The plague of originality

[Garren Jacobsen]

Yes, I said originality can be a plague and I doubt that will me any friends but it is the truth, so far as I can tell. As I peruse and comment on these boards it seems we attack ourselves by not being "original" or we constantly try to force originality into our works and worlds. I did this at one point I have tried to create things that are so original that it becomes surreal. It hurt my writing because originality took over for story, character, and solid writing.

So I ask why do we focus so much on world building and originality rather than story and character building? Is it because, like I did, we fear being deemed derivative and thus not be read? Is it us trying to make ourselves feel better by not writing our works where we preemptively call our works derivative? Or is it something else?

For myself I think it is combination of things but ultimately boils down to fear. We are afraid of rejection. We believe, falsely I think, that if we don't create an original enough magic system, government, or what have you then our works will be disregarded because of them and because of the potential for rejection we world build endlessly looking for something original and if we find something similar we abandon it. Like I almost did with my WIP. We also fear that our writing itself isn't good enough and so we create originality endlessly to make our works go from getting worked on today to be getting worked on someday.

I also wonder what would happen if we made our world building support our story rather than our story to support the world building.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I'm glad you didn't abandon your WIP. Most excellent!

Originality is never found in the plot or the world building. We all stand tall because we stand on the shoulders of giants, as did our forerunners. Where we as writers find our originality is in the unique voices we each bring to the stories we tell. That is where the true fear comes from. Each story is a writer exposing a slice of his or her soul to a merciless would. Not an activity for the feint of heart. But, it is that soul that makes our work truly one of a kind.

And yes, I agree completely. No matter how awesome a world we create, it is always, always, just set decoration for the story. The story rules over all.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

...I ask why do we focus so much on world building and originality rather than story and character building?

My focus is largely placed on character & story. World building, for my writing, plays a supporting role only.

Nothing under the sun is new or original. Not an action or thought. We are spinning new tales from old concepts, a redressing or repackaging, if you will. Acceptance of this can be liberating. Our characters make old ideas (and they're all old ideas) feel fresh because we can care for characters. We sympathize with them and find their interactions with other character types interesting. Yet, even they are not original...just different constructs that share common roots.

That sounds awfully depressing but it's not. Invoking an emotion through art is a pure goal. Whether or not we're building off others, or outright stealing ideas, matters little if you can yank emotion through your readers.

Where we as writers find our originality is in the unique voices we each bring to the stories we tell.

Yes, agreed.

 

[Jabrosky]

For my part, I'm less scared of appearing derivative than sounding repetitive and obsessive. It seems the vast majority of my story ideas share with each other certain themes, subject matter, or settings, which may be a symptom of my Asperger's Syndrome (we tend to fixate on a small number of topics). That probably wouldn't cause so many problems except that I've had people call me a monomaniacal one-trick pony and mock me for it. It's one thing to put your own spin on classic tropes you love, but I worry that writing what I want will bore everyone else.

 

[ecdavis]

Really, in our modern world, there are very few completely original ideas for fantasy stories. The number of people who are writing has increased dramatically over the years and with computers and the Internet, not to mention such stuff as graphic novels, television series and movies, I'm sure that most of us could pick apart something in a new novel that we felt was 'not original'. I agree 100% with you Brian; we need to focus more on characters and the story rather than worry about someone freaking out that they have read something similar some place else.

Take for example, the 'classic' vampire story; so many times they are just retelling 'Dracula', but that doesn't mean that there aren't well told variants that are worthy to be read. The same applies to Fantasy. How many times have we seen the typical 'dark lord who threatens the world, but a band of unlikely heroes travels across the world to either 1.) destroy a magic item 2.)find a magic item 3.) rescue someone that will stop him.' ? But there are many books that have used this timeless theme and are considered masterpieces. I think it is the characters and how well they are developed, combined with the movement and feel of the way the story is written.

It can get crazy if you constantly try to find patterns to stories and criticize them for their similarity. I saw a large number of parallels between 'Avatar' and 'Dances With Wolves' and much of the story-line is the same (An outsider to a culture finds his place within that culture and then defends his new people against his former culture). Yet I liked both movies due to character development and the way both were filmed. The same goes for fantasy books.

 

[Xaysai]

I've been thinking a lot lately about all of the rules and advice we give each other on these forums, and I think the most difficult part of writing for me so far has been learning: never always do something.

Speech tags are "bad" (but sometimes necessary)
Adverbs are "bad" (but sometimes necessary)
An opening with no hook is "bad" (but many of the greatest works ever written don't have one)
Works that lack originality are derivative (while everything is derivative, regardless)
"Show, don't tell" (unless it's one of those times you NEED TO TELL)

Etc., etc.

I'm beginning to believe that mastering the art of writing is more about knowing when it's acceptable to go against the generally accepted convention than when not to.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

For my part, I'm less scared of appearing derivative than sounding repetitive and obsessive. It seems the vast majority of my story ideas share with each other certain themes, subject matter, or settings, which may be a symptom of my Asperger's Syndrome (we tend to fixate on a small number of topics). That probably wouldn't cause so many problems except that I've had people call me a monomaniacal one-trick pony and mock me for it. It's one thing to put your own spin on classic tropes you love, but I worry that writing what I want will bore everyone else.

