Post History
If your work is nothing but message, it isn't a novel, it's a polemic or an allegory. And reading the same polemic or allegory over and over would be excruciatingly boring, because there would be ...
Answer
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T04:53:55Z (about 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/29918 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
by
Chris Sunami
·
2019-12-08T04:53:55Z (about 5 years ago)
If your work is nothing but message, it isn't a novel, it's a polemic or an allegory. And reading the same polemic or allegory over and over would be excruciatingly boring, because there would be nothing new in each iteration. But if you've really done the work to make your message come alive with living characters, and a plot that isn't just an excuse to beat the reader over the head with your ideas, then you could write a hundred books with the same message and never repeat yourself once. You really have to commit to letting the book live as a thing in itself, not just a soapbox. In summary, if you find own work repetitious, it might be the writing, not the message that is to blame. For what it's worth, I agree with you about the paramount importance of the message. But consider _Les Miserables_ and _The Brothers Karamazov_. They couldn't be more different in plot, characters and setting. But the message of both is very close, and neither one feels like a thinly disguised philosophy paper.
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2017-08-25T17:07:45Z (over 7 years ago)
Original score: 2