'I Will Not Read Your Fucking Script'

[jst5150]

It's by Josh Olson and it's pretty good commentary (or dick rant) on the business of writing, esp. from someone anchored in the business:
If that seems unfair, I'll make you a deal. In return for you not asking me to read your fucking script, I will not ask you to wash my fucking car, or take my fucking picture, or represent me in fucking court, or take out my fucking gall bladder, or whatever the fuck it is that you do for a living.

You're a lovely person. Whatever time we've spent together has, I'm sure, been pleasurable for both of us. I quite enjoyed that conversation we once had about structure and theme, and why Sergio Leone is the greatest director who ever lived. Yes, we bonded, and yes, I wish you luck in all your endeavors, and it would thrill me no end to hear that you had sold your screenplay, and that it had been made into the best movie since Godfather Part II.

But I will not read your fucking script.
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/i_will_not_read.php

[Samantha's_Song]

That's two people who'll be named. in the small print. to not be allowed to touch my stories when my novels are made into films then. :D

Edited to add. - That man is fucking rude and arrogant beyond belief.

[CACTUSWENDY]

Sounds like he needs a Prozac or something.

[icerose]

Getting past his first couple paragraphs of nonsensical ranting, the blog post actually had some pretty big lessons that anyone who's been around has been through.

[dpaterso]

That's the last time I ever sleep with that son of a bitch.

-Derek

[Samantha's_Song]

:roll:
That's the last time I ever sleep with that son of a bitch.

-Derek

But did he actually read your script afterwards, that's what we'd like to know.

[icerose]

:roll:


But did he actually read your script afterwards, that's what we'd like to know.

My guess is he just got screwed. ;)

Okay that's my cheap shot at humor for the day.

[ChaosTitan]

Getting past his first couple paragraphs of nonsensical ranting, the blog post actually had some pretty big lessons that anyone who's been around has been through.

Agreed. And I loved his Picasso story.

[Perks]

Ouch.

[creativexec]

Despite the brusque rant - which is the "hook" of the editorial - I understand his point.

My wife always moans to me about how I need to say "no" more often. But it can be difficult. For instance, my Mom will call and say that her friend's daughter has a script she'd like me to read. If I say "no," I make my Mom look bad. And so on. It's often more complicated than simply saying, "No. I don't have the time." (Although I do that often - because it's true.)

Also, I can relate to an aspiring filmmaker looking for a professional opinion (which is why I teach).

As was mentioned in the comments section of Josh's rant, it is the time investment that kills me more than anything.

If just one person a month asked me to read his script, it would be manageable. But I get, at least, one personal request a day.

Personal means from my mother or my co-worker or my neighbor or a colleague and so on. These are requests that have nothing to do with busness (although most think a read will launch their careers). Most are looking for feedback. They come at me from every which way.

This does not include the 200 queries letters I get a month from aspiring writers on top of the 400 or so professional scripts that come into my office a month (scripts from producers, studios, clients, casting directors and so on).

At least one personal request a day equals seven scripts a week, which equals two hours of reading time and two hours of post-read investment. That's about 28 hours a week of volunteer work. On top of the 100 hours of work from all my professional obligations/endeavors. (Family time is not included in any of this.)

It also becomes a full-time job just trying to keep all these contacts straight, notes in order, follow-ups timely. It's tough when these favors are at the bottom of the "to do" list, because as time goes by, many slip through the cracks as more pressing issues arise. And dropping the ball creates its own stress, because you know the scribe is waiting for your response. And although he knows you're busy with other things, he still wants his project to be a priority.

I often tell people that the wait time is months and they're OK with that. (Sometimes during the wait, they will send me e-mails with a revised draft, as Josh points out.) But, as time goes by, the scripts on the "favor pile" get higher and higher. And some of those favors are more important than others - which means certain favor scripts get priority over others - especially when time has to be managed.

I find that the hours of volunteerism get overwhelming. And how I dread to hear the oh-so politely passive-aggressive, "I know you're really busy and have no free time on your hands but...."

:)

By the way, there is the other issue of liability and how anyone in the business of making movies runs the risk of some sort of copyright lawsuit by a writer whose script they once read.

[alleycat]

That's the last time I ever sleep with that son of a bitch.

-Derek
You say that now. Just wait until you finish your next script.

[Kosh]

I have to side with Mr. Profanity on this one.
I know a lot of artists in many fields from music to CGI; they get the "could you...?" from people they met that very day. It's funny that when people hear you do something for a living, they assume you'll do it for free. I think a great rule of thumb is that if you can't find an abundance of friends and family members to can do a good job at it, you shouldn't expect someone to do it for free.
I'm nowhere near professional, yet people continually ask me to write 100+ page scripts for them.

[Chase]

.
Josh Olson: "It rarely takes more than a page to recognize that you're in the presence of someone who can write, but it only takes a sentence to know you're dealing with someone who can't. (By the way, here's a simple way to find out if you're a writer. If you disagree with that statement, you're not a writer. Because, you see, writers are also readers.)"

I've taught writing in high schools and colleges for a quarter century and have been reading voraciously more than twice that long.

Yet suggest to a self-proclaimed gifted writer that he or she needs to learn the basics of spelling, punctuation, grammar, and coherence before asking others to spend time proofing or critiquing -- and right away you're an "academic" with a heart of coal, bereft of people skills and out to crush the creative spirit. Olson's "bah, humbug" is spot on.

[icerose]

.
Josh Olson: "It rarely takes more than a page to recognize that you're in the presence of someone who can write, but it only takes a sentence to know you're dealing with someone who can't. (By the way, here's a simple way to find out if you're a writer. If you disagree with that statement, you're not a writer. Because, you see, writers are also readers.)"

I've taught writing in high schools and colleges for a quarter century and have been reading voraciously more than twice that long.

Yet suggest to a self-proclaimed gifted writer that he or she needs to learn the basics of spelling, punctuation, grammar, and coherence before asking others to spend time proofing or critiquing -- and right away you're an "academic" with a heart of coal, bereft of people skills and out to crush the creative spirit. Olson's "bah, humbug" is spot on.

Yeah exactly! I've learned my lesson. I tell them upfront what kind of mean unkind critiquer I am whenever someone asks. Sometimes I even send examples of my critiquing style and that I will shred their darlings and everyone who would have come back with a nasty gram instead of thoughtfully reading and considering my notes has backed out.

[Samantha's_Song]

Shrugs. Oh well, I'll know exactly how to answer all of the requests I get for beta reading on here in the future. :D

[Ken]

... great example for a Mod to be setting here with the language :rolleyes:

Just because one is quoting somebody doesn't mean they still can't abridge the questionable words, especially as there are members here who are minors with parents who may have serious objections to such stuff. (Wouldn't be surprised either if content restriction software banned AW from coming up on browsers, which would be a shame. So let's tone it down a bit.)

