What do you think?
Rate this book
La dramaturgie
L'édition revue et mise à jour d’un livre devenu culte dans les milieux professionnels. C’est la première fois que La Dramaturgie est accessible à tous les libraires.La Dramaturgie se présente comme l'équivalent contemporain de La poétique d'Aristote. C'est donc un traité sur les mécanismes du récit, leur raison d'être et leur signification. Mais alors que le philosophe n'avait que les pièces grecques pour illustrer son ouvrage, Yves Lavandier peut s'appuyer sur un répertoire beaucoup plus riche, puisant ses nombreux exemples dans le théâtre, le cinéma, la télévision, les contes et la bande dessinée.
- GenresWritingNonfictionFilm
615 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1997
31 people are currently reading
267 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
July 2, 2015
Aspiring and working screenwriters. STOP!
Are you looking for a really advanced screenwriting book? Are you aiming at writing quality screenplays that contain really good storytelling techniques? Have you read Seger, McKee, Snyder, Vogler and the likes and thought there might be something more to learn in screenwriting than what they teach to those people who are looking for short cuts and who have to depend on formulaic writing? (like it or not, but that's who these books are written for!) If you're ok with Seger that's fine with me, but this book just doesn't fit the same category. Those books are for beginners but not for people who want to work at a professional level.(Of course I’m exaggerating a bit here. These authors say some sensible things as well, but in my opinion they don’t go deep enough.)
So you are really looking for an advanced screenwriting book? And I suppose you don't have the money to move to LA and enroll in an expensive UCLA course but are interested in what those students learn in there? Stop right here then! This is a book for people who aspire becoming really advanced screenwriters and playwrights. This is a book for people who aim at producing quality screenplays. It is a book, but it contains the information of a very good writing course.
So yes, it is 600 pages long but If you are really serious on becoming a better writer and have the intention to live from your writing then I don't think that will be a big obstacle.
In my view, it's a book on pair with those of Lagos Egri, John Truby, Linda Aronson, Paul Lucey. In my opinion, the views these authors provide are all complimentary and there is no reason for competition between them. Those are all nr one screenwritig books.
I propose you read all the authors I mentioned as well, they say all very intelligent things! And they all touch other aspects of screenwriting. That's why you should never stick to one good screenwriting book. All those authors unveil different aspects of writing so you can have a broad view on the subject.
And yes, you CAN become a working professional it in Hollywood or wherever or write your pilot for a HBO television series if you're willing to educate yourself.
For me personally, after reading this book I quit my job to become a screenwriter!! Yes, that is right. That's what this book can make you do.
So what makes this book so special and different from other books by American authors? First of all, it provides a French view on play- and screenwriting. The author is a fan of good storytelling though, which the Americans know so well and many of todays European films unfortunately lack. European films often explore interesting themes but few of them are well told.
Lavandier explains very clearly a lot of classic storytelling techniques and cites many works to illustrate his viewpoints, many are classics, but also lesser known films. Italian films from what is called the commedia all' italiana, french films you never heard of and also a good deal of plays. He introduced me to Molière for example, whose plays are actually quite funny and you might be surprised what influence he could have on your comedy script for todays audiences. Lavandier meticulously unravels all the techniques used by those clasical guys so you can put those in your toolbox as a writer. After reading this book you might want to read some of those plays to enjoy the storytelling techniques they used. Also, if you'd like to read some interesting views on what comedy really is about you could start here. Lavandier talks throughout the whole book on it and dedicates a chapter to comedy.
You might find a fresh view in it and learn effective classical storytelling techniques and that's what the studio's and HBO is looking for, right?
Lavandier might be France's nr 1 screenwriting guru of today, but strangely his book is actually still little known to American screenwriters and film scholars, but I'm sure it won't stay that way. I think the book is self published at the moment but given its quality it will be picked up by an American publisher to give it a new, fresh edition so it will become an even better read.
And if you happen to know some French, the author also wrote a very concise book on script doctoring and reading screenplays: Evaluer un scénario. In my view, this book should be a must for studio readers and script consultants. It hasn't got an English edition yet but I think it soon will.
If you're willing to make a career in filmmaking and interested in really good storytelling order then a copy of this book! Reading a good book is of course not a garantee that you will write good screenplays, but I think it definitely increases the odds.
