neil. And it's difficult to intelligently criticize something without coming off like you're bitter about the author's success or want them to do badly. That's totally not the truth. More power to the author, here.

Heck, any one of my larks–or concerted literary efforts–can get picked up and I'd be fine with it. It says more about the market than anything.

Christine H said...

Mira,

WILL YOU CUT IT OUT!!!! Ice cream now? Oh my goodness, girl, you are addicted to your profile pic!

You're as bad as Bo and women.

Everyone else,

My comment on the ACTUAL TOPIC OF THIS POST is this:

Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.- C. S. Lewis So that's what I'm doing. History (and perhaps Nathan) will decide if I succeeded.

T. Anne said...

It would be an interesting exercise to give a group of writers the concept of a story, then see the different directions they each choose to run with.

Kristin Laughtin said...

Aren't there only seven unique storylines or something like that? I remember hearing something like that in some literature class years ago. If you condense a storyline down far enough, it will sound like hundreds of others. What makes it stand out is the details.

The Writers Canvas said...

Good points, Nathan. My TV/film college professor always loved the "there are only 7 plots" speech.

I really did enjoy the being an agent for a day exercise. It's opened my eyes!

Elaine

Mechelle Avey said...

Ian said -- "apart from the fact that there are still hundreds of other people, apart from ourselves, who want to get Nathan to be their agent so this thread will just run and run."

I've already been rejected by Nathan. Doesn't mean I don't think he's a great agent. I see him as a must read because he is a lighting rod for agent thought at the moment. Don't you all agree? If his blog is being written about in the UK, he could reasonably be seen as a cultural icon. Maybe it's temporary, maybe it's not. Time will tell. There are a lot of blogging agents, but Nathan seems to have touched off a sense of belonging in the writer psyche with his open and helpful nature. He is an agent who "clears the adversarial air" between writer and agent. Sorry, Nathan. I know you're human and all...don't mean to relegate you to culture icon.

lospi said...

I still say there's a difference between the canard of "only seven stories" and a shelf full of books where a civilian and a law-enforcement professional, one or both of whom have secrets from the past, fall in love while eluding a serial killer. It's not archetypical, it's derivative.

Neil said...

Uh-oh, Mechelle. You gone and done it now. You called Nathan a "cultural icon". Prepare for the emergence of his hitherto well-concealed gargantuan diva's ego! *braces himself*

PurpleClover said...

Of course you're right.

*says through clenched teeth*

I thought it sounded "done" so I passed. But I should have considered that it was a new voice. Bad PC! But I agree with your post.

And I have a new genre for you.

Suburban Fantasy ;)

Celebrity Philosophy :{

SciFi Non-Fiction (?)

Sorry. I'll be serious now. Though I really think Suburban Fantasy can work...

frau said...

I want to add this thought: not even truly new genres, ideas and plots come out of any one individual author, but from big societal shifts.

The basic tropes we have here in the West are somewhat recurring within other cultures, but then again there are those tropes and story arches from, say, the African or Asian literature tradition that don't resonate with us as much - because they're not as familiar. So of course you can say there are "three fundamental plots", but their fundaments came from the building blocks our culture used to build a tradition of thought. Linear thinking here in the West, for example.

Anyway: new tropes and ideas come in spurts, as our society undergoes big shifts - the Sci-Fi genre, for example, was a direct reaction to the industrial revolution. It wasn't any one writer or story, but a wave of individually unrelated authors cementing it.

True originality seems to come from being able to fully understand a trope, then push and flex it in different ways. Consequently it frequently comes from authors that have a meta-insight into culture: I'm thinking of Murakami - I think he understands how to use elements of Japanese storytelling culture in a way that resonates with the Western reader, too.

Am I making any sense? Anyone have more examples?

Marilyn Peake said...

Nathan said:
" ... it's also because it's very nearly impossible to be wholly original. Even when new genres are invented they tend to use classic story arcs that have been around for millennia -- the coming of age story, the great man with a fatal flaw, the hubris tragedy, the celebrity memoir. When new genres are invented they just place these stories in a new world."

I think that’s because literature arises out of human need. People read books or see movies because they want to see human problems resolved. The arts are limited by human nature, not by lack of imagination. We live on Earth, we only have so many needs, we perceive a limited number of physical dimensions, we see a limited range of the light spectrum and hear a limited range of sound. In The Metamorphosis, Franz Kafka wrote about a man waking up as an insect, but the short story dealt primarily with human emotions. If we were cockroaches with the I.Q. of Kafka, we might write horror stories about huge boots floating overhead trying to squash us, historical novels about how we used to inhabit the ancient civilization of Egypt, and romance novels in which ... oops, that would be human literature.

Neil said...

Marilyn --

I think you're onto something. I think "The Cockroach Chronicles" -- if you'll forgive the pun -- has legs...

Laurel said...

I was gratified to read this post. I AM that reader...finish a great book and after tearing through everything else by that author I immediately start trolling Amazon for "readers who bought this book also bought..."

Rowling, Paolini, David Eddings, and dozens of others in the fantasy genres almost all do a version of Arthur and Merlin. Tolkein's Gandalf is Middle Earth Merlin with Frodo as a humble Arthur. Pride and Prejudice gets redone because chicks dig Byronic heroes, not because everyone is trying to rip off Jane Austen. Rick Riordan has done great things with Greek mythology in his Percy Jackson series.

When I see a story that looks familiar with a character I haven't met yet, I can't wait to read it. Sometimes the only new twist I need is a compelling character.

But what do I know? I'm just the end consumer.

Marilyn Peake said...

Neil,

I like it!

Mira said...

Frau, you make a good point about the time creating the genre, but I'm not sure it holds true across the board.

Let me give you two examples.

My understanding is that Tolkien was heavily inspired by the horrors of World War II to create his saga.

Whereas I'm creating a unique and original genre because I want to have lunch with Nathan.

Now, granted these are two similar examples, but I think you can see that the indivdual motivations contributed to the scenarios.

Dorothy said...

Guilty as charged. I am always the one looking for something different. In books and in the rest of my journeys. Wise words. Thanks

bukarella said...

I think this is one of those things that everyone knows, but not everyone remembers. I guess nothing matters as much as voice. I think I can read just about any genre, if the voice appeals to me.

Then of course, as a writer, you get this wonderful idea, and you are thrilled at how original and unique it is, until the day after... You do a little bit of research, and realize there are 20 books with the same premise already out on the shelves. heh!

Anonymous said...

Nathan,

That was beautiful. Hope to the hopeless, yet hard a work.

frau said...

Mira,

Haha. The desire to eat lunch with / via / served atop of cute guys is of course a natural engine of change, so that would be an exception.

But I do think that, as much as individual situations enable writers to produce something, the mojo mind stuff that comes to infuse it with something new sneaks its way in by virtue of larger societal conditions having changed.

I think, for example, that we'll be seeing a lot more meta-tropes in literature because of the internet. We've gotten very self-conscious of what identity means and how easy it is to recreate it by yourself, so a possible new genre in the future would focus on that.

Genres are a way to deal with some new addition or complication to human life, ultimately.

Anonymous said...

T. Anne said...

It would be an interesting exercise to give a group of writers the concept of a story, then see the different directions they each choose to run with.
Wow, Anne, I love that.
Maybe you could sponsor that or maybe Nathan could consider it for his next contest.

