What my mother never said

I went to the "Made in Dagenham" Q&A with writer William Ivory on Wednesday and I had written a blog on it. But I just deleted it because of what my mother never said: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all".

It's not that he's a bad person or a bad writer (clearly not that) or that the interview was uninteresting, it's just I don't think he had anything to say worth repeating.

Damn. Just had to justify myself, didn't I, and see what happened?

Anyway I've been thinking about the science and technology of story. When I say technology I don't mean computers or software, or typewriters, or pens, or paper, or bits of stick with clay tablets.

Technology means techniques that can be applied to achieve a result. Anybody can be taught a technology of how to do something. Like the technology of plastering a wall. Doesn't mean they'll be a great wall plasterer but it means they could achieve a result that's not appalling (assuming they've practised the techniques as well).

Lack of technology is a bad thing when you're trying to achieve something, though occasionally you have to work it out for yourself. And sometimes there's bad technology which, if you try using it, will just end you up in trouble - and then you'll think "I can't do it" when the truth is: you don't know how, in fact worse, you think you know and you don't.

But let's do the science bit first.

I think you can divide "Story science" into two types, I have no idea what to call them but I know how to describe them, they are the Biology and the Physics of Story.

Originally (and still to a large extent) Biology is about classification. People looked at living things and began to classify them: Birds (feathers and fly), fish (live underwater) and so on.

Then there's Physics, about looking at things, suggesting rules to describe a situation, testing those rules to see if they work and if they work 100% of the time you've got a Law.

What's the Biology of Story? Campbell's Monomyth is an example of classification. So are Polti's 36 Dramatic Situations. Vogler's work is based on the Monomyth so that's classification too.

But, and I think this is important, sometimes you find something which does not fit the current classification. Does that mean it's not a living thing? Well, some people will say "yes, that is exactly what it means", like the man who, coming face to face with a giraffe, exclaimed "there ain't no such animal". Or the so-called doctor who proclaimed "I would rather err with Galen than accept Harvey's truth." - Galen stated blood moved like tides in the body, Harvey proved blood was pumped by the heart. Proof is not enough for some people.

The Monomyth is a classification. It does not mean that all stories have to contain those elements. They may but it cannot be stated as Truth.

What about the Physics of Story? Aristotle's Poetics, is the only one I can think of. Physics is different to Biology, Physics always applies. (I've probably pulled this metaphor a bit further than it should go, it's going to break any moment.)

Aristotle analysed plays that entertained and plays that failed to entertain (even though they were the same format and on the same subject) and came up with a set of principles which can be used to analyse any story to determine the degree to which it will succeed or fail.

(You have to understand that I write these blogs off the top of my head mostly - once they've had a chance to ferment a bit. This is not wine that's been laid down for years, more like a Beaujolais Nouveau.).

Then there's Story Technology - it's engineering. Engineering is about application of techniques (using tools) to produce the desired result - like a bridge. The bridge may not be perfect but as long as it does what it's supposed to do, then it's a good bridge.

Story technology is that. It's a form of engineering which may not produce a perfect story but as long as it does what it's supposed to do, then you've got a good story. (A bridge may be so well made that it's used as an example - so could a story, of course.)

So do we have story tools? Well, you can create a story that fits the Monomyth classification but that doesn't guarantee success. This happens all the time. Or you can apply Aristotle's principles and you will end up with something dramatic.

Of course a person's ability to apply these is dependent on their understanding and talent. So there's no guarantee it would be a great story. But it would work.

There are what you might call "lesser" tools, these are purely mechanical and designed to help you think through the story (index cards, for example). You can hammer a nail by hand, but it's easier and quicker to use a nail gun.

There are little bits of technology that can be used in specific areas, like dialogue: "Keep cutting out words until it stops meaning what it's supposed to mean - even if that means cutting the whole speech" (a little gem from Russell T Davies).

There are lots of tools to help you write well, whether and how you use them is up to you.

What about McKee? He comes under classification and "lesser" tools, that's not intended as an insult, it's just where he fits in this analysis.

---

What's on the turntable? "Time has told me" by Nick Drake from "Five Leaves Left"

New deadlines

I'm settling into my life here in Reading, Berks. Heading towards the end of my third week it's all ticking along pleasantly. Apart from the fact I slept badly last night because I had things to do.

Things to do.

So, on one of my script writing mailing lists, up pops a fascinating little project: it already has funding, has two major actors attached and no script. They want a character piece. And they're taking submissions (a treatment and sample scene) by the end of May. I shall call it the Bohemian Project henceforth.

As we all know I have a fondness for deadlines. Really. It's all those years I spent generating newsstand magazines every 4 weeks. And I really do mean every 4 weeks, we did 13 issues per year.

Can I write a character piece? I have no idea. However I did not know whether I could write a contemporary rom-com a month ago, and apparently I can. (It may not be brilliant, but I can do it.) We shall see.

But there's still the Blockbuster treatment for the Hollywood director to do and my TV script dialogue.

Tight deadlines. Even more fun.

I spent this evening mapping out a new version of the Blockbuster treatment. My professional readers really hadn't liked it much so I went back to square one and thought it through. I worked up some action plot lines for the four main groups of people. Then mapped them out on my Storylines software, I find it useful for getting things in order.

One of the problems with my treatment had been that it was all action and very little in the way of character. There is a problem with the source material for this adaptation in that there isn't a lot of character anyway. However I've already taken liberties with the plot so there's no reason for not taking liberties with the characters as well. (To a point.)

Screenwriting books will tell you lots of interesting things about External Conflict, Internal Conflict and Fatal Flaws. I'm not going to repeat it in detail here but while I didn't need this particular tool for "Une Nuit a Paris" (because the characters flowed well), it was definitely a tool for this treatment.

I wrote out those three things for each of the eight main characters (including the antagonists) and then thought what would be key scenes to go with these traits. Very interesting. I came up with some quite juicy ones and it turned one of the main bad guys into a potentially fascinating, and even tragic, character even though he gets very few scenes in this film. (He gets more in the sequel.)

Having done that I went back to my Storylines software and inserted the key scenes in the appropriate places so now I have both action and emotion. I can now re-write the Blockbuster treatment and hopefully make something better out of it.

I also realised that some of the interesting stuff with my bad guy would transfer very nicely to one of the principle characters in the Bohemian Project. Nice.

---

What's on the turntable? "Where Opposites Meet" by Sky from "Sky"