Dear Lords and Ladies~
HRH is on a writing hiatus for the next few days. Until then, a few treats for the court.
Today's treat - at long last! A sneak peek - nay, a free download of Chapter 3 from Book 3 in the Save the Cat! series of books - Save the Cat! Strikes Back - More Trouble for Screenwriters to Get Into - and Out of!
13 October 2009
12 October 2009
27 September 2009
Forgive me, Father...
We screenwriters are a funny breed. We’re awfully good about telling what we do well - we have to, in order to compete. The DIY generation has cornered the market on self-promotion.
What we’re not so great about is sharing what we don’t do well. God forgive the writer who admits to needing help in an area. Oh, the horror! The horror! Imperfection is seen as weakness, which translates to failure in the psyche of all things Hollywood. If we can’t discuss our weaknesses, we cannot improve them, so the problem becomes one of self-perpetuation, a Sisyphean-like existence, pushing the boulder of mediocrity up that hill, day in, day out, only to have it barreling down, crushing us under its weight, and then we start the task all over again.
In baseball, we revere players, who miss the ball seven times out of ten, with celebrity endorsements and multi-million dollar contracts. Why, then, are we so hard on artists?
I was working on my for hire yesterday, and began to ponder this quirk of very human nature. I went into shower (my method for generating the aha! moment), and realized that the solution might, just might, be absolution through confession.
Think about it – how much less powerful something is, once it is out there. To name it is to claim it, and by claiming it, you become the master instead of the slave.
Arnold Schwarzenegger is no Daniel Day-Lewis (please don’t ask me to discuss his politics, I’ll never be able to shut up). That being said, early in his career, he was able to identify his weaknesses, and then put forth Herculean effort, through hard work and discipline, to overcome these obstacles, and, by doing so, propelled himself into arguably one of the biggest box office draws of the latter part of the 20th century. He knew his dialect was unintelligible; he knew he could not act. He put in time – up to four hours a day – refining his speech and his skills, and it paid off.
All writers have talent. They would not be drawn to the craft if they did not. That being said, talent alone cannot sustain you. It’s the work, the hard work put into the craft, which distinguishes writer A (sales, hires and options) from writer B (still trying to complete script 1).
So, confession time. What is your weakness? What muscles need more flexing?
For me, it is a specific form of dialog, usually found in confrontation scenes. I find that, in my early drafts, I write these scenes with on the nose dialog. Absent of subtext and glaringly awful.
Within the rewrite process, I am slowly able to identify these moments, and cull through them, searching for the textual and sub-textual meaning behind each interchange. It is hard and it is frustrating. It is work. I can spend countless hours polishing a half page scene. I ride an emotional roller-coaster with these moments, often questioning my existence, my mental health, and why the f*ck I got into this crazy business in the first place.
That being said, there is nothing better when you have the breakthrough, when the great Aha! hits you like a ton of bricks. It’s better than chocolate. It’s better than cheese. And, if you create your Aha! moments as I do - in the shower - you’ll be clean and fresh as a daisy.
Confession time. What are your weaknesses? What muscles do you need to work out more? What process do you use to make this happen?
A friend and writer, Dan G., turned me onto a random logline generator. He uses it to issue weekly challenges on his Yahoo! Group; I have begun to use it each morning to generate a logline and write a 1-2 page scene, dialog heavy, as an early morning workout. I allow myself one hour to write and refine, and then put the pages away until the next morning, so I may see what worked – and what didn’t – and use that data to help me move forward in the craft.
Writing is an art, and a craft. It is always in motion, never stagnant. The day you cease to learn, is the day you might consider a new day job.
~ HRH, Princess Scribe
TODAY'S ASSIGNMENT: Commit to your craft. Spend at least one hour each day flexing the muscles that need it. Do this the entire week - every day. Emails, message boards and blogging do not count.
What we’re not so great about is sharing what we don’t do well. God forgive the writer who admits to needing help in an area. Oh, the horror! The horror! Imperfection is seen as weakness, which translates to failure in the psyche of all things Hollywood. If we can’t discuss our weaknesses, we cannot improve them, so the problem becomes one of self-perpetuation, a Sisyphean-like existence, pushing the boulder of mediocrity up that hill, day in, day out, only to have it barreling down, crushing us under its weight, and then we start the task all over again.
