Scan barcode
blahbloo's review against another edition
4.0
A lot of good advice and how-to info, got lots of great notes from this. Probably 4.5 for me.
katelynalice's review against another edition
challenging
funny
informative
inspiring
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
4.25
citypearl's review against another edition
5.0
I don’t know how I read, watched, or wrote a play before reading this book. Good soup. I should read some more theory.
mihaaap's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
3.75
tomstbr's review against another edition
5.0
The most direct and harsh writing book I've read. Highly recommended.
a_little_person's review against another edition
medium-paced
2.5
I cannot agree with everything written in the book. The book is more black&white than I thought at the beginning. I feel some elitisme through it's pages, which can seem condescending at some passages (i.e. the one about "genius"). Overall it has good advices, but they are put on a pedestal which is not deserved.
The dialectical Q&A's rubbed me the wrong way. It just felt like asking himself questions, which asserts his thesis. I feel like many arguments could have been made against his writing rules, with examples to back them up. On a more important note, I think the philosophy behind the "why" of writing, and what art is suppose to do is shortsighted, and dissmisive of other aesthetic philosophies.
He also sparsely adopts a sarcastic tone which do not fit with the intend of the book - which longs to be instructional.
The dialectical Q&A's rubbed me the wrong way. It just felt like asking himself questions, which asserts his thesis. I feel like many arguments could have been made against his writing rules, with examples to back them up. On a more important note, I think the philosophy behind the "why" of writing, and what art is suppose to do is shortsighted, and dissmisive of other aesthetic philosophies.
He also sparsely adopts a sarcastic tone which do not fit with the intend of the book - which longs to be instructional.
cjingreading's review against another edition
3.0
[https://ia802904.us.archive.org/33/items/dli.bengal.10689.12919/10689.12919.pdf]
Recommended by Film Crit Hulk
Focuses on premise, character, conflict, and general tips. Contains lots of references to plays to illustrate each point. I haven't read or even heard of most of them, but enough explanation and context were provided. Still, very thankful for the Shakespeare examples.
Reading non-fiction or for self-growth is great, but reading for pleasure, even if it's non-fiction, is genuinely more enjoyable.
Notes:
- Premise (encompasses theme, etc.) provides direction
- "Neither the premise nor any other part of a play has a separate life of its own. All must blend into a harmonious whole."
- Need to provide realistic reasons for their actions. Characters act the way they do because of their physical, mental, physiological, sociological characteristics, etc.
- "The contradictions within a man and the contradictions around him create a decision and a conflict. These in turn force him into a new decision and a new conflict. Many kinds of pressures are required before a human being can make a single decision. The 3 main groups are physiological, sociological, and psychological."
- "Only in bad writing does a man change without regard to his characteristics. When we plant an acorn, we would be justified in expecting an oak tree and shocked if it turned out to be an apple tree. Every character must have within it the seeds of its future development. There must be the seed or possibility of crime in the boy who's going to turn criminal at the end of the play."
- Character influences plot, not the other way around. Ex: if Hamlet had swapped Romeo, he would have contemplated on pursuing Juliet for so long that she would have ended up marrying Paris. The plot would have been different. (Personal note: this puts to rest all reviews like "none of this would have happened if this character didn't do or wasn't like this." Yes. That is the point. If the story had gone that way, there would be no story. It also puts to rest my frustration/review with The Comedy of Errors but let's ignore that T_T)
- "The real unity of opposites can be broken only if a trait or dominant quality in one or more characters is fundamentally changed. In a real unity of opposites, compromise is impossible. If the characters do not have this strong, unbreakable bond between them, your conflict will never rise to a climax."
- Action is not more important than the contributing factors that give rise to it.
- Conflict: static (remains static dno matter what you do), jumping (defies reality and common sense), slowly rising (grows naturally without obvious effort from playwright), foreshadowing (without it, no play can exist). In theatre, we want to see the the natural sequence, the step-by-step development of a character. Jumping conflict is rarely seen.
- We see real, rising conflict when antagonists are evenly matched.
- Characters who cannot make a decision in a play are responsible for static conflict. Example given: a man loves a woman but the woman hasn't made her mind and doesn't do anything to change that. There's conflict but it's static because there are no actions or decisions from either person. She starts with uncertainty and ends with it. He starts hopeful and remains hopeful.
- Jumps happen when transitions (or small conflicts) are missing. The transitions must also be a logical chain of events
- Every line of your play, every move your characters make, must further the premise. Each character must feel, intensely, that the action dictated by the premise is the only action possible.
- In a play, each conflict causes the one after it. Each is more intense than the one before (just thinking of how a Shakespeare play progresses)
- Foreshadowing conflict is tension in theatrical parlance
- "An author must find a character who wants something so desperately that he can't wait any longer. His needs are immediate. Why? You have your story or play the moment you can answer authoritatively why this man must do something so urgently and immediately. Whatever it is, the motivation must have grown out of what happened before the story started. In fact, your story is possible only because it grew out of the very thing that happened before. It is imerative that you story starts in the middle, and not under any circumstances at the beginning."
- Transitions like "friendship - anger", "anger - assault". There are smaller poles with their own transitions between. From friendship to anger, there could be disappointment and annoyance. The play should show these poles or steps.
- P. 214 for jumping conflicts
- Crisis -> climax -> resolution (self-explanatory)
- Exposition does not exist in the beginning of the play but throughout.
