One word at a time.

Posted by

One word at a time. That’s the answer. I suspect you might want more, and this is one of the times when I imagine me on a couch while you encourage me to open up, at least until the end of your 50-minute hour.

Plus you’re calming me down. I just now, I mean just right now, had an email purportedly asking my writing advice but really giving me some. It was chiefly about how brilliant a writer the sender is. He’s so brilliant that it doesn’t matter he’s telling the wrong person and he’s so brilliant that he didn’t get the message I sent him last time.

And if I think he’s over-selling his writing ability, he is at least talented at writing emails that truly piss you off. What this gets him other than blocked, I don’t know.

So he’s as antagonising as if he set out to be, but as it happens, he’s also about the sixth person to approach me in the last month. Five of them I liked. Either I already knew and liked them, or they were just likeable when they asked what they asked.

Maybe it’s a new year kind of thing, though it already feels like we’ve been in 2022 forever. Whatever reason so many asked my advice out of the blue like this, and whyever they asked me, their different issues were startlingly similar. So startlingly similar that I’ve slowly realised I’ve got the same issues and should listen to myself.

For instance, they and I both know we should be writing more. They and I feel guilty about not having written enough. They all told me how they are now determined to write more, and I want to tell you the same thing about me.

Two of them, by the way, have a lot of ideas and don’t know which to do. Two or three are planning to write for a certain amount of time on certain days. One wanted to know how to write a story that readers are interested in. And all of them guiltily referred to how they haven’t been writing.

I presume they’re asking everyone about this, not just me, but I believe I have some answers. For a start, there is nothing you can do about how you didn’t write yesterday, not a single thing you can do now about how you didn’t write last week.

But you can write today. And really, that’s all you can do.

That schedule idea isn’t bad. Isn’t necessarily good, but it isn’t bad. There’s an element of how if you set up your school exam revision timetable, you feel you’ve accomplished something even if what you’re really doing is postponing the moment you have to work.

And I know this for certain. If you plan to write for two hours every Tuesday and then when Tuesday comes and, for any reason, you don’t, you feel worse than you did before.

If you must feel worse at all, feel it about how if there were some other demand on your time that Tuesday, there is a bit of you that’s relieved. There’s a bit of you that agreed to help or to do something or to be somewhere, just a little bit more easily because it means you can’t write that day.

Sometimes, though, you simply aren’t capable of writing that day and it isn’t for want of trying. You cleared the time, you sat at the desk, and still nothing. Coming up with nothing or coming up only with writing that you immediately loathe, it’s very easily enough to turn these Tuesdays into a weekly demonstration that you’re right, you can’t write, it was stupid to think you could, everybody knows you’re wasting your time, that you’re a constant failure and disappointment who is just embarrassing yourself.

Doesn’t exactly make you rush to next Tuesday’s writing session.

Sometimes you have to walk away and write another day.

So yes, I am arguing that you need to get on with it, you need to be disciplined, I’m really arguing that you should write like this is a job, not a hobby. And at the same time, I am saying you need to be able to walk away – I’m saying you should not write like it’s a job.

I have no problem saying either, and not one single hesitation saying both.

I also have not the slightest little qualm about saying both that it’s great to have lots of ideas, and it isn’t. Ideas are easy, or at least the shiny idea you haven’t started writing yet is always infinitely easier than the one you’re currently tarnishing on the page or the screen.

If you do bounce between your different ideas, leaping off because the current one has reached a hard bit, you are writing, you are working, and you are wasting your time. Write bits of things and you have written nothing. You feel like you’ve put a lot of effort in, because you have, but the result is nothing.

And yet writing bits of your different ideas is practically ideal compared to the other problem when you have lots of ideas. That’s when you don’t write anything at all because you cannot decide which idea to do now, which idea you should be working on.

This is a case where if you have eight ideas, there is no right one, I believe that there are just seven wrong ones. Pick one idea, any one idea, pick it any way you like, then do that one.

Schedule your writing time, while not scheduling your writing time. Instead of vowing you will write for two hours every Tuesday evening, just write for an hour now.

Forget long term plans, ignore them as much as you forget the past where you weren’t writing. For the next one hour, write that one idea.

It’s always one word after another, one hour after another.

I don’t have the answers, but those are the answers.

Key on a keyboard

116keys

Posted by

Tomorrow is the second anniversary of 58keys, a YouTube series I do for writers like me who use and write on Macs, iPhones and iPads. If you don’t happen to write on those, 58keys is of no earthly use to you. But still, I want to share a general writing lesson I think I’ve learned from doing it.

And that’s just this: you can change what normal is.

I first thought of a YouTube channel in 2012 and even shot a couple of minutes of footage. I’m going to let myself off a little here by explaining that all I really had was an idea for one gag. Didn’t know what a channel of mine could be about, didn’t know what I’d be interested in, didn’t and really still don’t know what anyone watching could be interested in.

Nonetheless, for seven years I did bugger-all.

