A little bit of background for this topic: from my teenage years into my early 20s I was a prolific writer and artist. I wrote dozens of short stories, fanfics, and even a full length novel which I never posted publicly. I drew a lot, too. I would never consider myself ‘good’ at either discipline, but I’d say I reached the lofty heights of ‘passable’.
Unfortunately, you need to make a living in this world, so I put all that aside for about 10 years to become a software developer. I was still consuming a lot of media, though, and still do to this day. Like you guys, I lamented the wokeification of games, films, and books, and frequently discussed it with people in my personal life. I kept coming around to the same conclusion: ‘If we’re not happy with the stories the mainstream are providing, we need to create our own’.
Fast forward to today, I’m at a position in my career where I’ve automated a lot of things so that I have more free time. A few months ago my wandering mind was struck by a bolt of inspiration from the blue, and for the first time in ages I felt the desire to create again. As I sat down and organised my ideas, though, I realised that I was (consciously and sub-consciously) pulling elements from media which I have enjoyed and combining them into my own story. It’s very difficult to put a number on these things, but if I had to estimate I’d say about 60% of my ideas come from media, 40% from my own personal experiences. Of course, I did the same thing as a teenager, but I’m a bit more self-aware now than I was back then.
My question to you guys is, do you care about originality for its own sake, or does it have more to do with how a story is told? When I think about my favourite stories, some of them are extremely trite and tropey, but they are told masterfully well. Is it even possible to be truly original in such a media-saturated world as ours?
For what it’s worth, I don’t intend to shake the foundations of the world with my story, I just want to tell a good one that isn’t full of woke BS.
I’ve seen so much subvert garbage that I’d value a white male hero fighting evil orcs more than you could possibly imagine.
Yes, there is a lot to be said for playing things straight in this day and age.
Execution is far more important. Most "original" things are highly derivative of other works even if they seem original.
Yup. If you are d genre fiction junkie like me you are be definition into unoriginal things. Bad execution ruins interesting ideas.
This. Gothic is a perfect example for that. It has one of the most run of the mill stories you can get but has great characters, atmosphere and world building (gameplay-wise). The only original thing about the first game is the prison colony setting.
Writes Epic story.
Literally the Odyssey
I think you're right. True 'originality', whatever that might be, is fundamentally impossible, because we are products of our cultures. You're always going to be building on the shoulders of giants, no matter what you do.
One of my art teachers once told me that the way you develop a style is to find things you like that other people have made, steal them for yourself, and make them your own. Things that we consider "Original" tend to rely more on the unique perspective of the storyteller than the components of the story itself.
I think of Tolkien. He set out to create a mythology, and he succeeded with flying colors. But he built it off of other mythologies and languages that he studied and learned from. Look at hobbits. The idea of little people who live in caves and burrows wasn't exactly new. But making them civilized and having well-maintained, comfortable homes puts a clever new spin on the concept, making them both familiar and alien at the same time.
I think of games. Nobody would say that the New Super Mario Bros games feel bad to play, but people got sick of them around NSMBU, because they were becoming stale and repetitive. Then Super Mario Bros Wonder comes out, and played almost the same way. But the new presentation and mixing in new (and forgotten) concepts and mechanics breathed new life into the series! Sometimes, all it takes is a new perspective on the same, solid foundation to make it feel original and fresh.
Making something "original" usually boils down to taking something and presenting it from a new angle that isn't often considered. So don't worry about being "unoriginal." If the bar for originality was truly "Has never been seen before in the history of the world!" than nonsensical modern "art" would truly be the peak of culture.
That's definitely been my experience of developing an art style, so I can attest to that at least. To some degree I guess it's impossible to create a work which is completely derivative, as elements of the author's unique perspective will always shine through, even if you're deliberately attempting to copy something.
Depends on the medium, and how samey it is. If it's incredibly derivative, it makes fresh and original stuff pop more. But, even then, if the medium is enjoyable, I'll still enjoy the non-original stuff too. Anime is a perfect example. A ton of anime can be described perfectly by the phrase you used, trite and tropey. So an anime that shakes that up definitely stands out, and the originally is a selling point. But, the trite and tropey stuff is good too.
Point is, "originality" matters less than most people think...but can also be the standout feature. So, while far from meaningless, it's also largely optional. You of course can't do a complete copy/paste (unless you're writing women's romance fanfiction, I guess), but it also doesn't have to be super original to be good.
So, my take is, create what you want, and don't worry about "originality." Let it unfold as you go, and if something original falls into place, all the better. But it's not required.