(And, in my dreams, afterwards, we could possibly *nicely* workshop the results.)

Mira said...

Actually, Frau, in all seriousness, I agree with you.

I think it's not just societal changes, but the collective unconscious.

Sychronicity is a really interesting phenomenom, where several people think of the same new idea at the same time.

It's almost like the collective unconscious has decided it's time for a new vision, and it tries to send that vision out several different channels until it's been seen.

frau said...

Mira,

exactly! Originally I wanted to say something about how the light bulb, the telegraph, etc actually had two different people invent them at the same time - but I couldn't remember names or details so I just didn't go there.

It really IS a question of a deeper, collective thought process suddenly finding the right moment to mature, at which point those people that've paid attention to its rumblings the most snatch it up and do something with it.

I'm so psyched to see what kind of literature will start popping up in a couple of years. Internet has changed our whole way of living so much, SOMETHING's gotta shake up.

Mira said...

Frau - I know. The internet an amazing new playground for creativity.

I do think that there is a relatively new genre that's been created - narrative non-fiction, and the internet contributed to the creation of that.

Never before, in the history of man, have so many people had so much access to information.

You used to need to buy huge encylopedia sets that were rarely, if ever, updated. Now, constantly changing and updating information is available and the click of a mouse.

In terms of the collective unconscious, it means we can go back and look at history with very fresh eyes.

Thus, narrative non-fiction.

In theory, anyway.

Beatriz Kim said...

How can stories be really that original or different from what's been done before? It can't be done. Were human and we can't help writing from that perspective...unless there really are aliens among us...just kidding!

It's also why stories still sell. In the end, we want to connect with the human experience. Thank goodness that we're so different at the same time. Our different perspectives are influenced by our experiences, cultures, philosophy, and religious beliefs.

Many readers are curious. They want to see new ways of looking at the same old thing. For example, Monet, Van Gogh, and Georgia O'Keefe painted flowers, but each had a very unique way of painting them. No one would deny that all three are masters at their craft.

Writers must also work on their craft, to create masterpieces. They must take the same old story and give it a fresh appearance.

Monet abandoned the classical and realistic paintings of flowers; he painted just the impression of them, using color and light. Van Gogh changed the world of impressionism by using an impasto style; his works were more violent and passionate than Monet. Georgia O'Keefe made a small Pansy the size of a 6 foot man; giving people the opportunity to feel like the hungry bee.

Writing is the same. What makes your story special? Why should people read it?

Like I do for painting, I study the masters. My favorite is Tolstoy. He can show you the personality of a character, by how they put away their coat or hold a cigar. Wow! If only I could have 50% of his talent!

Sorry for the long entry. I was on the debate team; I'm always debating my point.

Nathan,

I could never do your job! I couldn't get past 15 entries. I'm glad there are people like you in the world of publishing. How else would good books find their way to the readers?

Have a great day everybody!

Lady Glamis said...

Well said! I've had these same thoughts and always try to combine two different things to create something fresh and exciting, but comfortable for the reader.

Anonymous said...

I don't think any prospective writer should have an aversion to standing on the shoulders of giants.

You will literally go insane if try and avoid all established literary tropes, themes and motifs. They exist because they work, and because readers respond to them.

That being said I do think there are occasions where we have to call a spade a spade. There's a difference between taking influence and inspiration from previous works, and putting yourself in a position where if Joe Eszterhas' lawyer rings, you aren't taking his call.

Simon

Anonymous said...

I would think this fear of repeating an idea would only be mortifying in those cases where a piece of writing relies heavily on one central conceit.

eg. the perfect murder (you do it with a knife made of ice. don't tell anyone)

I guess it would be a crushing blow to find the revelatory twist in your whodunnit had been dunn before, but any story that rests so heavily on a single idea is likely to be seriously flawed regardless.

Simon

Marilyn Peake said...

frau said:
"I'm so psyched to see what kind of literature will start popping up in a couple of years. Internet has changed our whole way of living so much, SOMETHING's gotta shake up."

I think that's already happening. I think one of the main reasons emphasis is now placed on tightly-written novels is because computers have made editing so much easier. I think that the demand to strip down writing to its bare essentials, taking out extra adjectives and adverbs is because readers have been trained to soak up huge amounts of information from social networking sites, and have come to appreciate information in thoughtfully worded sound bites. Readers don’t want to ponder and decipher long Russian literature type paragraphs. They want info. And they want it now. In as few character spaces as possible. Flash fiction’s a popular modern art form. I heard someone’s creating a flash fiction anthology over at Twitter where every entry must be 140 characters or less (don’t know if it’s true or not).

I read today that Susan Boyle doesn’t own a computer. She might not even know what a sound bite is. Is there no end to her lack of conformity? :)

lotusgirl said...

Holy cow! You've gotten so popular I can hardly scroll down to the bottom of your comments anymore, and I wonder sometime, "What's the point of adding my voice to the rest of these?" My voice is unique, though, so I add it even if it's repetitious. Nothing new under the sun and all that jazz. It's at least as much about the storyteller as it is about the story. Execution! Do we slay the story or the readers?

Robena Grant said...

For what it's worth, I read an article years ago on The Seven Original Story Ideas. Don't have the original to give credit, only my notes. The article claimed all plots whether simple or complex, novel, poem, play, or movie, were born from one of only seven possibilities:

Fact
Failure
Fantasy
Fear
Fidelity
Freedom
Fortune

What do you think?

PurpleClover said...

We were having a similar discussion at the blog Lisa & Laura Write (Lisa & Laura Roecker).

We've had the experience to write something and then pick up a book (obviously a genre we love) and find that certain aspects are very close to what we've written. Spooky.

Even those with brand-spanking new ideas probably share these ideas with others.

So Mira - I like your concept on the collective unconscious.

We will always have a WOW artist. But for the most part we just have to give different spins on the same ol' idea.

word ver: tatte

Aimless Writer said...

After playing agent I have a few questions.
1. Does the kiss-up in the first paragraph really mean anything to you? When I say I love your blog and think you're the best agent in the world ...do you even read that? (I found myself skimming)
2. If they say its one genre but you can tell it doesn't fit there but the hook looked good would you still request?
3. What would make you stop dead? Is there anything that would make you toss it before reading the whole page? Punctuation mistakes? A misspelled word?
4. Do you like it when we attach a chapter?
Which famous author would you love to have in your stable?

Max Cool said...

This is a really interesting place, but you're wrong about the alien DNA theory.

What really happened - this was about 65,000 BC - there were two groups of competing humanoids.

One colony had 6 fingers on each hand, had mastered construction, domestication of animals, hydraulics, and even basic flight.

On the other side of the valley was a bunch of inbred hick good 'ole boy wifebeaters who only knew how to brew alcohol and cook crack cocaine.

Then there was a war.

Dawn Maria said...

If anyone has read Jasper Fforde's wonderful Tuesday Next series (well worth the time), one of the plot devices he uses in his Book World is the last (and highly guarded) original story idea. Some even doubt if it actually exists.

Jen C said...

I don't agree at all that it's impossible to create an original plot. Just because none of us can come up with one, doesn't mean that some bright genius won't be able to do it in the future.

