There’s Nothing New Under the Sun

As a writer, this is something I wrestle with when assignment guidelines ask for an original piece of writing on a certain subject. How original can it be, when it is a subject I have no personal knowledge of and have to go away and research it? Does the fact that I have rewritten or rephrased the information in a different way mean that it is now an original piece, even though it still plainly uses someone else’s work? Does it become original simply because I incorporate my own point of view of the research I have used? I don’t know. I don’t even know if these questions are actually important – I’m just asking them because they are the things that I muse on sometimes when I am trying to write something original. Let’s face it, the whole thing about research is that someone else has to have already done it or written about it for you to be able to research it, unless of course, as mentioned before, you carry out your own social or scientific or whatever studies and use your own information.

I’m going to stop now because I feel as if I am about to branch out into some kind of metaphysics that might just make my head explode. I didn’t write this article because I expected clear answers from other writers, although I would be fascinated to read other views on the nature of originality, I wrote it because I found the “vicious circle” aspect of the concept an interesting one to try to put down on paper. I’m not trying to convince people that I’m right about the Internet being something original. This article isn’t an argument, it’s just my thoughts and I’ve enjoyed sorting them out and writing them down. It’s been helpful and it’s encouraged me to take this line of inquiry further – to read what others think of the concept of originality. If nothing else, I hope this piece has given you something to think about too. Just don’t make your head explode!