The book is really comprehensive, so I chose not to disclose all its content. Lavandier can explain it better than me anyway. But recently I came upon a youtube series made by the author in which he allready unveils some dramatic techniques that are discussed thoroughly in his book. So you might want to have a look at these:
http://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL...
Enjoy this treasure!
Are you looking for a really advanced screenwriting book? Are you aiming at writing quality screenplays that contain really good storytelling techniques? Have you read Seger, McKee, Snyder, Vogler and the likes and thought there might be something more to learn in screenwriting than what they teach to those people who are looking for short cuts and who have to depend on formulaic writing? (like it or not, but that's who these books are written for!) If you're ok with Seger that's fine with me, but this book just doesn't fit the same category. Those books are for beginners but not for people who want to work at a professional level.(Of course I’m exaggerating a bit here. These authors say some sensible things as well, but in my opinion they don’t go deep enough.)
So you are really looking for an advanced screenwriting book? And I suppose you don't have the money to move to LA and enroll in an expensive UCLA course but are interested in what those students learn in there? Stop right here then! This is a book for people who aspire becoming really advanced screenwriters and playwrights. This is a book for people who aim at producing quality screenplays. It is a book, but it contains the information of a very good writing course.
So yes, it is 600 pages long but If you are really serious on becoming a better writer and have the intention to live from your writing then I don't think that will be a big obstacle.
In my view, it's a book on pair with those of Lagos Egri, John Truby, Linda Aronson, Paul Lucey. In my opinion, the views these authors provide are all complimentary and there is no reason for competition between them. Those are all nr one screenwritig books.
I propose you read all the authors I mentioned as well, they say all very intelligent things! And they all touch other aspects of screenwriting. That's why you should never stick to one good screenwriting book. All those authors unveil different aspects of writing so you can have a broad view on the subject.
And yes, you CAN become a working professional it in Hollywood or wherever or write your pilot for a HBO television series if you're willing to educate yourself.
For me personally, after reading this book I quit my job to become a screenwriter!! Yes, that is right. That's what this book can make you do.
So what makes this book so special and different from other books by American authors? First of all, it provides a French view on play- and screenwriting. The author is a fan of good storytelling though, which the Americans know so well and many of todays European films unfortunately lack. European films often explore interesting themes but few of them are well told.
Lavandier explains very clearly a lot of classic storytelling techniques and cites many works to illustrate his viewpoints, many are classics, but also lesser known films. Italian films from what is called the commedia all' italiana, french films you never heard of and also a good deal of plays. He introduced me to Molière for example, whose plays are actually quite funny and you might be surprised what influence he could have on your comedy script for todays audiences. Lavandier meticulously unravels all the techniques used by those clasical guys so you can put those in your toolbox as a writer. After reading this book you might want to read some of those plays to enjoy the storytelling techniques they used. Also, if you'd like to read some interesting views on what comedy really is about you could start here. Lavandier talks throughout the whole book on it and dedicates a chapter to comedy.
You might find a fresh view in it and learn effective classical storytelling techniques and that's what the studio's and HBO is looking for, right?
Lavandier might be France's nr 1 screenwriting guru of today, but strangely his book is actually still little known to American screenwriters and film scholars, but I'm sure it won't stay that way. I think the book is self published at the moment but given its quality it will be picked up by an American publisher to give it a new, fresh edition so it will become an even better read.
And if you happen to know some French, the author also wrote a very concise book on script doctoring and reading screenplays: Evaluer un scénario. In my view, this book should be a must for studio readers and script consultants. It hasn't got an English edition yet but I think it soon will.
If you're willing to make a career in filmmaking and interested in really good storytelling order then a copy of this book! Reading a good book is of course not a garantee that you will write good screenplays, but I think it definitely increases the odds.
The book is really comprehensive, so I chose not to disclose all its content. Lavandier can explain it better than me anyway. But recently I came upon a youtube series made by the author in which he allready unveils some dramatic techniques that are discussed thoroughly in his book. So you might want to have a look at these:
http://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL...
Enjoy this treasure!
April 19, 2010
I just read a review copy of the third edition of Yves Lavandier's WRITING DRAMA. The book was translated from the French edition by Bernard Besserglik, so I am not exactly sure who I should blame for how dull the writing is. But I can certainly point the finger at Yves for the pomposity and the sheer wordiness. WRITING DRAMA is actually a very good book about writing - whether it's plays, scripts or books -- with lots of practical advice and important lessons about story structure, character development, and dialogue to offer. Unfortunately, I've read software manuals that are more lively and engaging.
