Writing about Writing

What have you learned about screenwriting lately?

2011-06-06T19:38:00.002+12:00

So, tomorrow night is the Wellington Writers Group meeting. I've passed on the role of co-ordinator of the group, but I have set the discussion topic for tomorrow night, which is:

“What have you learned about screenwriting lately?"

Short answer: a lot (I think).

I recently submitted an hour-long pilot episode into a NZWG screenwriting contest. For me, the simple act of completing this script in a straightforward manner within the set deadline was an accomplishment and a joy.

What I learnt about screenwriting from completing this:

I went into the writing process with three principles in descending order of importance. These three principles worked very well for me.

Principle #1: Deal with my emotions about writing as I go.

I have issues. Man, do I have issues. And I’ve found that feeling those issues while I’m writing doesn’t really help me write. It’s more likely to make me want to go hide in a dark cupboard.

However, if I face up to my emotions throughout the writing process, I’ve found that I can explore and address the negative feelings as I go. Then, once they’ve died down a bit, I can get on with the actual process of writing.

Principle #2: Feel positive about the direction I’m heading in.

What should I do when I realise I’m not happy with the script I’m working on?

People tell me: you should just keep writing a script to the end – you’ll learn things through the writing. Hmm, well maybe. But should I really spend weeks of my life writing something I don’t believe in when I know I need to rewrite it? Particularly if I have a deadline?

My way through this is to check in with myself about the script as I’m writing it. Outlines and other ‘higher-level’ documents can be great for this. The question is: am I feeling happy with where this is going? If not, what can I adjust about the script from here on in? I can come in and mop up the old stuff later.

Note I do not ask myself: is this script perfect? Because it won’t be. And that question can be a terrible trap of procrastination for us perfectionists.

Principle #3: Keep working solidly within the timeframes I’ve laid out

I stuck to my deadlines on this project. I worked solidly and didn’t procrastinate too much. That way I had time to deal with the problems that inevitably emerged.

Outside of these principles, I also learned how important it is for me to have an outside voice to provide feedback on a project: a reflector. I need someone to provide an independent mirror to my project, to give me that perspective that I just can’t see. I had two reflectors on this project, hix and Lyse. Thanks to them both.

Giving myself a fair bit of time is good. I do work well under pressure; but I work even better under pressure with enough time to turn out something good. And allowing some time to reflect between different iterations of a project; that’s important too.

How about you? What have you learnt about writing recently?

Lots of things a good writer needs

2010-11-22T20:01:00.003+13:00

Picking up from my last post, I asked my writing group to come up with the things a good writer needs. Thanks to Jackie, Malcolm, Warren, Steven, Jade, Steve, Ben, and Matt for the suggestions below (hope I haven't forgotten anyone!)

In no particular order, a good writer needs:

Mentor(s)
Objectivity
A desire for continuous improvement
An audience
Rewards
Something to write on
Judgement
Professionalism
Resilience
The ability to adapt
Luck
Joy in Writing
Basic composition skills
Talent
Craftsmanship
Practice
Passion
Drive
Obsession/Inner necessity
Self-belief
Chutzpah
Honest and reliable feedback
An ability to listen to feedback
A comfortable emotional state for their writing
Lots of ideas
Open-mindedness
Access to the industry
Social skills
Routine/discipline
The ability to know when to quit.

Anything we missed out?

Three things a good writer needs

2010-11-01T19:27:00.002+13:00

It's writers group time again. The topic for tomorrow night's meeting is:

"What are three things you think a good screenwriter needs?"

A deliberately broad topic that allows people to take it as seriously or as lightly as they like. What I'm hoping is to get a wide spectrum of ideas by asking people not to repeat the previous ideas if possible. So if we get 10 people along to the meeting, we might even get 30 ideas.

I'll start it off with these three things that I think a good screenwriter needs:

1) Joy in what they're doing.

The first point I thought of was 'perseverance' (which was funnily enough the first response from someone else attending tomorrow's meeting).

Thinking about it further though, I revised this point to a writer's joy in the act of writing. I totally think a writer needs perseverance in order to stick out writing long enough to become a good writer. But I think enjoying what you're doing will help you stick with it and give you resilience for the bad times. And hey, if you're not enjoying something, you've got to really ask why you're doing it in the first place...

2) An audience

The audience doesn't need to be big, but I think every writer needs someone. Someone needs to read and appreciate your work. Sometimes I'm my only audience for a project, but even then, I'm acting the role of the audience!

3) A life

After all, what else is there to write about?

I've got quite a few other points, but I want to keep it to three for now. I'll be interested to hear what people bring up at the meeting, and I'll aim to post a list of them here on the blog.

How about you? What are your three points? No repeating!

Who do I base my characters on?

2010-05-31T21:09:00.003+12:00

So, writers group tomorrow night. The topic for this meeting (suggested by my lovely wife - thanks hon!) is:

"Who do you base your characters on?"

A deliberately provocative question I know, because maybe you don't base your characters on anyone. Well that's fine, but I sure do.

I've figured out four different approaches that I take to creating characters.

1. I base them on other people

I find other people to be an interesting and ready source of character traits and motivations. They're everywhere! The plus side of this approach is that I'll never run out of characters.

The down sides are that I tend to feel guilty about 'stealing' from real people; or otherwise I feel afraid of offending friends/acquaintances/enemies when they realise that a character is based on them. The latter issue is not something I should worry about too much... I know that Hix based characters in Hopeless on some mutual friends, but I co-wrote the script with him and even I didn't realise that. And those people who did see themselves in the characters in Hopeless tended to be wrong. People are complex, so really as a writer you're unlikely to nail anyone so neatly and completely as to cause a blow.

2. I base them on me

In some ways, I know myself better than I know anyone else. And taking my own concerns and injecting them into characters is a good way to ensure that I'll be interested in them, even if no one else is. It gives the characters and the script a bit more dynamism if they're working out my issues. So the plus side of this approach is that it's personal. The down side is that it's personal.

3. I base them on other characters

Ideas are often not as fresh as they first seem, and characters can suffer from this problem along with other ideas. I often find that my first iterations of a character are not that original, and that I've probably snatched the idea of the character from some other story. So the plus side of this approach is that it's easy. The down side is it's lazy.

4. A mixture of all of the above.

This is actually what I do in reality, until I can't remember where the character came from. Once you fall in love with them, it doesn't matter anymore. That's when they feel real and as if they didn't come out of you at all!

Why do I write for film?

2010-05-03T22:20:00.001+12:00

I co-ordinate a Wellington writers group, and tomorrow night the topic is:

"Why have you decided to be a screenwriter/playwright/whatever you are? What makes that particular medium special to you?"

Why this topic? Well, longer time readers of this blog will know that I am narcissistically fascinated in my own desire to write. This blog began as ‘Why I Write?’ and many of the older posts are explorations of answers to that question.

So getting a bit deeper than that, I think I’m interested in why we choose the mediums that we do. I see our choices as a complex mix of contemporary forces and personal expression. Screenwriting in particular is a modern phenomenon, and in that respect a desire to be a screenwriter strikes me as almost faddish. If we were in the 18th century, none of us would be screenwriters. Screenwriting appears to me to be the young popular medium that has overshadowed all others, at least in the circles I move in (novelists/playwrights/poets/comic book artists/graffiti artists/Hallmark card writers feel free to blow me out of the water...) So I look at my own embrace of screenwriting with a certain degree of distrust; do I do it just because it’s the popular choice, or for more intrinsic reasons?

Well, there’s certainly some things I enjoy about film as a medium (I’ll talk about film, rather than TV, which I have also written for, but I’ll try to keep this post under control by dealing just with film.)

Film is fast – stories tend to be less than two hours long. That encourages brevity, which actually plays to a key strength of mine; I’m too lazy to write long. And I admire brevity – I like condensing material to its essence. I’ve never forgotten Hix telling me about what he did with the earlier drafts of Hopeless before I came on board as a co-writer; he talked about how he combined multiple characters into single characters, giving the single characters the strengths of the multiple ones. I like that kind of work - boiling things down to create a headier brew. Film demands you do that because you don’t have time.

Film is a collaborative medium, and I like others to read my work and get behind it. Film requires that I get a team around me; and if I can get a team around me, that feels validating for the work I’ve created. One of the reasons I started writing screenplays was because others were doing it, and that meant that I could do it with them.

I do love watching films, though I don’t think a great film stands above reading a great novel for me in terms of enjoyment. There are plenty of films that are etched in my brain though; and so I do feel a debt of love for the medium. I want to excel within it because I know how great it can be.

And finally film is something I’ve had some success in, and I know something about how to write screenplays. That doesn’t answer why I started screenwriting, but it does go some way to answer why I continue in it.

There are downsides to screenwriting too: most commercially minded cinema no longer especially interests me so I have trouble picturing a place for myself in the industry; the collaborative nature of film-making has the downside (as well as advantage) of being dependent on others for success; film is expensive and the competition for funding is tough.

Other mediums interest me too: theatre and novel writing are both starting to whisper to me. But I’ll stick with screenwriting in the medium term at least; I know it and love it, and want to consolidate the lessons that I’ve learnt.

Plus I need to finish something – so it might as well be that screenplay I’m in the middle of (Run), and then that other screenplay I’m in the middle of (The Gap)… That should keep me going for a while.

Why I Write: To Surprise

2009-08-30T18:45:00.003+12:00

This post is about what I learnt about myself after getting through my Dip yesterday.

But first I want to talk about what I used to do when I was nine*.

When I was nine*, I spent my breaks at school in the classroom constructing a maze, that eventually grew to six full scrapbook pages. My maze was so devious that I spent one entire scrapbook page drawing a dead end. My reasoning was this - no one would believe that they could possibly be in a dead end. Who would believe that I had spent all that time and effort to simply lead them down a false trail? It would be too big a surprise for any of my nine year-old classmates to even fathom.