[scarletpeaches]

What? Hell no!

If someone doesn't want their kids seeing swear words then they should limit their internet use. If adults want to swear, let them.

I for one see nothing wrong with quoting 'questionable words' as they were originally spoken.

Luckily for us the mods don't treat adults as children, and they expect children to be parented by THEIR PARENTS, not the internet.

[Samantha's_Song]

I got bollocked for saying a four-letter word on here.
Luckily for us the mods don't treat adults as children, and they expect children to be parented by THEIR PARENTS, not the internet.

[scarletpeaches]

But back to the original post. I can well understand the anger. Samantha's Song called him fucking rude and arrogant beyond belief. I disagree. He was pushed to the limit by people making 'dick moves' on him - and yes, I quote on that one. Imagine being asked time and time again to read this, read that, read my book, read my script...all by people who think they're the first and only one to make demands on your time. And if you say no, ooh look, out comes the guilt trip. I swear a hell of a lot in real life anyway but if I'm angry? Look out. And people pulling dick moves on me, trying to guilt trip me into giving up MY precious time to read THEIR shit makes me furious. And I'm not even a big-name screenwriter. I'm just a writer, doing her thing...

So yeah. I can well understand. And I'd react in the same way. Arrogant and rude? Hell no. The arrogant and rude ones are the people who think their work is so wonderful someone else should give up their time to read it for free.

Me? I'd tell 'em to get fucked.

[Samantha's_Song]

Well, ya know, I never ask anyone to read my work for me, but if I asked someone and they answered me like that, they'd get a punch in the mouth and then get the same kind of language back, twice fold. I don't get angry very often, maybe once every five years or so, but when I do, woe betide the person that actually makes me angry. I hit below the belt, and I hit hard, right where it hurts.

[scarletpeaches]

Just think of HOW MANY times he's been asked. It's like going up to a doctor at a party and asking him about your aches and pains. Why should he do work for anyone for free?

I'm completely with him on this one. It's rude to insult the value of someone else's time by expecting them to do their job for you, for free. Not only are you ripping them off but you're preventing them from making money in the time they wasted on you.

[Samantha's_Song]

If he's face to face, he can look them straight in the eye and say, "No. Sorry." End of story as far as I'm concerned.

I come into my AW account sometimes and find loads of emails asking me to beta read, I have never once replied badly, not even to the ones who can't be bothered to say please and bloody thank you.

[Cranky]

Just think of HOW MANY times he's been asked. It's like going up to a doctor at a party and asking him about your aches and pains. Why should he do work for anyone for free?

I'm completely with him on this one. It's rude to insult the value of someone else's time by expecting them to do their job for you, for free. Not only are you ripping them off but you're preventing them from making money in the time they wasted on you.

Not to mention, it's putting them on the spot. If they say no, they're an asshole. If they say yes, and the work stinks and they're honest about it, they're an asshole. If someone is gonna corner you with their script (or shove an ms under a bathroom stall at a con), the only answer they're going to accept with any degree of grace is "Wow,this is great! Let's get you hooked up with a contract right now!"

That's the impression I get, anyway. It's hubris in the extreme to expect an expert to look your work over for free, basically. Submitting to agents, etc., through official channels is different, I hasten to add, and they're really not obligated to give you an answer of any kind, either. It's nice, it's considered polite and good business to at least send a form reject, but to expect anything more is kind of foolish in my opinion.

I, too, loved the Picasso story.

[scarletpeaches]

If he's face to face, he can look them straight in the eye and say, "No. Sorry." End of story as far as I'm concerned.In the article he explains this is not always enough. There are persistent idiots out there who don't take no for an answer and make him the bad guy. So, like I said - with him all the way. If I say no to someone and they persist, they can take what I choose to dish out. If they cross the line first, they deserve it.

[Ken]

... for the record, I think swearing and whatnot have their time and place and are fine in those designated settings. A public message board, intended for all ages, just ain't one of those places in my own (seemingly singular) view.

[Samantha's_Song]

I do have to admit, I didn't read the article, I only read what was quoted on here. I guess if someone persistently pestered me, then I'd be pretty peed off too. I did have one like that the other week on here, but I refrained from saying what I thought and just deleted the emails before I did say something very rude, but I suppose it was only because I was afraid of being deleted from here again if I got reported.
In the article he explains this is not always enough. There are persistent idiots out there who don't take no for an answer and make him the bad guy. So, like I said - with him all the way. If I say no to someone and they persist, they can take what I choose to dish out. If they cross the line first, they deserve it.

[clockwork]

... for the record, I think swearing and whatnot have their time and place and are fine in those designated settings. A public message board, intended for all ages, just ain't one of those places in my own (seemingly singular) view.

I saw the thread earlier and decided to let it stand because I thought it fit in with the general guidelines we have here on AW. There's no "ban" on swearing here but at the same time, people have to own their words. Casual swearing is crass and generally cleaned up but when it's clear that a member has chosen to use a particular word because that was the right word at the right time, then it would be wrong to ask them to alter it because you'd be altering the truth and the passion of whatever sentiment they were trying to express.

True, this guy isn't a member here but I think the same applies to quoted material. In this instance, it tells you so much more about the author's mind-set than it would without it. He's a writer (one of the best) and he didn't choose that word arbitrarily. It's there for a reason and, for that reason, I think it should stay.

If Mac decides to take it out, that's cool, but it'll be her call.

[Cella]

... for the record, I think swearing and whatnot have their time and place and are fine in those designated settings. A public message board, intended for all ages, just ain't one of those places in my own (seemingly singular) view.


You're not alone in your opinion, Ken, but more parents need to figure out how to use the computer and screen what their kids are looking at. Swear words are in the movies they let their kids watch, and in the kid's mouths and in the mouths of their peers. They deal with it.

My husband in a self-employed mechanic and he gets this ALL THE TIME! People line up at parties or family gatherings telling him about this rattles or that jiggles and could he please just take a "quick look" at it (for free, of course) so he and I don't even get to enjoy our time out. It's very annoying--probably bothers me more than it does him. Nice guy.

[Chase]

Just because one is quoting somebody doesn't mean they still can't abridge the questionable words, especially as there are members here who are minors with parents who may have serious objections to such stuff. (Wouldn't be surprised either if content restriction software banned AW from coming up on browsers, which would be a shame. So let's tone it down a bit.)

... for the record, I think swearing and whatnot have their time and place and are fine in those designated settings. A public message board, intended for all ages, just ain't one of those places in my own (seemingly singular) view.

These are excellent reasons for AW to become an all-adult site. Let the kids pick up filthy language at recess as the rest of did.

What I find far more offensive -- certainly nothing kiddies should ever be exposed to -- is that "one" or "someone" (hard to tell which singular) should be referred to as "they," a plural. Is there no decency left among writers? I fear there ain't.

