Last night I was listening to an exceptional writers panel from The Nerdist. They covered a wide variety of topics: pitches, drafts, working the room, failure, directing. You could do worse things than spend an hour listening to this.
One of the writers, Emily Halpern, happened to work on The Unit under David Mamet. While talking about that experience the moderator mentioned an infamous memo Mamet sent out to the writers room. This was something I'd never heard about so I took to google to see what the fuss was about.
It's good. Very good.
Because it's the keys to writing good drama (a least one way to writing drama). It's a subject I was very unfamiliar with. Like most people in advertising I default to comedy writing and wrote off drama* a while ago. As a result, I know a decent amount about the ins and outs of comedy writing. And very little about writing drama.
Now, however, thanks to David Mamet and some kind soul who leaked this letter, I know a little more. Here's the long letter, in full. Warning: the whole thing is in caps. And it's the most worthwhile thing in rage-text you'll ever read. Enjoy.
"TO THE WRITERS OF THE UNIT
GREETINGS.
AS WE LEARN HOW TO WRITE THIS SHOW, A RECURRING PROBLEM BECOMES CLEAR.
THE PROBLEM IS THIS: TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN DRAMA AND NON-DRAMA. LET ME BREAK-IT-DOWN-NOW.
EVERYONE IN CREATION IS SCREAMING AT US TO MAKE THE SHOW CLEAR. WE ARE TASKED WITH, IT SEEMS, CRAMMING A SHITLOAD OF INFORMATION INTO A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.
OUR FRIENDS. THE PENGUINS, THINK THAT WE, THEREFORE, ARE EMPLOYED TO COMMUNICATE INFORMATION -- AND, SO, AT TIMES, IT SEEMS TO US.
BUT NOTE:THE AUDIENCE WILL NOT TUNE IN TO WATCH INFORMATION. YOU WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T. NO ONE WOULD OR WILL. THE AUDIENCE WILL ONLY TUNE IN AND STAY TUNED TO WATCH DRAMA.
QUESTION:WHAT IS DRAMA? DRAMA, AGAIN, IS THE QUEST OF THE HERO TO OVERCOME THOSE THINGS WHICH PREVENT HIM FROM ACHIEVING A SPECIFIC, ACUTE GOAL.
SO: WE, THE WRITERS, MUST ASK OURSELVES OF EVERY SCENE THESE THREE QUESTIONS.
1) WHO WANTS WHAT?
2) WHAT HAPPENS IF HER DON'T GET IT?
3) WHY NOW?
THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS ARE LITMUS PAPER. APPLY THEM, AND THEIR ANSWER WILL TELL YOU IF THE SCENE IS DRAMATIC OR NOT.
IF THE SCENE IS NOT DRAMATICALLY WRITTEN, IT WILL NOT BE DRAMATICALLY ACTED.
THERE IS NO MAGIC FAIRY DUST WHICH WILL MAKE A BORING, USELESS, REDUNDANT, OR MERELY INFORMATIVE SCENE AFTER IT LEAVES YOUR TYPEWRITER. YOU THE WRITERS, ARE IN CHARGE OF MAKING SURE EVERY SCENE IS DRAMATIC.
THIS MEANS ALL THE "LITTLE" EXPOSITIONAL SCENES OF TWO PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD. THIS BUSHWAH (AND WE ALL TEND TO WRITE IT ON THE FIRST DRAFT) IS LESS THAN USELESS, SHOULD IT FINALLY, GOD FORBID, GET FILMED.
IF THE SCENE BORES YOU WHEN YOU READ IT, REST ASSURED IT WILL BORE THE ACTORS, AND WILL, THEN, BORE THE AUDIENCE, AND WE'RE ALL GOING TO BE BACK IN THE BREADLINE.
SOMEONE HAS TO MAKE THE SCENE DRAMATIC. IT IS NOT THE ACTORS JOB (THE ACTORS JOB IS TO BE TRUTHFUL). IT IS NOT THE DIRECTORS JOB. HIS OR HER JOB IS TO FILM IT STRAIGHTFORWARDLY AND REMIND THE ACTORS TO TALK FAST. IT IS YOUR JOB.
EVERY SCENE MUST BE DRAMATIC. THAT MEANS: THE MAIN CHARACTER MUST HAVE A SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD, PRESSING NEED WHICH IMPELS HIM OR HER TO SHOW UP IN THE SCENE.
THIS NEED IS WHY THEY CAME. IT IS WHAT THE SCENE IS ABOUT. THEIR ATTEMPT TO GET THIS NEED MET WILL LEAD, AT THE END OF THE SCENE,TO FAILURE - THIS IS HOW THE SCENE IS OVER. IT, THIS FAILURE, WILL, THEN, OF NECESSITY, PROPEL US INTO THE NEXT SCENE.
ALL THESE ATTEMPTS, TAKEN TOGETHER, WILL, OVER THE COURSE OF THE EPISODE, CONSTITUTE THE PLOT.
ANY SCENE, THUS, WHICH DOES NOT BOTH ADVANCE THE PLOT, AND STANDALONE (THAT IS, DRAMATICALLY, BY ITSELF, ON ITS OWN MERITS) IS EITHER SUPERFLUOUS, OR INCORRECTLY WRITTEN.
YES BUT YES BUT YES BUT, YOU SAY: WHAT ABOUT THE NECESSITY OF WRITING IN ALL THAT "INFORMATION?"
AND I RESPOND "FIGURE IT OUT" ANY DICKHEAD WITH A BLUESUIT CAN BE (AND IS) TAUGHT TO SAY "MAKE IT CLEARER", AND "I WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT HIM".
WHEN YOU'VE MADE IT SO CLEAR THAT EVEN THIS BLUESUITED PENGUIN IS HAPPY, BOTH YOU AND HE OR SHE WILL BE OUT OF A JOB.
THE JOB OF THE DRAMATIST IS TO MAKE THE AUDIENCE WONDER WHAT HAPPENS NEXT. NOT TO EXPLAIN TO THEM WHAT JUST HAPPENED, OR TO*SUGGEST* TO THEM WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.
ANY DICKHEAD, AS ABOVE, CAN WRITE, "BUT, JIM, IF WE DON'T ASSASSINATE THE PRIME MINISTER IN THE NEXT SCENE, ALL EUROPE WILL BE ENGULFED IN FLAME"
WE ARE NOT GETTING PAID TO REALIZE THAT THE AUDIENCE NEEDS THIS INFORMATION TO UNDERSTAND THE NEXT SCENE, BUT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WRITE THE SCENE BEFORE US SUCH THAT THE AUDIENCE WILL BE INTERESTED IN WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.
YES BUT, YES BUT YES BUT YOU REITERATE.
AND I RESPOND FIGURE IT OUT.
HOW DOES ONE STRIKE THE BALANCE BETWEEN WITHHOLDING AND VOUCHSAFING INFORMATION? THAT IS THE ESSENTIAL TASK OF THE DRAMATIST. AND THE ABILITY TO DO THAT IS WHAT SEPARATES YOU FROM THE LESSER SPECIES IN THEIR BLUE SUITS.
FIGURE IT OUT.
START, EVERY TIME, WITH THIS INVIOLABLE RULE: THE SCENE MUST BE DRAMATIC. it must start because the hero HAS A PROBLEM, AND IT MUST CULMINATE WITH THE HERO FINDING HIM OR HERSELF EITHER THWARTED OR EDUCATED THAT ANOTHER WAY EXISTS.
LOOK AT YOUR LOG LINES. ANY LOGLINE READING "BOB AND SUE DISCUSS..." IS NOT DESCRIBING A DRAMATIC SCENE.
PLEASE NOTE THAT OUR OUTLINES ARE, GENERALLY, SPECTACULAR. THE DRAMA FLOWS OUT BETWEEN THE OUTLINE AND THE FIRST DRAFT.
THINK LIKE A FILMMAKER RATHER THAN A FUNCTIONARY, BECAUSE, IN TRUTH, YOU ARE MAKING THE FILM. WHAT YOU WRITE, THEY WILL SHOOT.
HERE ARE THE DANGER SIGNALS. ANY TIME TWO CHARACTERS ARE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.
ANY TIME ANY CHARACTER IS SAYING TO ANOTHER "AS YOU KNOW", THAT IS, TELLING ANOTHER CHARACTER WHAT YOU, THE WRITER, NEED THE AUDIENCE TO KNOW, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.
DO NOT WRITE A CROCK OF SHIT. WRITE A RIPPING THREE, FOUR, SEVEN MINUTE SCENE WHICH MOVES THE STORY ALONG, AND YOU CAN, VERY SOON, BUY A HOUSE IN BEL AIR AND HIRE SOMEONE TO LIVE THERE FOR YOU.
REMEMBER YOU ARE WRITING FOR A VISUAL MEDIUM. MOST TELEVISION WRITING, OURS INCLUDED, SOUNDS LIKE RADIO. THE CAMERA CAN DO THE EXPLAINING FOR YOU. LET IT. WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERS DOING -*LITERALLY*. WHAT ARE THEY HANDLING, WHAT ARE THEY READING. WHAT ARE THEY WATCHING ON TELEVISION, WHAT ARE THEY SEEING.
IF YOU PRETEND THE CHARACTERS CANT SPEAK, AND WRITE A SILENT MOVIE, YOU WILL BE WRITING GREAT DRAMA.
IF YOU DEPRIVE YOURSELF OF THE CRUTCH OF NARRATION, EXPOSITION,INDEED, OF SPEECH. YOU WILL BE FORGED TO WORK IN A NEW MEDIUM - TELLING THE STORY IN PICTURES (ALSO KNOWN AS SCREENWRITING)
THIS IS A NEW SKILL. NO ONE DOES IT NATURALLY. YOU CAN TRAIN YOURSELVES TO DO IT, BUT YOU NEED TO START.
I CLOSE WITH THE ONE THOUGHT: LOOK AT THE SCENE AND ASK YOURSELF "IS IT DRAMATIC? IS IT ESSENTIAL? DOES IT ADVANCE THE PLOT?
ANSWER TRUTHFULLY.
IF THE ANSWER IS "NO" WRITE IT AGAIN OR THROW IT OUT. IF YOU'VE GOT ANY QUESTIONS, CALL ME UP.
LOVE, DAVE MAMET
SANTA MONICA 19 OCTO 05
(IT IS NOT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW THE ANSWERS, BUT IT IS YOUR, AND MY, RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW AND TO ASK THE RIGHT Questions OVER AND OVER. UNTIL IT BECOMES SECOND NATURE. I BELIEVE THEY ARE LISTED ABOVE.)"
Letter via
*Despite writing a commercial called "The most dramatic, suspenseful lunchbox opening of all time." (Seen it?) Ater Mamet's list I fear it is not up to snuff in the dramatic department.
I finally got through an article I've had in my tabs for too long. It's about a Greek Island where "people forget to die."
There are days that I want to give up everything and move to a place like this. To live a simpler life, away from everything. To work the land and live off of it. To live forever (or at least a good long while) in a place seemingly devoid of competition. Because maybe living can be the point of life. Taking in the enjoyment of living each day.
But then I know that I would grow antsy. The same way I grow antsy here in Chicago after a long stretch of doing nothing. And I know that a life that works like this for some people probably wouldn't work for me. Ultimately I do want to compete. I want to make amazing things that other people enjoy because that's what makes life worth living. Proving myself to myself is my ultimate goal. To become self-actualized through the things I create. Even if that means I live a shorter amount of time.
Ultimately there is something broken in me that creates this desire. There has to be. But since it's what I know and what drives me that might not be the worst thing in the world. Even during the worst days I feel blessed to have been given so much. It gives me a reason to give back, to strive to do something worthwhile. Any alternative is unimaginable because I would feel this life has been wasted on someone who did not take the most advantage of it.
That's what scares me the most.
Link via BenKunz ages ago.
I love this new Nike Golf ad. Love it. Partially because it's getting a more attention than a poster posted to twitter should. We're talking mainstream media coverage. Lots of it. It did what an ad is supposed to do: got noticed, got people talking. It will probably even sell some clubs.
The use of the quote is also fascinating. It's bold and comes off the page like an edict. Even though when Tiger the quote it was in response to worrying about rankings. Not meant to be a mantra (Though, to his point, when you win the rankings do take care of themselves.) The way the creatives twisted it, and the client buying off on it, is pretty brilliant.
What I like most is Tiger's change as a character in advertising. He used to be the golden boy who inspires through his greatness. Now he's the villain egging you on to beat him. Inspiring in a very different, but no less valid, way. Even his goatee and look of determination have shades of Walter White.
He's broke bad. And he doesn't care.
"...the worst part is that they say you got killed on your own song." That, and more, in this interview. Donald Glover is very, very smart. (Which is probably why he was on Forbes' 30 under 30)
"The technology inside is really breakthrough," says Mr. Crociata at P&G. One of the formulas has a thickening agent that "gives you the feeling of 6,500 more hair strands in your ponytail."
- Kevin Crociata, marketing director of P&G's North American Hair Care business in "Packaging Noir"
What do you think this actually means? I can tell you what I think.
I think it means that this new thickening agent doesn't really do anything. Buying a new shirt can "give you the feeling" of looking better but it might not in actuality. Same with this shampoo.
It's a premium product, selling for $9 a per tube, but there doesn't really seem to be anything special about it beyond the black package and feeling of more hair in my pony tail.
NOTE: I'm still on a Community kick. So if this type of post is driving you crazy you can get out now. If you're as crazy about these posts as I am about Community then I love you. Yes you. Seriously.
One of the (many) reasons I have fallen into such fanatical love with Community is the people behind the show, specifically the writers. Their process amazes me. Their tenacity amazes me. But, most importantly, it's their honesty that has taught me the most about my own work.
Here's what I mean by honesty: they don't delude themselves into thinking each idea they have is gold. They even have the tendency to publicly pick apart episodes that didn't come together as neatly as they would have hoped. They are angry about their work at its worst, and sometimes at its best. Mostly because they know their own potential and the potential of the show.
There are numerous occasions where the writers addressed their fans on the internet to talk about dissatisfaction with certain episodes, or components of episodes, or things that happened behind the scenes that may or may not have had an impact on the show. They even do this preemptively to mitigate expectations about yet-to-be-aired episodes. People more into buzzwords than I would call this "transparency". I prefer to call it good old-fashioned "honesty". Because, at a base level, what they're doing is being honest with themselves and their fans about the quality of their work.
This isn't common practice in TV writing, at least to my knowledge, which makes it especially wonderful. It shows how much of themselves these writers put into making the series a success. They're raw. I think that shows in the end product.
This is also a practice I would love to see happen more often in advertising. So often people are talking about how amazing their own work is. Championing it around the digital and real worlds with conviction. All while others watch as people parade around a pile of excrement while calling it any number of buzzwords. Pick yours: "wonderful" "transformative" "innovative" "So great!"
Maybe people honestly believe their output is amazing. Maybe people don't have to publicly come out and trash their work. But a dose of honesty with themselves couldn't hurt. (This is as much directed at myself as others.) Sometimes you just have to let go.
There are things that are wonderful and worth shouting about. I have celebrated that work here, other places online, and in real life. But that's not often, because things wouldn't be exceptional if they were common.
Here's the meaty nugget I'm trying to get to. The only way to make something really good is to be painfully honest while evaluating it. During all stages in the process. Sometimes the public will decide something is great regardless of what you think of it. But the best thing we can do is make something we are in love with and send it out into the world. Chances are good someone else will love it too.
Behind-the-scenes features are perpetually interesting. A behind-the-scenes feature this good is extraordinarily interesting, at least it is to me.