And even in mid- to late-2019, I did bugger-little. Shot a title sequence. Figured out what I could do. Chose the name 58keys. Now I write it down, that seems more than I thought, but really it was all held back by me being me. Until January 2020 when, little knowing what could possibly be ahead of us all, I was determined to launch the channel before the end of the month.

Today I am making some little money from it, but if that’s not the reason I do it now, it definitely wasn’t the reason I launched it on January 29, 2020. The sole and specific and exclusive reason I launched it was sheer frustration with myself for not doing it, for constantly putting off a writing job I wanted to do. I can be very unhappy with me, but this time I was angry.

So I launched it. Just to shut me up.

Somehow I got 7 subscribers in the first week. I’m now on 2,400 or so. In that same week, the watch time, the total time anyone played any video of mine, was 584 minutes, which would amaze me just as much if it were this week. Except I record the statistics at the end of each Friday and last week the total for the preceding seven days was 218.2.

Hours.

So that’s 13,092 minutes of me watched last week. Since I’ve got all of my statistics plus a pocket calculator, hang on one sec.

God in heaven. Since I began, the total watch time is 6,514,500 minutes. Six million minutes of watching me, that’s insane. I have a sudden urge to comb my hair.

And still it’s not what I learned, it’s not what I want to talk to you about. Nor is the money: YouTube pays less than you think. I’m getting between £20 and £40 per month, but then I also separately got a lot of funding about 17 months in, so the real per-month figure is considerably higher. There are also book sales that have come from it, and various courses I run. Plus I’ve just been booked to make a lot of videos for other companies.

No, truly, what I learned is this thing about the new normal.

There have been no breaks in the two years, no gaps, just at least one video every week. I’ve done extra editions in short runs so the total is 117 videos in 104 weeks. And now I know that there will be a 118th next week, 119th the week after. It’s still the same amount of work, it’s still the same amount of effort, but the doubt is gone. I don’t doubt that I’ll do another video, because I no longer think about whether I should doubt, or at least not as much.

For better or worse, for as small as my channel is compared to others, for as little as it pays directly compared to the time it takes me, 58keys is now a normal part of my working life.

And since I’ve scripted at least 90 of those episodes, writing non-fiction YouTube scripts is also a normal part of my working life now. That’s been startling: I can see my scriptwriting is better than it was, which had been an aim but I hadn’t guessed how very much I would feel it would help me.

You can very easily argue that there are other things I could put the effort in to, but I don’t think you can argue that writing effort is not being made. Or that things are happening because of it.

Which all gives me encouragement just where I need some.

It encourages me because there are other things I have put off, there are other things that I want to write, other areas I want to write in, other failings that make me angry at myself on the hour and the half-hour. There are areas where I feel both that I am starting from scratch and that I should have started a long, long time ago.

Can’t do anything about what I haven’t done, but I can pull my bloody finger out and make these new areas be part of my normal working life.

We can make it to the Mexican border by nightfall

Posted by

So very long ago now, I used to write sometimes for an entertainment website – I’ve done this a lot and for more sites and magazines than I can reliably remember – and I was there when this one decided to launch TV episode guides. Even then, there were a fair few of these online, but they did tend to be either barebones TV Guide-style listings, or gushing fan tributes. This site wanted to become known for having the best episode guides, ones that were genuinely useful to someone looking up a detail, were totally accurate in that detail, and were also just a good read.

Really, they wanted readers to know the staff knew their stuff: the site wanted to be seen as an authority. So it had to be obvious that the guide wasn’t just rephrasing listing or PR copy, this all had to clearly be written by people who watched these episodes.

That’s a pretty ambitious, er, ambition. Not from the writing: the entire staff and all the freelancers like me had been writing about television drama for years on this and other publications. But it was dauntingly ambitious to start off on what was planned to become this enormous, comprehensive guide to just about everything.

I can’t remember all of the shows that something like five or six people were assigned first. But here’s how long ago this was: I got the then-new “Brothers and Sisters” season 1. I’ve just had to check and it apparently aired in 2006, which is a lot more recently than I’d remembered. I also had not remembered that there were 23 episodes in that first season.

Plus I can’t recall how long I got to watch them. I do remember a faintly feverish sense about it, I remember thinking I could just fit in one more episode if I did this or that, if so-and-so was as late as they usually are. I want to say I watched the season in a week, I am certain it was well under a month. Let’s call it ten days.

Ten days, one season, done, written about, filed, and I waited for what the next assignment would be.

It never came. Not on episode guides.

Instead, when my copy finally got read, I was told off. Taken to one side and told off.

At this distance, I can’t possibly remember the criticism, the specific words they used. But actually even right then, on the day, sitting in front of an unhappy editor, I believe my mind translated the words into “you wrote it too well”.

Because no one else watched any of their assigned shows.

Not one episode.

Everyone else had just rephrased and padded out listings and whatever they found online from the TV company’s PR people.

If you read mine, you knew I’d watched. If you read any of theirs, you knew they hadn’t. I’m not claiming that I wrote well and they did not, but I did and they didn’t.