After all, it was our ancestors who invented the plots we have in the first place, so it stands to reason that someone with a massive uber-brain in this day and age could have the capacity to invent something new.

It's only that tiny, minuscule number of people who are able to truly dream up something new, but that gosh for them...

Mechelle Avey said...

I know Neil. It sounds like pandering, doesn't it? Nathan seems remarkably lacking in ego, but what do we really know about him?
Then again, when you are surrounded by the titans of publishing, it's hard to be a big-head.

By the way, Marilyn, I tried to post compliments about your submission to the blog yesterday. For some reason, they never took. I requested your story anon... I also loved the Japanese one. Inunga? Can't remember the title. I requested 8 stories in all. Oops. Stopped requesting after I realized that this was not a free-for-all. There were many more that I would have liked to request.

Endless Secrets said...

Nathan,
Of course I must agree and this is what kills me when I sit down to write because my characters are so alive inside of me, but the story that they are set in can be connected to millions of others.

But I do have a very significant difference that to my knowledge has never been done.

Great Post Nathan!

Anonymous said...

Just remember what Einstein said: "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."

TecZ aka Dalton C Teczon - Writer said...

What you said makes sense. I think it's that human need to find something familiar to anchor to while you explore something new.

Marilyn Peake said...

Mechelle Avey said:
"By the way, Marilyn, I tried to post compliments about your submission to the blog yesterday. For some reason, they never took. I requested your story anon..."

Thank you very much! That means so much to me. I'm struggling to finish a novel by this week or next, and that was like a pep talk for me.

Jen C said...

Marilyn, good luck with finishing your latest book! I just downloaded Cannon Fodder from Fictionwise and I'm trying to not get busted reading it at work! So far, it's excellent and I can't wait to get home and read the rest.

Kimber An said...

"About once a generation a Mary Shelley or H.G. Wells or Tolkien or S.E. Hinton comes along to invent a new genre basically from scratch. Odds are you're not that person (although if you are, I want to meet you)."

If originality is so overrated, how on earth will you know such a person when you do meet him or her?

Christine H said...

Readers don’t want to ponder and decipher long Russian literature type paragraphs. Oh, Marilyn, I do! I do!

How I long for a real book... one that lets me savor the experience of reading it... one that I have to read through a couple of times to get all of the meanings.

I am so tired of neat, concise little info packages. It's like the entire world has turned into a 10-second commercial.

Isn't this really a type of cultural ADHD? Aren't we requiring less of our readers because we think they aren't willing to give it? And does that not feed the cultural attention deficit even more?

I know this is all hypothetical, and it doesn't sell books. But I just love books that start with "info dumps." Please, let me get to know something about the characters and their backgrounds before you start messing with them! Is that too much to ask?

"Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever and rich, with a comfortable home and a happy disposition, seemed to unite some of the best blessings of existence and had lived nearly twenty-one years in the world with very little to distress or vex her. She was the youngest of two daughters of a most affectionate, indulgent father..." -Emma by Jane Austen

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Nathan Bransford said...

anon-

Please try again, minus the rude.

Christine H said...

It would be an interesting exercise to give a group of writers the concept of a story, then see the different directions they each choose to run with.Awesome, awesome idea!!!!

Martin said...

Isn't that exactly what we've been talking about? Different writers taking the SAME idea and putting their own spin on it? You just described mass market publishing! :)

Anonymous said...

Nathan, my respect for you as an agent and person just grows and grows.

Hope Clark said...

It's called voice. Voice is what sells a story - any story. It's more how you tell it, not what you tell.

Christine H said...

I was just thinking how cool it would be to have all the stories (or a selection of them) published in one volume. It would be such a great teaching tool, for college professors, adult writing classes, and the like.

Christine H said...

I mean, short stories, that is. Under 4,000 words.

Vic K said...

I might be the one dissenting voice amongst this chorus of agreement...

Bravely then;

As Agent-for-a-day, I focused on original concepts. That's because I actively look for original ideas when I'm shopping for new books - and when I'm writing too of course - and so I reasoned agents would be on the look out for what readers want.

My argument here, very respectfully Nathan, is that I think you're confusing plot with concept.

I absolutely agree that there are no new original plots to be found.

I do believe however that there are many original concepts. Just off the top of my head, Naomi Novik's bestselling Temeraire series delivered an original concept - dragons alive in the Napoleonic era. Robin Hobb's wizard wood 'Ship of Magic' series, Melanie Rawn's Sunrunners, Anne McCaffery's 'Ship who sang' series, 'Crystal Singer' series and 'Dragons of Pern' series - those were all original concepts delivered within a plot framework that was not so original.

So two things; first my list is mostly fantasy. (If you missed it, that's my genre.) Second, I believe original concepts are more important in fantasy than other genres. I venture to say that we fantasy writers and readers search for original ideas and are excited when we find them.

(Which is exactly why Paolini is not a good example for dedicated fantasists. Few to zero original ideas.)

Anyway, my argument here boils down to this; amongst fantasy, (Maybe various other genres too, but I'm prepared to comment only on my own for the moment) there should be a continual striving for original concepts and ideas. The plot doesn't matter, so long as it is half way interesting, but the delivery of original concepts is important.

Hm. I might stretch to include science fiction. After all, don't we read futuristic stories to partly get our brain stretched y encountering thoughts, imagery and concepts we've never met or considered before?

I agree that occasionally you do find a rip-roaring yarn that doesn't have a huge amount to offer in the way of original concepts (Name of the Wind say, which had many little brilliant ideas but no breathtakingly large one) but the delivery and writing is so good no one cares and it never impacts on sales.

So I'm in agreement that original concepts arenn't the only important factor. Sure, maybe they're not even that high on the list in comparison to other elements. A unique take or a unique voice is just as essential.

I just wouldn't ever discount original concepts as being overrated in fiction.

Vic K

Mira said...

Hmmm.

I ate lunch today. After awhile it dawned on me that you weren't there, Nathan.

Something seems to have gone wrong with my plan here. All the elements were there:

>Told Nathan I had a unique genre idea.

Check.

>Told him I was available to discuss it at lunch.

Check.

>Ate lunch.

Check.

Hmmm. What's missing here? What piece of the equation is missing?

I'm bothered. I'm bewildered. I'd say I was bewitched but that's just silly.

After all, I'm trying to be rational here.

There's something missing. What part of my machiavellian plan has gone awry?


What? What am I missing? What?

Martin said...

Actually, years ago at a convention I picked up a little Japanese anthology (translated to English) called "There was a knock". It was a collection of stories that all started with that sentence. Not exactly the same thing, but it was fascinating to read.

morphine-moniza said...

Oh there definietly is no such thing as truly unique fiction. There cannot be. Fiction has to be derivitive because that's what appeals to readers. We expect certain tropes when we read books, and if our expectations are flouted for no good reason the book feels unsatisfactory.

The tools we have to use to create novels already exist, the best books conceal this fact.

Nathan Bransford said...

vic-

That's a great comment. I think you're right that in fantasy and probably science fiction there are more wholly original concepts because by nature they're dealing with the impossible. But I still think it fits into the overall framework of the post because even if they're still set in very unique worlds they're often even more dependent upon classical plot tropes to anchor them.

But that's a great addendum to the post.

Anonymous said...

