I especially appreciate the "start with the small notes"! Sometimes though, I know the whole thing needs a "page one rewrite", and the thought of "let me fix this typo JUST SO I CAN DELETE THIS WHOLE GODDAMN PIECE OF SHIT LATER" is so demoralizing that I run away and hide under my desk.
Something I've started doing recently is "metawriting." I saw a video about it, I can't find where now. You start off your writing work each day with a "metawriting" session: You open up a blank document and just write about your thoughts on your writing. I've found this helps a lot. It's a little bit like "morning pages" (Julia Cameron, "The Artist's Way") where you get your thoughts out for the day.
So my "metawriting" goes like this:
"My work is utter trash. I hate myself...I need more coffee...okay back with more coffee..I don't know how I'm going to fix that scene, no one understood it, no one understands me! No one understood Bob was trying to kill Jimmy.... Why didn't they get it...why??? Maybe because I didn't have any foreshadowing...should we try to have a scene with Bob where he..."
And then twenty minutes later, or an hour later, I'm getting into it again, I have some ideas, etc. and then I can start working on the piece. Sometimes it takes a long time and a whole lot of "this is trash and I hate myself and this is trash and I hate myself" but eventually it gets there.
Cool! I don't think I have ever heard of this concept despite a life-long obsession with all things Meta ('Don Quixote' is essentially my Bible), but I certainly like gist of this approach!
It sounds like you are diverting your stream of consciousness to focus *around* the writing process of a creative piece (as opposed to the more traditional letting your Stream o' C flow directly into the creative piece proper -- i.e., write what spontaneous [sketch] ideas come to mind and sort out the details later) to serve as a makeshift sounding board in absence of other feedback-providers! And so long as you are able to detach yourself from it and look at it with honest eyes later to pan the nuggets of wisdom from the other bits, I can definitely see the potential gains?
I'ma have to try that some time as a variation the aforementioned technique -- thanks for the tip! :D
I’m really looking forward to seeing what people have been coming up with since you started this! It’ll be really interesting to see some of these ideas put into practice.
This was an awesome lesson Trapp. I learned a lot and look forward to using the lessons when giving notes.
It was so cool to see a finalized sketch and what it looks like to be made.
Trapp, if you decide to use a script written by a CHUFFAH member will they get a heads up before hand?
SHAMELESS PLUG ANNOUNCEMENT
There is a Twitter group for CHUFFAH where we have already shared some scripts and gave feedback to each other. And we all follow the golden rule of note giving.
I'm @karasz411 so if interested let me know and I can add you to the group.
I'm not planning on giving a heads up, but I am planning on reviewing subscriber sketches as frequently as I can. There will be one going up this Saturday, and I hope to review 1 - 4 subscriber sketches per month.
I just went over the Shining sketch and compared everything. It's very interesting. So this was the actual final draft of the sketch, everything added was on the spur of the moment ?
Preeeetty sure this was the final draft. If there was one after this it would have just been a production draft with just a line or two different. Is there a specific difference between the script and the video that you're curious about?
I guess if this is the final draft, any difference I found would be pretty CH-cast-specific. But I'll ask anyways. Concerning the left out phrases :
"Grant : Okay, I guess I'll... uh, I think." which got changed for a more impactful tension breaking ? If I'm interpreting this right : when did the decision of doing this arise ? Why not in the writing phase ?
"Rekha : The part here... Where is it ? Let me find it..." : This seems to me like an editing choice, but it could just be the actors that felt it dragged too much during the shooting phase only. Do you think of that as a choice you could / should have written in (meaning not writing this sentence) ?
"Zac : Or maybe use "dlull" elsewhere after cuts ?" : Generally, what drives you to left out sentences between final draft and final cut ? Do you personnally have to give your go ahead ?
Concerning the additions and modifications : Going over the script I feel like you guys almost adapted the original writing during the shoots. Like most of the lines aren't the same ^^ I've actually been writing feeling that every word should be said with the specific intention I have in mind. Is that a bad sign ?
My general interrogation is : exactly how possessive should I be with the script I wrote after all exterior input has been given and accounted for ?
