You will not be able to write any coherent piece of any great length without dealing with literary tropes. There are a few ways of doing this, and the two most common appear to be the following:
- Playing it straight. You can simply follow the trope as-is.
- Inversion. You invert the trope, by beginning with something that looks similar to the trope and then going in the opposite direction.
I tend to be more of a traditionalist, taking the Bruce Lee-esque "There are no new ideas" tack. I think that originality comes at the cost of coherence, and coherence comes at the cost of interest. If you wanted to make really original music, you'd have to invent all-new instruments of your own design. Or you could decide that music itself is a cliche and try to invent an entirely new artform.
This leads us to the "central problem" I alluded to in the first paragraph. If you break all the boundaries, you're not doing the same thing anymore, and possibly not even doing anything coherent. And if you break none of the boundaries, you're basically just going through the motions.
I can't propose a single method that can be used to solve this problem. And why would I want to? This problem is arguably, in many ways, the tension that creates art. Navigating this process is part of what makes art so challenging and thus, so rewarding. The artistic process is largely about choosing which precedents to break, and how many.