Amateur = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur
He will not read your F*ing script
- Thread starter ChipG
- Start date
If you have never been cornered into something by professional, personal or emotional pressure (in fact, I wonder at your missing the part of the article wherein he explains precisely how he was pressured, and why he felt obliged to read...) then you have led a remarkably charmed life - particularly in the entertainment business, where people endlessly try to presume upon you to favor them with something-or-other that they think will be useful to them.
Maybe you're just fortunate enough to be in a position where people don't look upon you as the guy from whom they want that sort of favor.
Maybe you're just fortunate enough to be in a position where people don't look upon you as the guy from whom they want that sort of favor.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
The Wife and I do seminars for photographers. So, yes I understand 'being cornered'. But you know what... to date I've not published a proclaimation stating that "I will not review your fu*king photo in the halls, or in the garage, or at the vallet stand", in journals or internet sites where such persons may be found.
If I am in a hallway, and someone 'corners' me, I will be polite and say I have a meeting, dinner, restroom call, whatever is the actual truth of the situation. But often I may give a few words, and sometimes, have to search for the least 'negative', or at least one thing 'positive' to say.
There are others on the seminar circuit who are not so polite... and guess what, I don't particularlly care for them or their attitude either, whatever their artistic merits may be.
The Wife has even had people ask for reviews at her gallery exhibitions... and she is quite polite, and will often give a short review.
One need not be an as*hole, even if one does have something going for one's self.
Now that I think of it... I was once at a reading by Werner Herzog at the Goethe Institute in LA. A guy sitting next to me had a shief of papers, and told me, as we were waiting for the reading to start, that he was going to hand this 'project' idea to Mr. Herzog... I watched, Herzog politely declined acceptance... no big ad in Variety the next day, week, whatever, (pre-internet days...), about how as a famous film director/writer/producer he was beset with people trying to pitch their project, script, idea...
As for hallway 'reviews', The Wife one time got a hallway review from Arnold Newman. Newman gave The Wife his card and phone number and a general invite of 'if you're ever in New York, we can spend more time'... as it was he died before she could take him up on his offer...
These are sort of role models of 'luminaries' I have in my mind, rather than petulent whiners.
I think you ought to read the article again, for comprehension. Because the content of the article makes explicitly clear that the inspiration for the rant was not some random person buttonholing the author in a hallway and asking him to read their material and comment briefly, on the spot.
I mean, yeah, righteous twisted-panty indignation is fun, but why not actually parse the target to see if it's even relevant? You're complaining about something that's not even in the text of the article.
I mean, yeah, righteous twisted-panty indignation is fun, but why not actually parse the target to see if it's even relevant? You're complaining about something that's not even in the text of the article.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
I read the article and have refered back to it several times. Each time, I have no further clue why Olson felt a need to make a public announcement for an incident which apparently, by his own admission was due to a 'connection' based on 'knowing someone, who knew someone, etc., etc.'. He did not say in his article that he was being chased out of the Hip Bagel every afternoon by a horde of anonymous scriptwriters, and for which a general notice to the world at large may be a justifiable... the 'introduction' was by one of those tenuous connections that some set of people have been successful in playing upon, to get their 'foot in the door'.
I'll bet Olson used one such, or several such, to get into the position of being the 'pestered put upon writer'...
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
From http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/amateur
3) Someone who is unqualified or insufficiently skillful.
I don't think Olson's usage of 'amature' based on either of, and more neutral:
1. (obsolete) A lover of something.
2. A person attached to a particular pursuit, study, or science as to music or painting; esp. one who cultivates any study or art, from taste or attachment, without pursuing it professionally.
His description of the aspiring writer's behavior, experience, and quality-of-work certainly underwrites that definition (#3) and it's perfectly fair to apply. Why does he have to be 'neutral?' He's a professional and is qualified to offer a professional assessment of what he sees.
I'm sure Josh had this incredible amount of personal freedom that overcame him after writing the article.
From now on he can focus on his work without his phone ringing "Hey man, will you read my script". You guys think he is scouring the boards listening to what people are saying? ha ha ha ha. He has better things to do and could care less.
Freewill with a built in purpose, it really is a *****. Ha ha ha ha
From now on he can focus on his work without his phone ringing "Hey man, will you read my script". You guys think he is scouring the boards listening to what people are saying? ha ha ha ha. He has better things to do and could care less.
Freewill with a built in purpose, it really is a *****. Ha ha ha ha
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
If you can't tell the difference between:
'aspiring writer', that is someone whose skill may not be full developed, or perhaps demonstrably lacking at this time...
and
'amateur', someone who is incompetent, or unskilled...
then perhaps Mr. Olson is a wonderful writer...
He could have left his 'review' with 'I don't think you are ready yet, as the skill demonstrated is not up to what I consider to be professional standards.'...
Instead he claims he agonized over a response, eventually gets a cursory 'thanks from the Writer X', and gives a public rant, using words, in my opinion, which are not 'value/judgement' neutral.
Why does he have to be 'neutral'... of course he doesn't, and I don't have to be neutral in judging his behavior either.
As a note, unless you are Josh, or Writer X, neither you nor I have any basis to judge whether the synopsis submitted, if it exists, was of 'D' quality, as would be given by <any competent English instructor>... of course the operative word there is 'competent'...