I would say the most frequent discrepancy in this sketch between the script and the video are slight wording variations. These are things that don't affect the meaning or emotions of the lines, even though the words are different. There are some writers and directors who will insist on a word-perfect delivery of the script, but I am not one of those. I'm generally in favor of letting the actors tweak lines if it will help them deliver it more naturally. That was particularly the case in this script, since I wanted to catch the particular feeling and vocal inflections of a notes session -- which tends to have a lot of halting and stumbling as people look for the right words.
It's also important to remember that shooting video is incredibly tedious. You're repeating the same three lines over and over for hours, but still trying to capture the energy of the first reading. If an actor has to change a word to make it feel fresh and new to them, that's fine with me. Or if they suddenly have a joke they improvise to liven things up, I'm happy to keep it if it works in the final cut.
Now, sometimes it WILL be important for a line to be read EXACTLY as written. If an actor is changing it too much on set, the director might redirect them. And we'll always get at least one take that is as it is written exactly in the script. But in the editing room, you'll probably want to choose the best performance, not the one that is closest to the written words.
As for cut lines: it could be that the sketch was running long -- a script that looked like a good length on the page now felt long in viewing -- so you look for places to make cuts that won't affect too much. Or it could be the actor forgot those lines, but the rest of the performance was so good, it was worth losing the line for the rest of the delivery.
So, there a lot of different reasons why a script might see slight changes, cuts, or additions, and those changes may happen on set or in the editing room, but it looks to me like the big, overall question here is "How protective should you be of your script?" Different writers are going to have different feelings of this, but I think you'll save yourself a lot of heartache if you relax your grip on the script. If you're working with great actors, directors, and writers, let these talented people contribute and make choices.
I'm glad! I'm planning to share a lot more scripts, and I do think it's helpful to see how something looks on the page, and being able to compare it with the final version.
You definitely provide some top-notch guidance here, with some elements being very salient refresher/reminder points I always need to keep in mind when helping out friends via any type of feedback. Nice to discover some good crossover in there versus my own hobbyist experiences in music, literary, and newsie editing, even. And I certainly agree 113% with the "don't be a dick" adage as being one of the most important elements of the process, from both sides of the editing/notes game.
I would suggest one more note-providing guideline for the group's consideration, one that may admittedly be hard to follow when trying to adhere fully with the "Don't be a dick" mantra(pp) -- especially on those occasions when a particular piece may have fewer redeeming qualities than the norm (which happens to everyone, no matter how talented they may be):
Avoid providing 'empty'/gratuitous compliments (just) to make a person feel better.
It's been my experience that sugarcoating a critique (note) by inserting compliments about elements that are not particularly impactful to the work's success or failure can distract the author -- sometimes by drawing them away from the actual impactful items that need addressing, and sometimes by coming across as condescending or insulting. Saying something like "you provide very nice descriptions of your characters' outfits", "boy, you really have some great syntax throughout this script", or "I really appreciate your moxie" can be taken even more harshly (to the point of verging on insult) by a writer who may genuinely only be looking for feedback pertinent to the beats / meats of the matter.
Certainly, most experienced Creatives will notice if none of the positive notes have any bearing on the work itself. Meanwhile, some newer Creatives may be led down the wrong path and start focusing only on said gratuitous positives while ignoring the 'negative' aka constructive feedback that actually could impact/benefit their work.
(The good news is that usually, even the most challenging drafts usually have at least one good impactful beat to it, so that you can still provide at least one or a few pertinent positive notes.)
But never feel like you need to have a 50/50 or better ratio of positive/negative, or you risk doing more harm than good.
I think people wind up giving the empty compliments when they don't like a piece, but also don't know how to improve it. They might see a script as irreparable bad, but know that saying so isn't helpful, so they just focus on small positives. As you say, this isn't necessarily helpful. This is why it's so important to learn how to diagnose problems, or at least get comfortable having conversations about problems so the writer and the noter can diagnose together.
I especially appreciate the "start with the small notes"! Sometimes though, I know the whole thing needs a "page one rewrite", and the thought of "let me fix this typo JUST SO I CAN DELETE THIS WHOLE GODDAMN PIECE OF SHIT LATER" is so demoralizing that I run away and hide under my desk.
