JaneEspenson.com

Home of Jane's blog on writing for television
  • scissors
    January 10th, 2007Jane EspensonComedy, On Writing

    Let’s talk about split-infinitives. The “rule” is that you’re not supposed to put stuff between the “to” part and the verb part of an infinitive verb. So “…boldly to go…” is fine, and “…to boldly go…” is wrong. “It’s great just to see you” is fine. “It’s great to just see you,” is wrong. Seem arbitrary and strange? Good, because it is.

    I’ve been told that this rule has absolutely nothing to do with anything about the way English evolved or is structured, but was imposed on the language by scholars who felt English at its purest should work like Latin, in which the infinitive is a single word and cannot be split anyway. This, one should note, is a very silly reason to mess around with imposing rules on speakers of English.

    But, now, here, finally, is the definitive reason to ignore the split-infinitive “rule.” Here’s a joke from a recent episode of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart:

    Jon Stewart
    (re: execution)
    Wait– you were there?

    John Oliver
    Well, I didn’t spend Christmas in Baghdad to NOT go to a hanging.

    Now, this isn’t a joke because of the split infinitive, exactly. It’s a joke because it presupposes the desirability of going to a hanging. But it is substantially less funny if the infinitive is left unmolested. (If you care why, it’s because this word order makes not-going-to-a-hanging into more of a cohesive little unit, treats it as a THING TO DO. And that’s what allows Oliver to dismiss it as a laughable thing to do, given any alternative.)

    This is, of course, not the only example of this. You might have a jovial uncle who talks about how he likes to “go up to the lake to not fish.” Haw.

    The point of all this? Tweak your jokes. Look for little rule-defying tricks like this. Be willing to grab the grammar and twist it a little bit to see if some sweet comedy drips out.

    Lunch: The “Veggie Max” sandwich from Subway. I think that’s the name of it. It’s got things that look like veggie burger patties in it.

  • scissors
    January 4th, 2007Jane EspensonComedy, From the Mailbag, On Writing

    Recently I’ve been asked questions – in a few different letters and emails – that I think all boil down to the same thing. “How can I think funny?”

    We’ve all met people who are effortlessly, automatically funny. Fearless in front of strangers, they tell stories, they do voices, they jump to their feet and do ‘bits’. When one of their jokes lands, they instantly follow it up, expanding it into a routine. When one of their jokes flops, they become a whirlwind of self-deprecation that’s even funnier than if the whole thing had succeeded. I love these people (even though they’re exhausting).

    Comedy writers’ rooms are packed with these men and women (more men than women still, but that’ll change). I once heard that Martin Short literally could not leave the writers’ room (this must’ve been at SCTV or SNL) until he got a laugh, so that he could leave on the laugh. Geez.

    I think a lot of this comic ability has to do with childhood environment. Crowded houses where attention is doled out to the funniest child, those are the comedian factories of our world.

    But what about the rest of us? I myself am an only child from a quiet stable household where attention was not punchline-dependent. I did watch a lot of television comedy, and developed the ability to be funny “on the page” from observing what worked for me as an audience member. So I had that.

    Being funny on the page can be enough, thank goodness, but being able to “pitch” your jokes well in the room is also part of the comedy writer’s job, and I wasn’t very good at it. I was most comfortable working out a joke on paper for a while, massaging the wording… not blurting it out as it was forming in my head.

    Now, I’ve never gotten *really* good at blurting – I’m still fairly quiet in the room – but I will tell you what helped a lot. I took an acting class where we did improv. It was terrifying, but it did help. I had no time to overwork the joke, I *had to* just go with it. I already had a little bit of confidence that I could be funny given a trained actor to say the lines. I gained confidence in my ability to be funny with my own voicebox. It also is really good for teaching you to look at the world with an eye for comic potential — for “seeing things funny.” I can’t praise the experience enough.

    Start with other beginners, learn the rules, and give it a go. Maybe it’s never too late to have a survival-of-the-funniest childhood!

    Lunch: quesadilla, a coke, and something wonderful called a “buckeye” from Big Sugar Bakeshop… like a high-class Reeses peanut butter cup.

  • scissors
    January 3rd, 2007Jane EspensonComedy, On Writing, Pilots

    I caught a bit of the premiere of “Knights of Prosperity” tonight. And I saw an earlier cut of the whole thing months ago in the writers’ room at Andy Barker, too. Writing staffs will do that sometimes, checking out pilots together, rooting for quality. I liked Knights a lot. I had also read it when it was pilot script called “Let’s Rob Mick Jagger”. Before that, it was a pilot script called “Let’s Rob Jeff Goldblum”. And at some time in there, it was just called “Let’s Rob…” Discuss which is the best premise. Now discuss which is the best title. (Hint: It’s not ‘Knights of Prosperity’)

    Anyway, I think this show might be a good model for those of you writing spec comedy pilots. It’s single-camera, which feels less moribund than multi-camera, and it has a big flashy daring premise that’s instantly memorable. I have no idea if the show itself is going to be consistently good, but the pilot is perfectly designed to draw attention to itself, which is what you are going to need. Take a look, if you get a chance.

    By the way, employing built-in casting — as this script did — allows you to demonstrate you can write to a recognizable voice. I hesitate to recommend this in general, for fear of causing an avalanche of spec pilots all using the same gimmick: “My Aunt is Meryl Streep!” “I Reanimated the Three Stooges!” “Let’s Ask Rip Torn!” But I gotta say, it’s a pretty great idea.

