You Are A Failure

Dear Craig,

After I read the second draft of my first feature-length screenplay, I felt pretty good, pretty accomplished. Sure, by no means do I have a finished product on my hands, but I definitely recognized some significant improvements over my first draft. So in good spirits, I come across this latest blog posting of yours.

“You are a failure as a screenwriter.”

Thanks for the pick-me-up, Craig!

In all honesty though, thanks for maintaining this blog. Your continuned insight into the art and business of screenwriting is duly appreciated.

Congratulations on all the success,

Alex

What a wonderful entry!

I thought I had hit jack pot gold when I sold my first script a few months back. They have even shot the film starring a legit actress. I was on top of the world until I discovered that…

… almost every word I had written, was re-written.

This experience put me in a worse funk than any of my “non-selling” days. Talk about feeling like a dog kicked in the gut from not being loved!

I didn’t want to look at another movie, read another screenplay or write another word until that glorious morning I confronted my fear of failure and asked it to walk with me down this unsteady path.

Thank’s Craig, you’ve reinforced my fragile perspective!

Reminds me of a quote that I first read on Wordplay. I don’t remember the name of its author, but I rememmer the gist of its message. The quote goes somethin like: “This thing that we call failure isn’t the falling down but the staying down.” I love that quote.

Mariama

You are not a failure, you are a perfectionnist !

And obviously, to improve something you first have to reckon it is improvable, i.e. something better can be done, i.e. what you have done yet is less good than something else you may do, but cannot tell without a little more work…Without that, you would let things as they are, and never achieve anything, I guess.

However necessary self-criticism is, I think to much self-depreciation may lead to weird self-flagellation, and you would not do that, would you ? Keep cool and forget what you cannot change.

Oh, and don’t forget to criticize your critics as well before any change. Leave well alone ; “Le mieux est l’ennemi du bien” as we say here.

http://www.avantnews.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=254

How many times did Edison fail before inventing the lightbulb? He did not waver once and kept going… and thank God, because I wouldn’t get much screenwriting done under candlelight

Craig:

A few months ago I sent you an annoying tag about the “Worst Things You’ve Ever Done.” This is precisely why.

Unfortunately, most people have a problem being objective. Every time I get a script the writer always intimates that he/she spent years on the script and that it will change the world.

Hmmm.

Not so much. Once we realize that what we’re writing isn’t perfect and that it always needs improvement, it’ll be an amazing step towards success.

On the other hand, there’s nothing like a screenplay to divide a nation. It’s amazing how one person will love a screenplay and another will think it’s the hackiest thing ever put on paper.

No studio wants it. They hate your screenplay. They gotta be nuts, right? Your friends love it! Your friends told you that this will be a fantastic film! Great. Sell the screenplay to your friends.

Is that harsh? I don’t know. Does that make all executives geniuses? I don’t think so. I could just mean that you’ve written something that’s not appealing to a studio in the year you’re trying to sell it. Tastes change. Needs change.

Or your screenplay is crap.

It’s all so confusing!

And there’s no right answer. Almost nothing about a screenplay is definitive. You just have to keep trying and improving. Hopefully if enough people read your screenplay you’ll get some sort of litmus test for what is good or what is bad. That is, if bad/good wasn’t totally subjective.

Sigh.

Thank for this post. I’ve been thinking this way about my writing for quite a while, but thought I was just being my own worst critic. Reading this makes me realize that I keep writing because I enjoy the journey, the process—not because I expect some reward for it (though the reward sits in a thought bubble above my head, probably always will).

I remember reading somewhere that projects are never finished, only abandoned. I can see that in screenwriting.

-Mitch

Great post, Craig. Reminds me of this Michael Jordan quote from my past life in sales:

“I’ve missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I’ve lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I’ve been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I’ve failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.”

failure is an illusion, sucess even more so we’re all on the same ride, with the same destination only some of us are enjoying the view more than others

Love the sentiment of this post. Even if you (as in “one”) are the best writer in the world, you’re still gonna think you suck, even if there are a thousand groupies writing to you every week or posting stuff on your blog about how great you are - you’ll just write it off and say they’re insane and give yourself a whipping ‘cos you only managed ten pages written that day instead of the 25 you’d aimed for. A friend of mine, a succesful, award-winning producer, said to me: “One day I’m going to write a decent screenplay, start to finish, without the need for the breakdown in the middle or the multiple redrafts. It’s gonna be perfect, just like that.”

We all need to have something to aim for. Cheers Craig.

Actually, I am a failure —without the feel-good part of the equation.

“Once we realize that what we’re writing isn’t perfect and that it always needs improvement, it’ll be an amazing step towards success.”

A bigger step will be learning to have confidence in what you do, and to resist the notion that “it always needs improvement.” That’s a development exec’s mentality. These are people whose life depends on always being able to come up with a way to change a script, to make lateral moves seem like improvements.

Anyone can just adapt the mindset that “it always needs improvements.” It’s a way of shrugging off your responsibility. But it’s not your job to always be accomodating. It’s your job to be a fucking WRITER, and that means being able to stand your ground, to know when it’s time to stup fucking with the material, and fighting for that when you have to.

If you don’t respect the work, who will?

Anonymous:

I think the most useful part of your post is:

“know when it’s time to stop fucking with the material”

That’s part of being a good screenwriter. Knowing how to stop overwriting a particular scene.

But the other stuff you’re saying about being “confident” and “holding your ground” really applies more to what you have to do when you’re in development of a project that’s been sold. Selling a screenplay and “holding your ground” really have nothing to do with each other. If your script is not selling there could be a number of reasons. But it’s probably advantageous to take a look at the content of your script first rather than “holding your ground”.

