Quote:
|
Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus
I actually heard of this one playwright who, although he wasn't very innovative in his story development, and in fact borrowed the majority of his plots from folklore or even his contemporaries, managed to garner a small following. His name is escaping me right now, though-- uh... Willy... something? William? William Shagspar? Anybody want to help me out here?
The fact is, there are no original ideas. Every artistic work of a given form proceeds from a tradition, and exists in conversation with the legacy of composition in that form. Efforts to ignore this and render a 'unique' piece at all costs will doubtlessly fail spectacularly, whereas the key to greatness is to comprehend and engage with the past.
Check out Tradition and the Individual Talent if you so desire, in which essay T.S. Eliot shits on what you just said even more thoroughly than I can. |
Yes, yes, very clever.
My point was not about originality of plot structure, it was about name-dropping books within books, writing stories about other stories and characters, instead of inventing your own characters. I just find it pretentious. I am perfectly aware that characters and plot lines can't be one hundred per cent original.