[Ken]

What I find far more offensive -- certainly nothing kiddies should ever be exposed to -- is that "one" or "someone" (hard to tell which singular) should be referred to as "they," a plural. Is there no decency left among writers? I fear there ain't.

... the use of 'they' as a gender-neutral pronoun for he/she is acceptable, or at least tolerated:

The "singular" they (http://www.absolutewrite.com/wiki/Singular_they) is the use of this pronoun, where they is used as a gender-neutral (http://www.absolutewrite.com/wiki/Gender-neutral) singular (http://www.absolutewrite.com/wiki/Grammatical_number) rather than plural pronoun. The correctness of this usage is disputed

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/They

Thanks above for your opinions on the matter, Clockwork and Cella. Will stir them together with my own, put them through a sieve, and see what results ...

[Kosh]

Shrugs. Oh well, I'll know exactly how to answer all of the requests I get for beta reading on here in the future. :D
Strangely enough, I've Beta-read quite a bit. Here, Donedeal, even MySpace. But I didn't write A History of Violence, so it's still very much a learning experience.

[icerose]

I do have to admit, I didn't read the article, I only read what was quoted on here. I guess if someone persistently pestered me, then I'd be pretty peed off too. I did have one like that the other week on here, but I refrained from saying what I thought and just deleted the emails before I did say something very rude, but I suppose it was only because I was afraid of being deleted from here again if I got reported.

It was not only that he didn't stop, but that the writer spent weeks replying to the 2 page synopsis and the one pestering him didn't even say thankyou. Instead he treated him like he was a dick for not telling him his work was perfect and so on and so forth.

Those are the situations that piss me off to no end. It's like "You asked for my time and my expertise, and now you're throwing it back in my face and crapping on me and my effort?" Yeah, never sits well with me and I'm sure it's what pushed this particular writer into the rant.

[dolores haze]

The dude writes an excellent rant. I thought his language was perfect for his purpose.

[clockwork]

Thanks above for your opinions on the matter, Clockwork and Cella. Will stir them together with my own, put them through a sieve, and see what results ...

Thanks, Ken. I appreciate that.

I'd also appreciate it we could all focus on the article rather than our opinions about the cursing in it from now on. Thanks, everyone.

[Chase]

... the use of 'they' as a gender-neutral pronoun for he/she is acceptable, or at least tolerated:

The "singular" they is the use of this pronoun, where they is used as a gender-neutral singular rather than plural pronoun. The correctness of this usage is disputed.

Your quote merely described how a word is used and that its use is disputed. It by no means says it "is acceptable" or even "tolerated."

By the same token, I'm sure misreading and applying personal bias also caused the missed point in Olson's article -- that he believed strong language became necessary to make a point to writers trying to force personal favors.

[mommyjo2]

I'm nowhere near professional, yet people continually ask me to write 100+ page scripts for them.

I'm not even CLOSE to a professional, I just like working within the format of a script, and once a guy asked me to write a script for him WITHOUT TELLING ME THE STORY.

I think he was afraid I'd steal his super awesome idea, because he said "you watch movies from beginning to end, I'll tell you the story one scene at a time".

[mario_c]

So many opportunities for novice script writers to get their work polished by peers - TS, Zoe, Meetup groups, our own SYW - there's no reason to pitch a script that isn't dynamite to a professional. But some scribes get hard up for recognition and jump off the cliff without checking their parachute. It's sad.
Anyone else wonder why studio readers charge $40 and up per script? And contract / freelance readers charge at least twice that? Sure I'll read your $#%!ing script! :)

It's all reminiscent of a certain website...oh, don't remember the name, something about playing with words...can't come up with the link since author TR threatened to have Ms. Stone sued and arrested because someone dared to promote his work on this site...guess the guy is really a runny stool er, concerned about copyrights there. My point is, a similar theme going on there.

[ATP]

It was not only that he didn't stop, but that the writer spent weeks replying to the 2 page synopsis and the one pestering him didn't even say thankyou. Instead he treated him like he was a dick for not telling him his work was perfect and so on and so forth.

Those are the situations that piss me off to no end. It's like "You asked for my time and my expertise, and now you're throwing it back in my face and crapping on me and my effort?" Yeah, never sits well with me and I'm sure it's what pushed this particular writer into the rant.

I am not sure if this applies to the 'arts' world generally, or screenwriting in particular. At its simplest, there are too many agenda-ridden, overly compensating, quick climb-to-the-top-of-the-heap no talent motherfoulers out there who are trying their schtick on any and everyone.

In such cases as you've mentioned, they're singularly, though not unsurprisingly, graceless and lacking in any basic polite considerations of another human being's own situation. They are blind and deaf to protocol, if it can be said to exist in this situation--and most certainly in responding very harshly to any negative comments given by the professional writer.

That said, the writer of the article does get carried away. As others have pointed out, he once was on the bottom of the heap too, but seems to have forgotten this. In return, he is also showing how graceless he is.

I do not think that his chosen 'literary device' or particular 'voice' that he has employed makes any difference. But this doesn't detract from some of the fair points he makes.

In summary, you might say two things:

-for the professional writers who are asked, a simple thank you, but I am simply too busy making a living will suffice as reply;

-for the wannabes, make sure before you ask that you have rewritten the chosen product six times, have attended screenwriting seminars and lectures, and have read numerous books on the subject matter.

[Mac H.]

What I find far more offensive -- certainly nothing kiddies should ever be exposed to -- is that "one" or "someone" (hard to tell which singular) should be referred to as "they," a plural. Is there no decency left among writers?If you believe that, make sure the kiddies aren't exposed to Shakespreare. Or Jane Austen. Both of them have been known to use the singular 'they'.

Heck - even the British Passport Application form has used.

It might be poor 'American-dialect English', but it is good 'English-dialect English'. Which dialect are you referring to?

Mac

[scarletpeaches]

That said, the writer of the article does get carried away. As others have pointed out, he once was on the bottom of the heap too, but seems to have forgotten this. In return, he is also showing how graceless he is.He was once the bottom of the heap, yes, but now he's the top. That doesn't mean he's forgotten where he came from - it means he's met at every turn by people who think they have the right to impose their half-assed efforts on him.

Graceless? No. Why should he bestow grace on people who are themselves graceless and/or undeserving of his time?

He's earned the right to say no in any way he sees fit and in this case I think his reaction is to the proper degree. People keep talking about his language being rude - well, it was a reaction to another person's rudeness. Fighting fire with fire.

Some people claim they would never be so 'rude' as him. Well, when they have complete strangers making demands on their time and not taking no for an answer, we'll see how gracious they are then.

In some instances a well-timed "Fuck off," is what's needed. If someone is as persistent as the examples given in the article, you have to speak to them in a language they understand. You can't reason with unreason.