In baseball, we revere players, who miss the ball seven times out of ten, with celebrity endorsements and multi-million dollar contracts. Why, then, are we so hard on artists?
I was working on my for hire yesterday, and began to ponder this quirk of very human nature. I went into shower (my method for generating the aha! moment), and realized that the solution might, just might, be absolution through confession.
Think about it – how much less powerful something is, once it is out there. To name it is to claim it, and by claiming it, you become the master instead of the slave.
Arnold Schwarzenegger is no Daniel Day-Lewis (please don’t ask me to discuss his politics, I’ll never be able to shut up). That being said, early in his career, he was able to identify his weaknesses, and then put forth Herculean effort, through hard work and discipline, to overcome these obstacles, and, by doing so, propelled himself into arguably one of the biggest box office draws of the latter part of the 20th century. He knew his dialect was unintelligible; he knew he could not act. He put in time – up to four hours a day – refining his speech and his skills, and it paid off.
All writers have talent. They would not be drawn to the craft if they did not. That being said, talent alone cannot sustain you. It’s the work, the hard work put into the craft, which distinguishes writer A (sales, hires and options) from writer B (still trying to complete script 1).
So, confession time. What is your weakness? What muscles need more flexing?
For me, it is a specific form of dialog, usually found in confrontation scenes. I find that, in my early drafts, I write these scenes with on the nose dialog. Absent of subtext and glaringly awful.
Within the rewrite process, I am slowly able to identify these moments, and cull through them, searching for the textual and sub-textual meaning behind each interchange. It is hard and it is frustrating. It is work. I can spend countless hours polishing a half page scene. I ride an emotional roller-coaster with these moments, often questioning my existence, my mental health, and why the f*ck I got into this crazy business in the first place.
That being said, there is nothing better when you have the breakthrough, when the great Aha! hits you like a ton of bricks. It’s better than chocolate. It’s better than cheese. And, if you create your Aha! moments as I do - in the shower - you’ll be clean and fresh as a daisy.
Confession time. What are your weaknesses? What muscles do you need to work out more? What process do you use to make this happen?
A friend and writer, Dan G., turned me onto a random logline generator. He uses it to issue weekly challenges on his Yahoo! Group; I have begun to use it each morning to generate a logline and write a 1-2 page scene, dialog heavy, as an early morning workout. I allow myself one hour to write and refine, and then put the pages away until the next morning, so I may see what worked – and what didn’t – and use that data to help me move forward in the craft.
Writing is an art, and a craft. It is always in motion, never stagnant. The day you cease to learn, is the day you might consider a new day job.
~ HRH, Princess Scribe
TODAY'S ASSIGNMENT: Commit to your craft. Spend at least one hour each day flexing the muscles that need it. Do this the entire week - every day. Emails, message boards and blogging do not count.
Labels:
Arnold,
baseball,
confession,
Daniel Day Lewis,
dialog,
Hollywood,
screenwriters,
shower,
Sisyphus
16 September 2009
Is Story Dead?
The title was a simple reimagining of Frederick Nietzsche’s statement, “Gott ist tott”, appearing in a significant number of his philosophical works. From “The Madman”:
“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?”
Of course, what the ill-informed public did not grok was that Nietzsche did not mean for his statement to be interpreted in a literal sense; what he was expressing was that the “God” of the times – religion – was no longer a source of subjective wisdom.
Today, I would like for you to consider a new reimagining of this phrase. Is Story dead?
Consider the following quotes:
“When storytelling declines, the result is decadence.” ~ Aristotle
‘Deprive children of stories and you leave them unscripted, anxious stutterers in their actions as in their words.’ ~ Alasdair MacIntyre
Each year, over 50,000 scripts are registered at the Writers Guild of America, west. By including those scripts that have not been registered, the number is easily doubled. Each year, Hollywood spends over 1 billion dollars on story development.
Out of those numbers of scripts, less than 500 make it to the screen. Out of that number, less than a dozen are films of any true quality. Out of that dozen, we are told that five of these films (next year, it will be ten) are any good. Out of that five, we select one to represent what we believe is truth and excellence in storytelling. That one choice is often held up to the candle, to debate and discuss ad nauseum until the whole cycle begins again.
Technology has swept through Hollywood, like a raging inferno, incinerating each and every standard in its path. The upside to this is that film has never been less expensive – or more accessible – to produce. The price for this discount ticket is mighty – the devolution of story. Language has been reduced to a series of representational text bytes – “ruok” “wn2ply?” - and the enchanting “ull alw remain n my hart!”