Yves is obviously a bright, educated guy who has seen a lot of movies and thought hard about them...and he wants to be sure you know it. So to get to his very good advice, you have to endure lots of irrelevant digressions, pointless footnotes, self-indulgent pontificating, and lots of tiresome repetition (and far more examples and film references than are necessary). However there's so much practical wisdom in the book that I wish he'd had a decent editor or at least followed his own good advice:
"Economy - the art of condensing a text, of conveying as much information as possible in a compact form - is highly gratifying to the spectator. [...:] the writer should work through it again adding stylistic features and as many touches of humour and poetry as can be managed, in other words, the literary flourishes that make it more agreeable to read, and thus improve its chances of pleasing..."
If he'd taken his own advice, the book would have been a quarter of the size and much more useful, not to mention more readable (For starters, he could ditch what amounts to a 30 page introduction, in which he actually tells the reader they might want to skip ahead a few pages).
There's a lot to criticize about the book, particularly his lecturing about what's right and wrong about certain movies, his inane rules for writing for children, his ponderous deconstruction of comedy, and his opinions on television writing. But all that said, I would highly recommend the book to aspiring writers...and even established professionals looking for a little refresher. It worked for me. I am in the midst of adapting a book that I optioned and his book really got me thinking about my task. Reading WRITING DRAMA definitely helped me focus...to sharpen my outline and refine the character arcs. And I have been a working, professional screenwriter for a while now.
Yves begins his book by stating a few points that should be self-evident, but it's amazing how many writers of scripts and novels today seem to forget them:
"[Writers:] are all without exception writing for other people, for that set of others known as the audience. A work of drama exists only for and by virtue of the public. It takes two to speak this language: writer and receiver, with the actor-character as intermediary. Indeed, however much the actors pretend to be addressing each other, everything they say is directed in just one direction: at the spectator. [...:] Writers who do not take the trouble to master the language of their art, in other words to find out how the public receives and perceives drama, are too often inaccessible. Perhaps they believe that it is up to the public to be curious about their work, when it fact it is up to them to stimulate the public's curiosity. [...:] Drama does not exist because there are writers of drama; it is rather that writers of drama exist because there is a human need for drama. Whether he likes it or not, the writer's role is to meet this need."
His lengthy section on conflict and emotion is particularly strong.
"Conflict is at the heart of drama because conflict is at the heart of life, of which drama is an imitation. [...:] Conflict is a revealer of personality, which is why the great writers of drama have used it so abundantly. [...:] Conflict means opposition and thus obstacle."
He later writes, in his chapter on character, that:
"The action that a character adopts when faced with a conflict, either to prevent it or to overcome it, is one of the best indicators of the kind of person he is."
Those may seem like obvious points, but it's surprising how many rookie screenwriters and novelists fail to realize how important conflict is, thinking instead that witty description in the action and expository dialogue are the best ways to reveal character. Whenever I am writing, and a scene doesn't work, there's usually a problem with the conflict and the objectives each character is pursuing, or not pursuing, in the scene. Yves offers a useful schematic for the basic dramatic process:
"Character--objective--obstacle--conflict--emotion
A character seeks to achieve an objective but encounters obstacles, which gives rise to conflict and leads to emotion, not just for the character but also for the spectator."
This not only leads to drama, but also to comedy. Conflict is storytelling and it is character. His chapters on the Protagonist, Objectives and Obstacles are also full of good points and interesting observations:
"Some writers refuse to be cruel to their protagonists. It is simply beyond them. They identify so much with their characters that they suffer if they have to make them suffer. They fail to realize that the best way of getting the spectator to share their concern and love for their protagonists is precisely to spare them nothing."
I agree with him. And yet, he later advises:
"When a writer wishes to indulge his sadistic tendencies, it is better that he should do so on a secondary character rather than the protagonist."
I am not sure from reading his book where he actually draws that line, but it doesn't matter. I can live with his apparent contradiction. Overall, there's a lot a writer can learn from Yves' book and, despite the wordiness and occasional pomposity, it may be one of the best books on screenwriting out there.
