David Mamet: the three questions every story needs (#67)
The Pulitzer Prize-winning writer on what it takes to make drama
In the fall of 2005, the writers of CBS’s, The Unit, were struggling.
The producers of the show—which was adapted from a book about a special ops unit in the US Army— felt the script lacked the details necessary to tell the story, and they were giving the show’s creator a lot of shit about it.
But that creator—David Mamet— disagreed.
The Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright of Glengarry Glen Ross knew the real problem wasn’t lack of information, but lack of story. So, in a fit of controlled rage, Mamet wrote, Memo To The Unit Writing Staff, to remind them of the fundamentals of drama, and the three key questions each scene must answer.
Those questions, how to use them, and what to avoid, are the subject of today’s OGT.
The three questions every scene must have
AS WE LEARN HOW TO WRITE THIS SHOW,1 A RECURRING PROBLEM BECOMES CLEAR. THE PROBLEM IS THIS: TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN DRAMA AND NONDRAMA. LET ME BREAK-IT-DOWN-NOW.
EVERYONE IN CREATION IS SCREAMING AT US TO MAKE THE SHOW CLEAR. WE ARE TASKED WITH, IT SEEMS, CRAMMING A SHITLOAD OF INFORMATION INTO A LITTLE BIT OF TIME. OUR FRIENDS, THE PENGUINS, THINK THAT WE, THEREFORE, ARE EMPLOYED TO COMMUNICATE INFORMATION -- AND, SO, AT TIMES, IT SEEMS TO US.
BUT NOTE:THE AUDIENCE WILL NOT TUNE IN TO WATCH INFORMATION. YOU WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T. NO ONE WOULD OR WILL. THE AUDIENCE WILL ONLY TUNE IN AND STAY TUNED TO WATCH DRAMA.
QUESTION:WHAT IS DRAMA? DRAMA, AGAIN, IS THE QUEST OF THE HERO TO OVERCOME THOSE THINGS WHICH PREVENT HIM FROM ACHIEVING A SPECIFIC, ACUTE GOAL.
SO: WE, THE WRITERS, MUST ASK OURSELVES OF EVERY SCENE THESE THREE QUESTIONS.
WHO WANTS WHAT?
WHAT HAPPENS IF HER DON'T GET IT?
WHY NOW?
THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS ARE LITMUS PAPER. APPLY THEM, AND THEIR ANSWER WILL TELL YOU IF THE SCENE IS DRAMATIC OR NOT.
What makes the plot
EVERY SCENE MUST BE DRAMATIC.
THAT MEANS: THE MAIN CHARACTER MUST HAVE A SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD, PRESSING NEED WHICH IMPELS HIM OR HER TO SHOW UP IN THE SCENE. THIS NEED IS WHY THEY CAME. IT IS WHAT THE SCENE IS ABOUT. THEIR ATTEMPT TO GET THIS NEED MET WILL LEAD, AT THE END OF THE SCENE,TO FAILURE - THIS IS HOW THE SCENE IS OVER. IT, THIS FAILURE, WILL, THEN, OF NECESSITY, PROPEL US INTO THE NEXT SCENE.
ALL THESE ATTEMPTS, TAKEN TOGETHER, WILL, OVER THE COURSE OF THE EPISODE, CONSTITUTE THE PLOT. ANY SCENE, THUS, WHICH DOES NOT BOTH ADVANCE THE PLOT, AND STANDALONE (THAT IS, DRAMATICALLY, BY ITSELF, ON ITS OWN MERITS) IS EITHER SUPERFLUOUS, OR INCORRECTLY WRITTEN.
What about the exposition?
YES BUT YES BUT YES BUT, YOU SAY: WHAT ABOUT THE NECESSITY OF WRITING IN ALL THAT "INFORMATION?"
AND I RESPOND "FIGURE IT OUT"
ANY DICKHEAD WITH A BLUESUIT CAN BE (AND IS) TAUGHT TO SAY "MAKE IT CLEARER", AND "I WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT HIM".
