There are many, many stories involving a young man, often of unknown/mysterious parentage, who suddenly realizes he’s the chosen one and has to embark on a quest against impossible odds to save his people.
And yet Star Wars, Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings, David and Goliath, and countless other stories are all different and beloved.
There are many, many stories involving a girl who meets a mysterious/scandalous/acerbic man who she falls in love with even though she probably shouldn’t, and often even though the man tells her she shouldn’t.
And yet Gone With the Wind, Twilight, Pride and Prejudice, Jane Eyre, and countless other stories are all different and beloved.
The fine line between archetype and cliche
There’s an old saw that there are really only six or a dozen stories (the number changes) ever told. These are archetypes, and we’ve been telling variations of these stories since the days we recounted myths around campfires and painted them on cave walls.
At the same time, especially when dealing with very familiar arcs, there’s a very fine line between archetype and cliche. We’ve all read stories that feel tired and worn – whenever an author is trafficking in archetypes they run the risk of the reader rolling their eyes and saying, “Yeah, I’ve read this before.”
So how do authors navigate archetype vs. cliche?
What sets novels apart
It’s no great mystery: by telling a story differently. The tricky part is: doing it differently is much harder than it seems.
I think there’s a mistaken belief out there that all you need to set the 1,000,000th take on an archetype apart from the previous 999,999 is a little twist.
- It’s like Twilight, only zombies! Voila!
- It’s like Star Wars, only the dark side wins! Voila!
- It’s like The Da Vinci Code, only it’s the apocalypse!
I really don’t think that’s the way it works. It’s not a matter of coming up with a twist and otherwise appropriating a previously created world. That’s when projects fall into cliche. The way you use archetype is by telling the familiar arc in an entirely new world with its own rules, with unique characters, and in a unique style.
That’s why we have beloved stories as varied as Star Wars and Harry Potter, even though the basic arcs of the stories are similar. The worlds and characters could not be more different.
What makes your novel unique?
It’s not enough to start a story with a high school girl swooning in the midst of the cranky new kid’s smoldering stare. What’s different about this world and about these characters?
It’s not enough to start a story with a boy who has to save the realm/galaxy/kingdom from disaster. What’s different about this world and this character?
The road to cliche is paved with imitation. Start fresh.
Need help with your book? I’m available for manuscript edits, query critiques, and coaching!
For my best advice, check out my online classes, my guide to writing a novel, and my guide to publishing a book.
And if you like this post: subscribe to my newsletter!
UPDATED 8/26/17
Art: Kätzchen im Boudoir by Karl Reichert
First, my post is not a sequel from yesterday's post.
In case you were wondering.
However, like yesterday's post, I completely agree with everything you said, Nathan, and, no offense, but I really wish you'd stop that! How can I pontificate and write posts that I later have to delete/apologize for/or continue ranting about if you're writing things I agree with??
I think you can see how no one wins here.
That said, I think you're absolutely right. You can't just tweak a small detail and write another work that will touch people. If there is a magic forumla for writing books, it's not in the choice of previously successful topics.
I also like that you described the Twilight character as 'grumpy'. Lol. That's pretty funny.
This post shows how fine the line can be that differentiates success or failure of a manuscript (in varying degrees). Our selection of what to write is influenced by our own paradigms, but we must also be aware of what has gone before to avoid repetition.
Archetypes can be a good place to start creating a character, but one must infuse them with a life of their own, give them angst, hopes, etc. After all, a pure archetype could be irritating as a real person.
Great differentiation! 🙂 As a fantasy writer, I've been wondering about this. Thanks for the info and your take on it!
'There is nothing new under the sun but there are lots of old things we don't know.'
Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
Soooo…harness the knowledge and learn how to work the doo-dad that will turn your 'not-so-original-novel' into an original.
Wow, Nathan, just how many queries have you slogged through since getting back?
I think that's also a danger when writing queries. If you compare your book to another famous book, the agent might think it's a knock-off of the famous book instead of something fresh and new.