(And so it proved - they all gave up on my maze. And having lost my audience, I gave up too.)

After getting through my Dip, I realised yesterday that the same devious urge to surprise and mislead my audience still exists today inside me.

I like writing because I like to surprise people. Writing for me is a way of presenting creative surprises, shocks, twists, and turns.

A script for me is a vehicle for delivering those surprises to an audience. I'm willing to go to ridiculous effort, years of my life, in order to present something different, something which surprises and astounds.

One of the reasons I struggle with scripts is because I often forget the surprises that are in them, given the huge amount of time it takes to finish. I have to apply this lesson to The Gap, and remember the surprises that someone should get approaching the story fresh. And I need to keep projects going until they're made so I get to deliver those surprises.

I can see now that this wish to surprise has been a key driver in my creative writing/paid work/humour/this blog/my approach to just about everything. And it's taken a Dip to see it...

* Approximate age only

Why I Don't Write: The Dip

2009-08-29T18:29:00.006+12:00

I got through a Dip today.

I was asking myself whether I should continue writing. Not whether I should quit writing The Gap and write something else, but whether I should quit writing altogether.

At the same time as I was going through the Dip, I knew that the Dip itself wasn't actually a bad thing. If I did decide to stop writing, then that would be the right decision for me. But if I didn't stop writing (which I have to admit in my heart of hearts seemed the far more likely scenario), then I would learn something important about myself.

I didn't quit. I did learn something important about myself.

My next post will be on what that was.

Looking Back

2009-06-13T19:06:00.006+12:00

Given this blog has been around for a year now (Happy Birthday blog!), I thought it was time to look back and see if I’d learnt anything.

Looking back over my previous posts I can see that:

I’m more interested in questions than answers. The posts I find most interesting are the ones that explore inner conflicts, live issues, and conflicting positions, rather than the posts that try to provide the definitive answer to a problem.
I suffer from perfectionism. Just getting stuff done in a systematic and consistent fashion is helping to balance that out.
Writing is getting easier for me. It no longer tends to put me in a bad mood. In fact, I’m more conscious of the ways it puts me in a good mood.
Some of my projects have been put to bed (either permanently or temporarily). I’m now solely working on The Gap, and hope to work on The Kingdoms once that is done. I have no further plans, because I can sense how much time and effort I am going to put into The Gap. At the same time, I believe I will finish The Gap and get it made.
I drink ginger beer now rather than Coke.

How I Write: In the Flow (2)

2009-06-01T21:46:00.003+12:00

Today I've had one of the best days of writing I've ever had. Writing today was easy - a state of 'flow'.

What I particularly liked about today's flow state was it felt like a natural space for me to be in. I woke up this morning and I knew that I wanted to write. And that's what I've done, calmly and methodically for the majority of the day. I'd take breaks and then I'd come back to the writing again - not because I had to, but because I wanted to. I didn't feel driven. I felt right.

I've avoided the idea of writing as a full-time occupation for a number of years now, partly because I felt that I wouldn't be able to get the most out of my days, as I regularly find writing so hard that I couldn't spend most of the day doing it.

If I was able to write like today on an ongoing basis - even an occasional ongoing basis - then that reason no longer stacks up.

Because my flow state today was easy. It was effective. It was lasting. And it feels like it will be back.

Here's hoping.

Why I Write: To Grow Myself

2009-05-16T11:16:00.003+12:00

I’ve been realising recently that I really love growing myself, or helping others to grow.

What do I mean by ‘growing myself’? I think it’s about deepening my understanding so I change the way I relate to others, my environment, and even myself.

I love this process of progressively understanding something at a deeper level. For instance, I’m really enjoying working on The Gap, the script I’m writing. As my understanding of the script develops, the way I relate to it changes. I become more and more capable of writing it!

(Plus The Gap is all about people who are growing themselves. So in the process of writing The Gap, I am growing myself by writing about people growing themselves...)

This is also something I find hugely rewarding about my day job. I am encouraged to grow in my job and develop my thinking, and I’m also asked to coach other people to help develop themselves.

I will not be tomorrow who I am today – though mostly it’s hard to tell any difference! I have trouble remembering how I’ve changed. Writing this blog is one way for me to remember who I used to be...

Albion - Don Quixote

2009-05-13T08:59:00.000+12:00

Warning: Contains spoilers from a 400 year-old book.

I’ve recently finished reading Don Quixote by Miguel Cervantes. It’s amazing how a novel so old can seem so fresh. I guess that’s why they call it a classic.

Anyway, the purpose of this post is to explore the similarities and differences between Don Quixote and my (as yet unwritten) Albion project.

One of my concerns going into Don Quixote was that I’d find all the ground I wanted to cover in Albion had already been done. Luckily I’ve found these two are not covering the same ground at all. In fact, I think they’re from opposite sides of the planet.

Similarities

Both stories are comedies about mad characters who embrace a chivalric identity – Don Quixote de la Mancha in Don Quixote and King Arthur in Albion. Both characters are so strong in their convictions that they are able to draw others into their madness: Don Quixote has his faithful squire, Sancho Panza; King Arthur has an entire town (and even a country in one iteration).

Differences

Don Quixote is a sustained work of satire. The intention is always to lampoon notions of chivalry by exploding them against the real world. Don Quixote holds up our romantic notions and asks: do these hold up when you test them against the way the world really is? Or are we just making fools of ourselves?

By the end of the novel, the romantic ideal of the pastoral life (a common theme at the time Cervantes was writing) is skewered in precisely the same way as the romantic ideal of chivalry. In Don Quixote, illusions mislead us into folly. Those follies are amusing for the reader, but are a warning against taking our illusions literally. Don Quixote is a comic novel with deeply serious intent.

Albion is more forgiving of illusion – in fact, foolishness is more likely to arise from being unwilling to embrace illusion. Albion is dealing with a world in need of romanticism. The spreading madness of the King goes to the heart of that – chivalry in Albion is an idea whose time has come. Romanticism may not be enough, but it’s a needed step.

And Albion isn't a satire. A comedy, but not a satire.

So ultimately I feel Don Quixote and Albion are quite opposite in intent and approach. Which makes me feel better - I’m glad I’m not in competition with Cervantes!

What are my goals as a writer?

2009-05-10T20:31:00.002+12:00

I came up with this question for discussion at our most recent NZWG Wellington Writer’s Group. Having set it, I then had to try and answer it!

I came up with these answers:

In one year

I want to have finished a first and second draft of The Gap (the script I’m working on), and started to assemble a project team that can actually get it made.

In five years

I want to have a slate of projects with some level of funding attached, so I can reduce the level of non-writing work I have to do.

In ten years

I want to be able to make a good living out of writing things that I want to write!

Now that I’ve defined my goals, I want to think further about how to achieve those goals, and what the obstacles are.

How about you? What are your goals? And do you find goal-setting useful?

Watchmen, The Room, and the Shared Experience

2009-04-23T20:51:00.004+12:00

I’ve had the pleasure of seeing two films recently that I enjoyed very much, for wildly different reasons. What I want to focus on in this post is the audience response to these films: in one case, unusually divergent, in the other case, eerily similar.

Watchmen has led to a lot of debate amongst people I know and fellow bloggers. Opinion is definitely polarised – and in my opinion, more so than most films. People are responding to the same film in very different ways. I liked the sex scene set to 'Hallelujah' – for others, it’s the height of ludicrousness.

Which brings me to the other extreme.

On Monday, I had the pleasure of seeing The Room for the first time. If you enjoy 'bad movies', you have to see this film. Put simply, it’s the greatest 'bad movie' I have ever seen. The Room is so funny and particular that watching it was a sublime experience, and one I'm looking forward to repeating.

And something I found particularly fascinating was that The Room manages to create a very similar shared experience across viewers.

The four of us who saw it found it hilarious. We laughed at the same points – we made a number of ‘original’ wisecracks. Following up on the film the next day, we realised that most of our off-the-cuff observations were echoed across the Internet – sometimes down to nearly exactly the same line. What we found funny about the film was precisely the same stuff that the legion of Internet/LA fans find funny.

As a result of this, The Room has actually built up a ritualistic set of audience responses in the same way as the Rocky Horror Picture Show. Self-styled super-fans enjoy the shared experience of shouting lines (and spoons!) at the screen. It sounds like they get pretty much the same experience time and time again.

It got me thinking about authorial intention in cinema.

Is The Room a success for delivering such a consistent response, and Watchmen a failure because the audience responds so differently?

Is the aim of screenwriting to get the audience to feel a certain way about your work? And do you fail as a screenwriter if the audience doesn't respond as you expected?

Why I Write: For the Money (2)

2009-04-11T12:17:00.003+12:00

It’s hard to argue with the idea that screenwriters should be properly recompensed for their hard work, and that they should insist on decent writing rates and conditions.

But equally it’s hard to argue with the screenwriter that is willing to work for free in order to ‘break into the industry’ or simply get their vision up on screen.

I can see the virtue in both sides of this argument. So this is a debate where polarity management comes in useful; polarity management being the idea that apparently opposite sides of an argument can each have a good case to make, and the aim is to acknowledge and manage the debate rather than claim one side as the winner.

Helen and I were talking about this yesterday, and we came up with a principle that I feel incorporates the two sides of the argument for me. It’s this:

If someone is going to make a profit out of your work, then you as the screenwriter should be making a profit as well.

As screenwriters we don’t want to get ripped off. So it’s up to us to protect the investment that we’ve put into our work. And therefore to insist on decent writing rates and conditions.

But the ‘if’ in the principle above is a big one. A lot of films aren’t really making money, so where is this profit we’re meant to be earning as a screenwriter going to come from? So even though we should protect ourselves, we should be realistic about the expected return.