This devaluation of language is then expressed in a devaluation of story, as language is the means by which we express story. The box office dependent story factory churns and regurgitates a series of half-truths, vomited up at the local Cineplex night after night. The public is so desperate for truthful storytelling that they then turn to the faux truth of the reality show – a double lie, as there is as much reality in THE BACHELOR and JON AND KATE as there is in DAYS OF OUR LIVES.
The societal implications of this decline are beyond disturbing. If art is a reflection of society, then, lords and ladies of the court, we are officially fucked. If art is a reflection of society, then we are a society of vapid, vain, entitled, thrill-seeking sociopaths with no need for change, or for transformation, because we’re working the system pretty damn well. If art is a reflection of life, we are, by large, a violent tribe, hell-bent on self-destruction, but not before we mow a few (insert perjorative describing the enemy here) down. If art is a reflection of life, then women are little more than big-breasted, long legged nymphs who can master martial art while giving the best blowjob G.I. Joe ever had. Violence is worshipped; rape is seen as a form of recreational sex, and scantily clad prepubescents assure us that there is nothing coming between them and their Calvins.
The above diatribe in mind, in combination with Nietzsche's musings, forces me to assert that yes, story is dead.
And yet ... while I do not embrace religion, I do believe that all may not be lost, that story can indeed be resurrected.
And so, my dear scribes, I challenge you to be the hero/heroine of Story. Take this challenge as a Call to Action on your journey. Understand the relationship of story to life. Accept responsibility for your writings – ask yourself, “Why am I writing this story? Is it necessary?”- and most importantly, “What is its effect upon society? Does this story need to be told/made?”
Last, but not least, get educated. I recently attended a storytelling seminar, filled with screenwriters, novelists and playwrights. Out of approximately 200 attendees, less than 12 had read Aristotle’s Poetics, and less than that number had more than a passing acquaintance with Homer’s The Odyssey. A few more knew Hamlet - one young woman asked me “Wasn’t that the one with Mel Gibson?”
Oy.
Imagine a doctor, a surgeon, who decided that the study of medicine “got in their way.” This doctor decides that s/he can read a couple of books, and pretty much just wing it. No need for Latin, no need for anatomy, virology or understanding the development of antiseptic practices. S/he scrubs in and points to a row of surgical instruments:
DOCTOR
Give me that thingy over there.
Story is God in our society, for story informs us of the deepest, darkest truths about our culture.
Do you want to be known as the writer who killed God? Will you be soulless bastard who made baby Jesus cry?
I hope not.
~ HRH, The Princess Scribe
WRITING ASSIGNMENT – take out your most trite and trivial tale you’ve ever written – and rewrite it. This time, give it meaning and truth.
SUGGESTED BOOKS – Poetics by Aristotle, The Odyssey by Homer, The Complete Works of William Shakespeare, The Hero with a Thousand Faces by Joseph Campbell, Story by Robert McKee and the collected works of Jane Austen and Robert Heinlen.
Labels:
Aristotle,
Calvin Klein,
God,
Hamlet,
Hollywood,
Homer,
Jesus,
Mel Gibson,
Nietzsche,
Robert McKee,
screenplay,
Shakespeare,
story,
The Odyssey,
Time,
writing
29 August 2009
An Open Letter to the Los Angeles Zoo
Gentle readers - While the following note has little, well, nothing, to do with writing, it does provide an example of the power of the pen. HRH thanks you for reading it.
29 August, 2009
Mr. John R. Lewis
Director, Los Angeles Zoo
Los Angeles Zoo
5333 Zoo Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90027
John.lewis@lacity.org
Dear Mr. Lewis:
I am writing in regard to an incident that took place at the Los Angeles Zoo one week ago today, Saturday, August 29, 2009.
As Zoo members, my husband and I participated in the early admission offered on that date for members. We thought it a wonderful idea, a great way to beat the overwhelming heat and crowds that occur each summer.
We had been there for a little over an hour, and were enjoying our favorite “show” – the vocalizations of the Siamings, when we began to hear a great ruckus from the chimpanzee enclosure. Thinking that perhaps the animals were being fed (most were), we walked towards the chimpanzees.
As we drew near, we could tell that something was unusual. Most of the chimps were crowded together near the front of the enclosure, and they were agitated, and very, very vocal.