As an aside (and there are many, many, many of them in the book), he's also a persuasive defender of, and believer in, writers as the primary creative force in film-making:
"It is the writer's role to determine everything meaningful that goes into a work of drama. In theory, the actors, director, production designer, composer or editor should not have to do anything more than recreate, using their respective skills, the meaning intended by the writer. They are servants of the writer's vision in a sense which, I stress, is by no means pejorative and furthermore requires real talent."
So it's appropriate to close on one of his earliest and truest observations:
"[...:] people talk as if the screenplay does not exist. Or no longer exists. We are told the screenplay is a transitional phenomenon, existing only briefly, its relation to the film comparable to that of a caterpillar to a butterfly. This might be true of the object itself, the grubby manuscript that circulates from hand-to-hand on the set [...:] but it is emphatically not true of the text as a work of act, the product of a writer's imaginings, the film narrative. [...:] it is often the key element on which the quality of the movie depends."
If you've got the fortitude to slog through this book, and if you can stay awake, you will be rewarded with some valuable advice that will help you become a better writer. (Now if only his publisher could come out with an abridged edition...but with some liveliness, humor and character added!).
Yves is obviously a bright, educated guy who has seen a lot of movies and thought hard about them...and he wants to be sure you know it. So to get to his very good advice, you have to endure lots of irrelevant digressions, pointless footnotes, self-indulgent pontificating, and lots of tiresome repetition (and far more examples and film references than are necessary). However there's so much practical wisdom in the book that I wish he'd had a decent editor or at least followed his own good advice:
"Economy - the art of condensing a text, of conveying as much information as possible in a compact form - is highly gratifying to the spectator. [...:] the writer should work through it again adding stylistic features and as many touches of humour and poetry as can be managed, in other words, the literary flourishes that make it more agreeable to read, and thus improve its chances of pleasing..."
If he'd taken his own advice, the book would have been a quarter of the size and much more useful, not to mention more readable (For starters, he could ditch what amounts to a 30 page introduction, in which he actually tells the reader they might want to skip ahead a few pages).
There's a lot to criticize about the book, particularly his lecturing about what's right and wrong about certain movies, his inane rules for writing for children, his ponderous deconstruction of comedy, and his opinions on television writing. But all that said, I would highly recommend the book to aspiring writers...and even established professionals looking for a little refresher. It worked for me. I am in the midst of adapting a book that I optioned and his book really got me thinking about my task. Reading WRITING DRAMA definitely helped me focus...to sharpen my outline and refine the character arcs. And I have been a working, professional screenwriter for a while now.
Yves begins his book by stating a few points that should be self-evident, but it's amazing how many writers of scripts and novels today seem to forget them:
"[Writers:] are all without exception writing for other people, for that set of others known as the audience. A work of drama exists only for and by virtue of the public. It takes two to speak this language: writer and receiver, with the actor-character as intermediary. Indeed, however much the actors pretend to be addressing each other, everything they say is directed in just one direction: at the spectator. [...:] Writers who do not take the trouble to master the language of their art, in other words to find out how the public receives and perceives drama, are too often inaccessible. Perhaps they believe that it is up to the public to be curious about their work, when it fact it is up to them to stimulate the public's curiosity. [...:] Drama does not exist because there are writers of drama; it is rather that writers of drama exist because there is a human need for drama. Whether he likes it or not, the writer's role is to meet this need."
His lengthy section on conflict and emotion is particularly strong.
"Conflict is at the heart of drama because conflict is at the heart of life, of which drama is an imitation. [...:] Conflict is a revealer of personality, which is why the great writers of drama have used it so abundantly. [...:] Conflict means opposition and thus obstacle."
He later writes, in his chapter on character, that:
"The action that a character adopts when faced with a conflict, either to prevent it or to overcome it, is one of the best indicators of the kind of person he is."
Those may seem like obvious points, but it's surprising how many rookie screenwriters and novelists fail to realize how important conflict is, thinking instead that witty description in the action and expository dialogue are the best ways to reveal character. Whenever I am writing, and a scene doesn't work, there's usually a problem with the conflict and the objectives each character is pursuing, or not pursuing, in the scene. Yves offers a useful schematic for the basic dramatic process:
"Character--objective--obstacle--conflict--emotion
A character seeks to achieve an objective but encounters obstacles, which gives rise to conflict and leads to emotion, not just for the character but also for the spectator."