Oh, and a script can always be improved. That’s not a Development Exec’s mentality. It’s a Creatively Ojective mentality.

“Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.” —Vince Lombardi

Lombardi never sold a script either.

Failure. . . . B

I am hearing over and over, that it will be utterly impossibel to ever EVER be happy with doing anything related to writing a screenplay (read, working in this town). So, I see I’m totally free to enjoy every bit of the process, while continuing to make money out of air and finding the secret to happiness inside a cold and barren cave.

Oh, and a script can always be improved

But that doesn’t mean that THAT is what will happen by futzing with a finished script.

I think it’s more correct to state, a script can always be changed. It may be changed for the better, it may be changed for the worse, but it can be changed and someone is almost always going to want to change it, quite often for their own reasons.

If you want to sell a script, think about whether or not the suggested changes will help you do so. If they won’t, then don’t. Unless your being paid to make those changes and then, that’s a happier problem than before.

I should have wrote “you’re” instead of “your” in my above post, it’s one of my pet peeves and here I am, committing that crime msyelf.

See, even comment posts can be altered, improved or not improved. Life is fluid and work can be, too.

Which also means I’m a failure, too … I go home to hide, now.

Mr. Mazin, I come here looking for valid screenwriting advice… and you tell me something I already know. Shame on you.

“Oh, and a script can always be improved. That’s not a Development Exec’s mentality. It’s a Creatively Ojective mentality.”

Or a loser mentality, if we want to stay with the theme here. (Sorry - neglected to include my name last time.)

Anyway. Whether or not a script can always be improved is not the issue. The issue is if you walk into every situation thinking that way, you become a mush-head. A script can always be CHANGED - that’s why God invented studio execs. And those execs rely on writers being cowed enough by the mantra you’re pushing to go along.

Writers are whipped enough these days. We really don’t need people trying to convince them to be more beaten down than they already are. Have a voice, and have the courage to stand your ground. Resist the natterings of people who would convince you that all creative input is equal.

Sorry - neglected to include my name last time.

And yet, was there any doubt it was you? :)

Welcome back. Before things devolve the way they did last time, I just want to remind you guys that you can be as aggressive about your opinions as you’d like here, but I firmly draw the line at personal stuff.

A script can always be improved, but I prefer that the writer make the determination how that should happen.

I agree that change for change’s sake is not meaningful, and I agree that the writer ought to have the authority over the script itself.

And we do. No one pushes our fingers on the keyboard. It’s up to us to determine what is worth changing and what isn’t.

I have always found it fascinating that the work of some of the greatest filmmakers gets worse as the filmmaker gains acclaim. The Wachowski brothers, M. Night Shyamalan, and Coppola are examples.

It does seem as though acclaim can hurt an artist in that some artists stop questioning their own work and/or executives stop questioning their work.

We were once asked to work on a movie with a draft written by an Academy Award nominee and a draft written by an Academy Award winner. Their scripts were barely passable efforts. When we asked the studio how could this be, the exec told us that it’s hard to give criticism to a writer who walks into the room with their Oscar.

We like to be questioned, and we question our own work. Of course, the writer must always know when the changes will hurt the project. But just as confidence is good, so is a little insecurity.

I love it when Woody Allen talks about this. He famously never rewatches any of his films.

Q: Is it true that you never rewatch your own movies?

Woody Allen: That is true. I haven’t seen Take the Money and Run since 1968. I haven’t seen any of my movies again.

Q: Yet there are other movies that you do watch over and over again. How come not your own films?

Woody Allen: Well, because mine I would hate if I watched them over and over. If I saw them again I could only see what’s bad about them, the mistakes, those things that if I had the chance I could do over again, but I really can’t do them over because it’s not possible. Whereas if I watch somebody else’s movie again and again, it’s purely pleasurable!

Brother Olson brought up something interesting (well, he usually does, and he’s far from the only one, truth be told) but it was such a cool point I had to come out of hiding and comment upon it. His comment was thus;

Resist the natterings of people who would convince you that all creative input is equal

this, to me, is a great point. It doesn’t state that no one should have input, it doesn’t state that we all are not creative, whether we be directors, writers, producers or best boys, it draws no conclusions - it simply states that, when it comes to writing a specific project, all creative input is not equal.

I find this to be so true.

What do y’all think? Is all creative input equal when it comes to screenplays?

Every home run king is a strike out king, too.

• Bill

“What do y’all think? Is all creative input equal when it comes to screenplays?”

No, I don’t think so.

Welcome back, Josh!

“Writers are whipped enough these days. We really don’t need people trying to convince them to be more beaten down than they already are. Have a voice, and have the courage to stand your ground.”

Again, I think this really applies to films that are in development after you’ve sold the script. As far as selling a screenplay goes, I think that we can all agree that most screenplays aren’t very good and we shouldn’t dismiss “passes” because we think that the executive is an idiot. Sure, there are cases when an executive passes on a very successful movie. But at the same time, I’ve been in a room with a writer who is insanely passionate about their script and I’m trying to tell him that I don’t think his comedy script needs to be 198 pages.

You’re correct when you say that all creative input isn’t equal. That is so true. But when a couple of studios pass on your script, you should revisit the pages to see if there’s anything there that can be improved upon. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Do you?

For ages, I haven’t been able to read any wordplayer columns -my computer keeps showing the page not found message. So I just assumed it was no longer. But now I see you linking to one of Terry’s columns from the site, though I still get nothing when I click on it.