As someone who is a fan of the Trails JRPG series, I completely agree with the need for 'comfort food' when it comes to storytelling. That story is as overwrought and tropey as it gets, but sometimes you don't want to be challenged by a story, you just want a nice, comfy setting where the good guys are good and the bad guys are bad. As you say, anime is great for those kind of self-indulgent, comfortable stories, but it can also sometimes completely blow your expectations out of the water. There's a place for both kinds, I suppose.
I used to value it more, but at this point we are getting a mountain of unique stories that are also shit. I've come to value quality over originality.
I think it's also more so that novelty is confused for originality these days. Modern "artists" and authors are novel in that they create outlandish and flowery stories not because the story or medium demands it, but for the sake of getting attention by being "different" and "unique." It's like a cubist painting in contrast to a Rafaellian fresco, or a modern abstract sculpture compared to Michelangelo's David. But since originality demands actual experience and imagination, along with volumes of time, effort, and technique, which modern creators are either lacking in or aren't willing to commit to, novelty has unfortunately become the norm.
Yeah, I hear you. One could argue that a lot of progressive stories are 'original' in a perverse kind of way. That doesn't make them good.
I don't need much originality in the themes or character archetypes (unless its particularly insightful and also something obscure/unexplored), but I do expect at least some in the setting, context, and world. Nothing huge is necessary, but at least enough to make what you've created feel distinct and memorable so it can stand out.
I will say one of my favorite video game stories is Fire Emblem 7, and that's basically as stereotypical medieval fantasy as you can get in a lot of respects (minus one of the concepts behind the dragons I guess but it's still a series trope, and maybe the Morphs too), it's just executed incredibly well and hits hard imo. Plus the setting is memorable and unique because of the sum of its parts, even if individually the elements might not feel particularly original on their own.
Nothing wrong with just wanting to tell a good story, and you seem tempered and grounded in your expectations which is good, though I'd say don't be afraid to be more ambitious if you feel you have something unique to say that you can bring from your own perspective.
I think that 'more than the sum of its parts' applies to a lot of Japanese stories in particular, because they do tend to be quite derivative when looked at from the outside. The good ones, though, have very well rounded characters, and you tend to spend so long with them (especially in a JRPG) that you can't help but grow to like them.
I appreciate the note of encouragement. I don't think my story is breaking any new ground, really, but it will be influenced by my own conservative worldview, which I guess you could say makes it slightly more rare in the modern context. Stories have a way of taking on a life of their own once you start writing them, so I guess we'll see how ambitious it becomes.
Half of Shakespeare's plays are folk tales, or biographies and they are thought of fondly
True, Shakespeare is a stark example of how execution is a lot more important than originality at the source.
I would argue that originality only works if you aren't wasting your readers' time.
I'll point to Ecclesiastes 1:9 -- "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." (Emphasis mine)
You will get more mileage out of retreading the monomyth, with its familiar cycle, than you will by trying to reinvent the hero's journey. Similarly, if you're telling a fantasy story, using elves, dwarves, and orcs saves the reader time acclimating to your world. Tropes exist to be used as shorthand, so that the elements of the story you wish to emphasize-- what your muse yearns to explore can take center stage. You want to twist the tropes, ideally making at least three changes to make them your own, but you don't want to subvert; you're using the cultural shorthand to tighten your story, not drive the culture.
The more trite and unoriginal the basic elements are, the more they fade into the background. Ideally, this leaves your readers with headspace and bandwidth to appreciate how you tell the story elements that matter, or how you've tweaked elements to suit your tastes and style.
To sum up, originality isn't the most important thing. Execution and concision are. To the extent that you beg, borrow, and steal tropes and familiar literary forms to save your readers time acclimating to your story, you save both your and their time. The rest is entirely up to what you bring to the table-- does your story entertain and spend the readers' time well?
A very wise and well-considered comment. Thank you.
Cultural shorthand is an excellent way to describe tropes. I suppose an author shouldn't feel guilty or shy away from using them if they are part of the supporting architecture of the story. The intimidating part for me is, am I a good enough writer to get across the elements of the story that I actually want to focus on, and have them land with the appropriate gravitas?
While I am a creative person, I still have the mind of an engineer. Character interactions, emotions, and dialogue are hard for me to get right.
I suppose one benefit I have in the current age is that I am trying to tell a story earnestly, and not ironically or deconstructively as so much popular media does today. Because of that I feel like I need to treat my audience's attention with the respect it deserves, as you mentioned.