This not only leads to drama, but also to comedy. Conflict is storytelling and it is character. His chapters on the Protagonist, Objectives and Obstacles are also full of good points and interesting observations:
"Some writers refuse to be cruel to their protagonists. It is simply beyond them. They identify so much with their characters that they suffer if they have to make them suffer. They fail to realize that the best way of getting the spectator to share their concern and love for their protagonists is precisely to spare them nothing."
I agree with him. And yet, he later advises:
"When a writer wishes to indulge his sadistic tendencies, it is better that he should do so on a secondary character rather than the protagonist."
I am not sure from reading his book where he actually draws that line, but it doesn't matter. I can live with his apparent contradiction. Overall, there's a lot a writer can learn from Yves' book and, despite the wordiness and occasional pomposity, it may be one of the best books on screenwriting out there.
As an aside (and there are many, many, many of them in the book), he's also a persuasive defender of, and believer in, writers as the primary creative force in film-making:
"It is the writer's role to determine everything meaningful that goes into a work of drama. In theory, the actors, director, production designer, composer or editor should not have to do anything more than recreate, using their respective skills, the meaning intended by the writer. They are servants of the writer's vision in a sense which, I stress, is by no means pejorative and furthermore requires real talent."
So it's appropriate to close on one of his earliest and truest observations:
"[...:] people talk as if the screenplay does not exist. Or no longer exists. We are told the screenplay is a transitional phenomenon, existing only briefly, its relation to the film comparable to that of a caterpillar to a butterfly. This might be true of the object itself, the grubby manuscript that circulates from hand-to-hand on the set [...:] but it is emphatically not true of the text as a work of act, the product of a writer's imaginings, the film narrative. [...:] it is often the key element on which the quality of the movie depends."
If you've got the fortitude to slog through this book, and if you can stay awake, you will be rewarded with some valuable advice that will help you become a better writer. (Now if only his publisher could come out with an abridged edition...but with some liveliness, humor and character added!).
July 1, 2009
Available in English as Writing Drama. Probably the best book on writing drama available. The author covers a large field of diverse drama in film and theatre, in English and other language.
Am re-reading this at present.
Am re-reading this at present.
April 19, 2010
I just read a review copy of the third edition of Yves Lavandier's WRITING DRAMA. The book was translated from the French edition by Bernard Besserglik, so I am not exactly sure who I should blame for how dull the writing is. But I can certainly point the finger at Yves for the pomposity and the sheer wordiness. WRITING DRAMA is actually a very good book about writing - whether it's plays, scripts or books -- with lots of practical advice and important lessons about story structure, character development, and dialogue to offer. Unfortunately, I've read software manuals that are more lively and engaging.
Yves is obviously a bright, educated guy who has seen a lot of movies and thought hard about them...and he wants to be sure you know it. So to get to his very good advice, you have to endure lots of irrelevant digressions, pointless footnotes, self-indulgent pontificating, and lots of tiresome repetition (and far more examples and film references than are necessary). However there's so much practical wisdom in the book that I wish he'd had a decent editor or at least followed his own good advice:
"Economy - the art of condensing a text, of conveying as much information as possible in a compact form - is highly gratifying to the spectator. [...:] the writer should work through it again adding stylistic features and as many touches of humour and poetry as can be managed, in other words, the literary flourishes that make it more agreeable to read, and thus improve its chances of pleasing..."
If he'd taken his own advice, the book would have been a quarter of the size and much more useful, not to mention more readable (For starters, he could ditch what amounts to a 30 page introduction, in which he actually tells the reader they might want to skip ahead a few pages).
There's a lot to criticize about the book, particularly his lecturing about what's right and wrong about certain movies, his inane rules for writing for children, his ponderous deconstruction of comedy, and his opinions on television writing. But all that said, I would highly recommend the book to aspiring writers...and even established professionals looking for a little refresher. It worked for me. I am in the midst of adapting a book that I optioned and his book really got me thinking about my task. Reading WRITING DRAMA definitely helped me focus...to sharpen my outline and refine the character arcs. And I have been a working, professional screenwriter for a while now.
Yves begins his book by stating a few points that should be self-evident, but it's amazing how many writers of scripts and novels today seem to forget them:
"[Writers:] are all without exception writing for other people, for that set of others known as the audience. A work of drama exists only for and by virtue of the public. It takes two to speak this language: writer and receiver, with the actor-character as intermediary. Indeed, however much the actors pretend to be addressing each other, everything they say is directed in just one direction: at the spectator. [...:] Writers who do not take the trouble to master the language of their art, in other words to find out how the public receives and perceives drama, are too often inaccessible. Perhaps they believe that it is up to the public to be curious about their work, when it fact it is up to them to stimulate the public's curiosity. [...:] Drama does not exist because there are writers of drama; it is rather that writers of drama exist because there is a human need for drama. Whether he likes it or not, the writer's role is to meet this need."