I actually think fantasy and hard SF are less original than most genres. It's all the same--wizards, dragons, aliens--what's so original about that? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Anonymous said...

How 'bout Brokeback Mountain from the POV of the horses?

Bounce up on it, genre bandwagon riders!

Marilyn Peake said...

Jen C,

Wow! Thank you so much!

Christine H said...

Dear Anonymous,

Just wait 'til you read my fantasy novel. Then you'll find out what original is!

(Whenever I stop posting here and get around to finishing it, that is.)

(Yes, Mira, I'm changing my profile pic. Playing around to see which one I like best. Should I be myself, or a sunrise, or something else? Not sure.)

Marilyn Peake said...

Christine H,

I'm also a huge fan of Russian novels. I'm guessing that one day someone will write an amazingly thick book with lots of adjectives, adverbs, flowery prose and complicated ideas, and it will be the next hot thing. The Harry Potter books proved that kids like to read, even when popular rumor had it that they didn't.

Christine H said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marilyn Peake said...

Nathan said:
" ... in fantasy and probably science fiction there are more wholly original concepts because by nature they're dealing with the impossible."

I love that science fiction has led to real-world scientific inventions. I’ve been doing quite a bit of research into time travel for the science fiction novel I’ve just about completed, and it amazes me that scientists quote both Einstein and science fiction writers in explaining theories they’re developing. Very exciting!

Mira said...

Marilyn,

Lol. You could be right about the Russian novel. I can just see it. Then suddenly EVERYONE will write one.

So, back to you Nathan.

I'm trying to figure out where I went wrong here.

Maybe it was that I invited you to lunch. Perhaps that wasn't appropriate given that we've never met and I would have made you pay for it.

Of course you didn't know I would have made you pay, but it's possible something about our prior interacts would have led you to intuit it.

Maybe our first meeting should be in a more appropriate venue. A place where two strangers can meet for the first time to have a sedate and productive business discussion.

Breakfast.

Breakfast tomorrow, okay?

Your treat. Just let me know where.

Cool. Breakfast with Nathan. Has a ring to it.

Marilyn Peake said...

Mira said:
"Lol. You could be right about the Russian novel. I can just see it. Then suddenly EVERYONE will write one."

Uh-oh. It could take a whole lot more time to write those kind of tomes. We might have to give up Twitter and changing our blog pics.

Vic K said...

Thanks Nathan. : ) And I do agree - many of these novels do rest their original concepts upon classical plot tropes. As a reader and writer, I absolutely don't have a problem with that so long as the concepts they are delivering within that framework are original.

I know there is plenty of fantasy writing out there that is just a regurgitation of the same ideas and concepts - as Anon 7:06 points out - but I'm not writing it, and (sorry Paolini) I'm not reading it either.

When fantasy is done well, it still takes the world by storm; of the top bestselling books worldwide, (including Tolkien and Rowling amongst others) a surprising amount of them are fantasy novels.

Anyway, I'm getting a little off-topic, but my point was mainly the importance of originality in the genre - the very best writers have it at some level in their work.

(By best, I'm taking the definition decided on in Nathan's blog some months back when we were discussing the long term impact a book has on society.)

Agreed, Rowling may not have had an original plot with the wizard school but the originality at the execution level of her work is legendary for a reason. You could potentially make a sound argument that those wildly exciting and original concepts are part of the reason her work is so popular.


Vic K

Pattie Garner said...

Okay Nathan, so this has nothing to do with your topic--sorry--but that's why I like you. I want a serious answer. When do you give up? When do you realize you just aren't going to get an agent and your writing sucks? How do you come to terms with that simple fact?

PurpleClover said...

Marilyn -

That was actually what I was hinting towards with the "scifi non-fiction"...lol.

It's amazing what was scifi only decades ago (Portable phones you say??! YEAH RIGHT! Flying cars?? NO WAY!)

I guess its still an old story with a new spin? sigh.

SciFi definitely deserves its kudos though. It is pushing our society forward.

fatcaster said...

Anon 7:07

Brokeback w/horse POV wouldn't be a new genre. It's A Stranger Comes to Town plus Someone Takes a Ride--err, Journey (Well, maybe you could call it a genrebender):

Horse #1: "They're at it again. Again!"
Horse #2: "Yep. Just like rabbits."

PurpleClover said...

Mira - Hmm...you want a contract with Nathan.

I can think of a document with your name on it he might consider signing right now...


;) (I kid.)

Mira said...

Pattie - I'll answer that one, even though you didn't ask me.

Never. It's okay to take a break for awhile. But don't give up.

William Saroyan had a pile of rejections 30 inches high.

Keep going. Keep on. Keep on. Keep on.

Marilyn, that's awful. No twitter and blog pictures? We can't have that. Let's start an anti-russian novel movement and nip this looming evil in the bud.

Uh, well, we can form the movement after we do our important twitter and blog picture work, of course.

Mira said...

Purple Clover

What? What document? A signing contract? A publishing agreement? A breakfast menu?

What? What?

Now I can't sleep. What does Purple Clover know that I don't.

What?

Marilyn Peake said...

PurpleClover said:
"It's amazing what was scifi only decades ago (Portable phones you say??! YEAH RIGHT! Flying cars?? NO WAY!)"

I know. Right? I've been reading some amazing non-fiction books about time travel by scientists at major universities ... and, man, they've got me convinced it could happen in our lifetime, even though I can't really wrap my brain around that as a reality.

PurpleClover said...

Marilyn-

I've been doing physics research *smacks face* for a MS and if I mention one more iota of theory and/or revelation, my husband and friends are going to abandon me. I think it's fascinating! But how silly our grandchildren will think us when we tell them it wasn't invented yet in our time. ;)

My gramma likes to remind me of all the things that did not exist before I came along. I'm sure I'll be doing the same. :)

Mira said...

Oh I get it. Purple Clover is just torturing me.

This isn't the first time she's done this - tormented poor, innocent Mira.

I'll tell Nathan all about it at breakfast. I'm sure he'll be very nice - pat me on the head and tell me I don't deserve to be treated this way.

So there.

Pffffttttt.

Then we'll have a very mature, professional discussion about genres.

frau said...

Mira, I think he's getting at the bunny-boiling woman trope? How unimaginative (of him, not you - I'm pretty sure you'd come up with something way better than bunnies, which are so very 80's).

I think there needs to be a distinction between "original" and "unique".

Since nothing can ever truly be original, in the sense of coming out of nowhere, what you as writers (THAT'S RIGHT I AM NOT A WRITER YET I AM ON THIS BLOG! UNIVERSE PLOTLINE: IMPLODED) would be striving for is the "unique".

Combining mojo words and ideas in such a way that they reflect already existing concepts, but in a way that puts them in a new light. Or putting into words new concepts emerging in the real world nobody has recognized or grappled with yet (see modernity, surveillance society).

Yes, the hero gets the girl, but what if the hero is a massively depressed gerbil and the girl actually has a chromosome syndrome?

I also think most basic plots stem from basic social needs. In a culture that prizes individual identity and a linear conception of time, the basic plot will rely heavily on these things.

In a culture that prizes collective might and functions within ideas of circular time, though, the basic plot will still involve love and social redemption but have a very different arc and tropes.

Jil said...