You got me wondering, “is it just me?” I mean, certainly you wouldn’t go through the trouble of posting a link to something that does not exist anymore… Weird.

It’s definitely still there.

I think Josh O. has a very valid point, but unfortunately it can only hit home for those few people who are far enough long career-wise to have ground to stand their ground on.

It seems the message of Craig’s essay this week is intended for people starting out who are convinced their first draft is the second coming of Kasdan. And just as sure as I am that he’s right to say it, I’m also sure it’ll make no difference to those delusional folks who crowd up the marketplace with half-ass stuff.

Luckily, I have a really terrible self-esteem, so if even I think something I wrote is pretty good, that’s my sign to pursue it.

I don’t think Craig’s piece is only referring to those “people starting out who are convinced their first draft is the second coming of Kasdan.”

I think anyone who thinks their first draft is the second coming of Kasdan should question themselves. Even Kasdan.

At least question. Maybe it IS the second coming of Kasdan…but it’s good to always keep on yourself, isn’t it? Otherwise you become M. Night.

Hey Craig — great post.

Interesting comment, re: M. Night. My friends and I talk a lot about the ability to self-assess, and how it seems to be the Great Divide between pro-caliber work and not. The vast majority of aspiring writers (and many working writers) turn in work which they believe to be of pro quality, but isn’t. (It’s subjective, of course, but in general, suckiness abounds.)

For the working pros here, I wonder — how do you know? When is your own work up to snuff, and ready to go out?

I wouldn’t mind failing as badly as Ted Elliott… it’s the kind of shame I could live with.

Craig, you may want to define “failure” as a lot of cats seem to take your disparaging post literally. Getting aspiring writers to be hesitant about believing in their work in fear of becoming m. night (a two time oscar nominated writer whose films grossed over 700 million) is, quite frankly, a little bit disturbing. Especially on a site set up to “empower screenwriters”.

Sarcasm is a great communication tool, for those who get it. For the rest it can be pure poison.

I’m not being sarcastic.

Nor am I being disempowering.

I’m being realistic.

Failure is a part of every creative pursuit. We need to make peace with it. Look, if Olson wants to equate “recognize and accept your failures as part of your success” with “you’re a studio bootlick” then I can’t help him.

Studios have nothing to do with it. The studio may tell me I’m a failure. But that’s not really relevant to me. I know when something’s wrong. I know that I can probably do a bit better. And when I can’t, when I’m satisfied that what I’ve written is just…right…then I stand my ground.

Josh is confounding my point with his standard arguments about our employers, our art, our voices, etc.

That’s all irrelevant to my point.

Whether I’m alone or in development or on the set, at some point, I and only I can make a creative choice to stop or keep going.

When I make a choice to keep going, I am embracing my failure.

There’s nothing shameful or disturbing about this…other than some people’s inability to view failure as anything but a negative.

I hear your points. But feel you’re treading on thin ice when you imply to a lot of naturally insecure wanna-bes that they are failures unless every single script they ever write becomes the basis of a box office success. Why not stick to Nietzsche and tell the aspiring (and the working) writers on this board that if it doesn’t kill you it will make you stronger? Or that being paid (big bucks) for doing what you love is a blessing, and that hard work and honing their skills can actually get them there? Why not motivate in stead of deprecate?

“Failure is a part of every creative pursuit.”

Sure, but so is success. If you adminsiter the poison, at least hand out the antidote with it.

Johnny:

Do you think everything I write becomes the basis of a box office success? Was I not explicit about that?

You have drawn a false implication.

Johnny:

CRAIG WROTE:

“In order to succeed, you have to see failure for what it really is. It is not a Judgment of You. It is not a Sentence. It is not Permanent. We may call our bad writing “bad,” but it’s not bad. It’s wonderful. It’s the crawl before the walk, the walk before the run. If you haven’t solved your screenplay yet, rejoice. You are one of the chosen few who isn’t delusional about your own writing.”

This is what you took from that:

“you’re treading on thin ice when you imply to a lot of naturally insecure wanna-bes that they are failures unless every single script they ever write becomes the basis of a box office success.”

I really don’t think Craig is implying anything close to what you’re saying. It seems to me that Craig is saying that everybody fails and you shouldn’t be discouraged. It seems to me that Craig is saying that you can learn from your failures. It seems to me that Craig is saying that failure is part of the process to success. Which of course, is entirely true.

Do you really think that the purpose of Craig’s post was to tear writers down?

I didn’t see it that way. When you tell Craig:

“Why not stick to Nietzsche and tell the aspiring (and the working) writers on this board that if it doesn’t kill you it will make you stronger?”

it feels as if you truly do understand that Craig was being supportive but you just object to the exact words he used. Maybe he chose his words because, “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” is kind of cliched and overused.

Craig, I got that. But to me your post implies that UNLESS everything one writes becomes a box office hit, consider yourself a failure.

I’m not into false praise or motivating the weak and the whiney, trust me. Writing a script is easy, writing a good script is damn fucking hard. Writing a great one…unattainable for most.

Let me ask you this, what’s your definition of SUCCESS?

My definition of success is simple, and I’ve mentioned it a number of times on the site.

A successful screenwriter writes a movie that pleases the audience for which it was intended.

Therefore, if you write a screenplay at it isn’t produced, it’s a failure. If you write a screenplay and it is produced but doesn’t please the audience for which it was intended…it’s a failure.

Yes, that means we will fail more often than not.

Johnny, being a failure in this business isn’t a bad thing. It’s an inevitable thing. That’s my point. Stop thinking of it as a negative.