Nathan –
Once again, your post is timely with the events in my head. I'm doing my best to avoid the cliche storyline with my current project, but still using elements of other books (Fight Club, No Country. . .)that fit my unique spin.
If I can stay true to my story, but incorporate these elements (technique, structure, POV), I can use them to pitch my novel on what it's similar to, but also how it is unique.
Thanks!
So to a certain degree, we can't help but be derivative? I'm often concerned that I'll never be able to come up with something truly "original". I want to write "District 9", but I'm afraid my work is more like "Avatar".
And while we're at it, I wouldn't mind seeing more of "a high school boy swooning in the midst of the cranky new kid's smoldering stare" and "a girl who has to save the realm/galaxy/kingdom from disaster," please! Sometimes that seemingly small twist can provide the impetus you need to get you on the road to "starting fresh."
"The worlds and characters could not be more different."
Agreed!
Makes me think of that Despair quote about individuality: "Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else."
I agree with Margaret Yang.
I have found a great deal of cliche sounding query letters, (mine included) where reducing the elements makes so many writers' works look all the same when they can be vastly different in their pages.
My husband talks about the tried and true theme: Boy meets girl. Boy loses girl. Boy gets girl back.
But if she's a monkey riding girl and the boy is afraid of monkeys, then we have…something. (maybe)
I'll probably screw this up, but there's a native american story that makes a point of showing how everyone sitting in a circle will have a different view of an object in the center. Even though they're all looking at the same thing, everyone's take is different. It's all a matter of perspective, and there ought to be as many perspectives as there are individual writers.
Nathan
A case in point:
https://tinyurl.com/yjtx5fo
Click on the story analysis.
dylan
I have to say the first forty pages or so of my new WIP is always a small twist on the last WIP until I find the characters voice and figure our the world she lives in. If it doesn't feel authentic and fresh to me I figure it wont to the reader either.
I agree. I think archetypes are important in literature because they reflect, on a deeply unconscious level, different aspects of what it means to be human. If the story doesn’t work on an unconscious as well as superficial level, the symbolic characters become cliché. I wrote an article entitled ARCHETYPES IN FANTASY WRITING that’s been published on The Fantasy Guide and Epic-Fantasy.com websites. In the article, I explain Carl Jung’s theory of the collective unconscious and the archetypes that arise out of it, and discuss a number of specific archetypes, including mother, father, wise old man, child, family, hero, maiden, animal, shadow, and persona. I also talk about the successful use of archetypes in THE LORD OF THE RINGS, THE WIZARD OF OZ, HARRY POTTER, Cormac McCarthy’s THE ROAD, STAR WARS, and CINDERELLA. When they’re developed with depth and meaning, archetypes add immeasurably to a story. Archetypes should breathe life into a story, rather than bore the reader with the monotony of cliché.
It's always nice when you don't realize what the age-old formula of the story is, until you're so deep into it, that it hardly matters.
I agree that there is a very fine line, indeed, between archetype and cliche. The few who have done it newly and differntly and creatively have been both lucky and savvy.
When it turns something on its head (Pride & Prejudice & Zombies for instance) it can work and can be great fun. But…
Better to be fresh. Better to come up with something new than to recycle… even with a twist.
Jill
I think your characters and the setting are the defining points if you're treading over familiar story lines.
A great example is Edgar Sawtelle. It's a re-telling of Hamlet, but the main character is a mute teenage boy, and a great supporting cast of people and dogs rounds it out.
Man, this is so hard to do. But it's one of those things you just know…when you read something, you either can't stop reading, or you say, "Cliche alert. Meh. Been there, done that."
Most of your posts (a) make me terrified that I've committed whatever sin you're delineating and (b) intensely relieved that you posted something about it exactly when I was questioning whether I or not had committed it.
In other words, thanks. This was very helpful.
When a story borders on the cliché, add a an evil stepmother.
