I recently received feedback on one of my scripts from three different readers. Let’s just say they liked my writing style more than this particular script but you have to remember scripts can be revised and even rewritten many times and no one needs to know when they glance upon your words of plenty. These were contest judges and not my usual writing group. I can predict the feedback most of the time from my writing group; I know what catches their eye and their own internal writing style and it reflects in the analysis they give to other scripts. Sometimes it’s better to go outside your circle of readers to get feedback. But not just any feedback will do. You need to find someone capable of non-biased, informed, critical feedback who understands the most crucial element in all of screenwriting. Subjectivity.
Subjectivity is the single most important element when it comes to feedback from a reader. It’s the perception of story elements as defined by the cultural and environmental background of the reader. It took me several years to fully comprehend this beast, but I can now look at feedback with an eye towards getting inside the mind of the reader to understand why a certain note was made and more importantly decode the real underlying meaning of the comment. Yes, you read me right, sometimes the reader makes a comment that does not fully capture what was in his head when he wrote it. I actually look forward to constructive feedback as all writers should because it offers a glimpse into our reader’s minds.
I recently received this feedback from a contest judge – character lacks depth, too one dimensional – Translation: Reader only read the dialogue. Skimmed the description.
Or this – don’t understand what the protagonist wants – Translation: Reader skimmed the description and the dialogue.
Contrast the above with this feedback on the same screenplay draft but from a different contest and judge – characters well defined, complex and layered.
Same exact draft of the screenplay. Subjectivity is at play here. Two readers can read the same material and based on factors outside the control of the writer, e.g., individual point of view, personal biases, tastes, social class, will interpret it through a filtered lens. So what can a writer do to minimize this effect?
Let me digress for a moment. When a screenwriter writes a story we tend to write the movie we see in our head. It plays out against an imaginary screen projected from an imaginary projector somewhere in our brain and we watch a mini-clip and then write a line of action, or a beat of dialogue, then watch another mini-clip. The trick is to get it right on the page so the reader, and subsequent viewing audience will see the same movie play out in their head. Translating the movie we see in our head into the correct sequence of words to invoke the same emotions we have when we think about the movie is what craft is all about. It is a transfer of energy from our brain to our fingers into the computer and onto the page. Those of us who can master this process can make it as a paid screenwriter.
The effect of mastering this transference of energy is the elimination of ambiguity and the narrowing of subjectivity in the reader who will receive this energy and attempt to process through his neural paths so that his internal projector will project the same story as we created. In an ideal world this happens with every script we write. I mean, come on, how could anyone interpret your kick-ass scene any other way. Doesn’t the reader know why Molly goes into hiding during the holiday season; because as a child her mother burnt down the family Christmas tree every December 24, to avoid explaining why they were so poor and why they had no gifts under the tree. They burnt up in the blaze, right. In fact they were so poor her mother used an artificial tree to burn down, with flame retardant branches and leafs, so she could wipe it off and burn it down again the next year. 
Getting it right on the page sounds like a gimmick from a coffee break screenwriter, but try to bear with me as I explain. In simplest terms subjectivity is the percent of error in the comprehension of what we write. The more vague and unclear it is the more the chance the reader is going to screw it up.
If I write this line of description:
A black dog went after a young girl riding down the sidewalk.
There’s a lot of ambiguity in the above statement. What black dog? A black lab? A black poodle, a black Irish setter, or how about a black toy chihuahua. All of these project different images on our internal projector. Now let’s examine “went”, does this mean walked, ran, ambled, rode in a car, a truck, etc… Are you catching my drift? And what is the girl actually doing? Riding could be: on a skateboard, a bike, the back of a bike, on her father’s shoulders? All of these fit within the above board statement.
Now look at this line:
Molly’s toy chihuahua jumped out of her purse, all fours hitting the sidewalk, then raced after a little girl who rode by on her bike.
Does this invoke a clearer more defined image? An image that may be less ambiguous? An image that can only be interpreted within a very narrow range of subjectivity? Although not perfect it certainly conjurers a more vivid scene with more energy.
These are simplistic examples but I hope they get the idea across.
Take these beats of dialogue: I will use — to denote a line of description.
Bud
Put the stuff where I can see it.
Louie
Over my dead body?
Bud
Where I can see it.
Louie
You mean in the light one?
Bud
Next to you.
–BANG!
–Louie bends over in pain.
Bud
Don’t play games with me.
Okay, what’s going on here? Could be almost anything right. What stuff? Where is it? Literally over his dead body? What one next to you? Is Louie shot by Bud or is it the burrito he ate for lunch. Well, it could be.
Now let’s try this:
Bud
Put the money where I can see it.
–Louie turns to a stranger who just walked in.
Louie
Over my dead body.
Bud
Put it in the suitcase.
Louie
You mean the light one?
Bud
Next to you!
–Louie wheels around and levels off his Dirty Harry pistol at the stranger.
–BANG!
–The stranger shoots Louie in the gut. He grimaces over in pain.
–Bud turns towards the stranger.
Bud
Don’t play games with me.
See how the subject of the scene changes radically with clear concise description and matching dialog. The goal is to eliminate as much ambiguity as possible while writing it in such a way as to flow smoothly and allow for an easy read. Screenplays are not books thick with descriptive passages about what a door knob looks like in the sunset. Scripts are blueprints for a movie, there’s nothing literary about them. They need to convey a ton of information in a small space, within 120 pages and tell a compelling story that catches the reader’s attention and does not let go until the final fade out.
Removing the possibility for error and subsequently narrowing the range of allowable subjectivity will improve your writing exponentially.
I’ll leave subtext and the danger it poses for subjectivity for another installment.
Remember never stop looking up at the night sky and asking, what if…
Victor Grippi
The Atomic Writer