[Wayne K]

:nothing

[jst5150]

I posted the piece. So, I thought I'd offer an something other than its posting.

First, people want him to read his scripts because he's an insider and he has access. It's that, through him, they can get a foothold within the industry and make their way from there. He's a gatekeeper and though he never brings that home in his article, that's really what matters -- the relationship, not the reading.

That said, none of the people handing him scripts want him to critique it. Hardly. They just want access and the ability to say, "I know so and so and he read my script." They can build lies after that. Who's going to verify them? Besides, it's Hollywood and the thing is built on lies. But believing there's some educational factor to be gained? Really? Those sorts of relationships between professionals and potentials are built over time, not suddenly.

Finally, I made a choice to post the title of the article as it is. For one, it speaks to Hollywood and its realities. Two, primarily, this forum is inhabited by adults or teenagers with enough education to understand vulgarities and their use, in whatever form. Finally, that is the title of the article posted by a prominent east-coast media outlet and run with all its vulgarity in tact.

In future, I'll be more careful about offering disclaimers for the same and regret that this title may have caused some consternation. As a moderator, I should have thought better of our entire population of folks.

[padnar]

I agree with you all in these matter and if any unwanted guests turn up we can ask them to read our script . lol
padma

[ComicBent]

They think that screenwriting doesn't actually require the ability to write, just the ability to come up with a cool story that would make a cool movie.
So true, so true.

And I read the article.

[odocoileus]

I wonder if this will launch a series of viral videos on youtube.

It would be funny as hell heck to see a series of random people of all ages, genders, and ethnic backgrounds doing Olson's rant.

Extra points for people doing the rant with unusual accents.



:Soapbox: :Soapbox: :Soapbox: :Soapbox: :Soapbox:

[nmstevens]

I posted the piece. So, I thought I'd offer an something other than its posting.

First, people want him to read his scripts because he's an insider and he has access. It's that, through him, they can get a foothold within the industry and make their way from there. He's a gatekeeper and though he never brings that home in his article, that's really what matters -- the relationship, not the reading.

That said, none of the people handing him scripts want him to critique it. Hardly. They just want access and the ability to say, "I know so and so and he read my script." They can build lies after that. Who's going to verify them? Besides, it's Hollywood and the thing is built on lies. But believing there's some educational factor to be gained? Really? Those sorts of relationships between professionals and potentials are built over time, not suddenly.

Finally, I made a choice to post the title of the article as it is. For one, it speaks to Hollywood and its realities. Two, primarily, this forum is inhabited by adults or teenagers with enough education to understand vulgarities and their use, in whatever form. Finally, that is the title of the article posted by a prominent east-coast media outlet and run with all its vulgarity in tact.

In future, I'll be more careful about offering disclaimers for the same and regret that this title may have caused some consternation. As a moderator, I should have thought better of our entire population of folks.


My feeling about profanity, whether in headers or in the text of articles is this:

While this site is obviously not limited exclusively to adults, its subject is writing screenplays which, by its nature is only appropriate to adults or, at least teenagers, none of whom are strangers to profanity. The chances of small children wandering into this utterly graphics-free screenwriting web-site are, I suspect, rather small.

Now, anybody, of any age, might be offended by the casual use of such language -- and while I appreciate that one doesn't want to go out of the way to be offensive, nobody ever guaranteed anybody the right *not* to be offended.

We're all grown-ups and, to some extent, we should all be respectful on the one hand -- but we shouldn't have to tip toe around one another on the other. People swear. Kids sometimes hear it. Nobody dies. If that was the case, growing up around my Dad, we would all have died.

Regarding the article itself, while I can understand the strong desire on the part of beginners to get feedback from professionals, I also very much understand the position of the writer, however he chooses to express it.

As others have said, every professional finds himself put upon in similar fashion -- doctors get cornered and asked for free medical advice, lawyers for free legal advice -- and screenwriters get cornered and asked for free writing advice. In fact, a long time ago, one of the few times I ever broke the rule about reading someone's script -- it was a script written by a doctor who was treating my mother. Really tough to say no in a situation like that. And really tough diplomatic job to critique a completely awful script in a situation like that.

And I strongly suspect that that doctor would not have liked having to provide a comparable amount of free *medical* advice to me, in exchange for the substantial amount of free professional advice I gave to him.

Now, I simply say "no." My agent and my lawyer tell me I shouldn't do it. It's a major legal exposure, even with a release form. If a script I happen to read is similar to something I happen to be working on, or something in my idea file, or something I later get *hired* to write -- I'm just begging for a lawsuit -- and I just flat out don't need the trouble.

So I just say "no." No to family. No to friends who aren't in the business. No to everybody. I haven't read a non-pro script in years -- and I haven't missed it even a little bit.

It may sound cruel, but there's a reason why most development companies don't want to read your scripts either. There's a real downside time, money (for them), risk -- and virtually no upside.

And most of that, unfortunately, applies to other pro screenwriters as well.

NMS

[brutus]

Best response to "will you read my script?" is: "Yes. I charge $150 an hour."
Or: "Depends on how much it pays."


Watch the dust cloud as they turn and run like hell.

[odocoileus]

Best response to "will you read my script?" is: "Yes. I charge $150 an hour."
Or: "Depends on how much it pays."


Watch the dust cloud as they turn and run like hell.

"My standard rate is a thousand bucks, but I like you, so I'll make it eight fifty. Send me your script, and a cashier's check by registered mail, and we'll get to work." :D

[mario_c]

Odo and Brutus: I wish!

NMS that's a great story about your mother's doctor. I may actually be lucky in this respect to have a wussy self-deprecating personality - I have so little faith in myself, I actually expect criticism to improve my work. I must be weird.
To all the pros in here (add CreativeExec, Icerose, and who else to the list?), we hope you at least keep at it in SYW. We understand you have better things to do with your time than to prod us wannabes into trying harder, and we appreciate it.

OK back to the snark brigade. :)

[padnar]

Cheers to professionals (Icerose, cretive executivesand others). I always appreciate people who go out of thei way to help others.
padma

[icerose]

Odo and Brutus: I wish!

NMS that's a great story about your mother's doctor. I may actually be lucky in this respect to have a wussy self-deprecating personality - I have so little faith in myself, I actually expect criticism to improve my work. I must be weird.
To all the pros in here (add CreativeExec, Icerose, and who else to the list?), we hope you at least keep at it in SYW. We understand you have better things to do with your time than to prod us wannabes into trying harder, and we appreciate it.

OK back to the snark brigade. :)

NMS is much further along in the professional arena than I am. I'm just a newbie there. :)

As for SYW I don't really go there much as I am really harsh and straightforward in my critiques so I don't do critiques for anyone without proper warning. Some people simply aren't ready for my level and type of critique and I understand that.