And sometimes that return won't be money - there are different kinds of 'profit'. As a screenwriter, you want to make sure that your input into the finished film is properly recognised, and therefore you're rewarded in that way.

Something that further confuses the situation in the film industry is that it can often be hard to tell who’s making money and who isn’t. For those of you who haven’t seen it, Hix has linked to a very good post about Monkey Points. The key idea: make sure you sure you’re in line for a percentage of the gross profit rather than net profit. You’ll probably never see another cent if you wait for the net profit to come through.

Oh, and here’s a link to my earlier post on writing for the money as well.

Why I Write: To Share

2009-03-21T18:11:00.004+13:00

I’ve realised that one reason I write is to share.

As a concept, sharing goes a long way towards explaining why I write. (I’m not sure I need to explain why I write, but long-term readers of this blog will know that’s one of my interests!)

Sharing to me suggests that my script/film is an act of approaching the audience and saying:

“Take a look at this. I think it’s interesting. If you think it’s interesting too, let’s explore it together.”

Sharing implies a mutual process. As a writer, I need to be able to show why I am interested in my script. And I'm asking, not telling, an audience member to engage with the work.

Sharing starts with the writer and an act of offering something up. But it’s not a solitary act.

I’ve often heard writers say they write to communicate. I’ve said this myself, but never been entirely happy with the concept. ‘Writing to communicate’ strikes a chord with me, but the chord doesn’t sound quite right – like there’s one note out of place.

The thing is - writing to communicate sounds a little one way to me. Like I’m the only one with something to say, and everyone needs to shut up and listen to me.

I’m naturally uncomfortable holding the floor like that. I don't want to hold a megaphone and force the audience to listen to me. I don’t want that responsibility for starters!

I prefer the idea of sharing. Offer something to the audience. See if they’re as interested as you are. And if they are, let them do some of the work as well…

How I Write: In The Flow

2009-03-12T08:02:00.004+13:00

On Sunday, I found my writing flow. I thought I'd write down how I found it and what it is, partly as a reminder for myself for when I don't have it!

First thing Sunday, I was working on The Gap but finding the process hard going. I wanted to be doing anything else, and found myself continually procrastinating.

More than that - I realised I was stressed.

I was stressed in exactly the same way I would be if I was at a dinner party where I wasn't enjoying myself, but was making an effort to look like I was having a great time.

That realisation woke me up. Instead of being in touch with the writing, I was at a distance. And I was finding working like that was a draining experience. It was tiring me out!

So I did something totally different. I wrote a dialogue between my two main characters.

I let them talk about their issues, but in a very unreal way - something I'd never use in the finished script. I let them be my mouthpieces and just let them talk about what they were concerned about. Or rather, what I was interested in.

What I was looking for was not to get to the heart of them, but to get to the heart of my interest in the script. The nugget, to throw back to an old idea.

And I got into the flow. The writing wasn't hard anymore. It was rejuvenating actually. I wrote the first scenes for The Gap that I thought were actually good.

I haven't been able to totally hold on to Sunday's flow experience. It hasn't taken permanently. However I have been able to get back to feelings similar to it. And I'm continuing to write stuff which I think is better. So I think Sunday has made a lasting impact on me.

How I Write: Maturing My Scripter Self

2009-03-08T18:31:00.004+13:00

I've realised that I have at least two writing 'selves'.

The first, which I'll call the Planner, is my more familiar self.

In my Planner self, I'm figuring the script out from a distance - I don't want to get too close. I'm considering the questions of theme, of structure, of the purpose of a script. I come up with plot, characters, and situations, and can write a million and one notes (for the current script, 'The Gap', Hix and I have put together a Foolscap File Box full of notes...) I can stay in this Planner self long enough to kill a script - to have written it to death in my head without actually having written it at all.

The second self, which I've been experiencing again as I start to write 'The Gap', is my Scripter self. In this self, I'm actually writing, but in many ways I'm running scared. I'm usually just trying to blat it out. Thinking? Consideration? Who needs it? I just want to get the scene written as fast as possible and get it done.

The Scripter self picks up directly from the point I left him, which happens to have been the moment I finished working on my previous script 'Run' last year. I use the same style, the same tone, the same voice for the characters... And I can sense my Planner frustration (what's happened to all that good work we were doing!!) with the results the Scripter self is firing out.

I'm not suggesting that this differentiation of writing 'selves' is utterly unique to me - in fact I hope that other writers reading this post may be able to relate. But I am very conscious that in my case, I've spent a lot of time in my Planning self for the last ten years, and far less time in my Scripter self.

Consequently I'm feeling that my Scripter self has a lot of maturing to do. I need to be able to loosen up and consider options while I'm actually writing. I want to be able to calmly think about the best ways to express character and the heart of the scene, rather than always going for the easiest course, just because I want to be done with it as fast as possible. If I want to be a professional writer, then I need to be a lot more comfortable in my Scripter self.

I'm hoping that my Planner self can help my Scripter self, so that this maturing process doesn't take years! But it seems to me that getting more comfortable with my Scripter self is the most important thing I can be doing right now as a writer. So if it takes years, it takes years!

Finally, I'm sure there's some things my Planner self can learn from my Scripter self too - like when to let go and just do it!

How I Write: By Ambush

2009-03-01T18:14:00.004+13:00

Yesterday I started writing 'The Gap'.

I wasn't expecting to. Well, I knew I was heading in that general direction, but I knew that I wanted to write a step-by-step outline for the project first, and knowing me that would have taken at least a month...

So I knew I wasn't ready. But then, all of a sudden, I was.

I picked up my pen, grabbed the back of an old script (which is what I use for scrap-paper), and worked my way through my first scene. (Not a good first scene, but it'll get better). And past that first scene I can feel a whole reservoir of words.

So, I've officially started writing 'The Gap'.

Thinking about it today, I've realised that starting to write my last script 'Run' was exactly the same. I don't see the actual writing coming.

I dawdle around the edge of the pool, afraid to dive in. And eventually there's a moment when I realise 'Hey, I could just leap in now'. So I dive in, swim around, and think 'There, that's not so bad'. And then I feel ashamed about the dawdling before taking the dive, and all that thinking work feels like procrastination...

So either I have to sneak up on the script or the script has to sneak up on me.

How about you? Does the writing take you by surprise?

The Good, the Bad, and the Untruthfully Ugly

2009-01-17T19:42:00.001+13:00

I’ve been interested in polarities lately – the key idea being that apparent opposite sides of an argument can each have a good case to make, hence the fact there’s a clash in the first place. I think polarities are rich for storytelling and expect I’ll talk more about my fascination with them in later posts.

For this post, I want to focus on an element of storytelling that isn’t quite this type of polarity but is still based around opposites. My focus is this – that as a storyteller, I can tell a story about the ‘Good life’ through portraying the good, or through the total inverse, portraying the bad.

I’m working on a science fiction movie called The Gap. A key aspect of this project is portraying the ‘Good life’ – as in a better way to live, which I admire – through the struggles of the two main characters. I want both of them to be heroes, by struggling their way through adversity and embodying virtues that I think are admirable.

Pretty standard, right? But not the only way to talk about the ‘Good life’.

Think about ‘Requiem for a Dream’ (spoiler alert for anyone who hasn’t seen it). The characters in that story are terribly damaged by the end – perhaps not irrevocably – but still, as a friend of mine put it recently, in a state of suffering. It’s a traumatic movie, but I believe for good purpose. I believe the story is all about showing how bad life can get, and giving me (the viewer) a warning – this what life can be like. Avoid the abyss. Appreciate what I’ve got. In other words, value the Good life.

I’m fascinated that both approaches are effective. How can a writer do two opposite things and yet achieve the same overall effect?

I sense that a key concept at the heart of all this is authenticity. If a story is convincingly told, and rings with the truth, then I am encouraged to consider the relation of that story to my own life through the force of my engagement with it. Basically, if I care about the characters and believe in them, then I’ll compare their life to mine, and make my own moral judgements accordingly.

If, on the other hand, the depiction is shallow or cliched (a Goody-Goody-Two-Shoes character who I neither like or believe in), then that work can turn me away in horror. I’ll recoil from the depiction, but hopefully not from my own moral values.

Thinking about this has helped me articulate a problem I have with censorship. If a storyteller uses their work to challenge something repugnant by its truthful depiction (the rationalisations of Humbert Humbert in Lolita spring to mind), then the work should be celebrated for its moral effect rather than condemned or held up for censorship. Whereas a work that more falsely glamourised the actions of Humbert Humbert (simply by not ‘nailing’ the truth of the character) could be a nasty piece of work.

It’s a risk we run as storytellers. We’d better get it right, or it can get ugly.

Albion - the 'Chekhov' version

2008-12-13T23:58:00.005+13:00

INT. ERIC’S DINING ROOM - DAY

ERIC finishes a letter at the table. There’s an untouched plate of toast beside him. His mood is morose, gloomy. He wears a dressing gown and tiger slippers.

His wife GWEN runs in, adjusting her police uniform.

ERIC
Gwen.

Gwen kisses him quickly, dons her police cap.

GWEN
Writing?

ERIC
A little.

GWEN
Read it later, honest.

Gwen points at the toast next to Eric. Eric shrugs, passes her the toast. Gwen stuffs it in her mouth and bolts for the door.

ERIC
I love you.

Gwen turns, gives him a smile, goes.

Eric signs the letter. He places it in an envelope, leaves the envelope propped up on the table. The envelope is titled “For Gwen”.

EXT. ERIC’S HOUSE - DAY

Eric wanders outside, still in his dressing gown and slippers. He stops by the letterbox, breathes in the fresh air and sunlight. A flicker of enjoyment.