Christine H. I so agree with you! Some people do still want the experience of being taken to another place, feeling the breeze, hearing the sounds and savoring the land. It's about sharing another person's life. Looking deeply into another's heart and taking time to feel their emotions. These readers like to have their souls touched or memories stirred so when they have finished reading they sit quietly, not wanting to leave that other world and its characters.

Science fiction seldom makes one cry and the books I remember from when I was a child were the ones that moved me most and even brought me to tears.

Lastly:
Whatever is written will be original to somebody.

Mira said...

Um, I almost hate to ask this, but what is a bunny-boiling troupe?

Why is this blog suddenly so unfamiliar and confusing?

Bunny-boiling troupes? Nathan signing unknown contracts?

Have I changed my blog picture so many times that I've entered an alternate universe where people speak in words that are oddly familiar, yet strangly unintelligible?

Am I in a different story arc than I thought?

Ooooo.

Maybe I'm in a new genre.

That's it. The way to create a new genre. I discovered it. Me.

First you change your blog picture a million times. Then reality shifts and ta da! New genre.

Boy. I can't wait to tell Nathan at breakfast. Now, I actually have a new genre to talk about. I thought I'd have to dodge that question with witty repartee about waffles.

Which isn't easy. Conventional wisdom may tell you otherwise, but there really is only so much you can say about waffles.

I can go to bed tonight with a clear conscience.

Thank you, my odd but strangly unintelligible friends. You have brought me peace.

Mira said...

I don't know if anyone's noticed, but I'm practicing writing comedy on Nathan's blog.

The situations here strike me as hilarious sometimes. The muse swoops in. I also find that the subtle pressure, and the feeling of pushing the envelope doesn't hurt.

Hope it doesn't bug anyone.

But writing comedy is hard sometimes. Sometimes it flows like water, other times it gets all clunky.

I think the trick is to not push it. Well, I'm still learning the trick of it.

Anyway, thanks for putting up with my practicing. Thanks especially to Nathan.

Whirlochre said...

Most of the tropes have been tackled in an ironic way too.

Newbee said...

I could say so much on this topic today. But,...this is what I will say... I do agree with you Nathan. People want something like other famous books out there, but different. I hope to have such a thing. In creating my story, this was exactly my thought process. (Fingers Crossed)...Hopefully hitting the nail on the head.

knight_tour said...

This resonated strongly with me. On the writing forum I frequent one cannot post any query or chapter sample with an elf or a dragon in it without people criticizing the work as derivative. I would argue that there are many fantasy lovers, including myself, who love the traditional elements of fantasy, such as trolls, goblins, wizards and so on. In fantasy, at least, I wish they would stop harping on originality so much and focus on the freshness of the story.

Neil said...

Wow, did anyone see this (from The Guardian): "Random House...yesterday announced the record-breaking first print run of 6.5 million copies of The Lost Symbol, Dan Brown's follow-up to The Da Vinci Code...an unprecedented number for a new fiction title." 6.5 MILLION. Muh-illion. Whatever you want to say about Dan Brown's writing -- and the guy certainly has his detractors -- that's a LOT of books. What I want to hope for out of this is that this print run translates into massive blockbusting sales, and therefore Random House has much more spare cash to spend on new, exciting, emerging authors. At least, that's what they *should* be doing with the profits. I can dream...

knight_tour said...

Sorry to add another comment, but I just saw Vic K's comments about fantasy readers wanting completely new takes on plots. I agree that many fantasy readers do want that, but I would argue that there are a great many who disagree. When I read the back cover of a fantasy novel and see something like 'dragons in the age of Napoleon', my eyes glaze over and I drop it right back on the shelf. To me, that may be 'original' but it doesn't feel authentic to me. I think there are a good number of fantasy lovers who prefer a great new story but set in a traditional, realistic setting. One can complain about an author putting dwarves in mountains as derivative, but I would say that this is just where dwarves live. You can make a story about dwarves living in high rises, and I am sure you would find an audience, but I wouldn't read it. Different tastes and all that.

Anonymous said...

In response to Vic.

An admirable championing of the fantasy genre, but for those of us on the outside looking in, the positives that you site are possibly the very barriers we can't/won't overcome.

I consciously swerve any book with an innovative or 'high' concept (as I do with films), whether that be Wizard Schools, or dragons in Napoleonic era France.

The best new book I've read in the last year could be summed up as 'a cross-continental family saga'. Nothing there that sounds innovative or even particularly interesting, but I bought 'The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao' because I heard it was brilliantly written. And it was. Completely.

Not trying to start an inter-genre war (I respect anyone's thirst for books) just pointing out that one man's meat is another man's poison.

Simon

Kate said...

A fascinating post, thanks.

It's interesting how the same idea can be told in so many different ways. I've used the same basic concepts in more than one of my stories and always been surprised at how redically different the end result can be!

Christine H said...

I totally agree with knight-tour on the fantasy stuff. If I saw a book about dwarves in high rises, I would put it down, too.

Fantasy has its rules, just as real life does. These rules are not arbitrary, but are the product of hundreds of years of lore and cultural presence. Even Tolkein's elves - the big, strong, magical people not in the least like Santa's - were based on Norse mythology.

I am writing fantasy. I never really thought I would. But this story has very real, living characters in it who are the focus of the story. Any magic or mystical stuff is sort of incidental to the plot.

What makes fantasy work as a genre is the way it takes us out of ourselves and the real world we have to deal with every day, and puts the distilled concepts of truth, loyalty, love, honor, etc. into a setting in which they can be more easily understood.

I have no elves or dwarves. I invented my own race, and their own language. I don't know if that's original enough to count as something totally different, but I'm hoping the story itself will move my readers into feeling they were a part of my world for a little while.

Aden fath! Have Faith!

Vic K said...

Responding to knight_tour and Simon;

Thanks guys, for your comments. It's great to be opening a wider discussion on the subject of fantasy.

Knight_tour, it's interesting to hear you think there is a market out there for readers who prefer the same-old same-old. Clearly you're right, or Paolini wouldn't be able to make a sale. I'd love to see some solid statistics on this, but I've heard that fantasy readers are split rather interestingly across a gender bias line; male readers apparently prefer the basic archetypes provided by Tolkien, Terry Brooks and the like - elves, dwarves, wizards and so on. Female readers are apparently looking for more innovative concepts.

I'd like to think there is room for all styles of fantasy on the shelf, but I'm beginning to think that might not be so as publishers tighten their belts. I have to hope that their direction will lie in choosing more interesting and concept-driven works of originality going forward. If only because I am certain there are wonderful ideas out there I haven't read yet that I'm going to love... and I'd rather be falling in love with something new than re-reading the same old stuff written slightly differently.

For the record, I would rather not write than have a elf, wizard, troll or orc in my work. I'm all for making up new and fresh monsters myself.

The point you are making is along the lines of what Nathan is saying, but let me ask you this; if you have no new worlds or creatures or concepts, and we've more or less agreed there are only seven basic storylines... how do you make your work stand out from the crowd on a fantasy shelf?

(I'm not saying it can't be done, but surely it is just as difficult thinking up a new way to say the same old stuff as it is to think up new stuff altogether?)


Simon, I absolutely agree one man's meat is another man's poison. However, I read widely and across numerous genres. I hope you do too, because some of the loveliest writing out there is sitting on the fantasy shelves.