His lengthy section on conflict and emotion is particularly strong.
"Conflict is at the heart of drama because conflict is at the heart of life, of which drama is an imitation. [...:] Conflict is a revealer of personality, which is why the great writers of drama have used it so abundantly. [...:] Conflict means opposition and thus obstacle."
He later writes, in his chapter on character, that:
"The action that a character adopts when faced with a conflict, either to prevent it or to overcome it, is one of the best indicators of the kind of person he is."
Those may seem like obvious points, but it's surprising how many rookie screenwriters and novelists fail to realize how important conflict is, thinking instead that witty description in the action and expository dialogue are the best ways to reveal character. Whenever I am writing, and a scene doesn't work, there's usually a problem with the conflict and the objectives each character is pursuing, or not pursuing, in the scene. Yves offers a useful schematic for the basic dramatic process:
"Character--objective--obstacle--conflict--emotion
A character seeks to achieve an objective but encounters obstacles, which gives rise to conflict and leads to emotion, not just for the character but also for the spectator."
This not only leads to drama, but also to comedy. Conflict is storytelling and it is character. His chapters on the Protagonist, Objectives and Obstacles are also full of good points and interesting observations:
"Some writers refuse to be cruel to their protagonists. It is simply beyond them. They identify so much with their characters that they suffer if they have to make them suffer. They fail to realize that the best way of getting the spectator to share their concern and love for their protagonists is precisely to spare them nothing."
I agree with him. And yet, he later advises:
"When a writer wishes to indulge his sadistic tendencies, it is better that he should do so on a secondary character rather than the protagonist."
I am not sure from reading his book where he actually draws that line, but it doesn't matter. I can live with his apparent contradiction. Overall, there's a lot a writer can learn from Yves' book and, despite the wordiness and occasional pomposity, it may be one of the best books on screenwriting out there.
As an aside (and there are many, many, many of them in the book), he's also a persuasive defender of, and believer in, writers as the primary creative force in film-making:
"It is the writer's role to determine everything meaningful that goes into a work of drama. In theory, the actors, director, production designer, composer or editor should not have to do anything more than recreate, using their respective skills, the meaning intended by the writer. They are servants of the writer's vision in a sense which, I stress, is by no means pejorative and furthermore requires real talent."
So it's appropriate to close on one of his earliest and truest observations:
"[...:] people talk as if the screenplay does not exist. Or no longer exists. We are told the screenplay is a transitional phenomenon, existing only briefly, its relation to the film comparable to that of a caterpillar to a butterfly. This might be true of the object itself, the grubby manuscript that circulates from hand-to-hand on the set [...:] but it is emphatically not true of the text as a work of act, the product of a writer's imaginings, the film narrative. [...:] it is often the key element on which the quality of the movie depends."
If you've got the fortitude to slog through this book, and if you can stay awake, you will be rewarded with some valuable advice that will help you become a better writer. (Now if only his publisher could come out with an abridged edition...but with some liveliness, humor and character added!).
Yves is obviously a bright, educated guy who has seen a lot of movies and thought hard about them...and he wants to be sure you know it. So to get to his very good advice, you have to endure lots of irrelevant digressions, pointless footnotes, self-indulgent pontificating, and lots of tiresome repetition (and far more examples and film references than are necessary). However there's so much practical wisdom in the book that I wish he'd had a decent editor or at least followed his own good advice:
"Economy - the art of condensing a text, of conveying as much information as possible in a compact form - is highly gratifying to the spectator. [...:] the writer should work through it again adding stylistic features and as many touches of humour and poetry as can be managed, in other words, the literary flourishes that make it more agreeable to read, and thus improve its chances of pleasing..."
If he'd taken his own advice, the book would have been a quarter of the size and much more useful, not to mention more readable (For starters, he could ditch what amounts to a 30 page introduction, in which he actually tells the reader they might want to skip ahead a few pages).