The word, "derivative" comes to mind, as does, "band wagon". It works for some, like the gazillioneth vampire novel, but then something actually creative comes along and wows them all. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, for example.
One is just a copy-cat, and the other is just dammed clever.
I completely agree and I think it's a common struggle among writers, trying to find that new niche within the old way. As one of my college professors said, "good writers borrow, great writers steal."
Well, to an extent, anyway. ;o)
THANK YOU for saying this! I have argued with people that there is a difference between archetype and cliche (and archetype and stereotype)and often get a weird deer in headlight response. It is SO hard to touch on archetypes without going to the cliche, but you're absolutely right that it takes a different story WORLD and unique and interesting characters to make it work.
I've ended up subconsciously tapping into mythic structure in my own novel, but didn't realize it until after the first draft. Now I'm consciously playing on a few things, but making sure that I use the tropes creatively, rather than falling into cliche. I hope it works. We'll see.
One way to start is to come up with really interesting bad guys. So we know that Harry Bosch is always going to get the guy (or at figure out who it is), but we don't know just who he is going to come up against and that is what makes it the most fun.
I always wonder about the dozen (or so) plot line myth. How many billions of people are on this planet, each with their own story? It only takes a simple decision to turn yourself (or your character) into a hero or a villain.
– To chase the purse-snatcher (or be the purse-snatcher.)
– To pay for the stray dog's treatment you took to the vet after it got hit by a car –
– To decide to stay and wipe away her tears –
Any or a combination of these could skew a character onto a path to good, evil, romance . . . which could change their fictional world and views forevermore – and, depending upon how you go about it, invent a different story line.
G., who is getting over a sinus infection – which is what the babbling is all about.
Oh, I want to add one thing.
I don't think it's possible to write about anything other than archtype in fiction. There are no other stories.
It's all archtype. And doing it well – that's where talent and skill and the creativity come in.
Yes, success in writing a great archetype story is in the details, not the twist.
Unfortunately, getting agents and editor to read the millionth version of a story can require that twist.
I'd like to add something. To do it well, you also need to make the archetypes real. They need flaws, they need situations they don't win, and they need masks and trusty comical sidekicks.
I love this post so much, that it's the first post I shared on facebook! Thank you Nathan, I always struggle with trying not to make things cliche, and this really helps! So now I know a twist isn't good enough…guess I have to stick Larry Motter in the drawer and start from scratch. 🙂
Very well said, and yet this can be a very difficult thing to do. I have seen lots of stories advertised with "It's just like [bestseller], but with zombies/angels/parrotfish/pirates!" No. No no no. Adding the hot new trend of the week as the twist isn't enough to take it out of Cliché Town. You've got to do more than that.
I wonder if this gets harder for some serious/aspiring-to-be-published writers as they continue to write books. We're told to pick out comp titles, or we see what's selling well now. How many people look at those titles and decide to write a story just like them, but with a twist that doesn't really make anything feel new?
Marilyn–Going to read your article now! It sounds right up my alley. I once wrote a short practice story centered around Jungian archetypes. (Alas, I was young and it wasn't very good).
"There are no original ideas in fiction, only original execution", according to an Eng Lit prof of mine from long ago.
For those interested in the idea of a handful of archetypical plots, I recommend 20 Master Plots by Ronald Tobias, MFA and Professor of Media and Theatre Arts at U. of Montana.
I once came across an essay of Tobias' in which he argues there are a maximum of 36 plots, but several (I guess 16 of them) are no longer relevant due to the fundamental changes in culture (the plot of the Greek play Oedipus Rex being one of them).
I hadn't even thought about the archetype inherent in my current WIP but now I see it oh so clearly. I am wondering if that new insight will affect how the story develops. Is it better to be consciously aware of things like that as you write, or not?
All of humanity falls on the shoulders of one boy who hasn't learned to tie his shoes yet. Yep, I think Sword and the Stone falls in there too.
Related, but unrelated.