I'd like to think every writer reads widely and respectfully. There's beautiful writing to be found in fantasy, just as there is in literary classics and erotic romance novels.

The reason I write fantasy is because I enjoy the freedom it gives me to say what I want to say about life, living and the world, but wrapped up inside another world. The egg of truth hidden inside the egg of the fantastic, as it were. Sometimes 'high' concepts can be a way of delivering a rather interesting truth.

I don't think I (or any other writer) are less or more because we've chosen to write in the field of genre fiction.


Vic K

Mechelle Avey said...

Pattie Garner said...

Okay Nathan, so this has nothing to do with your topic--sorry--but that's why I like you. I want a serious answer. When do you give up? When do you realize you just aren't going to get an agent and your writing sucks? How do you come to terms with that simple fact?--

----
Pattie,

You give up when they pry the keyboard (or pen, or other writing instrument) from your cold, dead fingers. Writing is a disease. You can run, but you cannot hide. What most of us must realize is that, while Nathan educates and advocates traditional routes for publication, there are limits to the number of writers that traditional publication can support. Books have life cycles in publishing and attention spans are limited. By way of example, my child applied to Georgetown U. Really wanted to go. Even looked good enough on paper for an interview. Unfortunately, didn't get accepted. Why? Because there were 19,000 other kids applying for 2,000 spaces. Does that mean my child is not smart? Of course not. She got accepted to a great school. She is still doing what she wants to do. All writers struggle with self-image because we get rejected so much. You may be a bad writer. Then again, maybe you're a good writer and you just need to find that one publisher or agent. If you give up, you won't ever know. And, having your book in a bookstore is not the only way to be a writer. You can write a blog. You can write stories in your creativity journal. You can write on the bathroom wall (just don't get caught). Writing for an audience of one is still writing for an audience. I guess what I'm trying to say is, don't give up. Not yet. Reevaluate, yes. Refine, yes. Relearn. Rewrite, but don't give up.

Christine H said...

I also just want to add a quick comment about Tolkein, since Nathan mentioned him as having "invented" a whole new genre.

I just want to point out that he did this by breaking all the rules. He wrote a very long, very descriptive work that takes 6 books to contain it. And he took a lot of criticism for it, but basically he was out to please himself. He says his was "the desire of a tale-teller to try his hand at a really long story."

He wrote LOTR over a period of 13 years, during which he was employed full time in a very demanding position and had to tend to all the needs of family and such that all of us do, as well as getting through WWII along with the rest of Britain.

I felt much better when I found out the "13 years" bit, since I'm on my third year of my little piece.

He drew on his own experiences as a soldier in WWI for the narrative, which causes the obsession with terrain, weather, and food to make sense. As I explained to my ten-year-old nephew, getting from place to place wasn't easy when you had no cars or McDonald's! You really did have to worry about these details, or you could die before you got where you were going. Especially a soldier.

The dead bodies in the water were drawn from his memories of the dead in rain-filled trenches.

With all that said, I skimmed a lot of the books on the first couple of readings, but what I skimmed were the battle scenes. I read it for the wonderful descriptions, the characters and the poetry.

The books were published in the fifties, but didn't actually become popular until the post-Vietnam era, when people were suddenly trying to make sense of the horrible things that had happened. Suddenly, LOTR became culturally relevant. Forty years later, we have these blockbuster movies and the phenomenon is still going strong.

My point: Don't be afraid to break the rules, but don't be upset if people don't respond right away, either. And... establish yourself first!

Matthew R. Loney said...

At the same time, I don't believe that many publishers give off the impression that experimentation - formally or otherwise - is a fruitful endeavor. Up here in Canada, we seem to have a formula for how to write if you ever want to get published.

Fresh takes on old tropes are great, but the odd run-on sentence or dropping quotation marks seem to be token gestures so that the literary world can still call itself "art" without having to take a risk.

Experimentation has to be encouraged before it can flourish. And then turn into a trope of its own....

Ulysses said...

"It would be an interesting exercise to give a group of writers the concept of a story, then see the different directions they each choose to run with."

For those of you who find this idea fascinating, you may wish to check out Thema Magazine. Their concept is simple: they propose a theme (eg: "The box under the bed." "Not recognized at the airport.") for each issue, and that issue contains stories written around that theme. The variations are remarkable, and one theme was the springboard for one of my own published short stories.

knight_tour said...

Responding to Vic:

I am not saying that the traditionalists like bad writing (I won't direct this at Paolini since I have not read him, but this may apply to him from what I have read). We like authenticity and great writing, such as George R.R. Martin, Fritz Leiber, or Ursula Le Guin to name but a few. My only real point was that I am dismayed when critters on forums cut someone to ribbons in the fantasy genre for being 'derivative' when there may be nothing wrong at all with the writing, and I suspect many agents would also hit 'reject' right away on many such fantasy stories, failing to understand that there is a huge audience out here craving more. I know it won't ever be possible, but I would love to see a great writer take some of the more general pieces from Tolkien's Silmarillion and flesh them out into true books. I also appreciated McKiernan, even though his Iron Tower trilogy was clearly derivative of Tolkien - he was giving us more of what we craved.

Terri Nixon said...

Just wanted to address this:

T. Anne said...

It would be an interesting exercise to give a group of writers the concept of a story, then see the different directions they each choose to run with.
This kind of thing goes on all the time on writing forums, it's a really interesting exercise. On the Kelley Armstrong forum, for instance, we have a word count, a topic and one or two 'rules' and then all go off for 2 weeks with those. After that time all the stories are posted (anonymously) and we all vote for our favourite.
It's astonishing how different the stories will be, given the strictness of the guidelines.

Simon said...

FAO Vic K

thanks for the well reasoned response. Of course you're bang on about reading widely, and I would like to think I do (European AND American literary fiction, ha!)

I'm sure there are great works within the fantasy cannon, it's just I won't feel compelled to read them until I run out of great literature that doesn't contain elves.

I'm sure that's a frustrating response, and I'm not intending to be willfully obtuse, it's just where I'm at.

In my defense I would add that my favourite book of all time could probably be summarised in the single line: the devil comes to Moscow.

and I'm currently writing something with a mermaid in it, so maybe I'm in need of some genre re-allignment therapy

Simon

Anonymous said...

In response to Vic.
I'm a female fantasy reader/writer and I love elves, dwarves, wizards and dragons and would be greatly disappointed if they were ever completely removed from the fantasy genre. Fresher stories with some familiar concepts is just fine with me.
Oh, and I enjoyed Eargon. It wasn't wonderful, but I enjoyed it and it wasn't until the later books when he lost me (boy needs to listen to his editor :P). Just throwing that out there. :)
-JS
(Long time reader, first time poster. Nathan, I love your blog!)

PurpleClover said...

Sorry Mira -

It was after midnight so I went to bed. I didn't mean to leave you hanging but I thought you got the joke.

I was referring to a restraining order. ;)

I hate when I have to explain punchlines...cause then it means I was laughing alone. :(

csmith said...

@purpleclover

Nope. Was laughing right along with you and polishing the ice-cream patterned fluffy restraints for Mira's arrival!

Sooki Scott said...

No laughing alone for PurpleClover. Like csmith, I got it, too. I chuckled aloud.





Confucius says, "He who speaks without modesty will find it difficult to make his words good."