There's a lot to criticize about the book, particularly his lecturing about what's right and wrong about certain movies, his inane rules for writing for children, his ponderous deconstruction of comedy, and his opinions on television writing. But all that said, I would highly recommend the book to aspiring writers...and even established professionals looking for a little refresher. It worked for me. I am in the midst of adapting a book that I optioned and his book really got me thinking about my task. Reading WRITING DRAMA definitely helped me focus...to sharpen my outline and refine the character arcs. And I have been a working, professional screenwriter for a while now.
Yves begins his book by stating a few points that should be self-evident, but it's amazing how many writers of scripts and novels today seem to forget them:
"[Writers:] are all without exception writing for other people, for that set of others known as the audience. A work of drama exists only for and by virtue of the public. It takes two to speak this language: writer and receiver, with the actor-character as intermediary. Indeed, however much the actors pretend to be addressing each other, everything they say is directed in just one direction: at the spectator. [...:] Writers who do not take the trouble to master the language of their art, in other words to find out how the public receives and perceives drama, are too often inaccessible. Perhaps they believe that it is up to the public to be curious about their work, when it fact it is up to them to stimulate the public's curiosity. [...:] Drama does not exist because there are writers of drama; it is rather that writers of drama exist because there is a human need for drama. Whether he likes it or not, the writer's role is to meet this need."
His lengthy section on conflict and emotion is particularly strong.
"Conflict is at the heart of drama because conflict is at the heart of life, of which drama is an imitation. [...:] Conflict is a revealer of personality, which is why the great writers of drama have used it so abundantly. [...:] Conflict means opposition and thus obstacle."
He later writes, in his chapter on character, that:
"The action that a character adopts when faced with a conflict, either to prevent it or to overcome it, is one of the best indicators of the kind of person he is."
Those may seem like obvious points, but it's surprising how many rookie screenwriters and novelists fail to realize how important conflict is, thinking instead that witty description in the action and expository dialogue are the best ways to reveal character. Whenever I am writing, and a scene doesn't work, there's usually a problem with the conflict and the objectives each character is pursuing, or not pursuing, in the scene. Yves offers a useful schematic for the basic dramatic process:
"Character--objective--obstacle--conflict--emotion
A character seeks to achieve an objective but encounters obstacles, which gives rise to conflict and leads to emotion, not just for the character but also for the spectator."
This not only leads to drama, but also to comedy. Conflict is storytelling and it is character. His chapters on the Protagonist, Objectives and Obstacles are also full of good points and interesting observations:
"Some writers refuse to be cruel to their protagonists. It is simply beyond them. They identify so much with their characters that they suffer if they have to make them suffer. They fail to realize that the best way of getting the spectator to share their concern and love for their protagonists is precisely to spare them nothing."
I agree with him. And yet, he later advises:
"When a writer wishes to indulge his sadistic tendencies, it is better that he should do so on a secondary character rather than the protagonist."
I am not sure from reading his book where he actually draws that line, but it doesn't matter. I can live with his apparent contradiction. Overall, there's a lot a writer can learn from Yves' book and, despite the wordiness and occasional pomposity, it may be one of the best books on screenwriting out there.
As an aside (and there are many, many, many of them in the book), he's also a persuasive defender of, and believer in, writers as the primary creative force in film-making:
"It is the writer's role to determine everything meaningful that goes into a work of drama. In theory, the actors, director, production designer, composer or editor should not have to do anything more than recreate, using their respective skills, the meaning intended by the writer. They are servants of the writer's vision in a sense which, I stress, is by no means pejorative and furthermore requires real talent."
So it's appropriate to close on one of his earliest and truest observations:
"[...:] people talk as if the screenplay does not exist. Or no longer exists. We are told the screenplay is a transitional phenomenon, existing only briefly, its relation to the film comparable to that of a caterpillar to a butterfly. This might be true of the object itself, the grubby manuscript that circulates from hand-to-hand on the set [...:] but it is emphatically not true of the text as a work of act, the product of a writer's imaginings, the film narrative. [...:] it is often the key element on which the quality of the movie depends."
If you've got the fortitude to slog through this book, and if you can stay awake, you will be rewarded with some valuable advice that will help you become a better writer. (Now if only his publisher could come out with an abridged edition...but with some liveliness, humor and character added!).
July 8, 2023
Un livre absolument formidable sur le récit qui explique la théorie bien nécessaire derrière l'écriture d'un roman d'un film ou d'une pièce de théâtre. Non content de traiter ce sujet avec brio, il parle aussi de la vie en général en recadrant efficacement les petits problèmes quotidiens et tout ce qui est nous semble acquis.
