By that, I include posts on the forum and entering the competition that was TPTT.
The last couple of days have made me realise things that I regret, things that I most certainly don’t regret and interpretations I didn’t intend and now regret.
Mine:
The Competition: I regret that I hadn’t learnt the rules regarding synopses. I love cliff-hangers; they make me want to know more when I read them – but to pitch a play, I realise that producers/directors don’t like surprises; they need to need everything right now!
I regret telling the production team that Denim (one of the plays I entered) was based on my life experience – as I feel that it makes the play feel less credible/realistic to a reader (as thouggh I was playing on the fact that only I can feel those emotions).
Posts I regret a post I made saying that Lewes was no loss to the forum. I was angry about a comment made and blurted out a response that was far from what I feel in normality, but only reflected what I felt at the time.
I regret that I was interpreted as criticising a play that I haven’t seen; when I was ‘attempting’ to say that it was the ‘marketing’ (including the press reviews) that made/make me feel that that it was addressing too many ‘dark’ ‘issues’.
[/b]No Regrets[/b] The PhilStien/Neil Pearson debate. (Although I am very angry with ‘Production Team’ and the moderators.) I know that Mr Pearson will never talk to me again; but having nearly been trapped by a publishing scammer and watching others being burnt on other forums, I thought that it was my ‘duty’ to protect TPTT members from taking professional advice/opinions from an unverified member.
Other Regerts The fact that I love semi colons too much… The fact that I love en dashes too much… The fact that I love ellipsis too much…(whoops!) That I say ‘From my point’ too much… That I escape here too often when I feel the niggle of writers’ block… That we all can’t get together and have a damned fine p*** up…
I've come to the conclusion that I could have taken a hell of a lot less time over my entry and submitted two very different synopses which would have stood a much greater chance of meeting SF's need for 'theatricality'; synopses for plays I didn't actually WANT to write but COULD have written; but I didn't know then what I know now; and I don't regret not having done so. Would I be more careful next time? Maybe.
I've had a couple of interesting arguments with people here; but I feel as much sinned against as sinning, and I think acid and alkali were designed to counteract each other; there were times when others could not see my point nor I theirs, and we could have both shut up; and I don't regret not having done so. Would I be more careful next time? Maybe.
I've learned some things about writing; about myself; about the things going on around me in my life; and I don't regret anything.
I think that some of the saddest sentences in the world start "If only I'd...".
I am sure the advice given to all writers is good here.Know your market! But in truth having said that how could anyone really predict exactly what kind of play the trio were looking for. Now the professional readers,each with 50 plays to report on must have been given some guidelines? Excluding stuff that was illegible, illiterate,etc., there must have been some no nos e.g. political plays,science fiction( remember the disaster that was Metropolis),frothy comedies perhaps. What was clear was that the final thirty were not so hot and the final ten in SFs own words were "unproducable". Did this mean that some good plays were junked early on because they failed to meet certain predetermined criteria? Or was the overall standard so utterly deplorable? What is clear is that Sonia played a hunch on an idea for a play and having chosen that "play" all the rest was playing games, largely for the sake of the TV programme. After all they were/have obviously been involved in underwriting the West End show. 200 tickets at £10 each per night? It wouldn't pay for the Front of House cleaners never mind anyone else. Someone was picking up the tab for this abomination to get seven weeks. The "angels" were either reckless or fools, if they exist? Or is this just another myth, like the many others surrounding the project. We shall never know.
I am sure the advice given to all writers is good here.Know your market! But in truth having said that how could anyone really predict exactly what kind of play the trio were looking for.
PW2005 - Right and wrong, I think!
Yes, critically, know your market; given the choice to write to my own brief I write comedy; Cowerd's Star Quality, Cooney's Funny Money or even (God help me) Ayckbourn's Bedroom Farce are in my favourites list. And I believe I know the market for that.
But with TPTT we had TWO markets to worry about; yes, we had to be able to write for our audience but we also had to be able to submit to catch SF's eye (the other judges only being, in my humble opinion, supporting cast to SF's starring role).
And with hindsight, looking at SF's career and pre-comp comments, it was always likely that the winner would be somewhat dark and controversial, probably risky in some way! Even if it had comedic undertones - it was never going to be No Sex Please We're British!
Egrets, I've seen a few; Since I retired here to the coast. And yes, I've killed one or two With nets and traps, I'm proud to boast
I plan each bird's demise My busy week, Monday to Friday, These gulls who from the skies Crap on my driveway.
Then my mate Vince said it could be fun To borrow Barry's 12 bore gun. And now, I bring 'em down By firing leadshot all around. So, yes, I have to say I've shot 'em myyyy waaaayyyyy.
I LOVE Bedroom Farce. Was always a bit disappointed with Coward's "Star Quality" though - it's not a patch on "Private Lives" (my absolute favourite play of all time).
MrsR - I've seen Bedroom Farce twice; once very low-skill amateur, and once very pro. The former was rotten and the second brilliant, but there's a link here to one of SF's bugbears - "theatricality".
Having seen it performed twice, it seemed to me that if it's paced fast, not giving the audience too long to think, the dialogue comes across as brilliantly observed and the jokes very funny - but, with exactly the same script, paced wrong, it was dire! Because there's not that much action - no 'events' as SF might think! - it relies on the actors and their pace to get the dialogue humming.
Star Quality - I suppose I have a fondness for that just because of the main characters and plot (for anyone else - it's about a first-time playwright getting caught up in conflict between a temperamental actress and a star). True, it's not a sidesplitter; but then, I absolutely can't stand The Importance Of Being Earnest, and everyone else seems to think it's brilliant!
Trust me - unless you like references to handbags, it isn't remotely funny! There are as yet undiscovered tribal witchdoctors in South America that can write funnier stageplays!
* AdMan bares teeth, whoops a bit, grabs a stick and bangs a rock *
Pull Shapes - would be very interested to know more about your entry. There were a handful of the top ten we barely saw anything about - were you one of those, or one of the more featured writers?
Hello everyone, yes, don't mind saying who I am. My entry was "Rose Coloured". Have popped into the forum now and again: more "taking a peek" - there's me with my outrageous talk - rather than "lurking".