I was told that I had to cut my piece back, strip out as much as possible, and make it look like everybody else’s. I truly can’t remember and strongly suspect I didn’t say fuck that, but I know for certain that I didn’t do it. Just as I know for certain that the site never became known for any episode guides at all. Tellingly, to find out for you when this was and how many episodes there were in Brothers and Sisters, I looked up epguides.com, not this entertainment site.

God in heaven.

I’ve just checked on a whim and this site I’m not naming still exists, albeit in a radically different form. I couldn’t possibly resist: I’ve done a search on it for Brothers and Sisters season 1.

The site says it aired in 1998, which it didn’t. It lists this 2006 drama as drama, which is true, but also incorrectly says that it’s children’s TV.

I’m surprised to say that there is a guide, though it’s just 50 words or so per episode. I hope it’s not based on my writing: it reads like a short, flat PR/TV Guide listing. I suspect the actual listings whenever this show airs are automatically pulled from the guide: the format has that kind of feel to it.

Anyway.

The argument for cutting mine down to match everyone else’s was that the site had to look consistent. Fine, I definitely thought and I hope I said, be consistent by having them do their assignment, watch the bloody shows and write better.

To my mind, the argument against cutting down to match everyone else’s was what’s the point? For the sake of a consistent look, they were throwing away all of this ambition, every single bit of their aim for the entire project.

I didn’t know they were also throwing away accuracy and I’m quite shaken by that. Partly from how you’ve just got to get facts right, but also because the first transmission date of a TV drama is not exactly a grey area.

Here’s the thing, though. I do understand that desire for consistency. And have even shared it.

I used to believe that there was a need for this on the other end of this TV episode guide issue, that there was a need for it in actual TV episodes too. I love television drama series and for all the myriad issues and possibilities in them, one thing seems a bit obviously true.

They’re series.

You hope for some great progression between episode 1 and episode 23, but episode 23 has to be the same show that episode 1 was. You can’t have episode 1 be serious, bone-crunching drama and episode 23 be a musical. Well, you can, and there are shows that pull off incredible ranges of episodes.

Only Doctor Who really manages that, though. Imagine if Line of Duty was piercing contemporary drama one week and stilted historical renactment the next. Or more possibly, imagine if one week Line of Duty felt authentic and in the next it didn’t.

There has to be a consistency and I remember adding that criticism to the very many others I had about ITV’s police soap, The Bill. Whenever JC Wilsher would write an episode, the characters sounded and felt and seemed like real police. When other people wrote episodes, not so much.

I felt this was wrong and that the series was doing a bad job.

But.

I was wrong.

And this is why I wanted to talk to you about this today, why it’s on my mind and –– I can’t say I expected this –– why an argument on an entertainment site from prehistory came back into my mind for the first time in decades.

Last night, I watched Look to the Lady, the first story in the BBC’s 1989/1990 dramatisation of Margery Allingham’s Campion novels. Some time last week I’d seen a later story in the short run and enjoyed it enough to want to watch more.

The story later in the run was fine. Look to the Lady was excellent. Much funnier, every character much more witty and just alive, and plot-heavy exposition conveyed with a twinkle in the eye. Loved it.

And knew I would.

Because this first story was dramatised from Allingham’s book by Alan Plater. Knowing he’d written it, my wife Angela asked beforehand whether it was going to be wittier than the last one. Because, she pointed out, whenever he wrote Lewis episodes, Inspector Lewis and didn’t-he-used-to-be-good Sergeant Hathaway were always smarter, faster, better than in other episodes.

It’s also true that the episode included this line about making it to the Mexican border that Alan seemed to enjoy fitting in to every show he could.

But if that was an unmistakeable signpost that he’d written the episode, it was never the case that he went so far as to make a show unrecognisable. It was never the case that Lewis and Hathaway were different characters in Plater’s episodes compared to other ones. It was just that you were more interested in them when he was the writer.

This is a case where I suspect I could have argued for more consistency right up until very recently, ie last night. But if my head sees the need for a series to be a series, my heart knows I’m wrong and it’s known that for a lot longer than 12 hours.

You want any series to be uniformly excellent, but it isn’t going to happen. Some episodes will be better than others, visibly and markedly so, but it is not the series getting it wrong for allowing that difference. It’s the series being damn lucky to have a great episode.

Born in the 1900s

Posted by

I just heard this expression last night. In exchange for telling a guy of the old “never mind the quality, feel the width” line that you don’t even remember, he told me that the new insult is to refer to someone has having been born in the 1900s.

Of course, if you were born in 1999 then you would be 23 now but you also wouldn’t be insulted by the phrase, wouldn’t take it as a dig at your age, and quite possibly wouldn’t be reading this. The unstated cut is that you’re not actually aged between 23 and a maximum 121, it’s that you are indeed 121 and that you look every pixel of your age.