- P. 238 Dialogue is the chief means by which the premise is proved, the characters revealed, and the conflict carried. Rising conflict produces healthy dialogue.
- A play is talky because the characters have ceased to grow and the conflict has stopped moving.
- "Just as conflict must come from character, and the sense of the speech from both, so must the sound of the speech come from all the others. The sentences must build up as the play builds up, conveying the rhythm and meaning of each scene by sound as well as sense. Take Shakespeare: the sentences in his philosophical passages are weighty and measured; in his love scenes lines are lyrical and flow easily. Then, with the mounting of action, sentences become shorter and simpler, so that not only the sentence content, but the word and syllable content, vary with the development of the play."
- P. 251 Trouble with entrances and exits indicates that the playwright doesn't know his characters well enough. People can't wander in and out without rhyme or reason. When someone comes in or goes out, they must do so of necessity. His action must help the development of the conflict and be part of the character in the process of revealing himself.
Recommended by Film Crit Hulk
Focuses on premise, character, conflict, and general tips. Contains lots of references to plays to illustrate each point. I haven't read or even heard of most of them, but enough explanation and context were provided. Still, very thankful for the Shakespeare examples.
Reading non-fiction or for self-growth is great, but reading for pleasure, even if it's non-fiction, is genuinely more enjoyable.
Notes:
- Premise (encompasses theme, etc.) provides direction
- "Neither the premise nor any other part of a play has a separate life of its own. All must blend into a harmonious whole."
- Need to provide realistic reasons for their actions. Characters act the way they do because of their physical, mental, physiological, sociological characteristics, etc.
- "The contradictions within a man and the contradictions around him create a decision and a conflict. These in turn force him into a new decision and a new conflict. Many kinds of pressures are required before a human being can make a single decision. The 3 main groups are physiological, sociological, and psychological."
- "Only in bad writing does a man change without regard to his characteristics. When we plant an acorn, we would be justified in expecting an oak tree and shocked if it turned out to be an apple tree. Every character must have within it the seeds of its future development. There must be the seed or possibility of crime in the boy who's going to turn criminal at the end of the play."
- Character influences plot, not the other way around. Ex: if Hamlet had swapped Romeo, he would have contemplated on pursuing Juliet for so long that she would have ended up marrying Paris. The plot would have been different. (Personal note: this puts to rest all reviews like "none of this would have happened if this character didn't do or wasn't like this." Yes. That is the point. If the story had gone that way, there would be no story. It also puts to rest my frustration/review with The Comedy of Errors but let's ignore that T_T)
- "The real unity of opposites can be broken only if a trait or dominant quality in one or more characters is fundamentally changed. In a real unity of opposites, compromise is impossible. If the characters do not have this strong, unbreakable bond between them, your conflict will never rise to a climax."
- Action is not more important than the contributing factors that give rise to it.
- Conflict: static (remains static dno matter what you do), jumping (defies reality and common sense), slowly rising (grows naturally without obvious effort from playwright), foreshadowing (without it, no play can exist). In theatre, we want to see the the natural sequence, the step-by-step development of a character. Jumping conflict is rarely seen.
- We see real, rising conflict when antagonists are evenly matched.
- Characters who cannot make a decision in a play are responsible for static conflict. Example given: a man loves a woman but the woman hasn't made her mind and doesn't do anything to change that. There's conflict but it's static because there are no actions or decisions from either person. She starts with uncertainty and ends with it. He starts hopeful and remains hopeful.
- Jumps happen when transitions (or small conflicts) are missing. The transitions must also be a logical chain of events
- Every line of your play, every move your characters make, must further the premise. Each character must feel, intensely, that the action dictated by the premise is the only action possible.
- In a play, each conflict causes the one after it. Each is more intense than the one before (just thinking of how a Shakespeare play progresses)
- Foreshadowing conflict is tension in theatrical parlance
- "An author must find a character who wants something so desperately that he can't wait any longer. His needs are immediate. Why? You have your story or play the moment you can answer authoritatively why this man must do something so urgently and immediately. Whatever it is, the motivation must have grown out of what happened before the story started. In fact, your story is possible only because it grew out of the very thing that happened before. It is imerative that you story starts in the middle, and not under any circumstances at the beginning."
- Transitions like "friendship - anger", "anger - assault". There are smaller poles with their own transitions between. From friendship to anger, there could be disappointment and annoyance. The play should show these poles or steps.
- P. 214 for jumping conflicts
- Crisis -> climax -> resolution (self-explanatory)
- Exposition does not exist in the beginning of the play but throughout.
- P. 238 Dialogue is the chief means by which the premise is proved, the characters revealed, and the conflict carried. Rising conflict produces healthy dialogue.
- A play is talky because the characters have ceased to grow and the conflict has stopped moving.
- "Just as conflict must come from character, and the sense of the speech from both, so must the sound of the speech come from all the others. The sentences must build up as the play builds up, conveying the rhythm and meaning of each scene by sound as well as sense. Take Shakespeare: the sentences in his philosophical passages are weighty and measured; in his love scenes lines are lyrical and flow easily. Then, with the mounting of action, sentences become shorter and simpler, so that not only the sentence content, but the word and syllable content, vary with the development of the play."
- P. 251 Trouble with entrances and exits indicates that the playwright doesn't know his characters well enough. People can't wander in and out without rhyme or reason. When someone comes in or goes out, they must do so of necessity. His action must help the development of the conflict and be part of the character in the process of revealing himself.