So, all we have is the rantings of someone outraged, for whatever reasons.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
No, I just argue that this sort of thing is on par with the 5 year old pissing in the corner when guests arrive... just because he can...
Freewill is a *****...
I'd be willing to bet he was laughing his ass off when he wrote it vs. being outraged. Just my personal opinion.
Last edited:
I don't know what leads you to conclude that it is impossible to be both aspiring - as in wanting to do something - and to be an amateur at it, simultaneously.
*shrug* I found A History to be well-written.
It's an entertainment piece. Did you really miss that so completely...?
Difference is, you're not a professional of equivalent or greater standing in his field, evaluating his performance relevant to professional merit. You just don't care for what you take to be his manners.
For the purpose of a fun little rant-article, I'm content to take the successful professional's word.
He made his reasons exquisitely clear. I don't know how you manage to miss them, unless you're indulging in a rant of your own.
Scott F
Pug Life
Right, I forgot you are a Stern fan.
Now if I hear that you're only listening to one hour of Stern a week, then I'm going to be upset.
On that note, I don't know how I got sucked into this ilk in the first place, especially since I'm no screenwriter. I'm much more comfortable with Win Fred's Money, The Amish Game and World's Strongest Naked Woman.
Scott F
Pug Life
There's no way he's got time to surf the net. He's too busy reading hacky scripts.
Ryan, links to those quotes, please.
Lots of people have missed the boat on his article because they are offended by the tone.
There will be some indie writers out there that this article will really make them think twice and be inspired to not have a shi*ty script, no one will ever again describe a smell (for however many paragraphs he said
). Best rant ever, problem is lot's of educated people are having a hard time getting to the meat.I'm not sure how I or others can get an education from a 5 year old pissing, I already know how to piss.
Detach yourself emotionally from it, if you can, it's what successful people in any industry have to do to "see the light".
Follow the light
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
I don't care for Don Rickles form of rip someone apart style of 'humor', never have. I always thought someone from the audience should have torn Rickles a new one... but they probably had bouncers for that sort of attempt...
I did not read Olson's use of 'amateur' to have the same sense as say, 'The Amateur Radio Operators of America' sense, and as such, an aspiring ham, may also be classed as an 'amateur'...
As a 'professional' writer, I think this piece was lacking in several respects. One was his appeal to 'Picasso'. The analogy did not work. In the Picasso story, Picasso was asked to create a work, that had value in and of itself as a work of art. In the Olson Story, he was just asked to 'review' and 'comment' on another's work, which only had value to the producer of the work critiqued... or only value as a part of the postmortem 'Collected Works of Josh Olson'... should there ever be such.
Two vastly different categories of output... unless of course Olson thinks of his 'reviews' as having the same artistic weight as his scriptwriting... or Olson really is setting up to become a professional script guru... but at the moment he is a rank amateur and ought to keep his amateurish outbursts, I mean critiques, to himself...
As for 'criticizing a pro', while not being a 'pro' in that category of work... I do have a model, and I listed some examples of professional responses in the 'art or entertainment' world, and I can point out that Olson's behavior does not correspond to those models that I appreciate for the entertainment world.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
....
no one will ever again describe a smell (for however many paragraphs he said
On a completely different tangent...
One of the problems I had with the movie 'Das Parfum'(2006), was the entire story centered on an individual and his 'sense of smell'... There was Voice Over, there were nasal ECU shots, there were cues for 'he's smelling something now', 'he's tracking a faint oder now', etc. and reenforced by V.O...
'Das Parfum' didn't do so well, and I don't know if it was soley because of the intranslateableness of 'smell' to 'screen'...
But in any case, if there was a synopsis written for the script... I'm sure it had some number of paragraphs devoted to 'smell', and ways to communicate that visually. Perhaps Writer X had never heard of 'Das Parfum', the novel, or the film... so was at a loss as to how to handle this subject in a form that was visualizable...
So, from my 'educated' point of view, Mr. Olson's rant was not directed to 'uplifting', or 'increasing the current state of the art'... otherwise, in my opinion, he would have written his 'complaint' in a much different fashion.
For example, I recall reading an article on Wordplayer, and unfortunately I've forgotten the link, nor which of Elliott or Rossio wrote it... but The Story was 'someone asked me to read their script who was not in the business'... It was not filled with excoriations and explicatives. The 'punchline' was not that the fellow had written a mediocre script, but he told the pro, that he had not gone with 'the really good idea' that was his next writing project, which he then described. (sort of one of those typical 'amateur' errors...). The pro's response was the guy had just let the cat out of the bag, as one's 'idea' is the gold... the script is just a technical vehicle to communicate The Idea...
As I said, I can't refer to the article at the moment, so my recall may be a bit hazy... (now I'll have to go research that...ugh...)
But the impression I got was the pro author was acknowledging their pro position, writing the annecdote for the edification of 'aspiring writer', with an eye to improving the general state of the art.
Olson's rant does none of that.
dougspice
Veteran
Something about your writing style leads me to believe you have run it more than once through an automated translator, to achieve the bizarre inscrutable poetry that infects every line – or perhaps you are in a room with a significantly higher percentage of lithium vapor than is typical. I think that I like it, but I know that I can't understand it.