Mechelle Avey said...

Pattie --

Don't give up, that is, unless you're seriously depressed and considering ending it all because some agent or editor crushed your dreams. In that case, it may be time to take a break. Or take a break from submitting stories. As I thought about my previous post, it occurred to me that no one can tell you when, or if, you should give up. That's your decision. The only thing Nathan, or any of us, can do is tell you about The Others. You know The Others, don't you? Stephen King is one of The Others. He threw Carrie into the garbage because he didn't think he could finish it. He wanted to give up. His wife pulled the story from the trash. She told him to get his butt in gear and finish (my words). That's what he did. Ultimately, he sold the story for an insultingly low advance, and the rest is history. Carrie earned $400,000 during its first year in publication (at least according to Wikipedia). There are many stories like this in publishing. The Others are the ones who get discouraged, think about giving up, but don't. Eventually, they make peace with the writing life. They get published or produced. They find a bathroom wall and write their magnum opus. Maybe you, too, are an Other. Maybe you can add to the writer legends, the ones that keep us all going when we get discouraged. Anyway, whether you stick out the rough patch, or strike gold using your creativity in a different way, I wish you luck.

Mira said...

Purple Clover -

Restraining order? That's okay. I don't need to put out a restraining order on Nathan.

Thanks for the thought though. But really, he's been very appropriate in his communications with me.

So, anyway, it's almost breakfast time. I was thinking of just showing up at his house and surprising him. What do you think? Yes, I agree, I think that's a great idea.

Mira said...

Mechelle, that's a great story about Stephen King. I didn't know that.

I thought everything you said to Pattie was in both posts was really well-spoken.

I also want to add one thing though. Let's say the worst is true. You are a bad writer.

So?

Get better.

Musicians practice for hours every day. They do scales over and over and over just to get it right.

But writers sometimes feel that if it's a natural gift, it should be effortless.

I don't think so. For most people, talent is something that is developed and honed over time.

Even if you were a 'bad' writer, that's not a static condition.

Become a better one.

csmith said...

@Mira

Well said. Nothing is effortless. Writing is hard graft.

xx

coppervale said...

I asked Neil Gaiman to write an intro to my second graphic novel (which he did), because of all the negative letters I'd been getting for the issues being reprinted.

A lot of people were utterly CONVINCED that I had stolen two characters, Oberon and Titania, from Neil's SANDMAN, and they were terribly offended that I would just lift his creations that way.

Neil explained in the intro that I didn't steal them from him - that we'd BOTH gotten them from Shakespeare, who got them from someone ELSE. That's the nature of stories. We take what we find, and borrow, steal, reinterpret, reinvent, and eventually (hopefully) produce something that is a unique product of our own sensibilities.

Mira said...

csmith,

thanks. your comment was well-said, too.

Christine H said...

Um, Mira, sweetie... Nathan's not going to have lunch with you. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is.

Come back to CIC and I'll have Faldur make you a sandwich.

(Just kidding... I have to work now.)

Wonderful discussion here. I'm totally addicted and am prying my fingers off the keyboard... right... now...

Mira said...

Christine H,

Duh. I know Nathan's not going to have lunch with me.

We're meeting for breakfast.

Oh. I should get ready.

Laura Martone said...

I agree that nothing is completely original - but stories can be told in such a way (perhaps in a different time, by reversing gender roles, etc.) that they might feel like an original concept. You see this in movies all the time - "Clueless" serving as an updated, valley-girl version of "Emma" / "West Side Story" as the urban musical take on "Romeo and Juliet".

But, with the queries we read, I wasn't just looking for originality; I was looking for an intriguing story told by a professionally-minded writer. Although I considered #9 for a long time, I ultimately wanted to know more about the author, and the query was lacking in that department. #39 was a much better query - as far as structure, info about the author, etc. - but the idea simply didn't grab me, and while I thought there were better YA concepts in the "Be an Agent for a Day" group, I did appreciate the personal touch in #21.

Even before the contest, I knew how difficult an agent's job must be - to find a "gem" in a one-page letter - which is, I'm sure, why many agents (like NB) require the first few pages of the manuscript. Then, with the query, five (or more) pages, and perhaps a brief synopsis, the author at least has a fighting chance to convince an agent of his talent/worth/whatever, and an agent has a better sense of the rest of the book. Then, everybody's happy, right?

Laurel said...

In defense of Paolini:

He's taking a lot of hits here. I liked his books. I don't imagine they will ever make a high school required reading list, but they were fun for me to read. At the end of the day it seems not a bad strategy: write a book you would like to read.

Possession was an amazing book. I don't see how anyone could read it and not be floored with Byatt's accomplishment. I thoroughly enjoyed it but it wasn't as fun as Eragon.

And finally, he started that series when he was SEVENTEEN. No college degree, no MFA, nothing but a love of the genre and an idea he wanted to flesh out. He thought it would be cool to have a dragon. He couldn't get published by anyone so he self-pubbed and sold enough books on his own to attract the attention of a publisher. If either one of my kids pulls that off at age seventeen I will be very, very proud.

There seems to be a lot of focus on concept and originality while everyone laments their inability to get an agent. I don't know what agents are really looking for but since I buy books I assume it should bear some resemblence to what I look for. It's great to be ambitious but I don't always want a Pulitzer caliber book. Obviously I am not alone. Heard of Twilight? Honestly, which one of us didn't pick that up in the bookstore, read the back cover, and snicker as we put it back on the shelf? A few months later I read it and bought the other three although I was pretty ashamed of myself for liking them.

And regarding getting published, self pub is intimidating but getting easier all the time, especially with POD and ebooks drastically reducing the cost associated with a classic first print. It sounds like there are so many fantastic books out there that I have never heard of because no one will take a chance on them. How unfair! Come on, people, help the unwashed masses get what they want. Get your books out there!

Nathan Bransford said...

I also liked ERAGON, and what I think was unique about it was its innocent, fun spirit. It was more than just good relative to his age, he really captured the wide-eyed wonderment that you feel when you're that age. It was more than the sum of its parts.

There is fantasy that has a fun spirit and fantasy with dragons, but ERAGON really captures and embodies that teenage time where everything seems possible.

Laurel said...

I think you hit the nail on the head, Nathan. Eragon was the best of the three published so far and I never could put my finger on it. The other two just feel a tad too "epic fantasy." Still good, though.

Mira said...

Eragon, for me, was alright. I kept thinking it felt derivative - but - that may have to do with my gender. I've noticed that men tend to like it more than women do.

That's not based on scientific data, just an impression.

But in this case, I think Paolini captured a sort of fantasy that really speaks to men - or the young man inside them.

Mira said...

Obviously not only men, Laurel. Sorry. I'm not saying it's exlusive.

I just find there's a wish fulfillment element to most fantasy, especially YA fantasy. I think Paolini captured something in Eragon that really resonated with a certain yearning young men have.

Sort of like: Toy Story.

I think women can appreciate it, and many love it, but it's really a guy's archtype.

Laurel said...

Mira,

No offense taken. I think you're probably right. That is also one of the elements of fantasy that I really like. Most fantasy authors aren't afraid to write characters that are better than real people. The books I like best hold humanity to a higher standard by setting an example. I don't really mind if the example battles evil dragons and immortal war lords. And if he has a crush on a hot elf, that works, too!

