[quote]roguevampire wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]Nards wrote:
And please correct me if I’m wrong, but if it has to do with vampires then it’s definitely been done.
I mean even if it’s a story about a vamire that becomes a cop to fight vampires on the side of the law, then it’ll just be Lethal Weapon with vampires. If it’s set in the 28th Century on a spaceship then it’s Aliens VS Vampires.
Though I should mention that “nothing is original” is not trying to sound cynical. It’s OK and most writers (as well as audiences that try to act jaded) understand this and just try to tell a good story.[/quote]
While nothing is original is definitely true…or at least not much is original anyway…you are beyond correct with vampires. The genre is broken down to incredibly specific subgenres even. Rogue whatever you do with your vampire book, please please keep it out of the paranormal romance subgroup.[/quote]
wow. Im completely dumbfounded. where on earth did you get, that im writing about vampires? The book has nothing to do with vampires. stop going by what you hear a few morons say. [/quote]
You’re right my bad I just sort of assumed that was the genre and I shouldn’t have done that.
I’ve been thinking more about truly original fiction and imo, vintage Ellison was pretty solid. I really like a lot of William Gibson.
Some times though it seems works are analyzed to a point where it is ludicrous. While say …and I know they are fictionlized non fiction but I like Krakauer… Into the Wild and Into Thin Air while both can be boiled down to man versus nature that doesn’t tell the whole tale, and neither are the Old Man and the Sea. Its in the nuances that the differences can be seen and just because a topic has been done before doesn’t make it any less valuable or interesting necessarily.