Something I've started doing recently is "metawriting." I saw a video about it, I can't find where now. You start off your writing work each day with a "metawriting" session: You open up a blank document and just write about your thoughts on your writing. I've found this helps a lot. It's a little bit like "morning pages" (Julia Cameron, "The Artist's Way") where you get your thoughts out for the day.
So my "metawriting" goes like this:
"My work is utter trash. I hate myself...I need more coffee...okay back with more coffee..I don't know how I'm going to fix that scene, no one understood it, no one understands me! No one understood Bob was trying to kill Jimmy.... Why didn't they get it...why??? Maybe because I didn't have any foreshadowing...should we try to have a scene with Bob where he..."
And then twenty minutes later, or an hour later, I'm getting into it again, I have some ideas, etc. and then I can start working on the piece. Sometimes it takes a long time and a whole lot of "this is trash and I hate myself and this is trash and I hate myself" but eventually it gets there.
Cool! I don't think I have ever heard of this concept despite a life-long obsession with all things Meta ('Don Quixote' is essentially my Bible), but I certainly like gist of this approach!
It sounds like you are diverting your stream of consciousness to focus *around* the writing process of a creative piece (as opposed to the more traditional letting your Stream o' C flow directly into the creative piece proper -- i.e., write what spontaneous [sketch] ideas come to mind and sort out the details later) to serve as a makeshift sounding board in absence of other feedback-providers! And so long as you are able to detach yourself from it and look at it with honest eyes later to pan the nuggets of wisdom from the other bits, I can definitely see the potential gains?
I'ma have to try that some time as a variation the aforementioned technique -- thanks for the tip! :D
Ooh seeing the comparison to the written page is super helpful
I honestly think I laughed more reading it than watching it, and both are very funny.
I’m really looking forward to seeing what people have been coming up with since you started this! It’ll be really interesting to see some of these ideas put into practice.
This was an awesome lesson Trapp. I learned a lot and look forward to using the lessons when giving notes.
It was so cool to see a finalized sketch and what it looks like to be made.
Trapp, if you decide to use a script written by a CHUFFAH member will they get a heads up before hand?
SHAMELESS PLUG ANNOUNCEMENT
There is a Twitter group for CHUFFAH where we have already shared some scripts and gave feedback to each other. And we all follow the golden rule of note giving.
I'm @karasz411 so if interested let me know and I can add you to the group.
I'm not planning on giving a heads up, but I am planning on reviewing subscriber sketches as frequently as I can. There will be one going up this Saturday, and I hope to review 1 - 4 subscriber sketches per month.
I support this plug! I’ve gotten some great notes.
I just went over the Shining sketch and compared everything. It's very interesting. So this was the actual final draft of the sketch, everything added was on the spur of the moment ?
Preeeetty sure this was the final draft. If there was one after this it would have just been a production draft with just a line or two different. Is there a specific difference between the script and the video that you're curious about?
I guess if this is the final draft, any difference I found would be pretty CH-cast-specific. But I'll ask anyways. Concerning the left out phrases :
"Grant : Okay, I guess I'll... uh, I think." which got changed for a more impactful tension breaking ? If I'm interpreting this right : when did the decision of doing this arise ? Why not in the writing phase ?
"Rekha : The part here... Where is it ? Let me find it..." : This seems to me like an editing choice, but it could just be the actors that felt it dragged too much during the shooting phase only. Do you think of that as a choice you could / should have written in (meaning not writing this sentence) ?
"Zac : Or maybe use "dlull" elsewhere after cuts ?" : Generally, what drives you to left out sentences between final draft and final cut ? Do you personnally have to give your go ahead ?
Concerning the additions and modifications : Going over the script I feel like you guys almost adapted the original writing during the shoots. Like most of the lines aren't the same ^^ I've actually been writing feeling that every word should be said with the specific intention I have in mind. Is that a bad sign ?
My general interrogation is : exactly how possessive should I be with the script I wrote after all exterior input has been given and accounted for ?