I used to think everyone was like me and wanted deep down those harsh straight forward no hands holding critiques that flay the piece and lay bare all the flaws so the bad pieces could be picked out and the piece could be put back together in an all new amazing fashion. Not to mention I grow most in rewriting, especially after a good solid critique that knocked me around a bit.

Much to my surprise everyone is not looking for a harsh straight forward critique, not everyone is even looking to improve and some are doing little more than fishing for praise or even a recommendation.

I have had several members ask me privately for critiques and I have given them only with the understanding of exactly what they were going to get and it seems to work out really well.

It saves me from the situation the writer of the rant is, well, ranting about.

Sara

[Klazart]

Okay so here's a newbie question for Mr. Olsen.

I've been working at my writing for a bit. I think I've made some progress in understanding the craft of writing. I read screenplays, frequent forums and swallow up all the advice that I can. I also try to write as much as I can, and hope that I learn something with each new draft/screenplay that will make the next one I write that much better.

Looking back even a year or two, I think I've made significant progress and facepalm at some of my stuff that I THOUGHT was good.

The problem is that you can't help but think what you write has merit. No one is going to get up in the morning and spend two hours writing, thinking, hey, I'm writing shit, isn't it great I spend my time writing shit. It's the same with any endeavour we pour ourselves into. Sometimes I fear I'm going to end up like all the X-factor/American Idol audtionees. How do some of those people not realise how terrible they sound? Quite simply, because no one impartial/neutral has told them in a considerate and non-offensive manner. And sometimes even that isn't enough.

But I digress. The point is, I find myself in some kind of writer's twilight zone, where I'm starting to get where I think my stuff might be good enough, but I'm not sure. I'm not sure where the weaknesses are, where the strengths are. As has been pointed out above, I'm too close to my own work.

The only way I can progress is if I can get honest, constructive feedback from someone who knows more than me. It might be an hour of their time, but an hour of their time might help me make progress that would take me 6 months or a year to make blundering about on my own.

So why not just pay some script reader? This is where the analogies with Doctor's and lawyers falls flat. These are accredited professions with minimum standards. You ask a doctor for his medical advice because he has a degree that says he knows at least "x" about medicine. Enough that it's safe to place your life in their hands. There is no such standard for screenwriters. How do I know the person charging 100$ to review my script actually knows what they are talking about and aren't just a scam artist? How do I know they won't just give me the same pat on the back I could get from my mother's reading club (she doesn't have one)? Or worse still, send me in the wrong direction with mistaken or uninformed feedback.

That's why Pros like Mr. Olsen get much more inundated than doctors or lawyers. Because they have a badge (if any thing can be one in this industry) that says, they know something, enough to make it, which is what the rest of us are trying to figure out.

A year and a half ago I sent my novel out to a few people. I thought it was ready. Now I know how wrong I was. Now I shudder to think I actually wasted people's time with that crap. Not only that, but I probably made them think of me as some sort of rank amateur and this will always be in their thoughts if they ever look at something of mine again.

But I didn't do this to be a dick, or because I don't respect their time, or because I'm lazy. And I'd like to hope that I didn't do this because I'm a talentless, no-hoper, moron. I did it, because I simply didn't know any better. I thought it was good enough and had to learn the hard way that it wasn't.

[icerose]

The question, then, Klazart, is how did you react?

The person in question in the rant responded very poorly. Not only was he not even grateful for the time the writer took, they started spreading mean things about him.

I have critiqued works for other writers that were very beginning pieces with many many mistakes. However, if the person in question responds graciously and takes the effort to actually apply all the stuff I mentioned and improve their work, I'm quite happy. I critique for the sole purpose of helping others improve, not to tear them down or feel horrible about themselves and their work.

If they respond with a nasty gram and "You don't understand my genius!" then I feel like I completely wasted my time and know that until they get over themselves they're not going anywhere with their writing. They will continually make the same mistakes and wallow in their amature status forever. They have what's called Golden Word Syndrom, they can't recognize that their work might have flaws and have room to improve and are able to accept criticism and apply it to their work and improve.

But if the willingness to learn and improve is there, it's what makes critiquing worth it.

[nmstevens]

Okay so here's a newbie question for Mr. Olsen.

I've been working at my writing for a bit. I think I've made some progress in understanding the craft of writing. I read screenplays, frequent forums and swallow up all the advice that I can. I also try to write as much as I can, and hope that I learn something with each new draft/screenplay that will make the next one I write that much better.

Looking back even a year or two, I think I've made significant progress and facepalm at some of my stuff that I THOUGHT was good.

The problem is that you can't help but think what you write has merit. No one is going to get up in the morning and spend two hours writing, thinking, hey, I'm writing shit, isn't it great I spend my time writing shit. It's the same with any endeavour we pour ourselves into. Sometimes I fear I'm going to end up like all the X-factor/American Idol audtionees. How do some of those people not realise how terrible they sound? Quite simply, because no one impartial/neutral has told them in a considerate and non-offensive manner. And sometimes even that isn't enough.

But I digress. The point is, I find myself in some kind of writer's twilight zone, where I'm starting to get where I think my stuff might be good enough, but I'm not sure. I'm not sure where the weaknesses are, where the strengths are. As has been pointed out above, I'm too close to my own work.

The only way I can progress is if I can get honest, constructive feedback from someone who knows more than me. It might be an hour of their time, but an hour of their time might help me make progress that would take me 6 months or a year to make blundering about on my own.

So why not just pay some script reader? This is where the analogies with Doctor's and lawyers falls flat. These are accredited professions with minimum standards. You ask a doctor for his medical advice because he has a degree that says he knows at least "x" about medicine. Enough that it's safe to place your life in their hands. There is no such standard for screenwriters. How do I know the person charging 100$ to review my script actually knows what they are talking about and aren't just a scam artist? How do I know they won't just give me the same pat on the back I could get from my mother's reading club (she doesn't have one)? Or worse still, send me in the wrong direction with mistaken or uninformed feedback.

That's why Pros like Mr. Olsen get much more inundated than doctors or lawyers. Because they have a badge (if any thing can be one in this industry) that says, they know something, enough to make it, which is what the rest of us are trying to figure out.

A year and a half ago I sent my novel out to a few people. I thought it was ready. Now I know how wrong I was. Now I shudder to think I actually wasted people's time with that crap. Not only that, but I probably made them think of me as some sort of rank amateur and this will always be in their thoughts if they ever look at something of mine again.

But I didn't do this to be a dick, or because I don't respect their time, or because I'm lazy. And I'd like to hope that I didn't do this because I'm a talentless, no-hoper, moron. I did it, because I simply didn't know any better. I thought it was good enough and had to learn the hard way that it wasn't.


On some level, I think that you are looking for two different things, one of which is attainable without professional assistance, one of which may or may not be.

The first is -- what's wrong with my work?

The second is -- how do I fix it?

