Writing the solo show, Pt. 8: Reading and Research

If you're anything like me, you might find yourself avoiding the act of actually writing by going to the library to look up books about writing.  

Or perhaps, using Google or otherwise procrastinating on the internet? 

(Curse you, Facebook!)

Now, we know that research is often a necessary beast we must wrangle.  We may need a sense of what has come before us, or to be inspired, or to simply get away from our own projects.  But after awhile, there is that scary moment when reading takes the place of writing. 

That inner voice inside says, “No, not yet…I still haven’t read this yet…so how can I write something about it…nope…gotta do some research…”

This usually happens when whatever it is we want to write is daunting and fearful.

For me, that is this solo show.

I could go on and on about why this particular show scares the hell out of me (gee, other than the “solo” aspect of performing alone on stage?  Or the intimate, more personal conection with the audience, or…)

I have been reviewing some great resources on solo works, though.  The most interesting, and highly recommended is Extreme Exposure, edited by Jo Bonney.  

This book is like a sampler of some of the greatest and most exciting solo performers fron the 70s to today.  (Well, not today, since it was published about ten years ago.)  You can sample through seletions from Spalding Gray, Jessica Hagedorn, Lenny Bruce, Whoopi Goldberg, Eric Bogosion, Lisa Kron, Danny Hoch, John Luguiziamo and Luis Alfaro.  What you get is a lovely panarama of the possibilities of what solo shows can be.  They can be political, personal, epic, or deal with the every day.  They can be sexy and fun or dangerous.  I recommend this for everyone’s shelf, actually.

The other book I’ve looked at is The Power of One by Louis E. Catron.  

It has a more mainstream selection (not quite as radically charged as Extreme Exposure) including examples from Jane Martin and Lanford Wilson. It’s got some great quotes about theater and some helpful examples.  What’s particularly amusing, though, is the argument of how different solo plays are from other plays.  Yet, as he describes what makes a great solo play, he then says how you also need those same things for a great play—conflict, drama, characters, spectacle, etc. 

It’s in reading this book, though, that I’ve had my breakthrough.

Don’t think of solo plays as this "other type of play".  

A solo show is a play.  

It’s not much different than any other play.  It’s theater.  It just happens to be performed by one actor. 

Suddenly, I don’t feel so daunted by it. 

I know how to write a play. 

Sheesh.

Oh, Mamet, how do we love thee...Let us count the ways...

There was a memo recently (or a letter or email or some other form of vitriol from David Mamet, world renowned playwright, film-maker, TV show producer/writer and man about town).  

Mamet wrote it as a “guide” for the writers of THE UNIT.  

It is pure Mamet and though I sometimes think that Mamet is Mamet’s biggest fan, he is also 98% on target with his thoughts about dramatic writing and action (especially for TV).  

But his advice goes for writers of any dramatic form, whether it’s TV, film, or plays. 

Does it apply to experimental or movement-based works? There’s the question, right?  I don’t know how the works of Richard Maxwell, Robert Wilson or Young Jean Lee would stack up in his estimation, but the memo has sparked a lot of debate.

And since everyone else has seemed to put it up on the web, here it is for those of you who haven’t sent it.

FYI, Mamet is responsible for those caps and asterisks.  And fair warning, he swears a lot.  It IS Mamet and that's his thing.

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 FORCED 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.)

Stories left to tell

I seem to have done nothing but post about reading this month. 

Is January the month for reading?  I don’t think so…

So now time to announce the show I’m going to see at The Warhol next month.  It’s called Stories Left to Tell and it will be at the Warhol on February 12, starring David Conrad, celebrated actor and Pittsburgh native. 

Here's the info:

Spalding Gray’s autobiographical monologues were filled with the neuroses, fears and joys that resonate deeply with audiences. Co-conceived by Gray’s widow, Kathleen Russo and director, Lucy Sexton, Spalding Gray: Stories Left to Tell interweaves his well-loved stories, unpublished letters and journal entries into a funny, poignant and life-affirming evening of theater.

Are readings good for you?

Actor Brett Fetzer and director Jose Amador, at a table reading of Resurrecting the King by Dennis Schebetta at 14/48

A few years ago, a renowned playwright who I admired and looked up to, said to me about public readings, “I can never hear my play.”  She hated them.  She thought they were a waste of her time.  If some hack said this to me I might shrug it off, but this was a widely produced playwright, as well as an actress who had performed many times on Broadway.

Of course, she said this to me on a panel right before I was about to have a public reading of one of my plays.

And it made me wonder, are public readings helpful to playwrights?