Kevin,

I understand that Craig’s “Path of Failure” is the road to success.

But I wasn’t talking about me. I was talking about other contributors to this forum seemingly misunderstanding Craig’s mantra to negative effect.

It’s all about attitude…put’m down and pick’m up, or push’m hard to get them higher, if that makes any sense to you.

Johnny:

“But I wasn’t talking about me. I was talking about other contributors to this forum seemingly misunderstanding Craig’s mantra to negative effect.”

Number one, I’m not sure that’s entirely true. Number two, if someone misunderstands something, why would you put that on the speaker?

People misunderstand things all the time. If 10 people get something and 2 people don’t, I would think the problem lies somewhere other than the speaker. But again, I’m not entirely sure that your point is even true.

There’s always a smattering of insanity on message boards but I think the majority gets it. I mean, it’s a fairly simple concept, no?

Craig, thanks for the clarification. Obviously we have different views on what consitutes failure/sucess in the screenwriting business.

To me, making a living with screenwriting is a form of success, not a level failure.

The eternal pessimist might say PIRATES2 failed to become the fastest movie to gross 400 million at the box office, but where does that leave the unknown writer who just sold his first spec?

Why is it so hard to embrace and encourage the idea that you can be proud of your work, whether it broke box office records or not? If we, the writers, call ourselves failures every time a film we write gets produced but doesn’t gain commercial and critical acclaim, how can we ever expect the rest of the industry to respect our profession?

Johnny:

I totally see what you’re saying.

But as a career progesses we’ll naturally have different definitions of what we consider success and failure.

When a screenwriter sells his first spec, it’s success! No doubt about it. But logically speaking, if that film gets produced and flops, that will constitute a failure.

For all the successes of Bill Gates he’s obviously had a tremendous amount of failures. Anyone remember Windows ME?:)

Johnny, I see your point and I can understand why you feel the way you do. I just think that we’re all defining failure differently.

Well, obviously I think Pirates 2 meets my definition of success.

Nor do I believe that failure and pride are mutually exclusive. In fact, the scripts I’m most proud of are failures.

Fair enough. But why call them “failures”? Why not call them unsold (or unproduced, or badly produced, or terribly marketed) masterpieces?

Language, as you know, is a powerful tool. If you call your accomplishments failures, others will see them as such and apply their own definition, setting you up for…well, true failure.

Craig, By your definition, there are some VERY SUCCESSFUL porn writers out there. :)

Hey, Craig. I have a fun (I hope) question for you. In a comment above, you wrote:

“The studio may tell me I’m a failure. But that’s not really relevant to me. I know when something’s wrong. I know that I can probably do a bit better. And when I can’t, when I’m satisfied that what I’ve written is just…right…then I stand my ground.”

And in a past column, you wrote:

“I hate the Taskmaster, but I love the Taskmaster. I stamp my feet, bitch and moan. I protest that it can’t get better… [omitted] …and then I realize that it can be better. And once I write the new version, the thought of going backwards and using the version I had just so vigorously defended is, well…awful.”

How do you decide? When is it the first case, and when the second? It’s the same process we all deal with — when to incorporate notes, and when to stand firm — but I’m really curious about your perspective on it. Thanks!

Tom:

My easy answer: an open mind.

I allow myself to believe that it’s possible that my confidence is misplaced. I evaluate the work as objectively as possible.

Sometimes, I was right the first time. It’s good. My faith in it has been confirmed. Sometimes, though…

Derek:

Yes!

Johnny:

The entire point of this essay is to recast the word “failure” as neutral or even positive, rather than as a pejorative. If you can’t let that go, hey…what can I say?

Derek:

Actually, it’s amazing how successful porn producers are.

I wonder what their definition of failure is…?

Missing the pop shot?

Professional success is directly proportional to the amount of coke and hookers it affords you. Now this could be metaphorical coke and hookers, or (fingers crossed) actual real life coke and hookers. I mean we are talking about this writing thing as a profession, right?

If we’re talking about artistic success, it’s really not up to us the creators but in the short-term our audience, our peers, those that critique our particular medium be it screenwriting, finger painting or furry hentai anime; and in the long-term History with the big capital H. We don’t get to decide if we make that roll call; it’s up to that all-seeing, all-knowing deity who cares not for the follies of man (though occasionally laughs at our misfortune).

And I don’t think it’s accurate to measure creative success by how much our audience is pleased. Sometimes it’s the artist’s job to outrage and offend their intended audience (though doing so rarely results in that other type of success, i.e. professional, i.e. coke and hookers).

I do think it’s a good suggestion for the artist — no matter which type of success they hope to attain — to utilize that super-objectivity Terry mentioned in combination with the nattering-resistance Olson mentioned. The end result will be us doing the best work we can possibly do. And part of that also means knowing when to call it soup. Tinkering endlessly will generally result in nothing good, and while it’s sometimes the professional duty of the writer to tinker at the behest of his/her employers, it should be done with the cold detachment of a hitman killing his/her best friend. There’s coke and hookers at the end of this rainbow, Bobby.

But if it’s strictly creative success we’re after, more often than not it requires listening to no one else but our muse. The ability to do so without wavering is shared by both the very best and very worst of any craft.

This was a rather interesting essay for me, Craig, it’s stayed with me since you posted it, though perhaps just because I’m driven, but you sure know how to ring some bells. I wanted to address what you mentioned in a comment.

The entire point of this essay is to recast the word ‘failure’ as neutral or even positive, rather than as a pejorative. If you can’t let that go, hey,what can I say?