There are websites where you can post your work, read and critique other scripts and have other writers read and critique your scripts (names escape me, but I'm sure others here can post them).

You can even post short samples of your work here and get critiqued for free and those critiques can also be helpful.

Now the question is -- helpful in what way?

Critiques that come from non-pros are not necessarily going to tell you how to fix your script. In fact, you may get a wide range of critiques. Some may love it (especially if they're family members), others may hate it, others may fall in between.

But if you find that the objections to the script are all falling along the same lines, that should be telling something. And, like it or not, you should listen to that something. If nobody likes the ending, then there's a good chance that there's something wrong with the ending. If everybody finds the script confusing, there's a good chance the script is confusing -- in a bad way.

Now, a lot of times objections come in the form of suggestions -- suggestions as to how to fix things. And it's important to understand that most people who are offering suggestions are like people who are giving you medical advice who are not doctors -- they don't know what they are talking about. The point is, you need to look beyond the suggestion and see what it is that is bothering them about your script. What is it that they think is "sick" about your script that their suggestion is trying to make better?

Often you'll find that many different suggestions all come about as a result of a single "illness" in your script -- some one wrong thing that produces different symptons and yields a multiplicity of different "fixes" -- different suggestions -- none of which may get to the heart of the problem.

That's the point -- you usually don't need expert help to find out what's wrong with the script. And often it's only necessary for you to confront what is wrong with a script for you to fix it. Very often, you'll find that deep down, you really knew it all along and maybe you were hoping that nobody else would notice. Only they did. (We all kind of do this, by the way -- even pros). And now you have to do the real work of fixing what you sort of knew was never really working in the first place.

Then again, maybe you have no idea, even knowing what's wrong, how to go about fixing it.

Well, that's a tough problem and the answer may be that you have an insoluble story problem. That happens. And then you're screwed. Even professional writers have drawers (or computer files) full of unfinished scripts where we just never managed to crack a story problem.

Or it may be that you're not good enough yet to solve it.

So you may have to put the script away and write something else. In learning to solve one set of story problems, often the story problems of an earlier script that seemed insoluble may suddenly become clear.

Also, there are many books that you can read that deal with scripts analytically. If you haven't read them, you should. You should be reading screenplays -- and reading them analytically -- structurally. Asking yourself how particular effects are produced. How is a character revealed, constructed, developed. How is a theme played out and developed and payed off over the course of a movie. What purpose, in a story, does each character serve? How does each scene advance the story? How does a screenplay produce and develop emotional effects?

These are all things that you can learn through study.

It's great to have a mentor. I would certainly have liked to have had one myself. But I grew up in the suburbs far away from anybody who knew anything about screenwriting. Long before there was any such thing as the internet. Back when there were maybe two books about how to do it. Back before you could even buy screenplays.

And I still sat down at an old manual typewriter and wrote screenplays. And the first five, ten, fifteen, twenty screenplays that I wrote, weren't very good.

But it was by writing those twenty not-very-good screenplays that I learned how to write screenplays.

And people wonder why I have no patience with this flood of people who post here saying, "I'm half way through my first screenplay -- where do I find an agent?"

Nobody can give anybody the keys to the kingdom of mastering a craft, whether its mastering the craft of painting, or sculpting or any other craft.

The fact is, the kind of detailed critique that I would give of a screenplay, for it not to be largely wasted, requires that it be a professional piece of work -- because I'm going to give notes at a professional level. When I worked in development, I did this for a living, and my notes on drafts written by professional writers might run to fifteen or twenty pages.

If I attempted the same kind of critique on a work by an amateur the notes would run longer than the screenplay.

Sure, a college professor can teach sixth grade -- but it's not really the best use of everybody's time.

NMS

[Samantha's_Song]

People critique whole novels from here on AW too, but in private instead of on the forums. I'm pretty sure people will critique screenplays too. I love reading screenplays but I wouldn't say I could critique one, even though I do tons of novels for other AW members. And like IceRose, I am a superbitch of crits too. :D

[Klazart]

The question, then, Klazart, is how did you react?

The person in question in the rant responded very poorly. Not only was he not even grateful for the time the writer took, they started spreading mean things about him.

I have critiqued works for other writers that were very beginning pieces with many many mistakes. However, if the person in question responds graciously and takes the effort to actually apply all the stuff I mentioned and improve their work, I'm quite happy. I critique for the sole purpose of helping others improve, not to tear them down or feel horrible about themselves and their work.

If they respond with a nasty gram and "You don't understand my genius!" then I feel like I completely wasted my time and know that until they get over themselves they're not going anywhere with their writing. They will continually make the same mistakes and wallow in their amature status forever. They have what's called Golden Word Syndrom, they can't recognize that their work might have flaws and have room to improve and are able to accept criticism and apply it to their work and improve.

But if the willingness to learn and improve is there, it's what makes critiquing worth it.

I gotta be honest. At first it was like a body blow. I was gracious in my reply. I thanked them for the feedback and told them how I agreed with their points, (which deep down I did). But internally, for a while, I was like they don't get it. I wasn't feeling like this about everything, but a couple of "big" things it was really hard to accept that I had gotten it THAT wrong.

It took a few weeks for the bruised ego to recover, and I got a bit more distance and then I could kinda see what they were talking about, and later as I read more and wrote more, I could understand properly why the flaw that was pointed was there and what the problem with it was. I think in the long run, I learnt a lot from it, but it took me a little bit of time to get there.

More recently though, I think I've gotten a lot better at being able to take professional critique (esp when it's constructive) straight on the chin and not see it as something personal but more as a problem solving thing, and be a lot more dispassionate about it. I guess some take longer to grow that thicker skin than others :)

I've never been cold or nasty to anyone that's given me a critique, except this one time where I felt the person was actually trying to be mean and just tear me down rather than provide any constructive input, and that one time, I did reply with a "thanks for taking the time and for providing feedback I'll definitely consider it carefully.' But I struggled to find anything useful in that persons feedback.

I do want to work hard and keep improving my craft, because I definitely agree with one of the things that Mr. Olsen points out in his blog post. It's not about just getting that one amazing story out there (which is what I thought for my first two attempts), but about working and improving through practise and determination.

[icerose]

See and that's why I try not to critque in public anymore. When I get a sharp biting critique that just tears the piece apart and pulls out all the flaws, even if they are major ones, my first thought is, "Oh my goodness this person is worth their weight in GOLD, they just saved me months of bashing my head against the wall!" And I get really excited. It truly was shocking for me to realize that critiques actually hurt people's feelings because they take every remark personally. I have critiquers apologize to me and I'm like "Don't apologize, this stuff is great!"

[Klazart]

See and that's why I try not to critque in public anymore. When I get a sharp biting critique that just tears the piece apart and pulls out all the flaws, even if they are major ones, my first thought is, "Oh my goodness this person is worth their weight in GOLD, they just saved me months of bashing my head against the wall!" And I get really excited. It truly was shocking for me to realize that critiques actually hurt people's feelings because they take every remark personally. I have critiquers apologize to me and I'm like "Don't apologize, this stuff is great!"