I don't particularly care, as long as the format delivers on it's promise. If a video game has a completely unoriginal concept or story, but is very fun, I don't care about that. If a book or movie has a generic story, but the characters are well written or the setting is great or maybe it's just a beauty to look at, who cares if it's a rip-off of something else?
most art, including writing, is at least partially derivative. it's why archetypes exist.
the 'original' part is in how much you borrow from one particular story/concept and how much you put your own spin on it or apply concepts from other stories to the same idea.
an example of this is the evolution from twilight to twilight fanfiction to 50 shades of gray. not exactly good literature, but they illustrate the point.
A better example would be to compare the odyssey to the back to the future trilogy. Both are Hero's Journey archetypes, but they go about it in different ways.
Yeah, it's a tricky thing to apply your own spin on a well established archetype or stock character. As I mentioned in another reply, however, elements of the author's perspective are bound to emerge even if they are using a trope. Perhaps it's one of those things that's best not overthought.
I value good writing and entertaining stories much more than originality at this point.
There are something like 7 archetypes for stories and every story is a derivative of that, i.e. man vs man, man vs nature, man vs self, etc.
It's more important to me that the story is made with heart and soul than originality.
Originality gets positive recognition from me, but no more than any of the many other factors of a good story. The most original work I've ever read could fail to make my top 25 if by every other metric it's hot garbage.
There is a (very high) threshold where it flips from being just inspired by cultural forebears to just being a rip-off. Pastiches are fine, but if it's just a 95% beat-for-beat copy of the plot of some other work I've read, then I lose enjoyment rapidly.
And I say this knowing I actually value novelty greatly in my entertainment, very few things will I watch/read more than once. But I enjoy the little details and tweaked configurations enough that it doesn't take much for me to consider a piece of media to have differentiated itself.
I think I share your opinion when it comes to novelty. I too rarely watch/read something more than once, but I will enjoy sequels and remasters as long as they are different enough. Sometimes it's interesting just to see how a different creator will tell what is essentially the same story. Writers can't help but project parts of their own personality onto the characters/setting/tropes.
I think it matters a lot, and I often suspect the diversification of everything comes from a desperate desire to create original content from people who have no imagination. If you copy something people will just consume the original content
I think the question then becomes 'What is your threshold for a copy?'. How close does a work have to be to something that came before it in order for you to discard it as a copy?
I want to say it means a lot to me, but it doesn't. To me, it's all about form and technique. If the material of the story itself fails to subvert my expectations that's actually alright and comfy. Sometimes it's a great idea to jostle the viewer and shake them out of their comfort/expectations, when that is appropriate (which isnt always the case), but even the most unexpected and creative pitch won't save the film from unchecked nepotism, globohomo, indian cgi, shoddy production ethic, etc.
If the film is being done well, it can be Hamlet again for all I care- for all audiences at large care, I think. It could be the 13th spider-man origin story, but if it does it better than Raimi it will basically take over all the others. Hollywood sniffs money and doesn't seem to have a problem with juicing up glaringly unoriginal ideas with hundreds of millions of dollars, which leads me to believe that my viewpoint is not only shared among people, but is an observation of an innate truth about storytelling as a whole: that there are about 12 ancient core human stories that have been retold since truly ancient times, that we love and are doomed forever to play at the form and technique of these stories, and that our inability to expand on this core repertoire of stories reveals something about our attempts at "true" never-before-existant products of creativity; it's vanity, it's us grasping, reaching, etc at something just outside of our reach. (grasping at being The Creator, I think).
You'd be better off having an AI ghost write for you. This isn't an insult. I just think people like RL Stine and you could replace him with a computer
Well I have thought about using AI in the production of this thing for various purposes. The unfortunate truth is that I am just one guy and I still work full time, so even with my automation, I don't have the free time that I did when I was a teenager. Back then, writing that novel I metioned took about 5 years, and all I had to worry about was school.
Using AI as a tool would make it a lot more feasible for me to actually complete this thing in a reasonable time frame. I don't want to use it as a crutch, though.
Execution is more important than originality. Obviously you dont want to copy something wholesale, but its far less important to be original than it is to be good.
The virgin subversive media literacy vs the chad "The hero gathers a group of allies and they defeat the forces of evil through hard work and shared determination".
Yep, being earnest and playing things straight is becoming a lost art in the age of post-post-irony and deconstruction. This is part of the reason why Japanese media is soaring in popularity.