Children were running excitedly towards the cage, thinking they were going to be treated to an extraordinary sight. Unfortunately, they were.
At first, it was difficult to discern what was the cause of the chaos. Then, suddenly, the horrific truth unfolded. A juvenile raccoon had wandered into the enclosure, most likely overnight. When the chimps were released into the enclosure for the day, it had attempted to hide by climbing into a tree. After a little over an hour, the chimps had discovered it, climbed up the tree, and flung it to the tribe below.
The poor creature was quite terrified. This is not anthropomorphism gone wild – the little raccoon was quite aware of its impending death, its eyes were wide in its great distress. The chimps tossed it back and forth among themselves. At one point, they threw it to the ground again, and the creature made a desperate attempt to escape. Sadly, this did not happen.
The behavior of the chimpanzees accelerated in its aggression. They began to pull the raccoon as it struggled, ripping it from one another’s grip.
My eyes repeatedly scanned the crowd for a zoo employee. I located two and quickly ran to them, asking them to do something, at least cordon off the area, as very small children were becoming quite traumatized. One muttered to me that a “trainer was in the pen” with the chimps (?); the second responded with “that’s just what chimps do.”
By the time I turned back, the raccoon was walking away from the alpha male, who then snatched the raccoon up, flipped it on its back, and drove its teeth into its pelvic region.
Near me, a young girl began to scream, as her horrified mother attempted to comfort her.
I spotted a docent – a volunteer. An unpaid supporter of your zoo was the only person to respond. She pulled out her cell phone and called for security.
My husband and I left the carnage. We walked silently to the front of the zoo. A couple walking near us told us that they had seen the raccoon when the zoo first opened. They told a keeper – the keeper did nothing.
I have a long history of the study of primate behavior, and realize that a single grown chimpanzee can kill a man, let alone an entire pack of them. That being said, the inaction of your employees was absolutely reprehensible and without excuse. Rather than stand around and drink Pepsi, your employees could have immediately called security and restricted the area, thus preventing the public (including about 40 small children) from witnessing such a traumatic event. Of course, the sad truth is that your keepers should have done a great deal more. A visual sweep of the enclosure prior to releasing the chimps into it would have completely prevented this gruesome event. Second to that, once the keeper had been made aware of the presence of the young raccoon in the enclosure, he could have worked to get the chimps back into their holding area, and rescued the little creature.
Think of the goodwill that any of those actions would have set into motion.
Think on this. The Zoo is located in Griffith Park. What if, for example, a pack of coyotes were to wander into the Zoo, and tear apart one of your young animals – oh, let’s say a chimp – for food? Or a mountain lion? For both are indigenous to this area, and they are, as pointed out, just doing “what they do”. I wonder what the Zoo’s action would be then. The hunting and killing of these native animals. Why? Ah. I have it. Your animals cost money. They are of value to you.
These are troubled times, and your Zoo has had more than its fair share of bad press over the last two years. Now, I understand why. Your staff completely disregarded the safety of a native species as well as the emotional well being of close to a hundred Zoo members - Zoo members that have the choice to not renew their membership.
I am asking for an immediate, public response to these events. I would like to know what the Los Angeles Zoo plans to do to ensure that such a catastrophe does not occur again. I am posting this letter on my viral sites (Facebook, Twitter, Linked In) in an effort to raise awareness of your organization's mishandling of this occurrence, as well as to encourage anyone else who was witness to what happened that day to speak up and do the same.
I will never, ever be able to erase the memory of the expression on that poor little animal’s face. And for that, I hold you completely accountable.
Sincerely,
29 August, 2009
Mr. John R. Lewis
Director, Los Angeles Zoo
Los Angeles Zoo
5333 Zoo Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90027
John.lewis@lacity.org
Dear Mr. Lewis:
I am writing in regard to an incident that took place at the Los Angeles Zoo one week ago today, Saturday, August 29, 2009.
As Zoo members, my husband and I participated in the early admission offered on that date for members. We thought it a wonderful idea, a great way to beat the overwhelming heat and crowds that occur each summer.
We had been there for a little over an hour, and were enjoying our favorite “show” – the vocalizations of the Siamings, when we began to hear a great ruckus from the chimpanzee enclosure. Thinking that perhaps the animals were being fed (most were), we walked towards the chimpanzees.
