 |
|
|
Scifi and Fantasy Forum: Writer's Discussion: Questions :
Are YOU original?:
Archive through Apr 08, 2005
Archive through Apr 08, 2005
We have moved to new forum software and posting here is closed!
PLEASE BOOKMARK THE NEW FORUMS
Posted By:  aldan Apr 05, 2005 - 10:50 pm |       | FZ, I hate to disagree with you, but I studied art a wee bit in and while it's true that the greats didn't copy style AFTER they had finally developed theirs, they did copy previous authors' techniques and styles and even in some cases, subject matter until they HAD developed their own. If you study art in enough depth you will be able to see where a young Picasso copies an older master's technique, young Degas as well. Young Van Gogh? *nods* As well as many others... and THOSE were the ones who later became masters. We won't even need to speak of the lesser-known artists that painted dancers or that concentrated on the effects of light or distortion.
I agree that my analogy wasn't perfect. When I sit down to respond to an email, I don't really map out what I shall say, but instead think of a basic point to speak of and the start typing.
I agree that a degree of originality is essential in our line of work (or at least it's the one we're trying to gain employment in, so to speak), but I'm just saying that a sharp tongue can castrate a future Don Juan, can cripple a future sprinter, and harsh words can stop a potentially great future writer in his/her tracks. Is your opinion important? Yes. It is. However, so are the opinions that are on the other side of the fence, and so are the potential careers that you may be destroying. You do not need to read the stuff you believe to be crap, but there are a lot of people who gain a lot of enjoyment out of stuff like, oh, romance novels and men's adventure books. *Aldan fights down a gag reflex* Is it a right that is posessed here in the U.S. (for those IN the United States) to say what one believes without censorship? That's what it's supposed to be.
However, if I ever see you standing in front of a group of elementary school children and spewing forth foul language and cruel ideas, your car will likely explode soon afterward while you're in it. Literally? No, but my anger can get away from me, and it IS my right to become angry with idiotic and damaging behavior, and I shall.
| Posted By: aldan Apr 05, 2005 - 11:11 pm | | Now, on the previous post, I may have sounded like I was being threatening, and perhaps I was, but not concerning giving one's opinions on this website. Although there is no minimum age requirement being enforced on here, most people who would visit the site will be of middle school age (rarely) and above. Please note that I said "Elementary School" in speaking of what I did.
Also please note that the point I was making was to consider the feelings of others when you speak, so as to avoid hurting another person in the deepest way - in their feelings and creativity. Not all of us are equally talented, and not in the same areas.
In a similar vein, I read a true story today about Al Capone's lawyer, Fast Eddie, and how he ended up turning state's evidence against Capone, due to the fact that his conscience finally got to him through his son. He knew it was a death sentence to do so, but also knew that if he wanted his son to grow up to be better than he was, he'd have to show the son how to do it, and he did. A few weeks later he was shot to pieces in the street.
A second story was about this 29 year old pilot who flew off of the Lexington near the beginning of WW2. His squadron and he flew up to go on an attack run against a distant group of islands, and he noticed that his flight crew didn't top off his tanks so he wouldn't be able to complete the mission. He was given permission to head back to the carrier. As he was returning, he saw a large group of Japanese planes heading in the direction of his carrier and so to try to distract them and get them to turn back he took on the estimated 30 planes by himself. He took them by surprise and ended up damaging enough of them that they turned back. Later, his flight cameras showed he'd shot down 5 planes, making him the first American ace flying for the US during the second world war, and he ended up with the medal of honor for it. He ended up being shot down and killed one or two years later. His name was O'Hare. He was Fast Eddie's son. He was also the man after whom Chicago's first major airport was named after.
If Fast Eddie had just been thinking of his own freedoms and of his own actions his son would probably not have ended up doing what he did, since that son would probably not have become a naval pilot prior to WW2, and so wouldn't have been involved in that fighting then, most likely.
We need to keep it in mind that our freedoms are important to us, and by us I mean more than "me, myself and I". I mean US as in everyone. If we choose to be jackholes and peenwhoppers then we can be, but the country will continue to spiral down the drain, and while OUR freedoms will be intact, when it gets so bad that martial law will be required to protect the less strong, then whose fault will it be?
That example is the style of story I like to tell, and along the same lines some authors (like David Eddings) also likes to tell.
I think we all think of ourselves as original, at least in some way, shape, or fashion. I think I'm original in that I come up with very unique plots and subplots. I'm decent on characters, and the theme of my story requires me to have a large amount of players. So I make a strong effort to have each character have a strong history, a unique outlook and addition to the story, and to be more than just 2D.
I think I'm just lacking in the descriptive scenery department.
| Posted By: Sara Apr 06, 2005 - 08:53 am | | Didn't a wise man once say all of the original ideas in the world have already been taken?
Seriously, I agree with most everyone, as summed up by Spiderkeg. We're all original in our own ways. Give every one of us the same premise for a story, and you'd still wind up with completely different stories. Even a story about a wee half-sized man with a magic bracelet that he has to drop into Mt. Dread -- we'd all decide on different motivations, different plot twists, secondary characters, etc.