To quote one of my own characters,

"There's nothing wrong with being a one trick pony, as long as it's one heck of a trick." ~ Bridget Mulcahy, Fire Mage

Write what you want to read. You're not the only one who wants to read it. I, also, tend to write on certain themes and subject matter. The nature of good and evil, families, sexuality, redemption... these themes appear over and over again in my work. Am I worried about boring people? Naw. I also (probably) have Asperger's. I've been called a lot of things in my life - boring has never been one of them.

 

[Ophiucha]

For my part, I'm less scared of appearing derivative than sounding repetitive and obsessive. It seems the vast majority of my story ideas share with each other certain themes, subject matter, or settings, which may be a symptom of my Asperger's Syndrome (we tend to fixate on a small number of topics). That probably wouldn't cause so many problems except that I've had people call me a monomaniacal one-trick pony and mock me for it. It's one thing to put your own spin on classic tropes you love, but I worry that writing what I want will bore everyone else.

I empathize with that a lot - there are a few things I just... stick with. And they're sort of strange, specific things? Like, I really like space and all of my fantasy stories have elaborate zodiacs and often have a sort of 'Tower of Babel' myth and occasionally are even looking into rocket science. I always have a mute character, often one of the main characters. And it's like I can't help it? I'll start with something completely unrelated and then it'll just come together, naturally, that of course the MC should be mute and I, like, justify it by bringing it in with one of the themes I had established or something. I haven't published most of my stories, so my first book will be fine, but I'm sort of worried about what my second book will be like...

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I empathize with that a lot - there are a few things I just... stick with. And they're sort of strange, specific things? Like, I really like space and all of my fantasy stories have elaborate zodiacs and often have a sort of 'Tower of Babel' myth and occasionally are even looking into rocket science. I always have a mute character, often one of the main characters. And it's like I can't help it? I'll start with something completely unrelated and then it'll just come together, naturally, that of course the MC should be mute and I, like, justify it by bringing it in with one of the themes I had established or something. I haven't published most of my stories, so my first book will be fine, but I'm sort of worried about what my second book will be like...

I would say that by the time you get that first book out of your system, you'll have found some new, fun thing to obsess over. That's part of the adventure. And if you still have the need to work with your mute character? Series, babe! I hear they're gonna be big.

 

[Ophiucha]

Well, I mean, I've finished like three books with mute protagonists and I haven't kicked it yet. I'm just sort of hoping by the time I publish any of them I can move on to... blind protagonists, or something. Maybe that can be my thing, different sense-based disabilities.

@Topic, I tend to agree that the worldbuilding should support the story and characters, first and foremost. But I think it may be a bad sign if the best 'support' for your story is a generic medieval fantasy setting. Not necessarily a sign that you should just add some elaborate dragon biology and a fully-fledged economy so much as 'how original is your story if the best place for it is the most bland setting of the genre'? Because every story will develop originality on its own, but you need a somewhat original starting place in order to go anywhere new with it naturally. There's a balance, as with all things in writing.

 

[saellys]

My The Stone Front writers and I sent an excerpt to our beta readers a couple weeks ago. It's a "slow" scene with people talking in a castle, and it deals with a matter of succession in a noble family. Nothing even remotely groundbreaking.

A friend of mine, my favorite beta ever, worth her weight in gold for her laser-precise critique on the micro, macro, and meta levels, mentioned that she couldn't see the "big different thing" that set our medieval fantasy novel apart from other medieval fantasy novels. She was totally right. She could probably say the same thing about most of the rest of the novel, in fact! And you know what? I don't mind.

I know which parts of this story feel new and fresh to me, and I know what my co-authors and I are trying to accomplish in the form of our tone, our themes, and our characters. More importantly, I know where this story is going and what I want from it, and I'm not interested in introducing some big, different new element in the hope of hooking more readers. Moreover, we're not seeking a publisher, so we don't have to worry about mass marketability, and we want our fanbase to grow organically based on the strength of our story.

So while I do hope that my friend wasn't so bored by the excerpt that she will avoid giving us feedback in the future, I chose to give that portion of her critique a very low priority. The quest for originality is endless and futile. Write your story and believe in it--your conviction will carry you further than a gimmick ever could.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Well, yeah, I'll have to agree with that. There IS such a thing as not putting in any effort.

Edit: Oops! That was in reply to Ophi.

 

[Jabrosky]

I can easily avoid the medieval stereotype because medieval Europe isn't even my favorite time and place for a setting. I tend to specialize in the ancient Nile Valley or other regions of Africa.

 

[Alexandra]

... So I ask why do we focus so much on world building and originality rather than story and character building? Is it because, like I did, we fear being deemed derivative and thus not be read? Is it us trying to make ourselves feel better by not writing our works where we preemptively call our works derivative? Or is it something else?

