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.
Ecclesiastes 1:9, KJV
I'm of the opinion that, while there's such thing as a story or book that's unique to the reader, there is no genuinely unique story or book. What makes a story "unique" is the writing style and handling that the author does with it, and even then… If you look hard and long enough, you'll eventually find comparable authors.
Frankly, I've been thinking it would be fun to put together an a challenge wherein the participants would all start with the same premise or tagline or some such thing, as a case in point, because I'm ornery like that. But then I consider the details of how to set up the contracts and payments (and of finding folks who'd want to join in under such an arrangement) and decide the idea can wait.
But "There is nothing new under the sun." Take Lisa Shearin's upcoming SPI Files, which she describes as Stephanie Plum working for the Men in Black. I've not read the Stephanie Plum series, but from what I've heard of it, that basic description sounds like it'll be comparable to my unreleased "Buzz and Bunnies" short story and the series I eventually plan to write from that.
I admit, I'm a little down that she's going to get there before me, but I'm sure other comparable series are already out there. It's too fun a premise to be left unexplored.
Even her Raine Benares series could be compared to my own Chronicles of Marsdenfel in style—though I admit it isn't obvious unless you filter your consideration to world type, tone, and POV—although her books are kinda focused on epic battles and steamy love triangles. (I do enjoy them, but sometimes I feel like it enters TMI on the romance. Note that I am what some would consider a prude.)
But my point isn't that Lisa Shearin and I could be compared, if you squint. My point is that there is no objectively "unique" story.
Readers—and especially writers—usually don't like to think that. Readers can get tired of the same old, same old, and get annoyed when they think one author is ripping off another. (Which isn't necessarily the case… I've had a teacher tell me of students who complained about how the Lord of the Rings ripped off of Harry Potter.)
Writers… Well, we can get defensive when someone tells us our Preciouses pet stories aren't unique. Or we might be reluctant to write because we feel that we have nothing unique to bring to the table of everything that's published.
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.
Ecclesiastes 1:9, KJV
Sure, there's no objective uniqueness, but that's okay.
It's okay.
Because there is subjective uniqueness—unique to the writer, unique to the reader—and that's what writing is all about. The bigger the pool of what's available, the more folks can find what they want to write and read.
And I do believe that's a good thing.
What are your opinions on objectivity and its subjective or objective reality? You have any fun story comparisons to share?
—Misti
