Hi,
Interesting debate here; let me make some additional points.
I always find the term underrepresentation problematic as it seems to suggest that there is an optimal level of representation that would demonstrate that the industry is not prejudicing opportunities for particular groups. The ineffectiveness of diversity policy in the UK film and TV industry pays testimony to this. I feel the pursuit of representation by numbers (quota ect) ultimately serves agendas that are not really indexed to the actual needs of the targeted groups. Surely the only premise is to commission on the merits of the actual script/scriptwriter?
Further, the idea that increased involvement of women screenwriters suggests (as you've alluded to) a gender group with a single set of interests. Surely the task of both HE and the industry should be to develop good screenwriters who are able to create engaging characters of any gender?
Whilst I don't agree with all that you state Julian (as you know), I do feel there is a disconnect in certain areas of HE screenwriting from the industry. Certainly from my own experience as a postgraduate student, an understanding of industry practice (what’s desired by commissioners, producers and agents, what kind of work actually sells) was not holistic. The nature of the industry is always difficult to translate in pedagogy.
Dr Clive James Nwonka
Research Assistant
Screenwriting, Film & TV
[log in to unmask]
07935965669
School of Arts
Brunel University
Kingston Lane
Uxbridge UB8 3P
________________________________
From: Screenwriting Research Network [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Susan [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 04 July 2014 14:50
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: the reality of screenwriters (Bringing `Theory & Practice' Together)
Hi Julian and all,
Re the challenges for, and problems experienced by, female screenwriters.... thanks for the link Kersten. I know Helen and her excellent work. I was interested to hear Julian cite family/domestic commitments as a barrier (or the barrier?) to women screenwriters in the industry.That women shoulder most of the domestic and caring work ('love labour') is undoubtedly an important aspect of their exclusion or marginalization in many fields, not just screenwriting. While not denying such responsibilities are a significant impediment to the career of female screenwriters I think they are more problematic for female directors, for instance. There are other obstacles that I believe are even more problematic.
I'm presently researching the dramatic underrepresented of Irish female screenwriters and while it's a worldwide problem...some countries (Sweden, for instance - as I'm sure you know, Louise) have put strategies in place to support, encourage and facilitate women to gain a foothold in the industry -and, importantly, to build on early successes. The first port of call is an open acknowledgement that there is indeed a big problem. Unless there are statistics to work with, the problem can actually be denied or minimized. This is something I have been struggling with in an Irish context where there has not been statistical information recorded at all. Often the issue is not framed as a problem. Just business as usual. The way things are.
But I believe it is not only an equality issue for a film industry, its a question of including a range of voices with a range of stories to tell. I know that its unhelpful to pigeon-hole female writers by ascribing particular genre competences to them. Nonetheless, greater numbers of female filmmakers tend to translate into greater number of female characters onscreen. This has emerged in the work of Smith and Lauzen re Hollywood and in my work on narratives written by Irish female screenwriters it emerged that women screenwriters overwhelmingly choose a female protagonist.
Women's stories are often dismissed as 'television' and too 'small' for the cinema. There are value judgements of this kind being made all the time about the kinds of stories that should be told and the kinds of stories an audience want to see. Yet UK research (UK Film Council/ BFI) would suggest that commissioners sometimes don't always feel the wind of change. Cinema audience are aging and couples are attending in greater numbers. We no longer need to dance to the tune of a perceived young male audience. But producers tell you its a risky business and there is an element of playing safe involved that doesn't always work in favour of women screenwriters. Susan
Dr. Susan Liddy
Department Media and Communciations MIC (UL)
________________________________
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2014 09:27:11 +0000
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: the reality of screenwriters (Bringing `Theory & Practice' Together)
To: [log in to unmask]
As someone primarily interested in practice not theory I would like to make the following points:
1. Professional scriptwriters, agents, script readers are very uninterested in theory. It would seem that it is either user unfriendly or simply does not lead to better screenwriting. My favourite eg of theorists being out if touch with the real world is the academic who suggested that writers would write better if not forced to use Courier 12 Point.
2. Academics who once were screenwriters are more out of touch than they think. Even a busy agency with 50+ active screenwriters has trouble keeping up with the industry's desperate scramble to find new ways of working.
3. In my experience women find the unpredictable nature if a screenwriting career (esp film, less so TV) difficult to balance with the male expectation that the females take care of house, children. Until men fully share the domestic burden it will be more difficult for women.
Julian
Julian Friedmann
Blake Friedmann Literary Agency
Www.blakefriedmann.co.uk<http://Www.blakefriedmann.co.uk>
+44 20 7387 0842
+44 7949 652 111
On 4 Jul 2014, at 09:55, "Kerstin Stutterheim" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Hi
that's really an odd discussion - to split practice and 'theory' again and again and to set up fronts against each other. Thank you Steven for your well thought and written mail on that!