I got that was what you’re trying to do - I just don’t know that if it’s possible, which may be why I’ve been mulling this for so long. Here is the definition of the word from my laptop dictionary of the word.

failure -noun 1 lack of success : an economic policy that is doomed to failure | the failures of his policies. - an unsuccessful person, enterprise, or thing : bad weather had resulted in crop failures. - lack of success in passing an examination or test : exam failure. - a grade that is not high enough to pass an examination or test. 2 the omission of expected or required action : their failure to comply with the basic rules. -a lack or deficiency of a desirable quality : a failure of imagination. 3 the action or state of not functioning : symptoms of heart failure | an engine failure. - a sudden cessation of power. -The collapse of a business. ORIGIN mid 17th cent.(originally as failer, in the senses [nonoccurrence] and [cessation of supply] ): from Anglo-Norman French failer for Old French faillir (see fail ).
Thesaurus
failure noun
1 the failure of the assassination attempt lack of success, nonfulfillment, defeat, collapse, foundering. antonym success. 2 all his schemes had been a failure fiasco, debacle, catastrophe, disaster; informal flop, megaflop, washout, dead loss, snafu, clinker, dud, no-go. antonym success. 3 she was regarded as a failure loser, underachiever, ne’er-do-well, disappointment; informal no-hoper, dead loss, dud, write-off. antonym success. 4 his failure in duty negligence, dereliction; omission, oversight. 5 a crop failure inadequacy, insufficiency, deficiency, dearth, scarcity, shortfall. 6 the failure of the camera breaking down, breakdown, malfunction; crash. 7 company failures collapse, crash, bankruptcy, insolvency, liquidation, closure. antonym success.

So. It’s a loaded word, and not loaded in a neutral or postive sense - while it’s commendable to attempt to recast it, the larger question is when we spend so much of our time defining ourselves and our work through the specifics of words, why make it harder by recasting one which seems to describe, perfectly, the opposite of what we all strive for not only as writers but as people, as citizens and as a society?

It feels vaguely Orwellien (if that is a word) to say “bad” is “good” and “good” is “bad” and maybe that’s why I’m bugged somewhat, like Johnny is, by the point of the essay. I get where you’re going with it, but how you’re defining the journey sort of sticks a bit.

I certainly wouldn’t describe you as a failure, even though you’ve written screenplays that you haven’t yet had produced, or because two of the four movies weren’t quite the way you like them to be - you’ve also achieved some rather wonderful things along the way (and gotten yourself a fine collection of video games and gear, to boot) - isn’t it better to say that everything you’ve done as been a step in the direction that you’ve chosen to go, and that, like all of us, where you started is not where you are now nor is it where you hope to end up in terms of success?

Josh James;

Now why would I bother recasting a word that people already like? :)

Look, the dictionary is cool, but if all I wanted to do was talk about how failure and the experience of failure is pretty much exactly what you thought it was, then I would have just linked to a dictionary.

I don’t know if the dictionary is cool or not, but it certainly has some useful applications, especially when I stumble across the big long words I can’t pronounce just right.

There are a few of those.

Shoot, talking about failure and how it links to success, that I have no problem with, the first lesson in any basic judo class is how to fall down correctly, because one has to know how to fall before one can learn how to properly throw a person across the room (assuming that’s one of the things a person is there to learn) and how to protect yourself.

Falling down is important, I’d agree with you on that, and it sometimes takes a lot of guts and courage to stand back up after one has been knocked on the tuckus. No argument there, not from me. Shoot, I do believe I’ve even been knocked on me tuckus verbally a few times on this very forum.

I only posted because you mentioned you wanted to recast the word.

Failure, by the way, was also the name of a very cool L.A. band circa mid 1990’s. Those guys did a lot of drugs.

Perhaps writers should apply Thomas Edison’s approach to inventing to screenwriting. As I explained to Riley Poole (while we were plotting how to steal the Declaration of Independence),

/// Thomas Edison tried and failed nearly two thousand times to develop the carbonized cotton filament for the incandescent light bulb. And when asked about it he said, “I didn’t fail, I found two thousand ways how not to make a light bulb.” But he needed only one way to make it work. ///

Every ‘failure’ brought Edison closer to making it work. He knew as long as he learned something from each attempt, his efforts, although unsuccessful, weren’t failures. I remind myself of this frequently, while I’m searching for clues and solving mysteries. It helps me think creatively and keeps me from getting discouraged.

Love your site, by the way. Glad I discovered it.

“The entire point of this essay is to recast the word “failure” as neutral or even positive, rather than as a pejorative.”

Why bother? Seriously? It’s not a very empowering endeavor. Getting a film made based on your script is a success. If that film turns out to be good it’s a great success. If it breaks box office records it’s amazing success. See what I’m doing here?

I’m not trying to be mr. feel-good, or advocate medicocrey, but your definition of success sets 99.89 % of the working screenwriters up to be failures. Except failure is now a happy word so it’s okay. Brrrrrr.

“If you can’t let that go, hey…what can I say?”

You’re right. I can’t. It’s a negative word. No two ways about it. And using it to describe the creative process of screenwriting demeans that very process. And he or she who undergoes it, i.e. us.

You want to recast a word, target this one: SCREENWRITER.

Right now it means “expandable schmuck somewhat needed in the development of a film project”. Let me see you transmogrify it into “cerebral demiurge of fates and worlds essential in the making of a motion picture”, and I’ll shut up.

Not sure what’s going on in the comments section, but just wanted to say thanks for the great post!