Eric notices the front door is still wide open. He glares at it. He reaches for it listlessly, he’s nowhere near.

Eric shrugs, giving up. He strolls past the letterbox.

EXT. MAIN STREET - DAY

The shopping district of Stafford. Eric wanders along, attracting surprised looks from fellow pedestrians.

A young mother JULIE drags her four year old son MAX across the street, away from Eric. Max stares at Eric in amazement. Eric waves at both of them.

LANCE pulls up beside Eric in a beaten-up truck, which takes up most of the street. Lance hops out. Eric walks on, Lance beside him. There’s a honking noise.

LANCE
Eric.

ERIC
Lance.

LANCE
How are you?

ERIC
Fine.

Lance doubts this. There’s another honk.

LANCE
Haven’t seen you in a while -

ERIC
(firmly)
I’m good.

LANCE
(relieved)
Okay then. Later!

Lance waves, rushes back to his truck. Eric smiles, shakes his head, walks on.

EXT. BRIDGE - DAY

Eric stands on the narrow railing of the town bridge.

The river rushes below.

Eric closes his eyes, prepares to jump.

PETE (O.S)
Mind if I watch?

Eric opens his eyes. An elderly man, PETE, leans against the railing beside him.

ERIC
What?

PETE
I’ve never seen anyone commit suicide before. (beat) That is what you’re doing, right?

ERIC
Yes.

PETE
Good.

ERIC
Why is that good?

PETE
I’m sure you’ve got your reasons.

Pete waits. Eric hovers on the edge.

Eric prepares to jump, but he’s too conscious of Pete.

ERIC
(gesturing at Pete)
Do you mind?

PETE
No, of course not.

Pete takes a few steps back, continues staring intently.

Eric tries again, gives up.

Eric steps back off the railing. Pete’s disappointed.

ERIC
I can’t.(beat) Not yet.

PETE
Take your time.

Pete passes Eric a bottle of bourbon.

PETE
Help you get your courage up.

Eric tries it, screws up his face.

PETE
Now, leaping off a bridge has got to be better than that.

Eric nods.

PETE
So what is it? Cancer?

ERIC
No.

PETE
Incest? Adultery?

ERIC
I’m holding my wife back.

PETE
You hate her.

ERIC
I love her. But I’m a loser. I haven’t had a job for a year. I do nothing all day. I used to dream about writing, but I can’t. I’m useless.

PETE
Alright then.

ERIC
I can’t even kill myself.

Eric is in despair. Pete puts his arm around him.

PETE
Nonsense. You’re putting yourself down. You don’t believe in yourself.

ERIC
I don’t. You’re right.

PETE
And there’s your problem. The man I saw standing on top of that bridge knew the meaning of action. He was willing to look life in the eye and say stuff it.

ERIC
True.

PETE
Every decision you make is in your hands. You make the difference. Don’t worry about me or anyone else. Just do it.

ERIC
Absolutely.

Eric picks himself up.

ERIC
What was I thinking? Thank you.

Eric walks off. Pete watches him go, disappointed.

PETE
Damn.

EXT. ERIC’S HOUSE - DAY

Eric whistles as he passes the letterbox.

He pauses to enjoy the sunlight on his face.

Eric strolls through the still-open front door.

INT. ERIC’S DINING ROOM - DAY

Eric ruefully observes the letter he left for Gwen. He reaches out to pick it up.

There’s a SQUEAKING sound. Eric looks up.

A heavy-set man, GRAYSON, watches Eric from the doorway to the lounge. Grayson hefts a mostly full rubbish bag in one hand, and carries a video under the other arm.

Grayson drops the rubbish bag and places the video aside.

Eric steps back, puts his arms out. He doesn’t want trouble.

Grayson impassively walks toward Eric, slides by him. Eric cries out in pain. Grayson vanishes out the front door, pulling it shut behind him.

Eric finds a knife protruding from his abdomen. He stares in it in disbelief.

Eric stumbles for the phone, misses it. He falls to the ground.

Silence. Beat. Beat. Beat.

The sound of the front door being unlocked.

Gwen saunters into the room, oblivious.

She spots the letter on the table, opens it, begins to read. Her calm expression turns to horror.

GWEN
Oh God!

Gwen stumbles away from the table. She sees Eric lying on the ground with the knife sticking out of him.

GWEN
(even more horrified)
Oh God!

EXT. MAIN STREET - DAY

An ambulance zooms through the busy street. Max stares at it in amazement.

INT. SURGERY - DAY

The hospital doctors rush to save Eric’s life.

A nurse bustles Gwen out of the surgery room.

GWEN
How is he?

The nurse grimaces, shuts the door on Gwen’s face.

EXT. GARDEN - DAY

Eric walks out of darkness into a beautiful garden. In the centre of the garden is a pond. Gwen stands in this pond, dressed in flowing white lace.

Gwen smiles, welcoming. Eric walks towards her.

INT. SURGERY - DAY

Eric’s heart monitor stops. The doctors struggle to resuscitate him.

EXT. GARDEN - DAY

Eric crosses the pond to reach Gwen. The water barely covers the tops of his shoes.

As he reaches her, Gwen stretches out her arms and offers him a sparkling sword.

Eric takes it from her hands, examines the blade.

Abrupt cut to black.

INT. SURGERY - DAY

Eric’s heart monitor reveals life signs. The doctors congratulate each other.

Fade out.

INT. HOSPITAL CORRIDOR - DAY

Gwen marches along the corridor in civilian clothes. She looks expectant, and carries a large book.

INT. HOSPITAL ROOM - DAY

Gwen enters Eric’s hospital room. Eric is propped up in bed, and looks much recovered. He smiles at her.

ERIC
Hi.

GWEN
Hey.

She kisses him. He returns the kiss with interest.

ERIC
(spies the book)
You brought it.

Gwen passes him the book, an illustrated tome on the adventures of King Arthur.

GWEN
Yeah. Mind telling me why?

Eric flicks through the book. He settles on a page.

ERIC
(triumphant)
Ah. There it is.

GWEN
What’s going on, Eric? You said you’d tell me once you got the book.

Gwen sits beside him, takes his hand.

GWEN
It’s like you’re hiding something.

ERIC
Alright then.

He shows her a picture in the book. The sword Excalibur being held aloft, sparkling.

ERIC
It’s the one I saw.

GWEN
Near death experiences produce -

ERIC
It’s the same one, Gwen. That shows I was brought back for a reason.

GWEN
Sure, for us.

ERIC
Definitely. But more than that.
(reads from the book)
“The once and future king will return when the people need him.”

GWEN
Who?

ERIC
Your name’s Gwen. My best friend’s name is Lance. Lancelot.
(leans in)
I am King Arthur.

INT. HOSPITAL CORRIDOR - DAY

Gwen sits with her head in her hands.

She’s tapped on the shoulder.

Gwen looks up to see two plainclothes CIB cops, JARROD and MORGAN.

GWEN
Oh. You.

Jarrod and Morgan smirk at each other. Gwen stands.

GWEN
Eric’s indisposed right now.

JARROD
We’ll need to start on his case as soon as possible.

MORGAN
Someone has to get some work done.

GWEN
Well, let me know if it’s you.

JARROD
Don’t get us wrong. It’s good that you’re here for Eric. Best place for a woman really.

GWEN
What was that?

JARROD
I said -

Gwen cleanly punches him in the throat.

INT. POLICE DISTRICT COMMANDER’S OFFICE - DAY

WARREN, the older district commander watches Gwen play with a pen.

Warren waits for her to speak. Gwen looks up at him. He smiles. She continues playing with the pen. Warren’s disappointed, is about to speak.

GWEN
Yes?

WARREN
(blurting it out)
I’m just worried things are getting on top of you in Stafford.

GWEN
We’re fine.

WARREN
Tell me what I can do to help.

GWEN
How about another three sworn officers?

WARREN
Yes, that’d be nice. But -

GWEN
Alright, an admin assist?

WARREN
That’d be nice too -

GWEN
Can I keep the pen?

WARREN
No.

Gwen stands, prepares to leave.

GWEN
Thanks for your help.

WARREN
(frustrated)
Just keep that temper under control.

GWEN
Is that an official reprimand?

WARREN
Of course not -

Gwen leaves, shuts the door. Warren fumes. He throws the pen against the closed door. The pen breaks. He fumes some more.

.....

(Sorry folks, that's as far as I got...)

Albion - The ‘Meet the Parents’ version

2008-10-27T10:54:00.003+13:00

Tash and her girlfriend live in the big city together. The girlfriend (I can’t remember her name – let’s call her Megan) wants the two of them to get serious. The problem is, Tash has never introduced Megan to her family. In fact, she never talks about them. From where Megan is standing, this is a serious case of someone not wanting to come out of the closet.

Megan lays an ultimatum on Tash – if they’re going to have a future together, Tash has to introduce Megan to the family. This is the day Tash has always dreaded, but not for the reasons Megan imagines.

Tash is actually the daughter of the ‘famous’ King Arthur, a nut who has been causing a real stir in the small town of Savage. Tash is terribly embarrassed by her family, and just wants to disassociate herself as much as possible. Relieved that she was wrong, but recognising that there's still some stuff here to sort out, Megan persuades Tash to take her to meet the parents.

Upon arrival, it’s very clear that the town of Savage is going weird. People are polarised between supporting ‘King Arthur’ and opposing him. All of them take him seriously, which is the weirdest thing of all as far as Tash and Megan are concerned.

Tash introduces Megan to 'King Arthur' and 'Queen Guinevere'. She doesn’t introduce Megan as her girlfriend, re-igniting Megan’s annoyance at Tash’s avoidance. Megan also meets Sir Jeremy, a member of the inner circle of the Round Table and Tash’s old boyfriend from Savage College. All of Tash’s secrets are coming out…

Where does it go from there? I’m not too sure, having to re-create this version from my memory. (It never got any further than the outlining stage…)

The King approves of a union between Tash and Sir Jeremy, and he and Queen Guinevere are working to make that happen. Tash isn’t willing to tell her parents where she really stands, when leads to Tash and Megan fighting, which drives Tash towards Sir Jeremy – who is a pretty good guy.

The main question of the script was whether the spell of King Arthur and Albion would fall on our two main characters, and whether Tash would get honest with her family, with Megan, and herself. It was really pitting honesty and modern day values against cultural expectations.

Why did I abandon it and move on?

I felt this version wasn’t quite right and there was something better out there for the idea. I also suspect I felt it was moving too far away from the original idea, and not focused enough on Arthur.

Ironically, I was probably drawn towards this version because I felt it was difficult to draw Arthur’s psychology, and there was an appeal in keeping him at a distance. I think I’ll blog more about that tension about the distance at which to view Arthur in a later post.

Albion - the problems with tone (or "How funny is madness anyway?")

2008-10-06T06:08:00.001+13:00

One of the big problems I struggled with over Albion was tone.

In fact, if there's one thing that differentiates the versions of Albion in my head, it's the different tone to all of them. That tone basically runs the continuum from comedy to drama, and all those colourful spots in between.

The first version of Albion tried to mine comedy from the premise (using slapstick and a sense of the ridiculous), but was ultimately aiming to be an uplifting drama. The King himself summed up this attempt very well - he was a comic character initially, but still a man who could change the world.

Other versions took different tacks to him and the concept. Is the King comic, dramatic, or comic-tragic? Is his madness serious, or humourous, or both?

Trying to reconcile the tone between comedy and drama did take me down some fun roads.

Anton Chekhov is my favourite writer for combining the comedic and the tragic, and walking the knife edge between those two emotions.

One of my favourite versions of Albion (which I hope to post up in its entirety) was what I call my 'Chekhovian draft'. Basically I'd just read all five of Chekhov's major plays and was super-inspired by him. I rushed off the computer the next day and knocked off ten pages of script. The next day, the Chekhov inspiration wore off, and I abandoned the script.

I don't know whether it captured that Chekhovian tone - you can judge for yourself - but I did really like what I'd written. And going back to it recently, as a part of researching for these blog posts, I found I still liked it. I didn't really see the Chekhov so much, but I did like what was there.

So that was a cool experience!

Albion – the first version (5 of 5)

2008-09-30T07:50:00.000+13:00

Why did I move on so fundamentally from this first version?

I realised that the script didn’t work. I knew it wasn’t working after I’d given it to at least one reader who gave a reasonably polite assessment, but really wasn’t enthused. I wanted her to love it, and her ‘ho-hum’ response was pretty telling.

The concerns I think I had at the time:

Questioning whether Albion really was a better place. I’ve mentioned in an earlier post that I was looking for Albion to truly be a better society, and what I’d presented here didn’t really seem to do it. There’s a scene where two ‘peasants’ are effectively arguing what the standard measurement for rope is, and the King has to make a decision… That didn’t really seem an improvement on our world.
The script is overlong and overwritten. It’s 123 pages long and not formatted like a normal script. It would probably be about 160 pages long if properly formatted. For non-screenwriters, that’s very long as the rule of thumb is one page equals one minute of screentime.)
There’s a lack of subtext. Everyone pretty much says what they mean.
The events were large-scale and felt unreal. In particular, the King taking over the entire country felt too big.
I realised that the characters needed more depth.

My solution to these perceived problems was to throw the entire version out the window, and try to come up with a whole different approach to the story that solved them all.

So there’s an insight into my personality!

Albion – the first version (4 of 5)

2008-09-27T07:45:00.000+12:00

So, the flaws of this version of the story...

First, the story doesn’t take its characters seriously enough. The characterisation is slim. One of Tash’s only traits is that she always takes black coffee (after all she’s a reporter...) with three sugars. There’s a significant moment when Tash sides with Quillian when she rejects the sugar in her coffee - “I’m sick of sugar”!

Bigger than this, the characters are lost inside the transformation of Eric. It becomes entirely unclear who some of these characters actually are after they’ve been influenced by Arthur. Not only do they begin talking like Arthurian characters, they seem to have lost their identity. Admittedly this is a relief in some of their cases - the behaviour of his family and Lance at the beginning of the story is so despicable that I feel the best thing Eric can do is get some distance on these people… Subliminating their personalities is one way to do that, I suppose.

If I were to approach this story again, I would take the characters’ transformations as the basis of the story, and in particular the conflict of the Eric/Arthur identities.

Second, there’s a strange structural note where a partial transformation takes place, then leading to a full case of madness and identity transformation. The partial transformation is effectively the end of the story – Eric has successfully integrated charisma and ‘magic’ into his everyday life. The rest of the story basically loops back to that point.

I think I could improve this story structurally, and that's one of the things I'd be aiming to do.

Third, the power of the King. The effect of King Arthur seems to be that people just love him, far in excess to anything particular we see him do onscreen. His effect needs to be justified more – why would normal people abandon their lives and change course so dramatically. The answer seems to be charisma – which ultimately isn’t the best of all answers! Charisma doesn’t feed your kids…

I’m not so interested in portraying the perfect society now, but I am interested in exploring how the King is able to transform others. This would make for really interesting material if the transformation(s) felt truly motivated.

I’ll end my analysis of the first version with my next post, asking why did I move on from this version?

Albion – the first version (3 of 5)

2008-09-24T07:42:00.002+12:00

Actually, weirdly and unexpectedly, I like this first version.

The simplicity of the story is a joy. It knows what it’s going for, and it simply goes for it. Recently I’ve been exploring breaking a story down to sequences (with Hix funnily enough). Breaking this story down to its sequences is very revealing.

Looking back over this draft, its hardly surprising that when I think of Albion, I usually think of this version, and not just because it was the first. I feel like picking up this draft again and seeing what I can do with given the benefits of distance and 11 years experience.

I like its build. I like the sweep of the story – it feels epic. I like the movement from disregard to respect on the part of the family and other characters. I like the rejection of Eric by this new personality of Arthur. I like the idea of the ultimatum from the outside world, and the King turning it back on the outside world. I like the march to Parliament.

I was coming back to this draft as a point to measure progress from. I was pleasantly surprised to find how much I liked it, and how much I was willing to forgive its flaws.

And its flaws are pretty significant.

Albion – the first version (2 of 5)

2008-09-20T07:38:00.000+12:00

The Outside World Retaliates (page 68)

The Business Round Table! (led by business star Quillian) conspires against the new state. Their agent, the local MP Maningrey, enters Albion, and we see how much the town has transformed and abandoned the conventions of the outside world. Maningrey issues an ultimatum – the new kingdom has two weeks to disband or force will be used by New Zealand to restore democracy. The King responds that in two weeks New Zealand will no longer exist.

The Struggle For Wider Control (page 72)

The King and the people of Albion march on Parliament, building an immense groundswell of support as they go. There’s a garden of Gethsemane scene where the King fears his course will lead to violence, and Lance reassures him. The expected violent clash does not occur, given the King’s overwhelmingly popularity. The Prime Minister (Winston Peters!), Quillian, and Maningrey bend their knee to the King, but obviously they have other plans…

Cracks in the Regime (page 82)

The King is now the status quo and wildly popular. His enemies are faced with a problem: how to get rid of the King without doing it openly. Luckily, the King’s friends are doing a good job of screwing things up themselves. Shelly and Jeremy conspire against each other. Shelly drives away Tash, who sides with Quillian. The Eric/Arthur divide comes to a crisis, and the King questions whether Gwen would love him as Eric. The King disappears, leaving Lance nominally in charge while Shelly and Jeremy duke it out for succession.

Integration (page 106)

Tash leaves Quillian, finding his wicked ways not to her taste. Gwen and Tash team up to find Eric/Arthur, who has returned to the old car yard. Gwen tells Eric she does love him without the King Arthur trappings. An invigorated Arthur returns to Parliament to claim his throne, bypassing his enemies who are waiting for him. He reveals himself at a press conference, only to renounce his throne and his identity as King Arthur. Plain old Eric is good enough.

Coda (page 118)

Flash forward a year, and everyone has improved their lives. Eric is back to reading stories at the library, but they’re his stories now.

The End (page 123)

Albion – the first version (1 of 5)

2008-09-17T19:33:00.002+12:00

Well, actually the second reformatted draft from 12 August 1997, according to a note I found attached to the script from Hix.

This version of Albion we worked on together, so I want to acknowledge his script credit here. And I’ve also run my comments about this first version under his nose before publishing them here.

I thought I’d summarise this first version of Albion over two posts (at the risk of boring you all!). The following posts will analyse it.

Set-up (page 1)

Eric is an aspiring writer and particularly poor car salesman working in a yard run by his childhood ‘friend’ Lance. Eric’s on the verge of being fired and his wife Gwen is having a sleazy affair with Lance. His kids (twins Shelly and Jeremy) have no respect for him. The one bright spot in Eric’s week is reading stories at the library, especially from a book about King Arthur. The town reporter (Tash) reluctantly covers his efforts, as she’s unable to get the big story (a brewing fight between a local gang and the Mayor).

The Transformation – Partial (page 24)

Eric cracks under the strain. At his lowest ebb, a mystic moment occurs as he withdraws a key from one of the cars in the car lot (the Sword in the Stone). Eric’s charisma and inner confidence are transformed: he starts selling cars, he manages to get Tash an interview with the gang, he makes love to his wife... Eric is confused by what’s happened to him (though interestingly he seems to have sorted out all the problems of his life…) He seizes on the book of Arthurian tales to explain things.

The Transformation – Full (page 33)

Tash comes calling for Eric, interrupting Gwen, Jeremy and Shelly at breakfast. Jeremy is smitten with Tash. ‘Eric’ descends from the bedroom and announces himself as King Arthur, astounding everyone. Arthur shows his full transformation by sealing a peace between the gang and the Mayor, heading off the looming confrontation.

Development of the Transformation (page 47)

Arthur becomes a community co-ordinator, working with the gang with the Mayor’s mandate. His initiatives start to transform the town for the better. The gang turns to good deeds, such as (literally) helping little old ladies across the street. King Arthur and the town become a focus/running joke on the national news. Gwen chooses Arthur, rejects Lance, and wants to tell Arthur/Eric about the affair. Arthur rejects the Eric personality – he is no longer Eric, so the past is truly the past.

Control (page 66)

The town council steps down in favour of the King. The King’s first announcement is the succession of the new kingdom of Albion from New Zealand.

Albion - what makes a better society?

2008-09-07T11:06:00.005+12:00

One of the key ideas behind Albion was that Eric's transformation into King Arthur would lead to a better society. That his personal madness led to a social madness, and that both were good for the society and possibly even the world at large.

This is a simple enough idea, but you can always count on me to bugger up a simple idea by over-complicating it.

First off, medieval society (even the faux medieval society of King Arthurian myth) is decidedly not democratic.

Quite obviously there is a King. The King is in control and makes the law. Around the King there is a court, who hold some level of delegated or advisory power, but their authority derives from their association with the King. This is a model of authority centralised in one person.

Now I'm sure the King is a very wise man (well, he was in most of the approaches to Albion anyway), but I quite like my democratic freedoms, thanks. And I can't quite imagine myself being happy to live in what we'd now tend to define as a dictatorship.

Medieval society had quite a few things wrong with it apart from a lack of democracy. It wasn't liberal, it wasn't educated, or enlightened. Women and minorities were repressed, wealth was centralised in the hands of a few, and a serf class was kept uneducated and poor. Disease, low life expectancy, no colour TVs... Why on earth would we want to go back to that?

I kept on trying to reconcile the modern and the medieval/myth into a better society - after all, that was the purpose of Albion wasn't it? To present a vision of a better world. And I was always struggling with these questions and attempting to come up with a society that actually worked.

Should Albion the society do away with modern amenities? Do away with capitalist modes of production e.g. factories and corporations, etc... Is the society socialist, or is it based on feudal land owners tempered by a spirit of compassion for their fellow men?

And civil liberties and social questions tended to rear their head as well. In one version, Eric's daughter was gay and bringing her girlfriend to the transformed society for the first time. The daughter was worried that the medieval morality of the town wouldn't accept her sexuality, and if I remember properly, there was some idea of her being married off as a political alliance. (So really not an ideal society, where your father would marry you off against your will and sexual preference to stabilise his throne).

In another notable version, I turned against King Arthur entirely, and put the King's estranged wife Gwen and her lover, the weak-willed Lance, at the heart of the story. The story began with the couple being harassed by the King's knights, while the King turned a blind eye. So this version was a situation where modern civil liberties were being over-ridden by a sense of medieval morality and loyalty towards the sovereign.

One thing I feel now is that I tried too hard to deal with the real, and let go of the mythic side too much. Albion is about the embrace of mythic medieval values - celebration, adventure, camraderie, egalitarianism (after all, there was a Round Table), honour, romance, justice, truth, and valour. The golden age of Camelot. It might on the surface look regressive, but given that Camelot never existed, it was actually progressive and utopic.

And I also realise that I didn't need to resolve the tensions of modernity vs medieval/myth. The clash between the two poles is actually the interesting stuff, where the story tensions are being generated. One of the things that attracted me to the idea in the first place was the centralisation of power in just one man, and a crazy man at that.

Albion doesn't need to portray a perfect society. They really don't exist. It just needs to portray an attempt in that direction, and all the interesting things that fall out of that.

Albion - the once and future script?

2008-08-25T17:22:00.004+12:00

Albion is a story of a modern-day King Arthur. Set in small-town New Zealand, it's the story of a nice guy and common man transformed into a visionary leader. The nice guy (Eric) starts behaving as if he is King Arthur reincarnated, and the various characters around him either believe him or try to persuade him of his insanity.

Eric is crazy, but that’s not the point. His craziness is useful and liberating – it shields him and others from a hostile world and gives Eric purpose in his life.

In some ways, Albion is a modern Don Quixote, but with more respect for the knight – the feeling that chivalry has good points as well as being foolish. Or maybe think Lars and the Real Girl, but with King Arthur instead of a blow-up doll.

At heart, Albion has always seemed a simple idea to me.

Hah to the idea of a simple idea. Nothing else has haunted my scriptwriting career quite like Albion.

Part of that is when I started it. Albion was one of the first scripts I wrote an actual draft for, begun around 1997.

Like several scripts in the 1990s, I wrote it with Hix – at least, I wrote the first draft with him, and always kept him appraised of the current state of play. (I greatly enjoy collaboration, though I have been a major pain in the neck to work with at times. But I want to talk more about collaboration elsewhere, so I’ll keep this series of posts to Albion.) Hix, if you want to comment during this series about your experiences with Albion, it'll be great to hear them.

Another reason that Albion haunts me is I feel I never quite nailed the tone – except in one notable semi-draft. Achieving the right sense of tone is much more difficult than I ever bargained on.

And part of it is something I discussed in this blog earlier – an ability to shift the goalposts of what the project actually was, so I never managed to fulfil my current level of ambition.

In future posts, I’ll go into some of my takes on Albion to both show the evolution of the idea, and key problems I was struggling with it.

What I Write

2008-08-18T21:52:00.001+12:00

Welcome to a new phase of the blog – hence the name change.

What I want to do now is explore the writing projects that have been most problematic for me. These are the perennial projects that will just not give up the ghost. They’re neither dead nor alive, but lying somewhere in-between. Some because they’re simply not the priority of the moment, others because I have no idea how to progress them from here.

Perhaps I can finally put them to rest. Or maybe I’ll be able to bring them fully back to life and then finish them off properly!

I’ve struggled long and hard with how to approach this subject matter, and whether to come here at all. Will it be interesting enough for anyone other than myself to explore my writing projects? I don’t know. I hope so. You be the judge!

The first of these ‘limbo’ projects for me is Albion, my King Arthur story.

Why I Write: To impress

2008-08-15T00:01:00.001+12:00

Regular readers of this blog won’t be surprised to hear that one of the main reasons I got into writing was to impress other people.

At first it was very difficult showing my work to anyone. What if they told me that it wasn’t very good? That just seemed too hard to bear.

But my need to impress managed to win out over this fear.

So I did show my work to people. And often impressed them. Particularly if they were my age or younger, and were often just impressed by the fact I was writing at all.

Except my work in and of itself wasn’t that good yet. When I started showing my work to more independent readers, I was forced to realise that I still had a long way to go.

What I started to cling to as a defence for my ego was to embrace the gap between ‘professional’ writers and me as a beginning writer. I didn’t need to be a good writer yet because I was just a beginner.

Around this time I was mostly writing short stories, at a pace that amazes me now. I would always work to finish a story in one day – that way I didn’t spend too much time on anything (and I could always use that lack of effort as an excuse if someone didn’t like it).

The main defence was that I was always on to the next idea. My ego was protected by being a moving target. And I got to be a better writer quickly because I was writing so much.

I kept on applying this technique while working on my first film scripts and into the TV series Love Bites, where I think it started to become a problem. My unwillingness to revise an idea led to many different versions of the first episode, in an effort to continue to impress through new ideas.

After Love Bites I moved into a different space, which wasn’t necessarily better in hindsight – though it was a growth for me.

In this phase of my writing career, I wanted to get something ‘right’ before I showed it to anyone. I wanted to impress through depth and power rather than new ideas and the weight of fresh material.

One problem here was that I gave full vent to my perfectionist streak. When I actually had to stand beside a project and not just abandon it, it had to be pretty damn good to protect my ego.

And it was slow. I was afraid to put pen to paper, so I didn’t do anywhere near as much writing. As a result, I don’t think I’ve improved enough as a writer given the amount of time – roughly seven years since the end of the TV series.

So now I’m looking for a third way. Neither phase works for me now.

I want to move to a place where I can show others my work as it progresses, continue to work on stuff, and see an evolution in my writing. Getting drafts finished and getting them out there to be read is now a key goal for me.

And self-reflection is important too in helping me develop by looking back at my writing career. I can look at my strengths and weaknesses, and to see how I want to behave in the future. This blog is an important element in that self-reflection.

Coming soon!

2008-08-12T00:01:00.000+12:00

So far in this blog I’ve reflected on my experience through the lens of listing the 'reasons' why I write.

Soon I’m going to start also exploring some of the writing projects I’ve worked on. I want to ask "why did I write this?", what problems I faced, and if I got through them.

I expect it’ll be a lot like what I’ve been writing to date in this blog, but coming at the topic from another direction. And there'll be more 'reasons' posts as I go.

I'm looking forward to it. I hope it’ll be fun!

Why I Write: To be honest about my personal experience

2008-08-08T21:28:00.001+12:00

I've found that I like to write stuff that draws on my personal experience.

To take an example, Run (the script I'm working on now) draws on personal experiences and problems I've had in my life, and applies them to my characters. While also being a story about someone chased by a monster!

I find I enjoy my writing more when I'm drawing on personal experiences, and hopefully it makes the writing better as well.

My biggest problem with being honest is not so much around exposing myself, because I can always use the excuse "it's just fiction".

The thing I struggle with more is that when I use an idea, I can't use that idea in the future.