There is so much I wish I’d done sooner, been able, been capable of doing sooner. And there are a handful of things I’d rather I hadn’t done yet or, indeed, at all. On balance, I should’ve done more of both.

But otherwise I’m okay with my age, okay with where I am, quite a bit more than okay, sometimes, with what I’m doing. I can cope with 2022.

I just don’t seem to be able to cope with January.

This time I’m somehow still in a fuzzy cloud post-Christmas and at exactly the same time I estimate that we are already coming up on six million days into the year.

This week, I had a Zoom chat with a friend who, when pressed, admitted that she’d had to get up early to talk to me. I am profoundly flattered that anyone would, but in that moment the idea of being able to lie in on a morning was damn appealing. I’m just not sure how I can square that with how the fact that all month I’ve been struggling to get up before 7am.

I’ve had to today, fortunately. When I send this to you, I have to drive off to a school and spend the day there as a visiting author. I did a journalism day in a school last October, but otherwise it’s been over two years since I did this and the only real surprise so far is that I’m exactly as nervous as I was last time and the time before and the time before.

There is a difference. Schools often offer me a lunch but then most of the time I forget that they have, spend the entire lunch hour gassing away with pupils and teachers, and then wonder why I’m so exceptionally hungry.

Not today. Today I’ve learned a lesson and have made sandwiches.

And then there’s also that I took a lateral flow test last night and while it was negative, while it was fine, I learned in that pregnancy-test-style wait just how there is something that makes me more nervous than going into a school. It’s the prospect of not going in when you’ve promised to.

I’m nervous enough that as much as I know I’ll enjoy it, as much as I think it’s a privilege to be asked into a school, right now I would rather make you a mug of tea and ask how you’re doing.

Let me put the kettle on.

Why I left Radio Times

Posted by

I left Radio Times because they threw me out. Er, the end.

Okay, no, I say this to you and even one entire decade after I was chucked out of the Radio Times website and magazine, I want to explain that it was a budget thing. Some number of people had to go and it was so obvious that I was expendable at this particular point that I’d packed my bags at the start of the entire interview-for-your-own-job process.

That was the only bit I disliked and I’d actually forgotten it until I said that to you. Much as I loved Radio Times, that was telling me to take a typing test and that bit did piss me off. Even so, I’m not kidding: I knew immediately who would be kept on and who wouldn’t, and that was not from some fatalistic brilliance of mine, it was because it was that obvious.

Again you remind me of something. I say all of this to you and abruptly I can picture the room I was in when they told me. Mind you, this is also no startling feat on my part because the room was in the BBC Media Village and was one of the ones that had been decorated in the style of a BBC show. I was fired from Radio Times in the Doctor Who room. In fact, I’m a tiny bit unclear right now who the two people in front of me were, possibly three, but I am rock-solid clear about how I was sitting with my back to the TARDIS.

Which, if you discount the little detail that I was chucked out, is really why I left.

The actual ten-year anniversary is sometime in the middle of 2022, I’d have to figure it out to know when exactly, but it’s on my mind now because this week a colleague mentioned “The Writer’s Tale”, a book about the making of Doctor Who which I’d read before the aforementioned chucking out.

It is a very, very good book and was the idea of a Radio Times writer I don’t think I even ever met. Benjamin Cook. He asked Russell T Davies to email him about making Doctor Who and the result is – wait, let me check Amazon UK – 704 pages of immense detail. I expect it’s the same length on Amazon US.

Immense detail doesn’t cover it, oddly enough. This book is an oppressive whirlwind of pressures, even as it somehow manages to be joyous at exactly the same time. I remember reading it at night, unable to stop hours after my body was ordering me to sleep, and feeling this same intensity you get from nightmares.

God, it’s a great book.

But this Writers’ Guild colleague mentions it and that’s what put me back ten years or so, put me back in the Radio Times newsroom office like it was, well, not yesterday but no further back than Tuesday at the absolute most.

I can close my eyes and take you around that entire huge, open-plan space. I can point out where I usually sat. I can see in slow motion the moment when I once stood up and saw two identically-dressed people at opposite ends of the newsroom. And consequently realised at last that this is why I’d sometimes have a great chat with her and sometimes she’d blank me like a stranger.

Less embarrassingly and far more fascinatingly, to me anyway, is how I can also picture the precise angle from my usual seat where the office segued into the kitchen. Happy, cheery people would walk by on their way to get tea and at the same exact spot, once or twice they’d turn blood-angry. Like they’d been asked to take a typing test. Real anger, contained only by a desire to keep their job, and then at this moment no longer contained at all.

Always that same spot, always as they passed by me at this same angle.

I suddenly wonder if they just didn’t like me.

Anyway.

Last one. I can also picture-remember the different spot I happened to be sitting in when I was sneaking a few minutes to carry on reading “The Writer’s Tale”.

Again, sorry, fuzzy on the detail. This was some time before 2012, could even have been as far back as 2008 when the first edition of the book came out.

Whenever it was, the moment is vivid for me, the very feel of the paperback in my hand and the pages under my fingers, right here in my head like there’d been a flashbulb. All because of one moment in one of the email exchanges I was reading. Benjamin Cook had asked Russell T Davies about some particular decision in the making of Doctor Who and he’d replied with the answer. I want to say it was to do with casting, but forgive me, my flashbulb memory clearly has some limits.

The key thing, though, is that this was an email conversation. You’ve had a few of those yourself. So you know that every single one, every single exchange in the entire book comes with a date and time stamp. The day, the hour, the minute, that the email was sent.

And that’s why I left.

Because I was fascinated to read about this decision chiefly since I vividly remembered writing a news story for the Radio Times website about precisely that.

Only, I wrote the news story pretty much exactly one year after that email exchange.

I looked up from that page and for the first time, I was no longer where I wanted to be.

I now wanted to be making the decision, not writing about it a year later.

The end.

Okay, no. It should be the end. That would be the right dramatic ending: I look up, realise I don’t belong there anymore, and I get out. Instead, I take a couple of years to leave and I’m very much afraid that I might still be there if they hadn’t shown me a door and which exact side of it they wanted me on.

But really I was gone that day back reading the Doctor Who book. Maybe that was why it seemed so clear to me that it was right to chuck me out. I wish now that I’d left years before, but then I also wouldn’t wish away any of the time I spent there. So I wish instead that those years had been more compressed, exactly the way the decade since has.

I would hope for a great abduction story or something

Posted by

I’m not sure what 2021 was, other than not the year we expected after 2020. So I’m thinking of preparing myself for 2022 by only expecting it to be the 25th anniversary of the film “Grosse Pointe Blank” by Tom Jankiewicz, D. V. DeVincentis, Steve Pink and John Cusack.

Which makes it a quarter of a century that I’ve remembered and wished I’d written the film’s strapline: “Even a hitman deserves a second shot.”

And that I’ve also remembered this scene when Martin Blank (John Cusack) meets Debi Newberry (Minnie Driver) a decade after standing her up at their school’s prom night and vanishing.

DEBI: You tell me about yourself.
MARTIN: In California, travel around a lot on business.
DEBI: That’s it?
MARTIN: Yeah.
DEBI: That’s ten years?
MARTIN: Yeah.
DEBI: I would hope for a great abduction story or something.
MARTIN: I’ve had a few thrilling moments here and there.

It turns out I’ve had what I’d call a few thrilling moments in the last year and in the last ten years, too. Back in 2012, quite a lot happened to me. Radio Times chucked me out, for one thing, and BBC Ceefax closed down forever. I still think that was an overreaction. But, God, earlier this year we had some builders in and they accidentally took away my BBC Ceefax mug. The stun to my stomach when I realised was matched only by the relief when they brought it back the next day. A mug. I’m talking about a mug. I think you’re looking at one, too.

Anyway. Ten years on, sitting here writing to you, I realise I can’t entirely remember what happened with me and BBC News Online. That was always wrapped up around Ceefax and I’d long before lost regular work with that, so I think it just dribbled away.

Still, BBC News Online continues uninterrupted to this day and so does Radio Times. I can’t imagine how they’re managing without me. They must be being very brave. And BBC Breakfast could’ve interviewed many of them about Ceefax in 2012, but they interviewed me.

Those different teams –– RT, Ceefax, News Online – remain some of the best people I’ve worked with but the pleasure of that, the enjoyment of creative people at their peak, it was pretty much replaced for me in 2012 by Writing West Midlands. I can picture the first coffee meeting with that organisation’s Jonathan Davidson, and at this distance I can even feel my nerves as he wondered aloud about whether I’d be good at going into schools as a visiting author.

I officially became a full and proper author in 2012, too, as my first book came out. “BFI TV Classics: The Beiderbecke Affair” (Amazon UK, Amazon US). It was important to me for a hundred reasons, it turns out that it was important to quite a few readers over the years too, and some day I hope to make back the advance.

It must’ve been such a strange year for me. Losing my biggest clients, effectively losing all of the work that had seen me living on the motorway between home and London. And at the same time sitting here, actually right where I am now, when the author’s copies of my book arrived. Sitting here holding that book in my hand and realising that no one could ever take it away from me. Good or bad, right or wrong, no one can un-publish that book. I’d done something I longed for and it was real.

Curiously enough, ten years on in 2022, I’m going to do something else I’ve longed for. I’ll have a play on BBC Radio 4 at last.

But that’s enough now, you’ve indulged my nostalgia far too much, you are far too kind. I recommend that you take my best wishes for your 2022 and go be you. I don’t recommend that you read on.

Because if I can’t really describe the last ten years beyond a few thrilling moments, I can detail 2021 and I’m afraid it looks very much like I’m going to. For whatever reason that deep therapy might uncover, I do tend to count things as I go and I also now appear to need to show you how many jobs I’ve done, how many scripts I’ve written, that kind of thing. I can’t pretend that it is in any sensible way useful to me so, frankly, there’s no chance it’ll be of use to you.