As we drew near, we could tell that something was unusual. Most of the chimps were crowded together near the front of the enclosure, and they were agitated, and very, very vocal.
Children were running excitedly towards the cage, thinking they were going to be treated to an extraordinary sight. Unfortunately, they were.
At first, it was difficult to discern what was the cause of the chaos. Then, suddenly, the horrific truth unfolded. A juvenile raccoon had wandered into the enclosure, most likely overnight. When the chimps were released into the enclosure for the day, it had attempted to hide by climbing into a tree. After a little over an hour, the chimps had discovered it, climbed up the tree, and flung it to the tribe below.
The poor creature was quite terrified. This is not anthropomorphism gone wild – the little raccoon was quite aware of its impending death, its eyes were wide in its great distress. The chimps tossed it back and forth among themselves. At one point, they threw it to the ground again, and the creature made a desperate attempt to escape. Sadly, this did not happen.
The behavior of the chimpanzees accelerated in its aggression. They began to pull the raccoon as it struggled, ripping it from one another’s grip.
My eyes repeatedly scanned the crowd for a zoo employee. I located two and quickly ran to them, asking them to do something, at least cordon off the area, as very small children were becoming quite traumatized. One muttered to me that a “trainer was in the pen” with the chimps (?); the second responded with “that’s just what chimps do.”
By the time I turned back, the raccoon was walking away from the alpha male, who then snatched the raccoon up, flipped it on its back, and drove its teeth into its pelvic region.
Near me, a young girl began to scream, as her horrified mother attempted to comfort her.
I spotted a docent – a volunteer. An unpaid supporter of your zoo was the only person to respond. She pulled out her cell phone and called for security.
My husband and I left the carnage. We walked silently to the front of the zoo. A couple walking near us told us that they had seen the raccoon when the zoo first opened. They told a keeper – the keeper did nothing.
I have a long history of the study of primate behavior, and realize that a single grown chimpanzee can kill a man, let alone an entire pack of them. That being said, the inaction of your employees was absolutely reprehensible and without excuse. Rather than stand around and drink Pepsi, your employees could have immediately called security and restricted the area, thus preventing the public (including about 40 small children) from witnessing such a traumatic event. Of course, the sad truth is that your keepers should have done a great deal more. A visual sweep of the enclosure prior to releasing the chimps into it would have completely prevented this gruesome event. Second to that, once the keeper had been made aware of the presence of the young raccoon in the enclosure, he could have worked to get the chimps back into their holding area, and rescued the little creature.
Think of the goodwill that any of those actions would have set into motion.
Think on this. The Zoo is located in Griffith Park. What if, for example, a pack of coyotes were to wander into the Zoo, and tear apart one of your young animals – oh, let’s say a chimp – for food? Or a mountain lion? For both are indigenous to this area, and they are, as pointed out, just doing “what they do”. I wonder what the Zoo’s action would be then. The hunting and killing of these native animals. Why? Ah. I have it. Your animals cost money. They are of value to you.
These are troubled times, and your Zoo has had more than its fair share of bad press over the last two years. Now, I understand why. Your staff completely disregarded the safety of a native species as well as the emotional well being of close to a hundred Zoo members - Zoo members that have the choice to not renew their membership.
I am asking for an immediate, public response to these events. I would like to know what the Los Angeles Zoo plans to do to ensure that such a catastrophe does not occur again. I am posting this letter on my viral sites (Facebook, Twitter, Linked In) in an effort to raise awareness of your organization's mishandling of this occurrence, as well as to encourage anyone else who was witness to what happened that day to speak up and do the same.
I will never, ever be able to erase the memory of the expression on that poor little animal’s face. And for that, I hold you completely accountable.
Sincerely,
24 August 2009
The Importance of Being Structured

Princess Scribe arose this morning to her usual routine – a glorious sunrise, bunnies fetching her slippers, little birdies draping a bathrobe round HRH’s shoulders, and a long-lashed doe presenting her with her ritual cup of green tea. All was right in the world, as Princess sat down to review the morning’s offerings before taking on DISTRICT 9 as a new blog subject.
However, the world is an uncertain place, and Princess found herself, mouth open in dismay, reading the following blog, “Be a StoryWeaver - NOT a Story Mechanic!”
An entire blog devoted to the argument that too much importance is placed upon structure.