You might have seen this article in the New York Times recently about the plethora of readings in New York City.  You’ve probably been to a reading, either a small intimate affair or a big staged reading.  Maybe it was for a benefit or fundraiser, or maybe it was because of theatre company’s reading series, or because the theater company was either going to do it later that year (so it was a preview) or they were thinking of doing it (so it was an audition for the play).  I’ve also coordinated readings of new or alternative plays, since readings are quick and easy to put up and you can introduce audiences to new writers without the danger and risk of a full-scale production.

This article seems to infer that many plays from the readings get productions.  Given the amount of readings there are and low amount of new plays being produced, this seems highly unlikely, though no one has ever done a quantitative study.

(Oh, wait, no...TDF did a study and published a BOOK on the ires of new play development, called Outrageous Fortune.)

My main concern with readings is when they take the place of an actual production.

And I’ve seen that far too often.

Readings can have serve several purposes.  Sometimes it’s for me, the playwright, and for that I don’t always need an audience (and I usually don’t need a discussion afterwards—please, let’s not call them “talkbacks”, because who in the right minds wants to be talked back to?).  If the reading is used for promotion, or for audition for producing funding, I understand that.

What annoys me is when the reading is obviously for some other purpose (like raise the profile of the theater company) but masquerading as “developing a new play”.  This usually occurs with young companies who have no development background, no dramaturg on board, and no experience doing that kind of work. 

Also, with more presentational readings (reading as cheap production), theater practitioners and audience members often seem to think that this is a polished product.  If something doesn’t work in a reading, it needs to be cut, rewritten or dealt with.  This is sometimes the case, but not always.  There is rarely discussion of how something might need more work in rehearsal, (ie, more emotional life, blocking, etc.)

It’s funny, but whenever it’s a new play, suddenly we see it as “imperfect”.  We never do this with Shakespeare, even though many of his plays are quite flawed and make no sense.   But I digress…

In a time when theater is more and more moving to some kind of “Hollywood” model, I would hate to see theater using test audiences or surveys.

Writing a play is not done by committee.  It’s part of the collaborative endeavor of theater, but in the end, it is the Playwright’s vision and voice that will endure.

So, what do you think? Do you hear your play in a reading?

What You Should Be Reading: Golden Globe scripts

Is it ironic or just coincidence that it was on Facebook that I noticed this link to the script of The Social Network (which is about Facebook)?

I was never all that clear on the whole irony v. coincidence thing.

And you really can't trust Alanis Morrisette to straighten that out.

I discovered a new website today, though, and that always makes me feel somewhat intrigued, considering that after awhile the internet starts to look like the same old neighborhood, seeing the same pages over and over again... Raindance is a UK-centric site for promoting indie film and there are some great tips and resources for writers, directors and artists of all kinds dabbling and working in the film industry.

And they have made it quite easy to read all the nominated scripts for the Golden Globes, including the winner, of course, that being The Social Network by Aaron Sorkin.

It's a fine year for brilliant screenplays, I must say.  Simone Beaufoy's 127 hours (hot on the heels of his amazing Slumdog Millionaire), and Christopher Nolan and Lisa Cholodenko, not to mention David Seidler's The King's Speech, which is the best movie about a guy with a speech impediment probably ever made.

If you want to write great scripts, you have to read great scripts.

So, what are you waiting for?  Go read them.  I did.  Okay, not all of them, not yet. But I will be.

Goodbye Great One

When this is all over, my writing will add up to the sum total of me. The choices I make with my writing have a lot to do with myself as an unfolding personality, so that in the end your writing is really your destiny. It’s a question of finding that central thing that’s yours to say and yours alone.

Most theater audiences will not know, or remember, the name of Romulus Linney.  Or you may only think of him as Lara Linney's dad.  


He was a member of Ensemble Studio Theater, and one of the principal reasons for my wanting to work there when I arrived in New York City many years ago.  (That and other playwrights like Horton Foote, Wendy Wasserstein, Shel Silverstein, John Guare, countless actors and even my acting teacher, Bill Esper.)


Perhaps he'll gain a little more fame and recognition now that he's gone.   I know that I feel like I've neglected this great writer and am only familiar with a few of his works (though Gint, Childe Byron and Holy Ghosts are amazing works).  


Time to head to the library and read a few of his plays.  

B.U.S. is coming! (What the heckfire is B.U.S.?)

B.U.S. stands for Bricolage Urban Scrawl and it's Bricolage Theater's most fun event of the year, a 24 hour play festival that kicks off with putting playwrights on a random bus ride through the streets of steel city.

On February 25, I will be among many other local playwrights along for the ride.

Any other questions?

Surely, this video will explain it all for you.