Yet I keep doing it and in dark moments, there’s something about the routine of logging this stuff, there’s something about how I can feel stuck and failed but, look, at least I did this, this and that number of those. It seems even more flimsy as I tell you about it, but we both know I’ll continue, so let me get this off my chest and, for once, hope you’re looking the other way.

In 2021, I did 1,853 jobs. I need to explain what constitutes a job. If you commission me for an article, that article gets listed in my Job Book. If that article requires me to interview someone, as happened a lot this year, then the interview is a job too. So it’s a lot less than, say, submitting 1,853 CVs to companies, but it’s also more than, say, just a task in my To Do app.

And I know that because my To Do app is the superb OmniFocus – which, incidentally, I apparently began using ten years and maybe six months ago –– and OmniFocus tells me I completed 7,722 To Do tasks in 2021.

Those jobs and tasks include writing Self Distract to you, of which this is the 52nd of the year and, counting on my fingers, totals something around 39,000 words. It also includes 31 workshops, 1 school visit, 12 Writers’ Guild regional newsletters, 7 appearances on BBC Radio, 242 newswriting shifts, and apparently 14 podcast appearances. That seems a bit low to me, enough so that I wish I counted better.

I doubt I’ll do it, I am reaching my level of anoraksia, but looking at the figures today, I also wonder about making more of a distinction between different types of job. Because I am close to having to guess this next: I appear to have written 1,221 articles for 4 companies in 2021.

I definitely chaired 3 panels, worked as a judge on 2 awards ceremonies, and read 523 scripts. I’m relieved to say that I wrote a few scripts too. Throughout 2021 I had various meetings that meant at least twiddling with an existing drama script, at most doing a small redraft. But I also wrote 5 drama scripts from scratch, which is possibly not overwhelming, but makes me feel okay.

Then there were non-fiction scripts. I write almost every edition of my 58keys YouTube series, of which I produced 60 in 2021 (a few aren’t going out until early 2022), plus this year I made videos for other companies, too. I think I made 6, of which 2 were scripted. Call it 66 videos produced, and 60 non-fiction scripts written.

There’s also a book, “The Blank Screen: Interviewing for Authors and Writers” (Amazon UK, Amazon US). That originated with about five hours of script I wrote in 2020 for a Udemy online course, but I’m still going to count it as 2021 since a book is a bit different and I appear to be more than a bit needy.

Maybe the thing I think I did best, certainly the thing I’m proudest of, is that I created a six-week-long Tuesday Night Writing Club and then later a six-week-long Wednesday Night Writing Club. That’s a total of 12 weeks and I adore that it is a total which is vanishingly small compared to the fact that both clubs have continued without me. Just before Christmas I was invited to join a meeting of the old Tuesday Night gang, and it is inexpressibly wonderful to see a group that were strangers before me are now deep friends after me.

On the less fantastic side, 2021 is also when term limits meant I had to step down as deputy chair of the Writers’ Guild. And workload limits meant I had to step down as chair of Cucumber Playwrights. And funding cuts meant the closure of the workshops from the Federation of Entertainment Unions.

But if you’ve read this far, let me finally shut up by admitting that in the entire year, I wrote just one short piece of fiction.

I would hope for a great abduction story, but no.

Plaque build up

Posted by

This is going to sound like a joke because it should be one, but it isn’t. That photo above is of me standing outside 25 Gay Street, Bath, in the UK. It’s a dentist’s.

You can’t just go inside without an appointment and I did try. Too much of a wimp to punch myself in the mouth, I did still do my very best to eat all the chocolate in the city. I tell you, I was diligent. Yet nothing worked and so the outside was as far as I could get.

And I was still starstruck.

Because 25 Gay Street, Bath, is one of the few surviving places where Jane Austen lived. I can’t tell you what a thrill it was to stand there, nor really can I explain why it was such a thrill. By chance I have just started re-reading Austen, so the trip to Bath was well-timed, and she is a favourite writer for a dozen reasons including how swiftly vicious she can be, introducing a character and entirely destroying them in six words or so. But, still, I am rarely that starstruck and even more rarely by a building.

The problem is that you’d never know she lived there.

You have to already know and fortunately there is help. Just down the road at 40 Gay Street there is the Jane Austen Centre. Skip the oddly Benny Hill-like video that plays in one downstairs room and instead talk with the staff. There’s something incongruous about chatting away with a woman whose Regency costume only just covers her tattoo, but it’s a happy incongruity and all the nattering with the staff was my favourite part of the exhibition.

Not quite true. I knew nothing at all about Cassandra Austen, Jane’s mother, and now I know all I need from a poem of hers on display where three lines about a party she went to are enough to paint a picture of someone you’d like.

They came from Mr Bramston’s house,
With Madam, & her maiden Sister;
(Had she been absent who’d have missed her?)

It was funny hearing a laugh at intervals and knowing someone had just read to that point.

