A bit of housekeeping first. This is a new section of the newsletter. If you don’t want to receive it, you can opt out of it via your subscription management page.
I am a failed writer in the sense that I have never had my fiction professionally published. These posts, which will run on most Fridays, are an attempt to keep myself creatively motivated and just generally discuss the creative process from someone trying to figure it out. I genuinely love the process of making things — any things, from writing to drawing to music to woodworking to baking. Maybe my own failures can be a source of amusement or interest to others.
Cole Haddon is a screenwriter and novelist (Psalms for the End of the World is an excellent book) who runs one of the most interesting newsletters in the creative space. In it he discusses the power of art, the business of writing, and conducts excellent interviews with writers working in TV and movies. Anyone who is interested in how TV and movies are made, how art affects us, and just the creative process in general should subscribe.
Mr. Haddon consented to a short interview over email, focused mostly on the differences between US and non-US TV productions. The interview below has been edited for organization and clarity. I hope you enjoy.
KC: I have gotten the impression from your interviews and general writing that you prefer the UK version of TV writing -- smaller seasons, generally written by one person. Is that a purely artistic decision -- do you feel that such shows tell better stories, generally, than their US commercial counterparts? If so, why?
CH: To be honest, I prefer most TV markets outside of the United States. That’s counterintuitive, because the US is supposed to be this font of Peak TV and wealth. But I crave authorship, which is in greater abundance in the UK, in particular. Smaller seasons are also more appealing to me, as a storyteller. I’m not a giant fan of protracted writers’ rooms either, as you find them in the States. A month is about the limits of my patience for them, though I have made exceptions for projects I really appreciate.
KC: Given that a significant portion of the WGA strike was focused on creating guaranteed staff sizes in writers rooms, do you feel that was an inappropriate ask considering how non-US shows are made, or was that necessary given how US shows staff?
CH: It was absolutely appropriate to how Hollywood produces TV series, and I’m glad we won the fight for this there. There are many differences between the US TV model and other countries’, chief amongst them how much money it generates and how many TV series and hours of TV are produced. Writers whose labor produces that much wealth should benefit enough from it to actually keep roofs over their heads. In addition, that prolificity requires a vibrant training ground to produce more writers. Guaranteed staff sizes helped people pay their bills, yes, but the more important victory, in my mind, is ensuring there will be enough skilled writers to continue this work generation after generation. We saved US TV, as far as I’m concerned.
KC: One of the unanticipated (at least by management) downsides of outsourcing in my industry was the breaking of the junior to senior pipeline. In smaller or even singular writing rooms, such as are common outside the US, how do you mentor/teach the next generation of writers and show runners?
CH: It’s a tough question, because smaller rooms do result in fewer writers acquiring the necessary skills to run their own rooms in the future. I’ve tried to embrace a personal philosophy of not necessarily mentorship, but allyship. I make myself available to every writer I’ve worked with. I check in on them. I offer them guidance, when they need it, for whatever my guidance is worth. I suppose the solution, in my mind, is to foster a culture of artist-on-artist support – which requires community, something that isn’t a strong suit of most TV cultures outside of the States.
KC: Similar question around diversity -- with the rooms being essentially one or two people, how do you find space for voices that haven't traditionally been welcomed into TV/movies?
CH: Small rooms change the dynamics of rooms dramatically, sometimes making organic diversity in them much more difficult. I think the better solution depends more on what type of creators the networks/streamers are commissioning series from. The more diverse TV series are, in terms of perspectives, the more opportunities there will be across the board for diverse perspectives to be represented.
KC: Since you have worked with both American and UK productions, can you talk about some of the collaboration differences? What are the biggest differences in producing shows/movies between the two systems?
CH: I think there’s a significant difference between how UK producers view writers and how US producers view us. In the UK, writers are the most important part of the project. They are the visionary. They’re also only put in that position because, it’s assumed, they can do the job. Producers there aren’t interested in telling them how to do their job, at least from my experience; instead, they’re interested in helping them do their job at levels they might not have imagined they were capable of. In the US, I’ve always felt writers are seen as a dime a dozen. We’re expected to somehow be authors and utterly compliant to notes we mortally oppose. I honestly don’t know how great material gets produced there, even though it obviously does.
KC: Lots of advice to writers who have yet to sell is what I think of as the "save the cat" imperative -- you must hit certain beats and you must hit them at certain moments or your piece will be rejected out of hand if you are a beginner. Then there is what I think of as the "kill the dog" argument, from the book of the same title, that voice is what matters, that most good scripts don’t adhere to the beats. Do you have an opinion on the best way to write for not-yet-broken-in writers?
CH: I think the best way to break into screenwriting is to write with a voice so authentically and loudly yours that it’s impossible to ignore. If you write according to what the guides tell you, if you regurgitate variants of the same beats over and over, your script might read fine. It might even be good. But it probably won’t be great. It probably won’t have that audacious flair that catches a rep’s attention. Too many aspiring writers think they’re writing scripts to sell. My opinion is that’s a pipe dream. You’re really trying to write a script to audition for the chance to sell some other script. You need people’s attention first, then, when you have it, they’ll help you become a professional.
KC: What is your favorite part of writing for TV/movies -- the script itself or the process of collaboration that turns the script into the visual art?
CH: The script itself, every time. Same reason that I write novels. I love writing. Everything else is icing on that cake.
KC: For the writing itself, do you prefer a blank page or rewriting?
CH: I love rewriting, but I prefer the mystery of the blank page.
KC: If you could wave a magic wand and bring back a languishing genre, which would it be and why?
CH: I’d like to see the adult rom-com come back. Not rom-coms about twentysomethingers. I’m talking mature adults, the characters Nora Ephron wrote about, who Nancy Meyers and Richard Curtis still write about. I’d also like the opportunity to watch them on the big screen rather than just on Netflix, which I think has somehow managed to both resurrect and diminish the genre.
KC: Biggest mistake of your career not related to Dracula?
About half of the reps I’ve signed with, I signed with for the wrong reasons. I was listening to my head, not my gut. I was chasing success and dollar signs, more convinced Ari Gold could make me successful than an actually passionate, deeply committed agent of less illustrious and gold-plated standing. In every case, I made a mistake. And then made it again and again. I don’t make that mistake anymore. I only work with reps I love and whom I believe love me.
Thanks again to Mr. Haddon for his time and thoughtful answers. Again, if you have any interest in TV, movies, writing or how people create, his newsletter is well worth reading.
We will be back to my personal failed journey as we hit the three-month date of my last query round and discuss what I have and have not learned from the process.
Thanks for asking me to have this conversation with you!