Every time I write about something that is personally important to me, I'm reluctant to let the idea go. Because I don't want to 'spend' the idea, particularly on projects that may not work out.

I'm the kind of guy who likes to have another trick up my sleeve. On the Myers Briggs scale, I come out as an introvert. Which means I like to figure out what I'm going to say before I say it. And one of the reasons I like to do that is that I like to stay in control, by keeping a little piece of myself in reserve. By keeping an idea or two up my sleeve.

When I'm writing in this honest way, I don't feel that comfort zone so much. I'm giving stuff away left, right, and centre. Which is scary for me, though it's exactly what I want to be doing. I'm scared of running dry and having nothing worthwhile left to say.

Honesty for me requires a leap of faith. A belief that the ideas I give away will be replenished, hopefully by better ideas... And so far that's been the case for me. The more I give, the more I've found to give.

So the worry that the bank will run dry has diminished for me over time. And I also kind of question what I'm saving stuff up for. It's not like I'm going to get to write forever!

Why I Write: Open post

2008-08-04T00:01:00.001+12:00

Hix suggested that I should throw open a post to anyone who wants to talk about their reasons for writing.

So here goes! This is your post to talk about you. Why do you write?

Why I Write: To get better at writing

2008-08-02T15:29:00.002+12:00

Writing is a long slow (and conscious) process of building my ability to write.

I’ve been writing for a fair while now. Though I haven’t achieved as much as I feel I should have in that time (due to my various struggles with writing), I have written quite a lot.

One of the main outcomes of all that work is my growth as a writer. Looking back at my writing history shows me how much I’ve grown. Which gives me hope that I will one day become the writer I want to be, and create the work I aspire to.

I want to be always growing as a writer. I’m disappointed when I feel I’m not continuing to evolve, and that’s been a source of frustration for me the last few years.

But ultimately I find the fact that I have gotten better as a writer incredibly exciting. It’s part of my journey through life. Who knows where it’ll end up?

Why I Write: So I'll be able to write my other ideas

2008-07-26T08:33:00.008+12:00

I'm working on three scripts: The Gap, Run, and Utopia. I've been working on these ideas for over a year now (going on two years in one case), and still haven't got a proper first draft of any of them.

But I absolutely need to start finishing them! Because bubbling under and starting to sing to me are:

Two seasons of a TV series I've been tentatively calling The Kingdoms
An uncompleted Katherine Mansfield script
A teenage horror movie called The Devil You Know
An untitled horror project about the great advantage of being able to die.
An abandoned fictional future documentary called Only Human, which is now re-surfacing after seeing the wonderful Guy Maddin 'documentary' My Winnipeg.

Arggh! Too much!

Why I Write: To compete

2008-07-21T00:01:00.002+12:00

One of the main reasons I got into writing was to show other people that I was the best.

Writing was one big competition, with all my fellow writers as contestants - not that I'd ever admit I was competing (of course). But all of us were in a race to achieve the elusive crown of respect and achievement. And there could only be one, and that was going to be me (of course).

Competition is invigorating. It's helped me put pen to paper. But it has a pretty big dark side for me.

Jealousy has been a reoccurring experience for me as a screenwriter. I've found myself seeing the industry as a zero-sum game with extremely limited opportunities. Another screenwriter's success has deprived me of my rightful dues by squeezing me out of the frame.

I'd look for factors beyond my control to explain why this writer has 'succeeded' and I hadn't (ah, it's because they know such-and-such). And God knows I haven't approached their work fairly or with a positive attitude - I've been eager for them to fail.

Particularly galling is the success of a friend or someone I know. Then I have to congratulate them while secretly envying them and wishing for them to stumble.

Well, that's the dark side of my soul. But it's not the attitude I try to approach things with now. It's taken me a long time to turn it around, and sometimes it creeps back in anyway. Jealousy is a very strong emotion.

But I've tried to turn this around for me, because my jealousy hurts no one as much as myself. I'm the one who gets all worked up about the success of my fellow writers, and all that's doing is distracting me from the thing that counts - getting my work good enough so that others will be excited enough to help make it a reality or watch it. And therefore reaching towards achieving those successes I've been so jealous of.

Besides, I like helping people. I don't want to be the person dragging others down. And I believe the screenwriting industry, or whatever writing environment, isn't a zero-sum game. It can grow it, and I'll do it my part of that through achieving good work. Which will open up more opportunities for myself as well as others.

I believe that. It makes me happier believing that. When I slip away from that the jealousy creeps back in...

Why I Write: To get it perfect

2008-07-14T00:01:00.002+12:00

Perfectionism is one of my own little hells.

Perfectionism for me means:
1. Avoiding committing anything to paper before I've gotten it just right, and therefore not writing anything, or
2. Never being happy with what does hit the page and therefore never seeing an end in sight for a project.

How do I know I've got a script or idea 'perfect'? I never can, because the next time I look over the idea I start to become unhappy with what's there. There's always something to change. I've spent years being trapped in projects because of my perfectionist streaks.

Particularly deadly is a streak of perfectionism coupled with a growing sense of ambition. This allows me to shift the goalposts for a particular work as I'm working on it. Which allows me to chase my tail in search of perfection forever.

I think the worst problem about perfectionism for me is I eventually end up giving up on scripts, and to some degree myself as well, and moving on to something else that seems easier and brighter. I never quite finish because it just becomes too hard to finish.

What I hope I'm moving towards is a place where I can stop working on scripts and be satisfied with what I've accomplished. To really finish things rather than have the process aborted in some way or another - which includes having the script made but still not being happy with it. Which is yet another kind of perfectionism I suffer from...

Why I Write: For an audience

2008-07-10T00:01:00.008+12:00

If my writing isn't working for an audience, it isn't really working, regardless of whether I like it.

To return for a moment to my previous post, it's taken a long time for me to accept the idea of writing for myself. All that matters is I should be happy with a script, and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks of the script as long as I like it.

That's a worthy impulse as far as it goes, and it's certainly good when it comes to actually writing the script, when I don't need a lot of internal distractions.

But ultimately I am also writing for an audience.

I don't chip away for years at scripts (or ideas for scripts) simply for them to end up in a bottom drawer (or a box on top of the closet in my case). That's where they often end up, but that's not what I intend for them when I start on them.

I do get something out of these scripts or ideas that never see the full light of day. I get a huge amount out of them. But not everything that I hoped for them.

Part of what drives me onwards into the next script is the idea that this one will really get made, and an audience will get something out of it.

I use the words 'an audience' rather than 'the audience'. Not everyone needs to like or relate to everything I write. It's taken me a long time to accept that as well.

But someone (and preferably a lot of someones) have to get something out of what I've written. Otherwise frankly the script isn't good enough. That's why it's living in a box.

Why I Write: For me

2008-07-07T00:01:00.007+12:00

If a script that I'm writing isn't working for me, it isn't really working, regardless of whether other people like it.

I've noticed this effect when writing in group or for others - the desire to accept the opinion of others that something's good even when I know it isn't working for me yet. Sometimes others will be happier with stuff I've written than I am - or they'll be more willing to move on.

In those kind of situations, the temptation is very strong to leave something alone. And in some situations, factors such as time pressure or producer edict may mean that I do.

But I know the writing process, and probably the writing itself, is better if I feel happy with it. That way I can own it. That way it really comes from me, and I feel I have written for me.

Screenwriting can turn into a bit of a factory where no one really owns the finished product. And I instinctively rebel against that - I want to be able to own something I've written, or have participated in writing.

I believe that if I totally gave away writing for myself, then I'd be giving away a piece of myself - the piece that cares. And I'd be what I call a hack.

For me, that term doesn't mean someone who writes for money or whatever. It means someone who doesn't care about what they're writing and doesn't care what happens to it. I have had one encounter with a fellow writer who gave every impression that this was how he felt about his writing, and that encounter turned my stomach.

I don't want to give it away.

Why I Write: To have a cool job

2008-07-03T00:01:00.004+12:00

I've liked being able to list 'Writer' as my occupation on the electoral roll.

Why I Write: To stratch the itch

2008-06-30T00:01:00.004+12:00

It's an itch.

The nagging feeling that I should be writing, that I need to write now, and I'm wasting the precious minutes of my life doing whatever it is I'm doing now, and everything will be better with the world if I can just get to that page. If I can stratch the itch.

I've learnt over the last few years that I need to keep my life in balance. There are a number of dimensions in my life that need to all be taken care of if I'm to remain happy.

Writing is definitely one of those dimensions - much as I try to deny myself it should be. After all, what's writing? My self-indulgent inner workings which may never see the light of day... Why should I need to write?

Except I've caught myself time and time again feeling down, wondering what is bothering me, and realising that I haven't been writing for the last week. The itch is the symptom of that need to write, and it's good to listen to it before my mood starts getting worse.

Luckily for me, stratching the itch doesn't take too long. Ten minutes working on a story idea is usually enough to lose the itch and feel all is right in the world (I have a very low work threshold combined with an impressive ability to deceive myself that if I've started on an idea, I'm almost there...)

So maybe I'm an addict and writing is my fix. Or maybe I'm healthy and the itch is a reminder that I could get sick. I like to think the latter, but then again, it's cool to be an addict. Who wants to be healthy all the time?

Why I Write: To recover

2008-06-26T00:01:00.005+12:00

For periods between 2001 and 2004, I was working at home full-time as a writer. Projects included an unfinished and as yet untitled Katherine Mansfield biopic (various title suggestions include the completely unsuitable Katherine Mansfield and the Spiders from Mars) and a similarly unfinished fictional future documentary called Only Human.

Writing full-time was my dream and aspiration as a career. But I found this to be one of the hardest times of my life to date.

Writing was bringing out very dark feelings in me. Expectation of failure, tension, a lack of self-belief bordering on depression. Writing put me into a bad mood. Half an hour was enough for me to feel tense and want to lash out.

At the same time I really wanted to do it. I was drawn to writing, but the actual process of writing was really hard.

The immediate source for these negative feelings about writing was the damaging experiences I'd had while writing for the television series I co-created, Love Bites.

First, and most of all, I'd had a very hard time writing (or not succeeding in writing) parts of that show. The first episode, which I was in charge of, was rewritten too many times to remember. A few things fed into that experience in hindsight - uncertainty about my abilities and how to channel them in high pressure situations, a lack of clarity around what I wanted to produce, tight deadlines and the pressure of a production riding on my output, and sheer overwork.

Second, the show didn't make much of an impression in the cultural consciousness, so the sacrifices didn't seem to pay off into the finished product. The show came in for some criticism as well as some praise. My ego took a battering and that's something I've had to recover from as well.

The thing is, once the series had finished, I was eager to put into practice some of the lessons I'd learnt from writing on the show. And to improve on what I'd done. But now the actual process of writing had become incredibly difficult for me.

How did I get out of that? Persistence - I pushed through it by continuing to write. Awareness - knowing the writing process was hard for me, so not being so surprised when I felt bad while writing. Listening - hearing the negative voices inside of me, letting them have their say, and become part of me. Balance - I had come to place such pressure on writing that success or failure was too important to me. My life is now more balanced and I'm happier.

Writing still puts me in a bad mood. The less familiar I am with a particular part of the writing process (e.g. developing the idea, writing the first draft, editing), the more likely it is to bring out difficult feelings in me and more quickly. So the healing is ongoing. It's made me nervous of combining pressure situations and writing, which is something I still want to get over.

The process of writing Love Bites wasn't the only thing that caused me to feel the way I did then. The show came along at a particular time when I had a lot to learn, and I learned a lot from it. So I don't regret the show or blame the show - actually I thank it now and appreciate it.

Writing was hard before the show, and I think it'll always be hard. But it doesn't need to be as hard as that time of my life. I'm feeling the pleasures more now than the hurts, and that's something to celebrate.

Why I Write: For the pleasure

2008-06-23T00:01:00.002+12:00

Writing is (often) a pleasurable activity for me.

There's the delight of feeling something falling into place. The 'Aha!' moment, where I find just the right line that I'm proud of, or just the right point to end the scene, or just the right insight into the character. The bigger the insight for me, the bigger the thrill. But I very much enjoy the feeling of getting it right, and the continuing glow afterwards - which I stoke up by reading over and over something that I feel is right. I can dote on a favourite line for hours...

There's the joy of knowing something is on track and going somewhere good. It's the expectation of the finished good work combined with a sense that my life is on track. I don't need to be immediately working on a project to have this feeling, so it doesn't necessarily lead me towards actually completing anything!

And there's the deep satisfaction of accomplishment - the 'Ahhhh' moments where I feel I can sit back, take it easy, and crack open a beer (or a can of Coke in my case). I've overcome the fear of the blank page and persisted long enough to take the work all the way from A to Z.

I hope I would be able to take the conscious choice to give up writing if I didn't experience these pleasures from time to time. I fear I wouldn't be able to - maybe I'm enough of a masochist and dedicated enough to pursue in the face of receiving no reward whatsoever... Luckily, even when I haven't felt good about writing at all, I've eventually come through to a place where I do derive these pleasures from writing again.

It's those darker emotions that writing generates for me that are going to be the subject of my next post.

Why I Write: To be liked

2008-06-19T00:01:00.002+12:00

I've struggled with low self-esteem and still do, but to a lesser extent. One of the reasons I took up writing was to be liked for what I do rather than who I am.

Writing is something that people like. They generally respect or admire writers, particularly successful ones. So getting on the writing bandwagon seemed like a good way to get me some of that action.

There are at least three flaws with this plan.

First, writing can lead to respect and admiration. But that doesn't mean people will like me. Success doesn't bring personal connection - in fact it tends to distance people. Fans do not like the person they are fans of - they admire them. They place them at a different level to themselves. I don't have fans in this way, but I have seen this phenomenon in action, and have seen it's the person who is being admired who has to work to build a personal connection. It's actually kind of tiring!

But at least people are positive towards you though, which leads me to the second flaw.

Writing is always in danger of being judged negatively, particularly when you're starting out and maybe the work isn't all that good yet. Someone is not going to like what you've writtten, and particularly if they are a guy between 17 and 25 years of age there's a good chance they are going to tell you that, at the party at which you've just met them. Which doesn't really bolster a weak self-esteem.

The third flaw is probably the biggest, and the trap for the actual writing. If I write to be liked, this negatively influences what I write. I don't take risks. I avoid certain topics. I stick to the known in order to create a known effect. And the work is never as good.

Writing is not for the faint-hearted or for people with self-esteem issues. Writing has helped me with my self-esteem issues by forcing me to confront that I can't rely on external support to always feel good about myself. To be liked has transformed over time into To not rely on what others think of me. Which is all very positive but still not always the case!

Why I Write: To create something of meaning

2008-06-16T00:01:00.001+12:00

This is very important to me. I want to write work that inspires, because it has meaning.

But what do I mean by meaning? I have two questions and a test.

The first question is whether the story is meaningful to me. I'm going to spend a lot of time working on this story, and I need to know that it moves me. There's plenty of projects that don't fulfil this test, and plenty of them are worthwhile. Just because I think they're good ideas doesn't mean I personally should be working on them. I've already talked about the idea of pursuing the heart of the story, which I called the nugget. That glow of the nugget indicates the story has personal meaning for me.

(So what are the topics or themes I consider meaningful? One of my goals for this blog is to help me figure that out. I want to dig into the projects I have written and try to identify what was driving me to write them. By identifying these nuggets I expect to find some common topics and themes, and some I'll still want to be writing in the future.)

The second question is whether the story is meaningful to others. This is harder to accomplish, and is a true test of the writing.

I may find something I've written meaningful, but that may not be having that effect on a reader. That may be because I haven't written it well enough yet (entirely likely) or this person doesn't find that story as powerful as I do. Given it can be an individual response I try to show my work more widely. But if no one is relating to the story, then this particular piece of work either needs more work or is staying on the shelf.

So how can I test whether the story is meaningful? I've identifying three factors that I want the effect of a story to have, based on my own response to work that inspires me.

Force. A story must carry force. It must make an impact by the reader.
Depth. A story should affect the reader at a personal level. They should feel it affects them deeply.
Longevity. A story should have a lasting impact.

So when I say I want to write something meaningful, I think I mean I want to write something that forcefully strikes the reader at a personal level, the experience of which stays with the reader over time.

How about you? What does meaning mean to you?

Why I Write: To tell a story, but to practice it first

2008-06-12T22:45:00.009+12:00

I am not a good oral storyteller. I used to be better - I've scared roomfuls of kids with ghost stories - but I'm out of practice and I feel it.

One thing that holds me back is a reluctance to repeat myself verbally. Once I've told something once, I can't be bothered telling it again. But of course that practice helps get the story right.

That unwillingness to repeat myself is turned on its head when I come to writing stories. Here, I'm happy to continue reiterating an idea over and over again.

The true advantage of the written story is I don't need to get it right first time. In fact I'm not expected to - I'm pretty much required to practice it. The culture of screenwriting is such that if you haven't done half a dozen drafts, you've barely started.

Actually I can smell fear at the heart of my positions about both modes of storytelling.

I'm afraid to tell a story orally in case I get it wrong. And I'm afraid to let go of the written story in case I get it wrong.

My challenge then is to get stories out there and not let practice get in the way of achievement!

Why I Write: For the money

2008-06-10T00:01:00.003+12:00

One of the things that lured me into screenwriting (as opposed to say short story writing) was the promise of easy money. If I made just one million dollar sale I'd be set for life. And I'm not a greedy man. I'll take half that, particularly US money. The exchange rate's in our favour here.

So half a million dollars for one script. How long's that going to take me to bang out? A few weeks? Sweet.

Ten years plus later I have yet to make that big Hollywood sale. Or any Hollywood sale. Most Full members of the New Zealand Writers Guild earn less than $10,000 a year from writing, and I've been in that camp for a number of years now. But at least I have been paid and stuff I've written has been made. For a screenwriter anywhere that is a big deal.

So I've had to revise my Hollywood riches scenario a few times now over my screenwriting career. In fact I work full-time now so screenwriting doesn't have to pay the bills. This way, if some screenwriting money comes through to help pay for the bung door on the downstairs flat, I'm a happy man rather than a desperate man.

But there's still part of me waiting for that Hollywood money to flow. Easy money. And isn't that what screenwriting is all about - the fulfilment of dreams?

Why I Write: To find out why I'm driven to write this script

2008-06-09T00:01:00.005+12:00

I'm currently working on two scripts - The Gap and Utopia, while I let a third script, Run, settle for a while after having written a very rough draft.

All three scripts are in approximately the same place - the process of finding out why I feel driven to write them.

There is something in all three of them that I cannot let go of. I'm going to call this something the nugget.

In the process of finding out what the nugget is, I will let go of vast amounts of extraneous ideas which surround the nugget. And I don't know what this extraneous dirt is and what the nugget is until I go through this process.

Should the protagonist in Run be a man? Turns out she's definitely a woman. Old or young? Young, but not too young. Is her love interest a man then? No, turns out she's gay.

Through feeling my way through all these choices, I somehow get closer and closer to the nugget that is driving me to write the script. Maybe the nugget is a question. Maybe it's an emotion. Maybe the nugget doesn't sit still. Can I trust it's worthwhile? I don't know, but it keeps on gleaming. And it promises answers.

On reflection that doesn't sound very trustworthy.