    Lunch: falafel and various highly-flavored salads

  • scissors
    January 2nd, 2007Jane EspensonComedy, From the Mailbag, On Writing, Pilots

    Ooh. I love it when I learn something from you, gentle readers! A very interesting letter has arrived from Betsy in Los Angeles. She’s asking about that weird dividing line between TV comedy writers and drama writers. Her father was a TV writer, and she supplies us with this info:

    “When my father was working (60s-80s), there was no strong distinction between being a comedy writer or a dramatic writer. Many of his friends would write a Mary Tyler Moore episode one week, then a Streets of San Francisco, and so forth. Nowadays it seems a writer has to classify themselves as strictly one or the other… or do they?”

    First reaction: Oooh. That sounds amazing. How much would I love writing a MTM and then a Streets of SF? Much.

    I had no idea there was such mobility then. When I entered the business in the early 90s, the line was pretty strict. You really were one or the other, comedy or drama, although I’m sure there were ambidextrous exceptions. I was specifically warned against making the switch because it would require “starting over.”

    When I was a kid, I once heard an opera singer being interviewed about his “realization” that he was, in fact, not a baritone, but actually a bass. He had to learn everything over again. I was, and am, a bit puzzled by that. What do you have to learn to, um, sing lower? I guess there’s technical singy stuff I just don’t know. Anyway, TV writing was like that — changing over was treated as if you were starting a new career.

    But now, I’m happy to tell you, Betsy, that things seem to be going back to being like they were during your dad’s career, with more and more comedy writers finding their way onto the staffs of dramas, and with shows like Ugly Betty further blurring the distinction anyway.

    Betsy herself has a preference for comedy, but is wondering about whether to try her hand at a drama spec, maybe something in a procedural, which would, of course, be at quite the other end of the continuum.

    Yes. Do it. Comedy is coughing up blood right now anyway, so you probably would need to explore drama even if it didn’t interest you to some degree. And I personally think demonstrating versatility is worth something in its own right.

    My only warning is that you have to be careful of trying so hard to be *different than comedy* that you end up with something purposefully dry and characterless. A Law and Order spec, for example, can have that feel, and might fail to convey your strengths. I would recommend something like Heroes or House or a spec pilot of your own devising, that will allow you to show off some drama skills while still getting a script that benefits from your ability to write comedy.

    Good luck, Betsy! Sounds like you’re off to a good start!

    Lunch: A “Fat Burger” from “Fat Burger.”

  • scissors
    December 31st, 2006Jane EspensonComedy, From the Mailbag, On Writing, Pilots

    First off, I am told that some of you out there are finding yourself in the gratifying but agonizing position of being finalists in the ABC Writing Fellowships, and being forced to wait over the holiday to find out if you’ve actually made it in or not. Well, congratulations-slash-courage! I’m rooting for all of you! You’re one step closer to making it in!

    Which — sort of — leads us to a question from Reader Kris, who asks about something I rarely talk about, which is the Next Step. Kris asks, “Say you’ve got the perfect spec, you’ve got a great agent/manager, now comes the interview with the show runner/EP…what do you say or do to get the writing gig on their staff?”

    This hypothetical young writer has got a great agent/manager?! Wow. That’s actually the much harder step right now. But let’s go with it.

    The first thing is not to overstress. If your material made the show runner want to bring you in, then he or she is already impressed. Often these meetings are simply to make sure you show up wearing pants. A show runner doesn’t want a disruptive personality in the room, a person with a crazy vibe or a non-stop talker, someone with a confrontational attitude — that kind of stuff. So just show up on time and be sane. That’s most of it.

    You’ll also be asked how you got into TV writing, so you might want to practice your story. You’ll have to tell it your whole career, so it pays to have it nice and shiny anyway. If you have an interesting background, this could be your chance to bring it up.

    You can also help by knowing the show and knowing the show runner’s work history. Mention what you like about the show. Don’t mention what you don’t like. If it’s a terrible show and you’re asked what you like about it, it’s not a trick question. Find something to like. Something about the writing, not the acting, casting or costume design. (By the way, only ONCE in my career at one of these meetings, have I been asked to name something I *didn’t* like about a pilot. It was this last season, and my mind went totally blank.)

    Reread your own spec before you go into the meeting, too, because it’ll probably be discussed, and you might be asked about choices you made. If you’re given advice about changes to make to it, thank them and say you’ll change it, even if you disagree and aren’t going to do any such thing.

    If it’s a comedy meeting, it can help to be funny but it isn’t necessary. It’s better to be not funny while NOT attempting a joke than to be not funny while attempting one. They’ve seen your joke-writing in your spec, so it’s not like you’re coming in cold.

    Don’t sell yourself too hard. The job you’re going for is “staff writer,” so the show runner doesn’t need to hear about what your vision for his show is, although you can certainly weigh in with opinions *if asked*. But in general, just be alert, friendly, and, remember, pants-wearing.

    And if you don’t get the job? That’s often a matter of budget-failure, not you-failure. Shows staff from the top down — hiring the top-level producers, then lower and lower… it’s very common these days for a show simply not to staff at the lowest levels because they’ve spent all their money. So don’t assume you did anything wrong. In fact, you probably just impressed someone who will remember you next time ’round.

    Also, THANK YOU, gentle readers, for your holiday greetings! Thanks to Claire for the hieroglyph card, which I’m still translating, to Lilia for the book, to Ingrid for the candy… to everyone for your cards! Gosh, guys, you’re the best!!

    Have a happy and safe New Year’s Eve!

    Lunch: Very bad fried chicken strips at DuPars (a genuinely retro, not self-consciously retro, diner). They were followed by gooseberry pie, so all was well.

  • « Older Entries

    Newer Entries »