While Princess is not inclined to argue with the theories of others, she found herself unable to not address the points raised and suggestions given in this most offending blog. (HRH must concede that the above mentioned blogger has since re-blogged on the subject, and in a mind boggling act of wordsmith acrobatics has simultaneously retracted - and defended - her original post. Oy vey, Maria). Princess also objects to the term "Mechanic" used in a derogatory sense, as HRH's step-princelet is himself a mechanic - with an advanced degree in engineering from a prestigious public university, partially funded by the Carnegie Foundation. Anyone who thinks that mechanics are slackers and hackers has a sadly limited understanding of quantum physics, string theory and mechanical engineering. HRH also has little use for marginalization. She appreciates it about as much as the residents of District 9 appreciate being called prawns.
Imagine her dismay at this sentence: “First, clear your mind of any thoughts about characters, plot, theme, and genre. Avoid any consideration of character arc, hero's journey, acts, scenes, sequences, beats, messages, premises, settings, atmosphere, and formulas. In short - don't give structure a second thought.”
Prior to this ill-given advice, this statement reared its ugly head: “We have all seen movies and read novels that feel like "paint by numbers" creations. Sure, they hit all the marks and cover all the expected relationships, but they seem stilted, uninspired, contrived, and lifeless. The authors of such pedestrian fare are Story Mechanics. A Story Mechanic is a writer who constructs a story as if it were a machine. Starting with a blueprint, the writer gathers the necessary dramatic components, assembles the gears and pulleys, tightens all the structural nuts and bolts, and then tries to make the story interesting with a fancy paint job.”
No, that’s not a Story Mechanic, milady. That’s a lazy writer.
Structure is a necessity. HRH repeats, structure is a necessity.
A story is like an architectural building, with the structure being the foundation, the supporting walls and the beams. The dialogue, characters and action – these are the elements where the artistry come to play – adding layers of color, hand crafting the finishing touches. Without solid structure, these elements are simply creating a façade, and one that could be toppled by the flapping wings of an Amazonian butterfly.Writing is a craft; it is also an art. Let us look to other artists, those who broke the mold, and how classic structure played into their works:
• Miles Davis studied classical European music at Julliard. Although he did not complete the program, he often said that that training contributed to the theoretical background, which he would rely greatly upon in later years. Before breaking the wall of musical structure with jazz (a highly structured form), he knew he must master the principles of notes.• Isadora Duncan studied classical ballet before becoming the muse of modern dance.
• Strasberg, Bobby Lewis, Sandy Meisner, Stella Adler … all studied the works of Konstantin Stanislavsky before branching off and creating their own systems of principles as applied to the craft of acting.To state that structure is over-rated or of secondary or little importance is not just naïve, it is reckless, and terrible advice. Structure is not an impediment to the writing process – structure is the foundation of your story. Even better – structure is liberating. Good, solid structure frees you to focus on character, on dialogue, on writing pointed, breathless lines of action. Structure sets you free, free to breathe life into the world that you have created, and the characters that people it. Free to write with great emotional resonance, to write stories with social impact, with words flowing like the vibrato-laden notes of the Lady Tennant Stradivarius.
Of course, it can feel mechanical when you are a structural newbie. Not unlike the rote learning of notes on a piano, or the painstaking repetition exercises – “I’m tired.” “You’re tired?” “I’m tired.” “You’re tired?” – of the actor-in-training, mastering structure takes time and work.
What every good scribe realizes, is that there is the Aha! moment in the practice of their craft in which structure becomes organic. Princess now writes stories, much to her delight, in which each beat drops down in perfect, classic placement without her even realizing it. Catalyst/Inciting Incident – pg 12 – 15. Break into Two? Pg 25. Midpoint? Oh, look, the sequence begins on 55. And so on and so on and so on.
She also finishes them. Completion is an added benefit of structure.
All it takes is practice - a great deal of it.
A secondary note – solid structure weathers the stresses of development hell. A story with a solid foundation can be an impenetrable fortress, the walls of which even the likes of Larry Levy cannot tumble down.
~ The Princess Scribe
TODAY’S ASSIGNMENT – Run, do not walk, far from anyone who suggests that structure is of little importance. Recommended read – Outliers, by Malcom Gladwell; Save the Cat! and Save the Cat! Goes to the Movies by Blake Snyder. Make your 10,000 hours happen. Build your foundation. Build it well.