But, so, and. Here’s this Jane Austen Centre, set up in a house that is a minute away from where she actually lived and is presumably very like her place. Pop up the road to hers, though, and as I say, you will find a dentist’s.

You just won’t find anything else.

Not a sign, not a thing. Well, obviously there’s one sign or you wouldn’t know it was a dentist’s. And okay, there’s also “25” or you wouldn’t know which house was which. But there is not one single pixel celebrating, boasting or even vaguely acknowledging that Austen lived there.

It’s just wrong. I think of all the wit in her novels and this dentist’s office couldn’t manage one line. They presumably talk about plaque in that office, but they don’t have a blue one outside.

And they don’t even have a sign saying: “It is a tooth universally acknowledged…”

Ten favourite scripts of 2021

Posted by

I read these and didn’t have to. Wait, no, some I did: award shows are back so there were 30 or so scripts I was required to read. But other than that, so far this year I’ve read 500 scripts for fun and that number, plus it being mid-December, means I feel ready to recommend some reading to you, if I may.

Of those 500, 13 were stage plays, 20 were films, 43 were radio and a mere 424 were TV. What I can’t count or even really manage to guess is how many were written or made in 2021. I would have to say that the answer is not many at all.

This reading is done for pleasure and it’s as I find what I can. Some of the scripts are definitely new, but you also know how long it takes scripts to reach the screen so “new” can still mean a couple of years old. And then at least one script is from 30 years back.

So there’s no statistical analysis here, no rule or reason, no rhyme or plan. But I would like you to know that I found these ten to be immensely good reads. Just to avoid having any semblance of a countdown, let me split this all into the medium that the script was for.

Except for radio. There were a lot of really great radio drama scripts but only a couple that could’ve poked up into my top ten for the year –– and those were part of the judging I did so it’s awkward naming them ahead of the ceremony.

STAGE

Fleabag by Phoebe Waller-Bridge
Sweet Sorrow by Alan Plater

Neither is available online, I’m afraid. I got them from my bookshelves and you’re welcome to pop round.

I do keep a note next to each script I read, the very briefest of lines, ranging from “Okay” upwards and really only so I can look back and re-read the best ones.

Next to Fleabag, which I read on February 14, 2021, I’ve just written the word “Fantastic”. And next to Sweet Sorrow, read on November 4, it says “So good I cried.”

FILM

Promising Young Woman by Emerald Fennell

“Left me shaking,” says my note on February 1. “Wonderful.”

TV
Frasier: Dinner Party by Jeffrey Richman
The Handmaid’s Tale: Offred by Bruce Miller
Inside No 9: The 12 Days of Christine by Steve Pemberton and Reece Shearsmith
Press Gang: There are Crocodiles by Steven Moffat
The Queen’s Gambit (Episode 1) by Scott Frank
Schmigadoon! (Pilot) by Cinco Paul & Ken Daurio
Stumptown: Forget it, Dex, it’s Stumptown by Jason Richman

Looking at that list, I think I might go for The Queen’s Gambit, read March 3, as the best. All I’ve written next to it is “So good” but of all the series here, it’s the one I wish I could read the rest of.

I’m surprised to see just how wrenching some of these are. I’d have said I read a lot of comedy this year because a) I needed to 2) they’re quite short and also, er, iii?) they can be so tightly written that it’s fascinating. But apparently I also found time on February 16 for The Handmaid’s Tale which was like reading a knife.

This is the year I finally got into Inside No 9 and I did so because of the scripts. I can remember laughing so much, so very much at A Quiet Night In by Steve Pemberton and Reece Shearsmith, that I felt light headed as I read it on June 4. But it’s their The 12 Days of Christine, June 6, that sticks with me for how moving it is.

Still, speaking of funny, I was elated on September 19 to find that the script to episode 1 of Schmigadoon! was online. This is a musical comedy about comedy musicals and every frame is a loving nod to a genre of movie I did not realise I knew so well.

Seriously, every frame. And every note. The very opening sound of the first episode made me smile and I can’t say I didn’t stop until the end of the last episode, but it was pretty close.

Whereas Stumptown was upsetting on June 10 – but in a different way to the rest. It is a simply excellent detective series and so much so that you realise how rare that actually is. What’s upsetting is that the pilot went to series, the series is superb, it earned a second series commission –– and was then cancelled before production could start.

It was a scheduling thing and a COVID thing, and if I don’t know the details, I know it was pretty much a tragedy. You do not get great detective shows very often.

I look at my note next to Stumptown and how it just says “Excellent”. I am so good at conveying the worth of a script, clearly.

Mind you, you should see the ones I’m not telling you about and that I never will. One had just had the words “Staggeringly shite” next to it, and that was on a pilot script for a show that then ran for years.

Clearly, I know my stuff.

 

Press Gang

Quote me no quotes

Posted by

One of the more irritating things about me –– I keep a list, it’s available on application –– is that I quote incessantly. It’s not as if I’m ever quoting something you’d know, either. That could even be good.