I totally agree that we should - especially in research on screenwriting - try to work together close and ignore that gab, old odd disapproval..., this gap makes us less powerful and is hindering creativity.
To the other part of the discussion about gender and identity in movies and audiovisual media - it is not most of all a problem of writing and writers, but much more due to a male dominated and power as well as money related production and distribution world, what makes good female writers and directors less visible or what gives them less chances. What about a screenwriting department with 100 % male Profs for 50/50 students? Or a production department with 100% male profs and few female lecturers in addition. There it starts.
Also in film history some important women are often forgotten to mention, like Alice Guy-Blaché, Maya Deren... to name just the better known ones.
thus, please check your sources by counting and writing statements...
here a book I'd like to recommend to you, most of you will already not that and say I'd come out of the "Mustopf" = mush pot, like we say in German;
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9111041-the-woman-in-the-story
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_eZAtVJxVk
And JT, don't you think it is great that some aspects can't be defined complete for ever and ever? The aspects you are counting are as difficult to define as love and as documentary, like Nicholson put it already (in: introduction to documentary). What do you understand as 'good' topics? What about important topics? And that depends of the individual and her circumstances. There is and can't be a global hit-list for scientists or researcher or artists to become famous, what ever that means... I do like science / research and the openness of thinking this is offering.
But were I do completely agree - mixed teams of man and women are more effective and more creative. Thus, we should get a better balance in all levels of industry and academic work.
Let's continue with a 50 % male / 50 % female board of our network. Thus we, SRN, are ahead!
see you soon in Potsdam, at the now upgraded Film University Babelsberg Konrad Wolf, and continue to keep an eye on our postings.
best
Kerstin
JT Velikovsky <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> , 04.07.2014 1:29:
Hi Hugo, and, All,
In my view - one way to bring Theory and Practice together is, pick a real-world important Domain Problem, and solve it (or, solve a part of it).
e.g.: Say a real-world problem like - Women screenwriters being under-represented/obstructed/held-back, in industry (as Susan just mentioned)
- It's good to have a `Big List of Unsolved Domain Problems', in any Creative Domain (that Field agrees on, as: being Problems).
(Say, in Physics, or Chemistry, Biology, Maths, Social Sciences, Arts, Music, History, Humanities, ... or even Screenwriting, etc)
That way scholars can also know: "What are really good topics to pick for PhD's?" Or, topics to publish a book - or a journal article on, (etc).
(And, if they manage to solve a `hard problem', they might get famous, or rich, or, something. And, not just in academic circles...)
eg:
- In Philosophy, it's a scandal they haven't solved the problem of Free Will (ie - Do we have it, or not?) [so, Neurobiology is solving it, instead, for now...]
- In Sociology (and even Anthropology), it's a scandal that there's no Standard Definition of the word `Culture'. (There's about 200 definitions of it, and no consensus on what, exactly, it is. That Domain is a complete mess... Part of the problem is: no-one's scientifically defined the Meme, the unit of culture.)
- In Maths, `Problem #8 - The Riemann hypothesis' is still unsolved, after 100 years of people trying. No scandal, it's just really hard to do.
- Also, in Science, Maths and Engineering, women are also very under-represented (ie, held back).
Best
JT
-----------------------------------
And - The Long & Detailed Version - of The Above
So, in rambling email-essay form, I'd suggest, there's also one other way that `Theory and Practice' can work together.
Pick a real-world important Domain Problem, and solve it (or, solve a part of it).
Also - I'm afraid it may sound insane, at first.
This is the insane-sounding part:
- If you go here, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert's_problems<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert%27s_problems>) and scroll down (about halfway), you'll see a Table, of "Hilbert's 23 Unsolved Domain Problems", (and, you can see exactly which of those Problems have now been solved, and in which year, they were solved.)
ie - He presented a list of `23 key Problems' at a Conference, and it gave the entire Creative Domain (in that case, the domain of: Mathematics) a focus.
(Some of the `23 Problems' are still `too hard to solve' as yet, and - have thus, still not yet been (re)solved by that creative Field, even 100 years on -- as you can see from the `Table' there.)
[And, Apologies for a Wikipedia link, but - it's the only place with, an easy-to-read Table]
And - This part (slowly) gets slightly-less-insane, the more you read on:
So, with that in mind, I actually created 2 x Surveys a few years ago (one short, one long), to find out (from the Academic Field of Screenwriting) what: The Biggest Domain Problems in Screenwriting, are.
(Mostly, inspired by Ian W Macdonald's excellent 2004 PhD thesis, which I think, identifies about 20 x of the Problems).
eg: The 2 x Surveys are here, if it's of interest. http://storyality.wordpress.com/surveys/
(But I don't suggest anyone takes it, as I haven't gotten Ethics Clearance for it yet, so, I couldn't conduct it in academia nor publish the results academically until then, anyway. Though, seeing the actual List of Problems may be inspiring. - Or, not.