21 August 2009
Married To It

“Dear Princess Scribe:
Once upon a time, I had an idea for a story. It was a tantalizing tale, and I quickly found myself courting it; I’d take it out in public, introduce it to people. Soon, I realized that what I had was a most perfect story. It was time for me to take the plunge, and commit myself wholly and completely.
But now, three years and six drafts later, I fear that the magic is gone. I no longer wake with this story on my mind. Instead, I find myself thinking about other stories. Taking them out. Talking about them. Working out the beats; massaging the B-story. Do I move on, and embrace these new delicious loglines? Or do I remain faithful to the old ball and chain? What do I do to fall in love with my story again?
Yours,
Disloyal Servant”
Dear Disloyal:
Ah, the capricious nature of the adulterous scribe.
Writing is more than a craft. Writing is a commitment. Not unlike a marriage.
I repeat ~ writing is a commitment.
There are the obvious commitments, of course: time, money, energy, creation of your space. Then there is the single most important commitment – to STORY. Three years and six drafts?
Let’s take a gander at these numbers:
• LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE spent five years and close to a hundred drafts by different writers before production began
• CAPOTE took over seven years to go from conception to completion
• INSIDE MAN, also close to seven years, according to Gerwitz’s post-screening Q&A hosted by Creative Screenwriting
Tell me, my fickle friend, where would any of these stories be if their scribes were two-timing them? Chances are, they’d never see completion.
A conversation I recently had, with a writer, to whom I was giving counsel:
WRITER
See, I’m a little ADD. I mean, I have to have a bunch
of projects going on. I write a little on this one for
awhile, then I move to that one, and then I have...
He gestures to his Board
WRITER (CONT’D)
this over here...
PRINCESS SCRIBE
How is that working for you?
WRITER
Great! Just great! I mean, I’ve got four projects going.
PRINCESS SCRIBE
How many have you completed?
WRITER
Of these? Well, none, yet.
PRINCESS SCRIBE
Have you written other scripts?
WRITER
Yeah, sure. Six scripts, maybe seven.
PRINCESS SCRIBE
And how many of those have you completed?
A pause.
WRITER
(blank stare)
Completed?
Good lords and ladies of the court, I rest my case.
A story is like a marriage. You must commit to it, each and every day. Writers write. Each and every day.
There are days, of course, when you don’t feel the magic. Welcome to the world. Guess what? You still have to commit to it. Each and every day. Like a marriage, writing takes work. And you will find that, some days, you just have to do the work.
So, you’ve lost the spark? Instead of blaming your partner – your story – you might take a look inward and determine why that spark isn’t there. Self-sabotage? Fear of failure? Perhaps something as simple as structure gone bad – scenes in need of reorder, a misidentified protagonist, two stories competing in one script. Your ennui may be screaming to you, to wake up, open your eyes, take a step back and explore every nook and cranny of your story. Go back to the beginning. Meet your characters for the first time, all over again. Get to know your story’s world. Try dating your story; I assure you that spark is still there. It’s your job to find it.
You will not find the spark if you abandon your story.
The above being said, Princess Scribe does concede the necessity of managing multiple projects as a challenge in the life of the scribe. Princess finds herself doing the same; she writes spec scripts as she prefers to write her own lies. However, as Los Angeles is a far more costly kingdom than say, Madison, Wisconsin, HRH finds herself working for hire while working on her own material. This arrangement is not an adulterous one. Think of it, instead, as polygamy.

You are Bill Henrickson, and your stories are his wives. Simple time management:

HRH’s Ye Olde Calendar
Princess Scribe rises at 5:30. 7 to 8:30 am is devoted to physical and mental transformation through physical exertion. At 9 am, her workday begins with spec writes/rewrites. 11 am heralds time for other business, face time with clients, phone calls, coffee dates. 2 – 4 pm is devoted to work for hire or consultations.
So, my dear Disloyal Subject, Princess suggests that you resist the temptation to play the field. Instead, she would prefer that you step back, take a deep breath and assess your commitment to your craft – and to your story. Divorce is simple. Writing is not. If it was, everyone could do it.
~The Princess Scribe
TODAY’S ASSIGNMENT: Write a one page article on your story, and why you are not at completion. Take responsibility for your actions, and create a game plan to drive you to the finish line.
Recommended reads: “101 Habits of Highly Successful Screenwriters” by Karl Iglesias; “The War of Art” by Steven Pressfield; recommended site: The Business of Show Business Institute
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)






