Assignment 2 Part III: Influential Text – Written For The Screen (Sternberg, 1997)
Claudia Sternberg’s Written For the Screen (1997), evoked major revelations about the craft of screenwriting for me. It spoke to me as both a creative screenwriter and analytical viewer. I found her ideas inspiring and refreshing, and most importantly adaptable for my own practice.
https://giphy.com/gifs/spongebob-cartoon-nickelodeon-thumbs-3o7abKhOpu0NwenH3O
Sternberg epitomises the different ways screenwriters can interject their style or voice. Such style is detailed into two streams; The Stylistic Paradigm (Sternberg, 1997, pp. 80-87) refers to a screenwriter’s practice through devices, genre and ideas, and the Imagery and Language of Images (Sternberg, 1997, pp. 87-91) refers strictly to linguistic tools, such as simile and metaphor. In the first section, Sternberg outlines that the screenwriter’s choices in syntagmatic requirements of the text-type (scenic structure, character action and dialogue, time and place of specification) form the stylistic paradigm of the text-type. (Sternberg, 1997, pp. 80). In the latter section, Sternberg emphasises that action and henceforth screenplay imagery, can be greatly assisted by via “decodable constructions”. (Sternberg, 1997, p. 87). This refers to metaphor, simile, comparisons, descriptions. She argues that these methods are more telling than action descriptions as screenwriters can “substantiate moods and emotions”. (Sternberg, 1997, p. 87).
I particularly enjoyed Sternberg’s Written For the Screen (1997) reading as it introduces screenwriting in a similar light to that of a literary piece or film. It focuses on the creativity and art of the screenwriting craft, rather than regurgitating classic screenwriting formula and conventions. This more liberating opinion shattered my previous assumptions of classic or fixed screenwriting format, such as in Mckee’s positioning on description (Mckee, 1999, pp.394-400). In class Stayci advised us that opinions about style and description are firm and often opposing in the screenwriting world – as evidenced in the contrasts between Mckee and Sternberg, because the screenplay is such a collaborative document.
I found the examples referenced throughout not only interesting, but useful. Typically being a very analytical reader and viewer, writing can make me feel trapped. I really enjoy editing but first getting that idea out there is the big challenge. Sternberg’s positioning between the two realms, the way she explains the impact of examples makes me want to get drafting. Her observations make me feel more confident to stylise my own writing. I know I can get stuck in the passive voice, I can over describe and complicate the simplest action, I can not give enough spatial awareness for a scene, but Sternberg’s observations point me out of these pitfalls – ie I can utilise genre devices or metaphors that will better communicate an idea.
https://giphy.com/gifs/batman-joker-i-got-more-style-brains-rUgeFk3eZ8Cwo
Sternberg’s opening passage is a quote by Sergei Eisenstein which introduces the style notion:
- (1925: 35 cited in Sternberg 1997, p. 80)
This quote is significant to me as I recently did an assignment on Eisenstein’s theory of montage for my Histories of Film Theories subject. Sergei Eisenstein, Marxist and former engineering student, is renowned a “revolutionary Russian director” and influential Soviet Montage filmmaker (Vassilieva 2017). He had a lifelong fascination with how audience responses can be aroused in the theatre and in film. (Shaw 2004). His filmic ideals and methods of montage are extremely pivotal to visual storytelling and he contended that style is the greatest form of impact. (Shaw 2004).
(His style was mainly the propaganda sort, but style nonetheless!)
When asked to source examples of Sternberg’s mentioned styles, my group focussed on the screenplay Thelma and Louise (Khouri, 1990). Identifying these examples further established tool presets in my mind as to what I can use in my very own writing. We found examples of screenplay language reflecting genre as aforementioned by Sternberg (1997, pp. 82-3). The description of a character as a “real ladykiller” (Khouri, 1990, p. 2) exhibits the screenplay’s language reflecting the ‘world’, and also serves as being ‘stylistically reminiscent of diction’ (Sternberg 1997 p. 83). Another example of this kind is when Louise is described as a “waitress in a coffee shop… too old to be doing this” (Khouri, 1990, p. 1).
REFERENCES:
Mckee, R 1999, ‘The Text’ in STORY: Substance, structure, style, and the principles of screenwriting, Harper Collins, London, pp. 394-400.
Shaw, D 2004, ‘Sergei Eisenstein’, Senses of Cinema, 30 February, viewed 15 March 2018, <http://sensesofcinema.com/2004/great-directors/eisenstein/>.
Sternberg, C 1997, Written for the Screen: The American Motion-Picture Screenplay as Text, Transatlantic Perspectives, Stauffenburg Verlag, Tübingen.
Thelma and Louise, 199o, Callie Khouri, 5 June, viewed March 22, <http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/thelmaandlouise.html>.
Vassilieva, J 2017, ‘Sergei Eisenstein’, Senses of Cinema, 17 December, viewed 15 March 2018, <http://sensesofcinema.com/2017/great-directors/sergei-eisenstein/>.