Adapting the strong points of others' writing styles into your own is part and parcel of the process by which our own individual narrative voices mature and develop. You take the best of those aspects you like and admire in other writers' styles and incorporate them into your own -- thus developing your own unique voice, an amalgamous and original blend of many different voices.
Heh, World of Warcraft has this pretty funny emote that can be played which IS the Lord of the Rings premise, but with World of Warcraft themes instead. I've put it up for people to listen to. First time I heard it, I busted out laughing.
"Hey, the King's Back!"
http://tiger.towson.edu/~tmorri3/lotr.wav
You know what I call someone easily crippled? A weakling. That's like saying you're not going to give a 100% critique because you're afraid the critique my damage the person's ability to write. When I first started writing, I was basically told I hold no chance in hell of ever being good at it. That I didn't understand the mechanics of writing. That I should work on bringing up my grades in math class because English was going nowhere.
Three years later, I graduated with the third highest grade in my Honors English class, said to be the best writer on the school newspaper, and everyone came to me to write their papers for them.
Did I let the opinions of some stupid bitch get me down? No. Because I'm not a weakling. If someone tells you, 'Well, you can write and everything, but your ideas and characters are a bit cliche' and that person just gives up . . . well, that's personal failing. Don't blame that on somebody like FZ.
| Posted By: Magus Apr 06, 2005 - 12:53 pm | | I would say that what you say is true. Anybody who is considering writing should be ready to take harsh critisism. If they aren't then they simply aren't looking for critisism at all, merely praise. And to improve as a writer you must indeed know what you are doing right, but also what you are doing wrong. And proper critisism covers both aspects and should be brutally honest. And if a person can't take that then maybe they shouldn't ask to be critiqued.
My English teacher actually said something to our class the other day. Here's the exact quote:
"None of you will ever reach my expertise in writing. It's just not going to happen."
Is she conceited? Yes. Is she full of herself? Yes. Is she going to stop me from writing? No.
So a person whould take any critisism that's offered. But they should themselves be able to differentiate between constructive critisism and unconstructive critisism that serves only to belittle a person. I think that Manji serves as an excellent example of a person able to discern between the two kinds.
Aldan, I know what you're saying. Even if I implied this, I did not mean to say that artists don't copy eachothers styles. But in this case it is for personal gain, they find something that works for them that they like, and they use it until they can formulate their own style. Hell, I did that, too. But the fact remains that eventually they forum their own style, and likewise form their own subject matter.
Which is something I am not seeing in most fictional works these days, and the point I'm trying to make. The style thing is there, I can respect a writer copying another style to get on their feet or see what works. But what absolutely ticks me off is the fact that after that writer gains his or her own style, they still copy other writers' subject matter. And they think it's OK because its standard classic fantasy and its what all of us are familiar with. And that's the problem here, we're all familiar with it.
Trust me, I respect writing skill and they way most writers present their stories, most of them are very good. But what I do not respect is reading about the same crap over and over again, just with a few minor tweaks or twists inbetween books. But I suppose I can't stop anyone from writing about what they want to write about, so my opinion really shouldn't affect anyone here that much.
| Posted By: logan Apr 06, 2005 - 02:20 pm | | I had to change my ID, but I still wanted to respond to foreverzero's comments to my posts
Don't mix creativity with 'originality'. I would never disagree that creativity is a prime trait of a writer - because that is what they do. They create.
But if my opinion is being asked, I would tell everyone the same thing - don't worry about what's been done, and what hasn't. At the base, you will find that many stories that YOU think are 'original', have, in fact, been adapted from a number of other sources - and those sources were adapted and influenced by a number of other stories before them.
Tell a good story - THAT'S IT.
Don't make it more complicated than it has to be, because that statement, in and off itself, is impossible for a great many people.
And if you read my book sometime in the future, and you spot my influences and think it's a rip off - and that makes you lose respect for me - trust me, I will *try* to keep a stiff upper lip.
Still, I'm not asking for something that has never been done before in some way, shape, or form, because I know that probably won't happen. It'll be linked back to some sort of influence no matter how you look at it. What I am asking for is more original subject matter in general. I don't care if more than one writer uses this new subject matter, as long as the entire population of them doesn't dwell on it for decades, I'll be satisfied.
I just want something new and original, above and beyond what most writers pump out these days. Or is that too much to ask? If being original is too "complicated" for them, then I begin to wonder if writing is really their forte. I don't know--I was always under the impression that writers strive to make themselves better. Well, after getting a 'perfect' writing style, there only one other direction you can go, and its something tons of writers haven't tried yet.
| Posted By: logan Apr 07, 2005 - 06:54 am | | everyone should strive to make themselves better, whether you write or lay concrete for a living. Most people don't, but maybe that's part of human nature. Also it's completely beside the point.
I also don't think that I'm saying that being original is too complicated for them - I said it makes the process more complicated than it needs to be. Again, that's my opinion - it doesn't have to be yours.
Most of us, here, should know just how hard it is to get a book on the shelves. So I question anyone who wonders if writing is really their forte. If anyone should wonder if writing is or is not their own forte, it is someone like me - who tries everyday and still has SO long to go. And originality is not among my top ten concerns.