It’s also not as if I always realise it’s a quote. The line will have become part of me, part of my idiolect, but I didn’t think it up, not so much. Now I say that bit aloud, I realise I could’ve got away with just quoting. If you don’t know it’s a quote, you might get irritated by its repetition over the years, but you couldn’t know I stole the line. I would have got away with it, but for you pesky kid.

I wish you’d been pesky another week. Because the line I have been forcibly reminded is a quote, the line that made me want to confess my sins to you today, is really tough to set up clearly. Nonetheless, you’re here, I’m here, we’ve got my quote, let’s play our game.

Please imagine you and I have got to a party or somewhere and we are waiting to be let in. It has been known that when the door opens, I may gesture to you and tell the host that “I caught this one trying to escape.” That’s it. You may well struggle to imagine that it gets a laugh, but over the years, its hit rate is pretty good. It’s not as if I do it every day, that’s not what I’m saying, but it comes up and then it tends to come out of me practically involuntarily.

Okay.

I read a script every day, I suppose because I’m scriptwriter and I want to get better at it, but chiefly because I enjoy it and I see no reason to stop. Since I also appear to need to count things, I can tell you that last Tuesday’s script was the 491st I’ve read this year. Please take a look at page 37, scene 634 from that script:

EXT. CAMPBELL’S DRIVEWAY. EVENING.

…The Butler answers the door. Spike immediately drags Lynda through.

SPIKE: (To Butler) I caught this one trying to escape – dug a tunnel with a cocktail stick.

It’s Press Gang. Series 2, episode 6, “At Last a Dragon” by Steven Moffat. The script is dated March 1, 1989 – you can read it all right here – and I probably saw the episode around the time it aired, February 22, 1990. That’s 31 years, 9 months and 18 days ago. It’s 11,614 days back and I am still quoting what turns out to be half a line from what we’d now call a Young Adult series.

Give me some credit, it’s the better half of the line. But if you’re still imagining us standing at a door, please look at my face as I reach that line in the script and realise all of this.

I was a bit startled. It did also flash me back to interviewing Moffat on the Press Gang newsroom set. It flashed me back further to when I used to work in a large company and we had Christmas parties. I see myself and I don’t know, perhaps 20 other people, in the St John Swallow Hotel in Solihull, where I am the only person at the bar who is more interested in what’s on the TV set than in the bottles.

Perhaps it doesn’t seem it now, but back in the late 1980s, Press Gang simply looked better than anything else. Certainly better than anything else airing around that late afternoon children’s/teen slot. I’m at the bar, the TV is on, the sound is off, and I’m wondering what this movie is I’m watching.

I can’t pin down the date I was at that bar, I can’t guess what Press Gang episode was being shown then. But I can pin down that it was 1,659 weeks and 1 day since I saw “At Last a Dragon”.

And I can tell you that the script still stands up. I’m not overkeen on the cocktail stick line, that’s not going to take a place in my idiolect, but I could do with being able to write that well. Makes you wonder whether Steven Moffat went on to write anything else.

Pronouncing sentence

Posted by

I’m hoping it’s the way you tell ’em, but I suspect it’s the way you read it. Please take a look at the following sentence, which is the sole thing I remember from an entire night of nightmares.

“I’m tired of boring people.”

Now, maybe it also depends how nice you are. I would like to think that you read that as meaning I, me, this fella right here in front of you, is weary of some other people who have in some way been continuously boring.

Except I read it as I, me, this guy, is weary of how much he bores everyone.

I did tell you it was a nightmare. I didn’t tell you it was five nights ago and I won’t tell you that I’ve spent a ridiculous amount of time since thinking about it. But you can possibly guess.

As a result of spending a ridiculous amount of time thinking about it, though, I can definitively say that I’ve now thought back through everybody I’ve ever met. And there was only one man, a councillor I interviewed in Redditch, who was boring. Give him credit, he was clearly practicing to become boring professionally and I am certain he will have made it to the top.

Everybody is interesting. Everything is interesting, absolutely everything.

(Except football.)

But everything else, absolutely everything else is so interesting that I can’t get enough of it.

Apparently I also can’t shut up about it either. For it turns out that this is the 702nd Self Distract I’ve written to you.

I’m not sure how I missed that I’d got to 700, but then I’m equally unsure how in the world I got to 700. I will say, mind, that for the first while, Self Distract was less a letter to you and more some plugging of whatever work I’d just done on Radio Times or BBC Ceefax or BBC News Online or UK DVD Review.

Let’s rule out those few dull ones, then, and call this the 3rd Self Distract.

Or perhaps you and I can think of it as the first since BBC Radio 4 commissioned a play of mine. It’s less a play, more a sacred trust, and I’ve only wanted it for so many years that if they found out, they’d conclude I was a rubbish scriptwriter and take it back.

But while I can’t yet tell you, not even you, what the play is truly about, I can say that it’s based on an archive of letters. Even more letters than there have been Self Distracts, which appears to be saying something.

I think that’s interesting.