Cheers

Sir Winston Churchill: “Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm.” I think that quote may relate to the point Craig was making with his original entry, without posing existential quandaries regarding what constitutes failure or success. It is the enthusiasm that forms true worth, the pursuit of art in writing—-or at least it should be until you have a mortgage to pay.

Of course, Churchill was also the guy who didn’t care what food was served at a meal, as long as it was prefaced with a martini, accompanied by champagne, followed by brandy, and if the night went long, whisky and soda for a nightcap. Where have all the good leaders gone?

Craig, that is so weird. The wordplayer site is still up and running yet, for the longest time (like 2+ years) I have only had MSN telling me “page not found”… I had assumed it was no longer online for all this time. Until I saw your post, that is. The only thing I can imagine (though I am pessimistic about this theory) is that I use a Japanese language browser. But that has never been a problem before. Ah, well, glad to hear it’s just my end, though I know I’m missing out…

How many drafts? Oh, I don�t know. Maybe 150 by now? And how many of those drafts were so-called �final� drafts? Let�s say twenty. And how many of those actually made it to screen? Try four.

Dude, you’re practically MVP with those stats. Mine would be 75/1/0. You know what would be cool? Screenwriter baseball cards. We’d all be depicted in PJ’s at our laptops. I’m going to make this my mission if we strike and I need a fun project I can do at home in the nude.

Johnny:

99.89%? No. 100%.

Your definition of screenwriter, and how you view our position, says more about you than about the reality of our position. I’m a screenwriter, Johnny. And I’m not the guy you’ve described. Never have been. Not even on my first job.

Julie:

You want something fun to do at home while naked? I’ll get to work on a list…

Craig:

You got me all wrong, and I think you know it. The “expandable hack…” description is not MY view of screenwriters, but how many of the powers to be see us, or at least treat us.

To empower writers means (in part) to change that view. I feel it’s hard enough to accomplish that without the attempt to recast words like “failure” into a neutral or even a positive.

It’s like me saying you’re an asshole… BUT assholes are great! Because they speak their mind and have unique opinions they stand for and offend only because others aren’t as smart as them!!

I just told you that I think being an asshole is a great thing, and I wish I was as big an asshole as you. And yet you can’t help but feel offended, can you?

Same thing.

Failure will always have negative nuances. No matter how peachy anyone’s personal definition is of the word.

Johnny:

Well, I guess this essay didn’t work for you, then. Feel free to ignore it.

I don’t think Craig is saying that it is a positive word. He doesn’t want to rewrite the Dictionnary. I think that he’s saying : “In our specific job, failure is obligatory. So you’d better live with it and consider that IN OUR SPECIFIC CASE, it’s positive because we have the possibility to improve our current work.”

I’ll take a “personnal” example :-) France soccer team has lost the 2006 world cup. THE END. Let’s hope we will play better in four years. If they were like screenwriters, we could tell them “Ok guys, you have lost the finale. But it doesn’t matter, you know why ? Because you can go to the training session during one week or two, and we could soon play the finale again.”

That’s why failure is good when you’re a screenwriter… Isn’t it ? (Always look on the bright side of life ? whistles)

“The entire point of this essay is to recast the word “failure” as neutral or even positive, rather than as a pejorative.”

Sorry Alfie, but that’s exactly what Craig was doing with the word failure.

I don’t know why this essay is so hard to fathom. I think we writers are insecure about our talent, and people are having a knee-jerk reaction to the title. (I know I did!)

This is an awesome blog.

Screenwriting sucks, doesn’t it?

…we should all do something else.

like save little russian children. Or plant trees. or adopt a cat.

Joshua : That is why I said “in our case”. I mean, dictionnary doesn’t care about screenwriters because it’s a very small part of the society and it is just an exception. He says “You are a failure as a screenwriter. The good news is that you’re not a failure at something that actually matters in life like, say, bridge construction or angioplasty.” Craig’s positive definition is right about screenwriting only.

“Sorry Alfie, but that’s exactly what Craig was doing with the word failure.” He doesn’t recast the word “failure” as neutral or positive. He recasts the word “failure” as neutral or positive only talking about screenwriters. That makes a big difference to me. ;-) It’s like in a video game, a kind of “add-on” (to the actual definition), not a new game (definition). Or like the exception who confirms the rule. That’s all.

Some reactions make me think that Anne Robinson actually wrote the article. :D

The dictionary is a tool, Alfie, not a therapist, it’s a tool that we use in our craft - a very useful one, because it helps us to define the words we use to communicate with. How we feel about the words is one thing, what their definition is, exactly, is another thing entirely.

The definition of the word represents the reality from yesterday and today. Seeing as that we make our living as craft of words, it’s important to know what the words are now.

I don’t necessarily have an issue with the recasting of words, it happens naturally every day, it’s part of our evolving culture. Words, like everything else, change over time.

That being said, I believe Failure (with regard to screenwriting) is a rather loaded word and the vast distance we’d to go to change is, in the end, unnecessary. Failure is pretty clear on what it stands for, as a word, and why make it a good thing, any way? It feels too much like saying, ‘war is a good thing’.

I think a better word to redefine with regard to screenwriting would be success, but that’s simply me, that’s all. Just my opinion, no more or no less.

I disagree with Craig’s essay, nothing more or less, that this one word needs to be recast more than the word Screenwriter, which Johnny wrote about more eloqently than I did. Just because we disagree it doesn’t make us insecure.