And obviously gender plays a big part in who buys books. I don't know any men who've read Twilight and I would never recommend it to any of the men I know. That also plays to an uber-stereotype a lot of women like: selfless superhero protector guy falls in love with hapless heroine. I do wish the heroine didn't faint quite so much, though.

If I want subtelty, I read Zora Neale Hurston. After putting a 5 and 2 year old to bed I read bestsellers.

Laurel said...

Oh, and Eragon was absolutely derivative. The most original thing about it was that he used EVERY archetype all in the same book. Some of the details reminded me so much of David Eddings that I felt positive he must have read those...turned out I was right. And I didn't care one bit.

PurpleClover said...

Oh yay, not alone in my jokes. Glad someone gets them.

Mira - you are hilarious...but I'm starting to think you are a character and not a real person?? I'm wondering if your blog is a ploy...

*ponders*

Mira said...

Laurel - Really, we all have masculine and feminine parts of us, so any book can speak to any of us.

With Eragon - it also may be generational. The 'hot' book of your time. I know a 21 who loves fantasy, but he couldn't get past chapter one in Tolkien. He ate Eragon up.

Whereas I love Tolkien, and always will - even though it only has two female characters in 3 books.

Btw I know men, a couple of them, that enjoyed Twilight.

Clearly, Eragon absolutely spoke to you. That is cool. I love when I find a book that does that for me.

Mira said...

P.C.

You caught me. I'm not a real person.

I'm, ummmm, let's see. Who am I today?

Oh shoot. I forgot to write myself a note. Today, I was going to be either Scarlett O'hara or Minnie Mouse.

I hate when I forget to tell myself who I am. Now, I'm going to be dealing with existential identity crises all day long.

Sucks.

Laurel said...

Mira,

It's not so much that Eragon "spoke" to me as I really think Nathan is exactly right about originality. Despite the lack of originality, I really enjoyed the book. In the genre I'd have to say the books that spoke to me the most were probably CS Lewis and I was too young to know it at the time. There was also a great book called The Unlikely Ones by Mary Brown that touched me.

I just think we miss out on so much when we read books as critics instead of settling into someone else's fantasy for a little while. Of course, there are books you just can't like for whatever reason and that's different.

Gender preferences are really only an important consideration if you're trying to sell one, not if you're buying one.

How are your lunch plans coming?

Christine H said...

Personally, I think Mira is Mrs. Fettleston's alter ego.

In real life, she crochets doilies and says "dear" a lot.

This whole fantasy discussion has me itching to get back to work on my novel. But I can't. I have to go teach statistics!!! ARRRRGGGHHH!!!

(16 days novel-free and counting.)

Marilyn Peake said...

Christine H said:

Personally, I think Mira is Mrs. Fettleston's alter ego.

In real life, she crochets doilies and says "dear" a lot.
-------------

I've thought the same thing. If Mira were to start a humor blog, she might develop a following. Her humor cracks me up.

Mira, are you still sitting at breakfast? Your pancakes are getting cold.

Mira said...

Christine,

Yes, dear.

Lauren,

My lunch plans. Were actually not lunch plans. They were breakfast plans.

In case, you're wondering what happened, I was stood up.

I was. Nathan did not show for breakfast.

At first, I was a tad miffed. I had prepared a whole breakfast for him. A special one.

First there was the milk, then the sugar, then the Cheerios. It was a production.

But then it dawned on me. There are really only two things that would cause Nathan to stand up a stranger who stalks him on his blog. They are:

a. He has the bubonic plague.

b. There is no other reason.

Nathan. I'm so sorry. I had no idea.

Please go take care of yourself. We'll have breakfast some other time.

Really. Don't say another word about it.

Contrary to how we usually interact.

I just want you to take care of you.

Mira said...

Hi Marilyn,

Thanks for the compliment. Means alot. :-)

I'm going to write a humor book. I just need to nail the concept down.

I created Come In Character to help me do that.

In terms of breakfast, you can see what happened.

Mira said...

Disclaimer:

Just to be very clear here, the above comment that Nathan has the bubonic plague is a joke.

Nathan does not, and most likely never will, have the bubonic plague.

To my knowledge.

He has more than enough just dealing with the scurvy.

Just a joke, too. Nathan does not have scurvy.

This entire exercise was designed to send home to you the very clear message that diseases are nothing to joke about.

No diseased jokes.

Okay?

Good. My work here is done.

Laurel said...

So sorry the cheerios got soggy. Maybe he's not a breakfast guy.

Try showing up with coffee. I get the feeling caffeine is his favorite food group since apparently he never sleeps.

Jovanna said...

What happens if you have absolutely no idea what genre your story is? I feel so ignorant... wait, maybe that's because I am!

New genre? I doubt it, I just don't know what all the genres are because they confuse me, although I have to admit, I haven't quite seen any other stories like mine... but wait again, that might be because I live in a black hole with horrible abridged versions of various classics rewritten for kids, and nothing else to read but the same books over and over and over and over and over the hills and far away. Why are books so hard to come by these days? Why?

Mira, you're humour is affecting me like a sinister contagion, and well, I know I'm bad at humour. sigh. So while I would love to barf up more about campfire DNA that was implanted into aliens by our ancient cave men, I will now retreat back into my black hole and under the trap door where all the bad jokes belong.

Marilyn Peake said...

Mira said:
"I'm going to write a humor book. I just need to nail the concept down."

Excellent!! Sounds wonderful!!

hippokrene said...

Someone else said:

"eg. the perfect murder (you do it with a knife made of ice. don't tell anyone)" How in the world would that be the perfect murder weapon? The police are will notice the stab wound and people have been sentenced for murders when the weapon was never found.

Ben said...

I embrace the tropes. One of my favourite writing exercises is to go to TVTropes.org and select one or more tropes, usually at random, then write something (I say "something" because I don't always produce what resembles a complete story) that uses all of the selected tropes. It's actually very liberating, because it allows me to focus more on the execution and less on the plotting.

Similarly, attempting to avert a trope is a good way to get a story. This isn't the same as being original (since trope aversions are far from original themselves). It's just a way to get two stories out of one trope. And its fun to turn worlds on their heads.

Mira said...

Marilyn -

Thanks!! :-)

Simon said...

FAO: Hippokrene

thanks for kind of illustrating my point. Therein lies the problem of staking the success of your writing on a single device or 'orginal' idea.

There's always a chance someone will point out that it's either a) not that original, or b) a stupid idea that doesn't make sense.

csmith said...

@ Simon:

I don't know if you had the dubious pleasure of seeing "The Apprentice" last night on BBC1 (UK TV). If you want to know exactly what happens to a "stupid idea" which is original just for the sake of it with no thought behind it, it is really something to watch. Because boy did it go down like a lead balloon. Now, don't get me wrong, I rather like originality - what I'm writing now is relatively original (not fanstasy, historical). But because of that, I'm being sure to stick to existing tropes in other areas. People like the familiar, to a greater or lesser extent, in my experience.

All the best,

chris

Simon said...

@ Chris smith

I did have that 'pleasure', albeit watched between my fingers (it was worse than a horror film)

a perfect example of the dangers that can come with an obsessive pursuit for originality.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 211   Newer› Newest»
Related Posts with Thumbnails