I am having a contest on my blog that is a fun twist on an old campfire way of telling stories – but with authors. The story is building, and the twists just keep getting better and better.
http://www.aj-frey.blogspot.com
@Linda Godfrey: I think it helps to have an awareness of the common elements of archetypical plots as a guide. A painter paints from a certain range of colors; a composer composes from a certain range of notes; likewise, a writer writes from a certain set of plots.
just another wonderful, informative post. how'd you get to be so awesome, nathan?
I've whinged about this before, but I'm in the unusual position of having written a story like Twilight before I realised Twilight existed. However I don't claim to have written a story as well as this one in any way. It's just this coincidence that I can't get over. Mine doesn't have a main male character who is as charismatic and loving as Edward, though. And I've combined liberal amounts of Christianity and inspirational which is prob. a no-no in a paranormal. However this story is unique to me and everything I believe and have experienced or have drawn from imagination. It's the best I can do. I know I should move on and create other stories now, but I'm old and tired, so it's harder as I know how many years – even decades – of work are ahead, as this is the speed I work at.
Sorry to sound so downbeat. I've been feeling rather defeated and hopeless lately.
Some well-thought out posts have been written, I think. Some great minds visit this blog and run it. 🙂
How about a heroine who goes on a quest to save the world while (unsuccessfully) trying not to date the bad boy?
🙂
It's like Star Wars, only the dark side wins! Voila!
This falls into the 'Ooops, you goofed.' category. As a Star Wars and Sci Fi fan, this not only sounds cool — it was at least partially the basis for a best selling Star Wars video game, Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (the new expanded edition has the Dark Side winning missions and the protagonist of the game itself is Vader's apprentice).
While I understand you were trying to create some cliche storylines, you might want to beef up your own knowledge of books and writing if you think that this isn't a fantastic idea.
Now we know why agents don't pick up great books — they can't tell a great idea when they see one.
Oh anon…. anon anon anon….. it's a great idea for Star Wars. Don't try and out-nerd me when it comes to the Force. I will go Boba Fett on you faster than Han Solo ran the Kessel run, and I won't get eaten by the Sarlacc either.
When I create characters, I have to make sure the GMC-goal, motivation and conflict both internal and external are right before I get down to the deeper aspects of plotting and creating a believable world. It's the experiences of the hero/heroine that help make the difference.
The past of the character and their experiences impact their decisions now.
The better I know my characters, the easier it is for me to plot.
If GMC is a problem area, I highly recommend Debra Dixon's book GMC-Goal, Motivation and Conflict. It isn't just for romance writers.
Best,
Tambra
Another insightful post from Nathan. You're the C.S. Lewis of the writers world, thank you for the shared wisdom.
Beautiful photo. There's something about that Mexican light.
I enjoyed reading your comments from San Miguel. My brother lived there many years ago.
I will go Boba Fett on you faster than Han Solo ran the Kessel run
You lose the geek test. A parsec is a measurement of distance, not speed. Han wasn't bragging about how fast his ship went, he was bragging about his piloting skills through an area of variable distance like navigating near several black holes. 😉
anon-
Just as "light year" is both a unit of time and a distance, so too can a parsec be used in a similar fashion. And Han was specifically responding to the question, "Is this a fast ship?", so it stands to reason that he was referring to speed.
NERDED.
I have to jump to Nathan's defense on the whole parsec thing. In our reality, a parsec is a measurement of space, but Han Solo's quote is that the Falcon made the Kessel run in less than 12 parsecs. Now, you might argue that in a lot of the written Star Wars stuff, they have tried to retcon this to say that Solo meant space and not time, but I bet if you went back and asked mid 70's Lucas what he wanted Solo to say, he would say it was a time unit – because he wanted the Falcon to sound FAST.
I love it when the Nerds come out to play.
I've never heard it explained better. But I consider the archetype the basic formula as in romance; boy meets girl, boy gets girl, boy looses girl, boy gets girl back. The story is all in how you write it to keep it from being a cliche.