WHEN YOU'VE MADE IT SO CLEAR THAT EVEN THIS BLUESUITED PENGUIN IS HAPPY, BOTH YOU AND HE OR SHE WILL BE OUT OF A JOB.
WE ARE NOT GETTING PAID TO REALIZE THAT THE AUDIENCE NEEDS THIS INFORMATION TO UNDERSTAND THE NEXT SCENE, BUT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WRITE THE SCENE BEFORE US SUCH THAT THE AUDIENCE WILL BE INTERESTED IN WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.
The “Danger Signals”
HERE ARE THE DANGER SIGNALS.
ANY TIME TWO CHARACTERS ARE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.
ANY TIME ANY CHARACTER IS SAYING TO ANOTHER "AS YOU KNOW", THAT IS, TELLING ANOTHER CHARACTER WHAT YOU, THE WRITER, NEED THE AUDIENCE TO KNOW, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.
DO NOT WRITE A CROCK OF SHIT. WRITE A RIPPING THREE, FOUR, SEVEN MINUTE SCENE WHICH MOVES THE STORY ALONG, AND YOU CAN, VERY SOON, BUY A HOUSE IN BEL AIR AND HIRE SOMEONE TO LIVE THERE FOR YOU. \
A trick: write silent
REMEMBER YOU ARE WRITING FOR A VISUAL MEDIUM. MOST TELEVISION WRITING, OURS INCLUDED, SOUNDS LIKE RADIO. THE CAMERA CAN DO THE EXPLAINING FOR YOU. LET IT. WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERS DOING -*LITERALLY*. WHAT ARE THEY HANDLING, WHAT ARE THEY READING. WHAT ARE THEY WATCHING ON TELEVISION, WHAT ARE THEY SEEING.
IF YOU PRETEND THE CHARACTERS CANT SPEAK, AND WRITE A SILENT MOVIE, YOU WILL BE WRITING GREAT DRAMA.
IF YOU DEPRIVE YOURSELF OF THE CRUTCH OF NARRATION, EXPOSITION,INDEED, OF SPEECH. YOU WILL BE FORGED TO WORK IN A NEW MEDIUM - TELLING THE STORY IN PICTURES (ALSO KNOWN AS SCREENWRITING)
Reminder: this is a skill, and it takes time
THIS IS A NEW SKILL.
NO ONE DOES IT NATURALLY. YOU CAN TRAIN YOURSELVES TO DO IT, BUT YOU NEED TO START.
I CLOSE WITH THE ONE THOUGHT: LOOK AT THE SCENE AND ASK YOURSELF "IS IT DRAMATIC? IS IT ESSENTIAL? DOES IT ADVANCE THE PLOT? ANSWER TRUTHFULLY.
IF THE ANSWER IS "NO" WRITE IT AGAIN OR THROW IT OUT.
The OGT: Use these questions to improve your story
Most of you aren’t screenwriters, but you all tell stories.
It’s obvious for me as a writer, but what about presenting a new investment to the board of your company? You’ll certainly want to use it if you have to speak at a wedding, or (god forbid) at a funeral. And, you’ll definitely want to know how to tell a story when relaying crazy thing that happened in the grocery store parking lot to a friend.
I’ve used Mamet’s three questions to rewrite a sales pitch, a presentation, a short speech, and in the introduction to a book I’m writing called foodwise (on how to get yourself to eat healthy, consistently, forever).
The first draft was mostly information. But, people who read a draft of it quickly explained to me more or less what Mamet said —any dickhead can write information. What we need is an interested reader, and readers are interested in drama.
So, rather than tell much about what happened,2 I’ve now changed it to a scene in which I really want something (to figure out how to eat healthy), and why I want it now (at first to be good a sports, then to impress people, and eventually because I want be my best). I continue to fail to get there, until I finally figure out a framework (a plot).
That’s how I used it (except, you know, by showing it).
How will you?
Mamet’s memo was in CAPS so I kept it that way for funzies
Ironically, I’m telling you about it now. Not great drama.