It may also be: super-depressing. Maybe, these are all the problems you face every day, as a Screenwriter.)
So - It's sometimes good (ie helpful) to see a big list of the "Key Domain Problems" (as voted by, the consensus of: the whole Field).
That way, people (eg - researchers, students, independent scholars, or anyone) in that Field (the People) and Domain (the Knowledge) can see (and, perhaps agree): What are perhaps, some good topics for a PhD, say.
Or, what anyone might want to try solving, if they're crazy enough to try.
(And - likewise, what are `very hard problems' - maybe, to avoid - if you maybe don't want to make life, too difficult for yourself.)
Ironically, in many Creative domains, often, it's "newcomers" to a field that solve key problems mainly as, they don't know what `rules'/conventions they are `breaking', or doxa they are accidentally ignoring - by thinking so radically `outside the box'.
Also, combining ideas - from another Creative Domain - very often results in, a creative breakthrough.
eg: Csikszentmihalyi in Creativity (1996), p88-9: (a consilient survey of nearly 100 x eminent `big-c' Creative people)
“An intellectual problem is not restricted to a particular domain. Indeed, some of the most creative breakthroughs occur when an idea that works well in one domain gets grafted to another and revitalizes it. This was certainly the case with the widespread applications of physics’ quantum theory to neighbouring disciplines like chemistry and astronomy. Creative people are ever alert to what people over the fence are doing… A large majority of our respondents were inspired by a tension in their domain that became obvious when looked at from the perspective of another domain. Even though they do not think of themselves as interdisciplinary, their best work bridges realms of ideas. Their histories tend to cast doubts on the wisdom of overspecialization, where bright young people are trained to become exclusive experts in one field and shun breadth like the plague.’ (Csikszentmihalyi 1996: 88-9)
So - I suggest, Solving a `real-world problem' in a Domain, is one way to: Bring Theory and Practice, very much, together...
Usually, even some of the General Public can vaguely understand it, when `A Very Big Problem' has been solved, in a creative Domain. (Science, the Arts)
(It usually changes the Domain for the better somehow, and then the Field can all move on, to work on: other, `deeper' - or, maybe just `different' problems.)
- Of course, in a very-highly-structured creative symbolic Domain like, say Maths, (or, Physics, or Chemistry, or say Biology) where, there's often only one solution (or else, most experts in the Field, can usually easily tell, if it's a "wrong" solution) -- it's a lot easier to tell if the problem is solved.
ie Someone `curing cancer' in the domain of Biology is: Newsworthy. (And also, even Nobel-Prize worthy.)
Though - in less-highly-structured creative Domains, like say, The Arts/Humanities (eg: Movies, tv, games, screenwriting, novels, songs, poems, painting, comics, theatre, history, philosophy etc) the Domain problems are often firstly, trickier to identify --- and, tricky for others to actually understand/agree that, these are, actually, a Big Problem.
(Not everyone experiences all the exact-same Problems in their career.)
But, there certainly are a few things that many people tend to agree on as Problems, moreso than other Problems.
Anyway - I have an article that I submitted to a journal, on this (still being reviewed.)
In it, I suggested a list of `32 Key Problems in the Domain of Screenwriting'...
But, in theory, anyone in the Field could suggest a number of Domain Problems.
Problems they either have experienced, or, can clearly see, are a Problem for others.
The trick is to find out, what the Field in general sees (and, agrees) are, the Key Problems...
As - Creativity (at least -- according to the scientific research in the domain of Psychology) involves the Creative: Person, Process, Product, Place, and Persuasion (maybe even Potential)...
(For a reference see the chapter: `THEORIES OF CREATIVITY, pp 20-48, here:
The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (2010)
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=1EBT3Qj5L5EC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false)
(see also specifically: "FOUR OR SIX P's of CREATIVITY", on p24)
Also - If `the majority' (at least 40%, oddly) of a Field is not persuaded that a certain Problem is indeed, a Problem, then - for the Field, it's not...
(they ignore it - or, just don't worry about it, as a whole)
But - I'd certainly add to the list (of "32 Key Domain problems in Screenwriting, and also - a Key Domain Problem in Film"), the one that Susan just mentioned: The under-representation of Women/Females, and, all the obstructions they can face...
That `Very Big Problem' can be `broken out' into a list of smaller `component problems' (eg Specific problems, that women face, at each stage of the creative process, in screenwriting/film.)
Then, once identified, each Problem can potentially, be addressed.
(- Whether it is later, solved, is another matter. The point is, to try.)