And actually, I don’t understand why people think this has been a hot and bothered comment string - Johnny and I took issue with a couple of Craig’s points and that’s it. Nobody yelled or screamed, there have been ideas exchanged but I doubt Craig is losing sleep over the fact Johnny or I disagree with him, nor have I lost sleep over it. I think it would be strange to have a large diverse group of writers and NOT have some disagreements over anything.

But to say folks got their panties in a bunch on this comment string is strange I mean, come on, hasn’t anyone else here been witness to some of the Josh Olson debates?

Now there was talk, boyo, some serious shots fired in those discussions, that was something to see and be a part of. This doesn’t even qualify as a skirmish in comparison.

Craig,

you want me to stop posting, please say so… I will. In the meantime I can ignore your essay, but it’s hard to ignore the greater implication, that a site created to empower screenwriters seemingly accomplishes exactly the opposite. You write:

“…you’re not a failure at something that actually matters in life (…). You’re a failure at something silly like writing movies.”

Seeing that you stated how you’re not being sarcastic, but realistic, I can only assume you mean the above statement literally. In which case your essay does degrade our profession, and I’m surprised at your surprise that a couple o’ folk feel ticked off.

For someone who advocates “the rewriting, improving, rethinking, and most importantly, fearlessly tearing down (of) the creative idols you erected in order to raise up new ones” you seem reluctant to follow your own advice… For maybe your essay needs exactly that, some rethinking.

Failure is an Orphan, right? So why are you trying to make us adopt the little brat?

The point to the article is really to save a lot of younger writers time. However, younger writers aren’t going to believe nor understand where Craig is speaking from, as the word “failure” is an emotional one, and denotes a level of worthlessness.

Writing has nothing to do with the western thinking of success or failure. Writing is a process, and the process helps you understand who you are, your character, how your perceive life, others around you, love, friendship, safety, etc. Its a grim reminder that if you aren’t self actualized, its going to show in your writing, and its probably not going to be good.

Craig’s comments are about living long enough to understand that we are all failures as writers, not because we aren’t good, but because the Hollywood doesn’t operate on the same plane as writing and thus you get the failure complex.

Throwing in the towel really means to forget the idea that you’re gonna sell something to Hollywood. The odds are so very very grim, you’re better off getting a real job that pays, then trying to make writing your source of retirement. Consider that idea a lost cause. Until you accepted that premise, you’ve missed the whole intention of what the article means. Once you do, you can move on and write a great script under better conditions.

Eric

Johnny:

You can post to your heart’s content.

I’m not at all surprised that a couple of people are ticked off. Frankly, I’m surprised so many people were so accepting of the central message, because it’s a tough one to accept.

I’m also gratified that so many people are accepting of it.

Does my essay need rewriting?

In my opinion, it does not. It’s not fiction. It’s not creative writing. It’s an editorial. My only criterion for these editorials is this: does the editorial accurately reflect my view?

I believe it does.

Failure - absolutely. No matter how well I write, I’m always aware that I can do better. There are always moments when I know that I have produced something that outright works and no tinkering would improve on it, but those are few and far between.

At least the constant failure to meet the standard I set for myself keeps me pushing myself harder - even when others tell me I’ve done enough.

“I’m surprised so many people were so accepting of the central message…”

At least we share one thing in common.

I second that, Johnny.

Look, it’s quite simple: “Lego,” not “Legos.”

Look, it’s quite simple: “Lego,” not “Legos.”

Oh, lord.

“If it’ll make you feel any better, I’ve learned that life is one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead.” -Homer Simpson

Thank you.

I don’t think I’m a failure. I consider myself a huge success. And extremely smart and talented. I’ve done the hardest thing you can do as a writer, I’ve completed a script that i’m proud of. And I know that no other writer or studio exec can make it better. They can only make it worse and then make it. The can’t handle it. So when you call me a failure, I object. I object with intent to fight. If that intimidates you, I’m sorry. I’m just confident…like that other guy. It’s like that Moby song where he says “we are all made of stars”, except you’re not recognizing that.

So in closing, if I didn’t overwhelm you, I’d like to say that no matter how hard you try to convince me I’m a failure…it won’t work.

Perhaps that’s what you’re scared of, Mazin.

You are a huge success, Malcolm. Because you have written a perfect unsold screenplay, and that is something that nobody can ever take away from you, not even if they try, not even with tazers and a court order. Mazin can’t handle it — and if he ever tries to handle it, then you just come at him like a hurricane made of teeth, and hair, and fingernails, man! You have overwhelmed him, and he must submit. His Tiger and Crane are no match for your Eagle’s Claw. That’s what really scares him.

i think your main post is right on track.

A novel isn’t a novel until it’s sold and made into a book that people buy. Until then, it’s just a bunch of pages with words on them.

Scripts are the same way.

Sure, this is art, what we’re doing. But it’s a business too. I’ve never fooled myself into thinking otherwise.

…in conclusion, never take yourself too seriously. I don’t.

which is why i sometimes wear a LOT of spandex.

Malcolm -

I can’t decide if that’s a joke post or not. You’ve just embodied nearly every wannabe-writer stereotype with only a couple sentences, so bravo for that. I’m still trying to figure out why a professional screenwriter who makes hundreds of thousands of dollars a year (probably into the millions, but I like to play it safe) would be “scared” or “intimidated” by some nobody aspirant. Maybe it’s your unwillingness to let the man keep you down. Or maybe it’s your disturbing delusion. Either way, keep on truckin’!

Phoenix:

Malcolm was joking.

I agree. Malcolm, for the good of all, you simply must post a link to this excellent screenplay of yours. There is much you can teach us.