Well, everyone's different so that's understandable. It's impossible to know what kind of situation the person who's asking for the critique is in, how much their heart is set on it, and whether they are really looking for critique or as Mr. Olsen put it, approval (which I guess is true for most cases).

I think that it's just something that some writers take a little longer to learn than others. As I said, the first serious pro crit I got, I took it quite badly internally, but I still learnt a lot from it and learned to recognize its value over time. Nowadays I just take crits in my stride, and learn from each one.

Also, critiquing styles vary as much as the ability of the people receiving them to handle them. I don't think there's any writer out there that's totally inept. Personally, while I don't pretend something's good when it isn't, I do try to find something positive to say also when I crit something. Maybe this is easier to find in prose than in screenplays as I've yet to crit a screenplay for someone.

[mario_c]

See and that's why I try not to critque in public anymore. When I get a sharp biting critique that just tears the piece apart and pulls out all the flaws, even if they are major ones, my first thought is, "Oh my goodness this person is worth their weight in GOLD, they just saved me months of bashing my head against the wall!" And I get really excited. It truly was shocking for me to realize that critiques actually hurt people's feelings because they take every remark personally. I have critiquers apologize to me and I'm like "Don't apologize, this stuff is great!"

Well, getting mad is good if you use it constructively. When you get emotionally involved, it means you really care about being the best writer you can be. If this is really what you want to do for a career and a vocation, knowing you suck at it can hurt. Make that motivate you to never settle for OK. (to kick the ass of the snide rude bastards who told you that you suck, at least :D)

[icerose]

Well, getting mad is good if you use it constructively. When you get emotionally involved, it means you really care about being the best writer you can be. If this is really what you want to do for a career and a vocation, knowing you suck at it can hurt. Make that motivate you to never settle for OK. (to kick the ass of the snide rude bastards who told you that you suck, at least :D)

I'm just the other way I guess. I love my work so much that I want to see it the best I can get it, and sometimes I need other people to point out the flaws that I can only guess might be there because I haven't improved enough as a writer to spot them, then I can fix them and get even better and the piece is even more worthy of getting excited about.

[katiemac]

Just wanted to toss in I've seen a couple agents (novels) quote this on their blog over the weekend. Olson's blogpost speaks to a lot of people in the writing industry. We've had threads about this idea on AW in the past (you write kids' books, so you should read my ex-wife's friend's dentist's poem), just minus some of the language.

[scarletpeaches]

I see LKH has commented about this on her blog, complete with typos and spelling mistakes.

http://blog.laurellkhamilton.org/index.php/site/josh_olson_is_not_a_bastard/

[GeorgeK]

a long time ago, one of the few times I ever broke the rule about reading someone's script -- it was a script written by a doctor who was treating my mother. Really tough to say no in a situation like that. And really tough diplomatic job to critique a completely awful script in a situation like that.

And I strongly suspect that that doctor would not have liked having to provide a comparable amount of free *medical* advice to me, in exchange for the substantial amount of free professional advice I gave to him.


It would depend upon the personality of the doctor, but if it had been me, I would have gladly accepted bartering my doctor fees against your professional script reading fees. Next time that happens, you might give him/her your card and say, "If you are serious, give me a call and we can maybe work out a trade."

Doctors are often used to people telling them that they are wrong. It's part of the process of medical school to get grilled about a topic and then roasted for your responses. It's called "being pimped", and I don't know how that name stuck.

We are also used to paying others for their services. It's often better for us to not mention being a physician because then the prices go up.


Another question regarding doctors:
If you have a stack of manuscripts to read and in the pile you see one from somebody with some initials after their name, but you've never heard of them, do you...

A. Continue as normal, maybe glance at it and either toss it in the no pile or in the maybe pile?

B. Think, "another hack who thinks that I'll be impressed with some initials in an unrelated field," and toss it in the rejects without wasting any time on it?

C. Think, "Hey, someone with an advanced degree means they can't be a total retard, so I should at least take a look at it.

D. something else?

[nmstevens]

It would depend upon the personality of the doctor, but if it had been me, I would have gladly accepted bartering my doctor fees against your professional script reading fees. Next time that happens, you might give him/her your card and say, "If you are serious, give me a call and we can maybe work out a trade."

Doctors are often used to people telling them that they are wrong. It's part of the process of medical school to get grilled about a topic and then roasted for your responses. It's called "being pimped", and I don't know how that name stuck.

We are also used to paying others for their services. It's often better for us to not mention being a physician because then the prices go up.


Another question regarding doctors:
If you have a stack of manuscripts to read and in the pile you see one from somebody with some initials after their name, but you've never heard of them, do you...

A. Continue as normal, maybe glance at it and either toss it in the no pile or in the maybe pile?

B. Think, "another hack who thinks that I'll be impressed with some initials in an unrelated field," and toss it in the rejects without wasting any time on it?

C. Think, "Hey, someone with an advanced degree means they can't be a total retard, so I should at least take a look at it.

D. something else?

Well, the fact of the matter is, I have thankfully passed the day when I have stacks of scripts to read. Now, I only have scripts to read under two circumstances.

First, when my agent sends me a script to read from a producer who's looking to pay somebody to re-write it, in which case it's time sensitive and I'll stop what I'm doing and read it, or a friend who's in the business sends me a script to read, in which case I'll get to it when I have a chance or when I'm feeling guilty enough.

Back when I was doing this for a living, and there were stacks they came in a few different varieties.

Scripts that had already been covered and we'd talked about the coverage and somebody (usually me) had been given the job of "giving it a read).

A script that had come in from an agent with some urgency attached and that had, for some reason, by-passed the coverage process and needed to read more quickly -- so basically, they wanted me to read it and tell them whether it was worth doing.

Scripts that my bosses would come in and dump on my desk and tell me to read and then tell them whether they were any good and give them a page of comments on.

This last category, in fact, were all of those scripts that friends and relatives and friends of relatives had managed to give to my bosses, thinking that they were now going to be read by some friendly boss of a film company. But, in fact, they couldn't spare five minutes to look at some script written by a non-pro, so they'd walk down the hall and dump it on my over-burdened desk.

Me, who would at soon tear said script into strips on the off chance that doomsday would arrive and there'd be a world-wide toilet paper shortage and I'd make a killing in that post-apocalyptic landscape bartering those strips of your masterpiece for that purpose.

As far as your question is concerned, what I did with those scripts was pretty much what everybody in my place did with scripts.

If there was coverage, I'd read it. If there was a cover letter, I'd read it. And, I suppose, if the cover letter suggested that you had some personal competence relevant to the script, it might matter, but not all that terribly much, and definitely not unless that cover letter indicated that you knew how to write.