I would say the most frequent discrepancy in this sketch between the script and the video are slight wording variations. These are things that don't affect the meaning or emotions of the lines, even though the words are different. There are some writers and directors who will insist on a word-perfect delivery of the script, but I am not one of those. I'm generally in favor of letting the actors tweak lines if it will help them deliver it more naturally. That was particularly the case in this script, since I wanted to catch the particular feeling and vocal inflections of a notes session -- which tends to have a lot of halting and stumbling as people look for the right words.
It's also important to remember that shooting video is incredibly tedious. You're repeating the same three lines over and over for hours, but still trying to capture the energy of the first reading. If an actor has to change a word to make it feel fresh and new to them, that's fine with me. Or if they suddenly have a joke they improvise to liven things up, I'm happy to keep it if it works in the final cut.
Now, sometimes it WILL be important for a line to be read EXACTLY as written. If an actor is changing it too much on set, the director might redirect them. And we'll always get at least one take that is as it is written exactly in the script. But in the editing room, you'll probably want to choose the best performance, not the one that is closest to the written words.
As for cut lines: it could be that the sketch was running long -- a script that looked like a good length on the page now felt long in viewing -- so you look for places to make cuts that won't affect too much. Or it could be the actor forgot those lines, but the rest of the performance was so good, it was worth losing the line for the rest of the delivery.
So, there a lot of different reasons why a script might see slight changes, cuts, or additions, and those changes may happen on set or in the editing room, but it looks to me like the big, overall question here is "How protective should you be of your script?" Different writers are going to have different feelings of this, but I think you'll save yourself a lot of heartache if you relax your grip on the script. If you're working with great actors, directors, and writers, let these talented people contribute and make choices.
Seems simple but I really, really appreciate letting us take a look at a draft of things you've written-- whether they ended up getting made or not.
I'm glad! I'm planning to share a lot more scripts, and I do think it's helpful to see how something looks on the page, and being able to compare it with the final version.
Another excellent piece, Mr. Trapp.
You definitely provide some top-notch guidance here, with some elements being very salient refresher/reminder points I always need to keep in mind when helping out friends via any type of feedback. Nice to discover some good crossover in there versus my own hobbyist experiences in music, literary, and newsie editing, even. And I certainly agree 113% with the "don't be a dick" adage as being one of the most important elements of the process, from both sides of the editing/notes game.
I would suggest one more note-providing guideline for the group's consideration, one that may admittedly be hard to follow when trying to adhere fully with the "Don't be a dick" mantra(pp) -- especially on those occasions when a particular piece may have fewer redeeming qualities than the norm (which happens to everyone, no matter how talented they may be):
Avoid providing 'empty'/gratuitous compliments (just) to make a person feel better.
It's been my experience that sugarcoating a critique (note) by inserting compliments about elements that are not particularly impactful to the work's success or failure can distract the author -- sometimes by drawing them away from the actual impactful items that need addressing, and sometimes by coming across as condescending or insulting. Saying something like "you provide very nice descriptions of your characters' outfits", "boy, you really have some great syntax throughout this script", or "I really appreciate your moxie" can be taken even more harshly (to the point of verging on insult) by a writer who may genuinely only be looking for feedback pertinent to the beats / meats of the matter.
Certainly, most experienced Creatives will notice if none of the positive notes have any bearing on the work itself. Meanwhile, some newer Creatives may be led down the wrong path and start focusing only on said gratuitous positives while ignoring the 'negative' aka constructive feedback that actually could impact/benefit their work.
(The good news is that usually, even the most challenging drafts usually have at least one good impactful beat to it, so that you can still provide at least one or a few pertinent positive notes.)
But never feel like you need to have a 50/50 or better ratio of positive/negative, or you risk doing more harm than good.
(My own Two Cents Acadian, at least?)
I think people wind up giving the empty compliments when they don't like a piece, but also don't know how to improve it. They might see a script as irreparable bad, but know that saying so isn't helpful, so they just focus on small positives. As you say, this isn't necessarily helpful. This is why it's so important to learn how to diagnose problems, or at least get comfortable having conversations about problems so the writer and the noter can diagnose together.