For myself I think it is combination of things but ultimately boils down to fear ...

Yes, but not of rejection but of work. Real work. The kind of writers' work which breathes life into characters great and small and forces the reader to read on late into the night because you're telling such a rippin' good yarn. Spending hours fussing over the names of your gods or how the currency works or whether your magic system "makes sense" are simple diversions from the more important task at hand–convincing me that I should care about your characters, and that I must know what happens next. World building can aid and abet the greater goals, but that's all.

Don't get me wrong, I world build too. The world of The Songs... is loosely based on early medieval western Europe; I studied history in school and gravitated towards this time for a number of reasons, now I use what I've learned over the years to create settings which will encourage my readers to suspend their disbelief then be seduced by the characters and the narrative. World building for me involves closing my eyes and imagining what I need; I take copious notes because I've a poor memory. Often historical writings back up what I've imagined or clarifies a social or technological point–history can be a great friend to the fantasy writer.

 

[Ireth]

As a fellow Aspie, I can definitely sympathize with the "one-trick pony" idea. The majority of my current WIPs include either vampires, Fae, or both. I've tried to write about other things like lycanthropes and intelligent wolves, but both of those stories have stalled. :/

 

[Jabrosky]

How many times have we seen the typical 'dark lord who threatens the world, but a band of unlikely heroes travels across the world to either 1.) destroy a magic item 2.)find a magic item 3.) rescue someone that will stop him.' ? But there are many books that have used this timeless theme and are considered masterpieces. I think it is the characters and how well they are developed, combined with the movement and feel of the way the story is written.

In addition, some tropes persist because they are inherently appealing. Take quests for example. They provide both writer and reader with the opportunity to explore an richly detailed imaginary world, and who can resist that?

I will admit to feeling more ambivalent about the magic doohickey at the end though. If I could write an exploratory quest story that didn't necessitate finding some supernatural thingamabob, I would.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I've been thinking a lot lately about all of the rules and advice we give each other on these forums, and I think the most difficult part of writing for me so far has been learning: never always do something.

Speech tags are "bad" (but sometimes necessary)
Adverbs are "bad" (but sometimes necessary)
An opening with no hook is "bad" (but many of the greatest works ever written don't have one)
Works that lack originality are derivative (while everything is derivative, regardless)
"Show, don't tell" (unless it's one of those times you NEED TO TELL)

Etc., etc.

I'm beginning to believe that mastering the art of writing is more about knowing when it's acceptable to go against the generally accepted convention than when not to.

When you figure out where your ideals lie on topics like these, you're on your way to finding your own unique voice.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

If I could write an exploratory quest story that didn't necessitate finding some supernatural thingamabob, I would.

Solving mysteries....seeking revenge or justice...anything like these different non-item related quests you find in other genres, can be applied to fantasy writing.

 

[danr62]

[Understatement]Our own Michael Sullivan did alright with a generic medieval setting. [\understatement]

Having a generic element isn't the kiss of death. Michael has said that he chose the medieval setting specifically because it was something fantasy readers would easily and readily accept. He didn't want to have to spend a ton of time educating readers about the world. Instead, he dove right in with character and plot and kept the narrative tight.

 

[Mythopoet]

Yes, I said originality can be a plague and I doubt that will me any friends but it is the truth, so far as I can tell. As I peruse and comment on these boards it seems we attack ourselves by not being "original" or we constantly try to force originality into our works and worlds. I did this at one point I have tried to create things that are so original that it becomes surreal. It hurt my writing because originality took over for story, character, and solid writing.

So I ask why do we focus so much on world building and originality rather than story and character building? Is it because, like I did, we fear being deemed derivative and thus not be read? Is it us trying to make ourselves feel better by not writing our works where we preemptively call our works derivative? Or is it something else?

For myself I think it is combination of things but ultimately boils down to fear. We are afraid of rejection. We believe, falsely I think, that if we don't create an original enough magic system, government, or what have you then our works will be disregarded because of them and because of the potential for rejection we world build endlessly looking for something original and if we find something similar we abandon it. Like I almost did with my WIP. We also fear that our writing itself isn't good enough and so we create originality endlessly to make our works go from getting worked on today to be getting worked on someday.

I also wonder what would happen if we made our world building support our story rather than our story to support the world building.

I wouldn't call originality a plague, though I do believe that it is highly overrated. It is also impossible. As the poet said, there is nothing new under the sun. Or as Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "All my best thoughts were stolen by the ancients". No matter how new an interesting an idea feels to you there's probably someone out there who has done it before, though you may not be aware of it. That doesn't mean you can't take that idea and make it fresh and new all over again. Perspective and voice IS originality in fiction.

There is danger in striving for originality. If you're trying too hard to be original readers are likely to notice because your storytelling will feel contrived. As C.S. Lewis said, "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."

I am, however, wondering what an emphasis on worldbuilding has to do with anything? You can create over wrought fiction by striving for originality in plot or character just as much as in setting.