If it sounded like crap (and there were times when crap coverage, for some reason, would nevertheless inspire somebody to say, "Let's give it a read" -- meaning, that I should give it a read) I'd look to see how long it was. If it was longer than around a hundred and ten pages -- one strike.

I'd start reading. Any typos or bad grammar or poor writing generally in the first few pages -- two strikes.

If something didn't happen in the first five pages or so that made me want to keep reading or if it was just wasn't getting any better, three strikes. Out.

Onto the next.

The torturous stuff was the stuff that bypassed the coverage, because that was often equally abominable, but I actually had to read it all because my bosses expected me to comment on it.

So I'd read some hot script and the V.P. would come in and ask me about it and I'd say, "It's a complete piece of crap." and he'd, "Well, Whoopi Goldberg is interested in being in it." to which I'd reply, "Well, then it'd be a complete piece of crap with Whoopie Goldberg in it. What do you want me to say?"

Or even better was when I'd have to write notes on one of these "friend" scripts. I remember once when I actually got to see how those notes were used -- when I sat in the office of the aforementioned V.P. -- and say him call whoever it was who'd given him the script and use my notes as a crib sheet, talking to them about their script as if he'd actually read it (with me sort of quietly miming when he didn't quite understand what I was getting at in the notes).

The cold cruel truth is, you could have put Pope John Paul II on the title page and if the first five pages didn't thrill me it would have gone on the heap. (Sorry, though your Papal Encyclical was inspiring, we just don't see its potential as a movie at this time. Best of luck with all your future endeavors).

In the end the "something else" is an opening that grabs you, a hook embodied in the first act that's original and holds your interest, a "rest of the script" that doesn't let you go, and an ending that pays off all that came before.

That's really all we ever wanted.

Just do that and you'll be fine.

NMS

[ATP]

He was once the bottom of the heap, yes, but now he's the top. That doesn't mean he's forgotten where he came from - it means he's met at every turn by people who think they have the right to impose their half-assed efforts on him.

Graceless? No. Why should he bestow grace on people who are themselves graceless and/or undeserving of his time?

He's earned the right to say no in any way he sees fit and in this case I think his reaction is to the proper degree. People keep talking about his language being rude - well, it was a reaction to another person's rudeness. Fighting fire with fire.

Some people claim they would never be so 'rude' as him. Well, when they have complete strangers making demands on their time and not taking no for an answer, we'll see how gracious they are then.

In some instances a well-timed "Fuck off," is what's needed. If someone is as persistent as the examples given in the article, you have to speak to them in a language they understand. You can't reason with unreason.

[I retained the full quote, as in this particular instance the meaning is lost if I <snipped>].

Well, Scarlet, you're younger than me, and still have a lot of energy to waste/burn. I find that I now consciously try and not 'lose it' -- it isn't good for my health; you know, heart attack risk and all that. I am certainly better at control publically than I am in private. But, I am trying to improve this.

If you look at post #46 & #48, you will find a full range of methods or 'sufficient coverage' to deal effectively with just this situation as the article writer dealt with.

I have recently re-read Daniel Goleman's 'Emotional Intelligence'. Do you know of this book? If not, you might try borrowing a copy from your local library; it is worth a read.

[scarletpeaches]

[I retained the full quote, as in this particular instance the meaning is lost if I <snipped>].

Well, Scarlet, you're younger than me, and still have a lot of energy to waste/burn. I find that I now consciously try and not 'lose it' -- it isn't good for my health; you know, heart attack risk and all that. I am certainly better at control publically than I am in private. But, I am trying to improve this.

If you look at post #46 & #48, you will find a full range of methods or 'sufficient coverage' to deal effectively with just this situation as the article writer dealt with.

I have recently re-read Daniel Goleman's 'Emotional Intelligence'. Do you know of this book? If not, you might try borrowing a copy from your local library; it is worth a read.Ooh the condescension, it burns! It burns MIGHTILY!!!

[JMBlackman]

It's by Josh Olson and it's pretty good commentary (or dick rant) on the business of writing, esp. from someone anchored in the business:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/i_will_not_read.php


I agree that it was indeed good commentary. I'm a couple days late on this, but I have to say...I love this man. I wish I could just send him a slip of paper that said, "I love you."


Completely unrelated: Oh, wow. Patrick Swayze just died. What is wrong with this year?

[mario_c]

The newbie abuse continues - leave it to Harlan Ellison (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/harlan_ellisons.php) to perform what reads like a hip-hop rendition of the OP rant.

[spasticpancake]

The newbie abuse continues - leave it to Harlan Ellison (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/harlan_ellisons.php) to perform what reads like a hip-hop rendition of the OP rant.

That is fantastic.

[clockwork]

Some of the later topics (script length, writer location, etc) have been split off to a new thread (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155327). This thread's for comments and discussion about the Olsen article only from now on please.

[ricetalks]

I read this article and I think the guy is right. If you have the nerve to walk up to a well established and recognized professional and ask them to read the first thing you've ever written I think that person is entitled to verbally blast you back into reality or farther into outerspace (which ever way that wind takes you). Too often I have seen people who don't really want to be writers, they just want to be famous. And they don't really want criticism, they want to be told that they are a special and unrecognized genuis. And they want to be famous and they think they have talent because they think they are personally special and have been born under a lucky sign.

I remember reviewing someone's work once and, afterwards, they came back and told me I was arrogant and rude and who did I think I was, anyway, to say this about them and their work? What gives me the right? (It wasn't about them but that is often the confusion they make.)

Never mind that they gave me the right when they asked me to critisize their script, I felt bad that my criticism seemed to hit them so hard.

Luckily for me, they later came back and apologized.

[Cyia]

No one who asks a professional (or even an amateur) to read/crit something should ever start a statement with "What gives you the right..."

YOU did, moron, by approaching them for an opinion/feedback.

[MrJayVee]

I've done many script critiques for budding writers in the last handful of years, and I rarely get anyone "going off" on me. Virtually all the writers I've worked with have found my notes very useful. But there was one guy...oh boy, what a nut. Here's an entry from my blog that will fill you in on the somewhat scary details:

http://theworkingscreenwriter.blogspot.com/2009/01/web-series-news-hey-whered-my-thriller.html

(When you get to the blog, scroll down to the section labled "Mr Creepy.")

[writeronfire]

Just think of HOW MANY times he's been asked. It's like going up to a doctor at a party and asking him about your aches and pains. Why should he do work for anyone for free?

I completely agree.

[Billytwice]

He was once the bottom of the heap, yes, but now he's the top.

Well, I never heard of him. Don't think I'll be bothering to find out who he is either...

[clockwork]

Well, I never heard of him. Don't think I'll be bothering to find out who he is either...

OK then. Thanks for letting us know.

I think this one's finally done.