Kevin-

I really hope so. I don’t recall if he’s posted here before, so I don’t know what he’s about. But I know that there are people out there like that, and I have to assume the worst on this here Intertron.

Phoenix:

That’s true. I don’t know what’s worse. A delusional Actor or a delusional Writer. I guess on a scale of 1-10, they’re both at about a 9.

But I’m pretty sure Malcolm was poking fun at the other two arguing with Mazin. But you can see how thin that line is. That’s the scary part.

I applaud Mazin for the ability to put up with it. Lord knows I couldn’t.

I wish I had a cool name like Malcolm Laser Bomb. :-(

I don’t know if it would help me as a writer but it could be great for networking. I would even invest in business cards, with a little clip art of a laser then a plus sign then a little clip art of a bomb.

Ah, to dream…

Craig’s essay has a tough-love message, and some of the comments are aptly contentious. I wonder, isn’t failure for a creative artist one of perception? That being — How do we perceive ourselves and how are we perceived by others who buy, alter and produce our work?

When failure occurs but we resolve to act, to write, and to edit in order to succeed, have we truly failed? Ultimately, time and resolve determine the extent of our failure.

Failure is thus a relative and an absolute thing. If it’s a relative, its my brother-in-law Charles; if its absolute, it’s an average vodka with better than average marketing.

Here are some other’s thoughts on success and failure. You judge which succeed or fail…

Success and failure are equally disastrous. - Tennessee Williams

Success is simply a matter of luck. Ask any failure. - Earl Wilson

Success is a public affair. Failure is a private funeral. - Rosalind Russell

But man is not made for defeat. A man can be destroyed but not defeated. -Ernest Hemingway (a big game hunter who was his last game.)

Success is often achieved by those who don’t know that failure is inevitable. - Coco Chanel

There is much to be said for failure. It is more interesting than success. - Max Beerbohm

It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail. - Gore Vidal

It’s fine to celebrate success but it is more important to heed the lessons of failure. - Bill Gates (that Windows ME haunts him…)

My play was a complete success. The audience was a failure. - Ashleigh Brilliant

Success and failure are greatly overrated. But failure gives you a whole lot more to talk about. - Hildegard Knef

One must be a god to be able to tell successes from failures without making a mistake. - Anton Chekhov

Brings to mind the Edison quote when asked how it felt to fail so many times before inventing the light bulb. His answer, paraphrased, was something along: “I didn’t fail. I figured out 2000 ways how not to build a light bulb first.” That’s invention. That’s screenwriting too.

I was indeed joking. Craig is a genius. An evil, evil, genius. His daddy Ted is nicer only in that he only kills when necessary.

Craig also happens to be correct in all things hollywood about 87-94% of the time.

But me and him both know when he’s wrong.

M. L. Bomb,

Out…

I have never posted a message on ANY blog or website before. I don’t know whether anyone will see this, as the article is old and appears to have run its course, however, I thought that the entire Ping Pong match about “failure” was fascinating. I have been writing stories for most of my adult life, although none have been published, maybe because none have been submitted. Aha! A closet scribe. I am very new to screenplays, so my view on things may change as I enter the cold cruel world of movies. My view on the failure aspect is that every story, novel, song, screenplay, or joke ever written, told, or sung is a failure. The reason is that the purpose for writing is to have the audience feel, see, smell, hear, or taste what you have in your head, or heart, or soul, or wherever you create your stories. In my humble opinion, this can never be accomplished. A portion of the audience will take from your blood, sweat, and tears, a portion of your story, but never the entire story. A portion of the audience will think you are nothing but a crazy person for thinking that you have anything to give to the world. All of this is failure because the story can never be reproduced into another person’s world. Our best efforts will all fall short of perfection. All we can do is try, and enjoy the trying while we are here to enjoy it. Great topic. Thanks.

RJ:

All comments are read, even on older posts. :) Thanks for your perspective.

That wasn’t flying! That was… falling with style! -Woody and later Buzz from Toy Story (as I don’t know which writer put that line in)

Success is failing with style and grace! -Hugo Fuchs

If you measure how many movies get made from all the drafts you write then, yes, you are a failure. On the other hand if you view the fact that you are able to support yourself by writing because you love it, you are an undeniable success. In the end, is the glass half empty or half full.

Re: Thomas Edison He did not invent the lightbulb. Not even close. What he did was invented the long lasting lightbulb. So did several other people, but Edison went into busines with one of them to avoid patent issues. If you’ve ever seen most of his personal inventions, as opposed to those he bought, you’d understand he was alot like Bill Gates. He was alot better with the business end than the creative end.

On the other hand, Edison HAS said some inspirational things that also apply to writing.

“Anything that won’t sell, I don’t want to invent. Its sale is proof of utility, and utility is success.”

“Being busy does not always mean real work. The object of all work is production or accomplishment and to either of these ends there must be forethought, system, planning, intelligence, and honest purpose, as well as perspiration. Seeming to do is not doing.”

“Hell, there are no rules here - we’re trying to accomplish something.”

“One might think that the money value of an invention constitutes its reward to the man who loves his work. But… I continue to find my greatest pleasure, and so my reward, in the work that precedes what the world calls success.”

“I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.”

“I start where the last man left off.”

“If we did all the things we are capable of, we would literally astound ourselves.”

“Just because something doesn’t do what you planned it to do doesn’t mean it’s useless.”

“Many of life’s failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up.”

“Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.”

“There’s a way to do it better - find it.”

“To have a great idea, have a lot of them.”

“To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk.”

“When I have fully decided that a result is worth getting I go ahead of it and make trial after trial until it comes.”