And I could write 20 books, and I would still prefer people think of the 21st novel as 'good' rather than 'original'.
That does not mean that I am say 'hey copy things - it's ok.' My first comment in this thread was to indicate that I don't think it's a necessary concern for people to consider 'I like how writer (blank) did (such and such), but if I take that and use something like it here, will people think I'm not original?' - I don't think so. In fact, I don't think half your audience will even notice. Most of the remaining half won't even care, and there will always be a few who roll their eyes at anything.
Logan,
"And I could write 20 books, and I would still prefer people think of the 21st novel as 'good' rather than 'original'." I'm not knocking this comment, but personally, I'd want them to say both. Why does it have to be one and not the other? It doesn't! There are still a sparse amount of original ideas that haven't been done and can be not merely, good, but great as well as original. We all have a LONG way to go as we are constantly learning new things even upon our deaths (the last thing we learn is the meaning of life or so I'd hope) so you're not alone in that boat. I constantly wonder if writing is my forte, but I don't care if it is or not because I write for the love of doing it and that's what counts.
Magus,
You should tell your teacher to get her head out of the dirt! HOW DOES SHE KNOW?!? You know what I say? Prove her wrong! Make that woman eat her words. No teacher should ever, ever say something like that to their students--it's ludicrous!
| Posted By: Magus Apr 07, 2005 - 12:18 pm | | I've been keeping quite in her class all year, or at least failing in the attempt to. She's the stupid teacher I talk about all the time. The only problem is that not only does she give me my grade but, somehow, she's in charge of my school's honor program, so she could really screw me up for a little while yet.
| Posted By: logan Apr 07, 2005 - 01:27 pm | | Rereading my post, the comment does indicate that I seem to be pitting good against original. I don't really mean that, necessarily. One does not exclude the other, by any stretch.
My point was that I would rather people think of my stories as 'good'. I want people to enjoy them, that is why I write. In order to be good, one need not be original. Again, I don't mean that to read 'it's ok to copy'. I just think, and this is my opinion, that one should focus on the objective of writing the best story he or she can write - not the most original story he or she can write.
But that's exactly one of my problems with writing these days. Writers write just to write, rather than write to tell a story. I value creativity and imagination more than any level of skill or intelligence, personally, so when I see things blatantly re-used (Like Elves and all those standard races), I instantly lose my interest in the story, regardless of how well it is written.
Sure, some (or many) people will say your stories are good, and I'm not going to deny that they are because I've never read them, but personally, I won't be able to comment on a story, ever, if it doens't have something new that catches my interest. I want to read a creative and original story, not a well written rehash of material. Forgive the exaggeration there, but seriously.
| Posted By: Magus Apr 07, 2005 - 05:23 pm | | I see your points, ForeverZero. And personally I agree with them. The creativity put into the story and characters far surpasses style in order of importance.
Logan,
"one should focus on the objective of writing the best story he or she can write - not the most original story he or she can write." I think good writers, nay great writers, do both. That's what makes them the great writers, IMHO. They should write the best story they can but they should also strive for originality in plot, characters, and overall story.
FZ,
"Writers write just to write, rather than write to tell a story. I value creativity and imagination more than any level of skill or intelligence, personally, so when I see things blatantly re-used (Like Elves and all those standard races), I instantly lose my interest in the story, regardless of how well it is written."
We're more alike than you think! I, too, lose interest when it comes to reading about the standard fantasy creatures, unless it's original enough to stand out above the rest. I once wrote a short story called, "Why Fairies Dream" and made it where when the fairy is dreaming, they live the lives of humans, and when the human dies, the fairy wakes from the dream. I never revised it but it made for a cute story and it was somewhat original. Normally, though, I steer clear of writing things like that because of the reused characters.
My favorite is Egyptian fantasy and things related to it like the half-human and mixed creatures of the underworld(EX: a lion's head with a scorpions body, and the tale of crocodile). These are the creatures that fascinate me the most so I write about them. They may to an extent be a rehash of mythological characters but not many people these days write about them and do it well.
A great story has to be well-balanced. Skill and intelligence can only get you so far. Originality has to be there in some form or fashion and I'm willing to bet it usually is because we're all unique in our own ways and now two people will write a story in the same way as another. 
Actually, a good writer should never write for others. A good writer should always write for themselves. How many authors sat down to write a story that they could themselves enjoy, but to have it be so good that others found it worthwhile too.
Don't write for your audience or else you will always fail. Write for yourself. That's what poets do. They write poetry for themselves. Even if the poem is "for someone" it is really an attempt for them to express something they feel for themself.
Actually, Stephen King said there are two kinds of writers. Those who write for others and those who write for themselves. He said the ones who write for others, the popular writers, are the ones who sell the most book because they entertain the audience. Those who write for themselves, the more literary writer, are the ones who will release a book every few years or so and, while praised, it will not be widely read.
He said he was a popular writer, or one who writes for others.
I really think it's okay to write for an audience. So far I've only written novels for myself, but a couple of my short stories have been written for an audience. I can't say that those short stories turned out any worse than the ones I wrote for myself.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion
