Touche

Sarcastically Delicious (aka boyfriend) and I are bit of jokers. Together we own a DVD rental kiosk company called Movies on the Spot. He sends out weekly e-mails to let our customers know what new movies are coming out each week. I receive a copy of these emails as well. This past week the movie Valentine's Day was released on DVD. I kind of want to see it, but Sarcastically Delicious doesn't like romantic comedies.

In response to his email I wrote:

Dear Movies on the Spot,
How can I convince my boyfriend to watch Valentine's Day with me? I mean it's made from the people who made Love Actually. Who wouldn't want to watch that?!?
Anita Saxena

Below is his monumental response:

Dear Ms. Saxena,

Therein lies the problem. By actually having a "boyfriend", I must assume that he is heterosexual since he is still dating you. If this premise holds true, then he cannot be a homosexual--naturally (or unnaturally depending on your beliefs). Your statement that "...it's made from the people who made Love Actually" implies that he may have actually watched said movie. From this, I must question my prior assumption that "he is heterosexual" or believe that he was forced to watch said movie against his will, which would be in violation of his civil rights (assuming he is in fact a US Citizen and should be granted those rights as set forth in the Constitution of the United States of America). If he is not a US Citizen, then no violation of civil rights exist as he has not been granted such rights.

Regarding Love Actually, this movie personifies the oxymoron "romantic comedy" like none other. Perhaps a definition of the conflicting words will enlighten you.

Romantic (as defined by dictionary.com)
–adjective

1. of, pertaining to, or of the nature of romance; characteristic or suggestive of the world of romance: a romantic adventure.

2. fanciful; impractical; unrealistic: romantic ideas.

3. imbued with or dominated by idealism, a desire for adventure, chivalry, etc.

4. characterized by a preoccupation with love or by the idealizing of love or one's beloved.

5. displaying or expressing love or strong affection.

6. ardent; passionate; fervent.

7. (usually initial capital letter) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of a style of literature and art that subordinates form to content, encourages freedom of treatment, emphasizes imagination, emotion, and introspection, and often celebrates nature, the ordinary person, and freedom of the spirit (contrasted with classical).

8. of or pertaining to a musical style characteristic chiefly of the 19th century and marked by the free expression of imagination and emotion, virtuosic display, experimentation with form, and the adventurous development of orchestral and piano music and opera.

9. imaginary, fictitious, or fabulous.
10. noting, of, or pertaining to the role of a suitor or lover in a play about love: the romantic lead.

Comedy (as defined by dictionary.com)

–noun,plural-dies.

1. a play, movie, etc., of light and humorous character with a happy or cheerful ending; a dramatic work in which the central motif is the triumph over adverse circumstance, resulting in a successful or happy conclusion.

2. that branch of the drama which concerns itself with this form of composition.

3. the comic element of drama, of literature generally, or of life.

4. any literary composition dealing with a theme suitable for comedy, or employing the methods of comedy.

5. any comic or humorous incident or series of incidents

To better exemplify the the characteristics of such a genre, I suggest the following term:

Shit (as defined by dictionary.com)

–noun

1. excrement; feces.

2. an act of defecating; evacuation.

3. the shits. diarrhea.

4. Slang. pretense, lies, exaggeration, or nonsense.

5. Slang. something inferior or worthless.

6. Slang. a selfish, mean, or otherwise contemptible person.

7. Slang. narcotic drugs, esp. heroin or marijuana.

8. Slang. possessions, equipment, mementos, etc.; stuff

In particular, definitions 4 and 5 seem most appropriate. Oddly enough, definition 4 correlates well with definitions 2 and 9 of "romantic." To revisit the "comedy" aspect of "romantic comedy" I would argue that no fitting definition exists (see above) to use the word when describing Love Actually. However, "comedy" may simply be meant as tongue-in-cheek if one believed the movie to actually be "shit" as many men (heterosexually speaking) find the subject of "shit" to be quite humorous.

Let's move forward to a discussion of entertainment vs time. Is it better to waste 3 hours watching "shit" as presented on DVD or similarly formatted media or simply spend a few extra seconds postdefecation watching real "shit" swirl in amazement as it travels down the porcelain abyss?

In conclusion, I see no entertainment value in watching "shit" for 3 hours. Unless your boyfriend is a homosexual or an illegal immigrant (whom you could force to watch the movie as he would have no civil recourse) I see no way to convince him to watch Valentine's Day with you. Besides, if he watched Love Actually, or any similar "shit" movie, then he's already seen it.

Good Luck,
"Sarcastically Delicious"

If you don't call it an "outline" then it doesn't seem so bad...