- If someone solved that Big Problem (eg - under-representation of Women screenwriters) it might well be a major `breakthrough', that
(1) made (creative) life easier for a lot of Women, and (2) probably would also make more Men, feel less-guilty, about the whole situation... (for example)
Anyway - that's one way to - perhaps - bring `Theory' and `Practice' closer together:
ie - Have a `big list' of Key Domain Problems (derived from: Problems, in practice.)
And also, have the Field all vote on, which of the listed Problems they feel are important (or even, `easy', or `hard' or: `impossible!').
(And also, add in any `new'/discovered/`found' Problems that come along as time passes, and as things change and evolve.)
Also, if you have a Field/Domain where, just a lot of people (scholars) are `working quietly away, and not talking to each other, much', then two or more of them might be trying to solve the same Problem, without even knowing it;
If they know (communicate about it) - they also might decide to co-operate instead of (even, unknowingly) compete.
And thus, might solve it together, much quicker...
(But then they have to "share the glory evenly", like say Watson & Crick discovering the structure of the DNA molecule. Or, Darwin & Wallace, even though they independently `discovered' Evolution...)
So - `Problem-Finding', and, `Problem-Shaping' comes into it when making:
A Big List of Problems That Somebody Really Ought To Solve To Make Life Easier For Us All, In Practice. (eg As Screenwriters, Filmmakers, etc)
So - that's actually 90% of finding an Answer/Solution (ie - Posing the right, or at least, a `good' question.)
For more on all of that -- see Csikszentmihalyi's work on Creative Problem-Finding & Solving; Eva Novrup Redvall's work in that area of screenwriting; and Ian W Macdonald's PhD thesis, for essentially, a huge list of well-identified `Domain Problems in Screenwriting'. (That 2004 research was conducted in the UK - but having worked in both Hollywood and Australia, I can say many of the problems Ian identified are `universal' in screenwriting; not all of them are nationally, or culturally-specific. - Then again, I don't know about: non-native English speaking European cultures. Am sure they have their own Culturally-specific problems.)
Anyway, so - it sounds crazy, when you talk to Screenwriters about Maths. (and how the `Domain problems' are similar.)
(But - Koestler showed how Creativity works the same in: the Arts, Sciences and even Humour, in, 1964: The Act of Creation)
And Professors Csikszentmihalyi (1988, 1996) and Simonton (2004, 2011) did the same (more or less, in Koestler's footsteps), with the DIFi systems model of Creativity...
So (in broad view) it's just looking at another Creative Domain - and, seeing how they solved their own problems, early on, in their Emergence/Evolution as a Field, and as a Domain.
Given that the First International Maths Conference was in 1900, and, that by comparison, the first International Academic Screenwriting Research Network conference was in: 2008...
As a Creative Domain, in terms of our Cultural Evolution, we're about: 100 years `behind' the Domain of Maths...
But - now have the internet. (Thanks to: Creativity/Innovation)
If we blatantly steal any or even all of their Creativity `shortcuts' from Maths or any other domain - ie - shortcuts that actually worked - it might just work, in this Domain too... and we might even catch up, or even overtake them, in about 10-20 years. (Who knows.)
Or - of course, it could be a bad idea to look at other Creative Domains across History, and see how they solved the same Problems...
But, there seems to be a general trend in The Academy towards: Consilience/Interdisciplinary thinking, at the moment. (I hear those words a lot at conferences...)
So - Who knows - It might have some benefits... (Crazy, but it just might work, etc etc)
Anyway so - that's - maybe - one way, to bring `Theory and Practice' together.
eg - If `Theorists' solve a Big Problem (or even, many Little Problems) that then, helps a lot of `Practitioners' in "the real world".
(Whatever that term, "real world" means.)
Cheers
JT
PS - And then, there's lots of other ways, of bringing Theory and Practice together, too -- that are all just as important.
eg - Everything Steven (Maras) just said... (all just in my opinion, though)
--
-----------------------
JT Velikovsky
Film/Story/Screenplay/Transmedia Analyst
http://storyality.wordpress.com/
and Transmedia Writer-Director-Producer:
Movies, Games, TV, Theatre, Books, Comics
Transmedia Writing Blog: http://on-writering.blogspot.com/
Free Screenwriting TextBook: http://www.lulu.com/shop/joe-velikovsky/feature-film-screenwriters-workbook/ebook/product-20376941.html
Transmedia Comic-Fantasy Novel: http://am-so-as.webs.com/
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Also: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Skype: joe.tee.vee
Twitter: @joeteevee
Imdb: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2853350/
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/joeteevee
aka: JT Velikovsky
Research Student & Filmmaker
Doctorate of Creative Arts - Feature Film / Screenwriting
School of Humanities and Communication Arts
University of Western Sydney
http://uws.academia.edu/JTVelikovsky/
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been checked for known viruses
On 3/07/2014 10:57 PM, Vercauteren Hugo wrote:
But theory and practice should become a team… to overcome internal conflicts. Not easy. Easy to say. Difficult to do.
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