Une merveille absolument nécessaire le 6 type personne désireuse d'apprendre l'écriture, ou d'apprendre la vie.
Une merveille absolument nécessaire le 6 type personne désireuse d'apprendre l'écriture, ou d'apprendre la vie.
April 24, 2019
Quasiment tout ce qu'il y a à savoir quand on veut raconter une histoire.
December 26, 2023
Útil, un poco arcaico ya, pero interesante para generar controversias con alumnos y entender las etapas del drama.
November 11, 2011
L'IMMENSE MAJORITE des livres traitant de la dramaturgie, souvent de manière beaucoup moins large que ne le fait ici Yves Lavandier, sont publiés aux éditions Eyrolles et proviennent la plupart du temps d'auteurs d'outre-Atlantique ce qui, vu l'état du cinéma américain actuel, n'est pas des plus encourageant.
C'est donc pourquoi, après avoir lu quelques-uns de ces opuscules, je me suis mis en quête d'un ouvrage écrit dans la langue de Peyrefitte dans l'espoir d'y lire ce que je n'avais pas encore lu chez les autres.
Regret : Yves Lavandier a étudié aux Etats-Unis, il n'est donc pas totalement neutre bien que son discours soit clairement plus nuancé que celui de ses confrères écrivains et scénaristes. L'auteur aborde cependant la dramaturgie dans son ensemble et ponctue son livre d'innombrables références émanant des divers arts dont le récit est le ciment, bon point, cela aère considérablement l'ensemble qui aurait facilement pu devenir indigeste. Au final, il n'est pas comparable avec les autres publications traitant du scénario, des personnages, bref de sous-ensembles du récit et s'inscrit plutôt dans une approche globale de la dramaturgie. Cela permet de mettre le doigt sur les points auxquels il convient de faire attention afin d'obtenir une histoire digne de ce nom mais pas toujours d'en régler les problèmes, c'est pourquoi je conseille de compléter ce livre par d'autres, plus petits, mais plus spécialisés.
La dramaturgie d'Yves Lavandier est un excellent point de départ, si pas l'unique point de départ, pour qui désire approfondir ses connaissances en dramaturgie en français dans le texte.
P.-S Je n'ai qu'une chose à lui reprocher : l'emploi abusif (et c'est un euphémisme) de l'expression " L'immense majorité" que l'on retrouve à presque toutes les pages, j'en suis venu à me mettre en colère l'expression finissant par me faire l'effet d'un robinet qui goutte. Argh.
C'est donc pourquoi, après avoir lu quelques-uns de ces opuscules, je me suis mis en quête d'un ouvrage écrit dans la langue de Peyrefitte dans l'espoir d'y lire ce que je n'avais pas encore lu chez les autres.
Regret : Yves Lavandier a étudié aux Etats-Unis, il n'est donc pas totalement neutre bien que son discours soit clairement plus nuancé que celui de ses confrères écrivains et scénaristes. L'auteur aborde cependant la dramaturgie dans son ensemble et ponctue son livre d'innombrables références émanant des divers arts dont le récit est le ciment, bon point, cela aère considérablement l'ensemble qui aurait facilement pu devenir indigeste. Au final, il n'est pas comparable avec les autres publications traitant du scénario, des personnages, bref de sous-ensembles du récit et s'inscrit plutôt dans une approche globale de la dramaturgie. Cela permet de mettre le doigt sur les points auxquels il convient de faire attention afin d'obtenir une histoire digne de ce nom mais pas toujours d'en régler les problèmes, c'est pourquoi je conseille de compléter ce livre par d'autres, plus petits, mais plus spécialisés.
La dramaturgie d'Yves Lavandier est un excellent point de départ, si pas l'unique point de départ, pour qui désire approfondir ses connaissances en dramaturgie en français dans le texte.
P.-S Je n'ai qu'une chose à lui reprocher : l'emploi abusif (et c'est un euphémisme) de l'expression " L'immense majorité" que l'on retrouve à presque toutes les pages, j'en suis venu à me mettre en colère l'expression finissant par me faire l'effet d'un robinet qui goutte. Argh.
August 27, 2011
Ouvrage indispensable pour comprendre et pratiquer l'écriture de scénario. Facile à lire, pratique et complet.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews