Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/36719
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

It's a simple fact the there are more fiction books in existence now than one person could possibly read in a lifetime. Add to this the supposition that all plots, themes and genres have been thoroughly explored, and I arrive at the conclusion that no-one need write anything 'new' for a long, long time.

In the face of this logic and the gathering ocean of printed matter, I feel like collecting a huge pile of my favourite tomes, finding somewhere cosy, and just curling up to read them. Maybe there are others that feel this way too.

My question is: **your personal opinions aside, what facts, references, or specific expertise can you offer to counter the idea that it's all been done so many times before and that to continue writing fiction is a pointless exercise?**

* * *

**Research** : There have been some good questions about writer's block ([Help! I've got Writer's Block](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/2100/help-ive-got-writers-block) / [What are the reasons behind Writer's block?](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/17128/what-are-the-reasons-behind-writers-block?noredirect=1&lq=1)) and motivation ([How can I get into the mindset to write?](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/31421/how-can-i-get-into-the-mindset-to-write)), but most of them focus on what to do when we're confronted with a blank screen or a stalled project, not (as I'm interested in): what gets us in front of the screen in the first place.

Original score: 11