My mission: to write a nail biting, tantalizing, outline of the revision of my current WIP.
We've discussed outlines before on this blog but it never changed the fact that whenever I sit down and plan to outline something, absolutely. nothing. happens. It's like writer's block to the infinite exponential degree. And then highschool memories haunt me of teachers forcing me to outline research papers and draw those stupid spider things when you brainstorm. Roman numerals. Lower case letters. AAAHHHHH!!!

Solution: Don't call it an outline
A fabulous critique partner referred to it as "steps." She encouraged me to write the steps, or as I like to call it, a "scene flow" of where I'd like the story to go. And you know what?
It worked!!! I'm about 40% of the way through my steps and I can't wait to create more steps. It's like building a staircase really, a staircase to a really cool imaginary place.

Happy writing!

A Great Memo on Drama from David Mamet

A friend posted this on my facebook wall today. Even though it's directed towards screen writers, I think it is applicable to writers in general. It's so great, I just had to share it in it's entirety:

David Mamet's Master Class Memo to the Writers of The Unit

Written by Seth Abramovitch CBS’s drama The Unit, about the lives of the highly trained members of a top-secret military division, was canceled last year, but a memo to its writing staff from its executive producer David Mamet has just surfaced online. (The source appears to be the online writing collective Ink Canada.) If you think you know where this is heading, you might be wrong:
Besides the fact that it’s written in all-caps, there’s nothing particularly ranty, pejorative or potty-mouthed about it. Rather, Mamet lays down an extremely sensible case for what makes good television, imploring them to avoid expository writing for what he characterizes as authentic “drama.” Along the way, he refers repeatedly to the “blue-suited penguins” (probably the copious-note-givers at the network), while passing along some very useful advice (“any time two characters are talking about a third, the scene is a crock of shit”) and helpful writing exercises (“pretend the characters can’t speak and write a silent movie”). Screenwriters, take note: You may think you knew this already, but there’s nothing like Mamet for a good kick-in-the-ass reminder.
“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.)”

Making Choices

Writing is a process. And as we are on that journey of writing a million bad words before anything gleaming is produced, our minds become more astute when it comes to the creative process and the eventual development of our one-day-fictional-masterpieces. Along the way we learn a variety of caveats: show don't tell, every word should earn its place, less is more, etc...

Well, today a critique partner and I had a great discussion on the importance our characters being presented with decisions and making choices. In my first through fifth drafts of my manuscript, my MC had a lot of things happening to her. She went here and found this. She went there and someone told her that. And along the way she learned things, met people, had a face to face with a bad guy, and then wham bam happy ending. Unfortunately, this does not make for very good reading. An intriguing book presents circumstances that force characters to make choices. Should Harry Potter go after the horcruxes or the hallows? Should Gemma listen to Kartik and block her visions or should she embrace them? Should Fire use her ability to control minds to aid in prisoner interrogation?

Will you choose to write characters that bouce around fictional words where things happen to them or will you choose to create characters that are active, make choices, and move the story forward?
Happy Writing!

Peeing in Your Pants

"Ms. Snyder says the school bathroom is so dirty that you are better off peeing in your pants."
It's over hearing statements like these that make airports so much fun.
I had the pleasure of flying to Los Angeles last Friday for my best friend's bachelorette weekend. I don't know about you, but I'm a people watcher. In fact, I think a lot of artists enjoy observing people. When we write we create people with unique personalities, looks, and mannerisms, so an airport can be a treasure chest of inspiration.

• I've met other writers. 
• Given people parts in my writing, although they'll never know it. 
• You get to hear different dialects and speech patterns. 
• I've had the opportunity to talk to complete strangers and hear their life stories.
• And it never stops astounding me how there really are no two people that look alike (except for twins). I like to observe, specifically, differences in facial structure, coloring, hair, and over all body type.
• What can be better than penning away your masterpiece on an airplane? No phone calls. No internet (although Delta is now offering WIFI on their planes for $9.95 per flight). And the only interruption you'll get is when the stewardess offers you a snack and drink.

If you think people-watching might be for you, first beware that there is an art to people watching and it may take some practice. You have to observe without being caught- that is key- unless you plan on striking up a conversation with the person. But who knows where that conversation may take you? You may end up hearing about the life threatening mold growing in Aunt Gertrude's bed pan or hear about an exciting hike through a rain forest where someone found ever lasting love. It's a bit of a gamble. You can take notes, but don't stare and take notes at the same time. Remember, discretion. Also, female versus male people-watchers have to conduct their research a bit differently or you may end up with a bloody nose and a few broken bones.

Are there any other people-watchers out there?