Screenwriting : Perfection of screenwriting by Stephen Floyd

I think art has evolved since Plato. Perhaps the big guy was wrong?

He also said society was doomed because young people are aimless

My reaction to the idea of “requirements” was to think of the more visceral necessities for writing, like a comfortable chair, spare time and motivation. The idea being: give a writer these things and they’ll eventually get around to the perfect screenplay.

If the requirement is "endless imagination" then art never completed.

Screenwriting theorists don't make movies; they teach.

Filmmakers make movies; it's a collaboration process from paper to on-set filming. There's a recent post of "Nightcrawler" script which many say it is a great screenplay, but the writer-director, Dan Gilroy, gives actor Jake Gyllenhaal full credit for shaping the main character.

IMHO, screenwriting isn't art - it's craft (which I define separately and differently). Since a script is just the (most important) start of a project, it's the framework for the collaboration, as Dan MaxXx said. While a finished building may be called art (e.g. Frank Lloyd Wright), the blueprints are never mistaken for art.

A comfortable chair, a reliable writing device and a whole heap of how do I make this idea work. Everyone abuses those who write books but those who write books all inspire people. There is a lot of common sense that has been distilled over the decades. However at the end of it, it is a writer still scratching their head and trying to find a way that works for them. There is no right or wrong. There is just what works for you, but it starts with a comfy chair and a reliable writing tool.

This quote seems something a non-artist would say...

"Requirements?" "Perfection?" Perfectionism and "perfection ideals" can ruin art.

Well, Plato sure was a B.S. artist...

IMHO, craft is methodology and art is ideology. One does not oppose the other, and screenwriting requires both.

There's an even simpler way to define art: Art is creative expression. The other aspect of "art" is artistic skill: a prowess in craft and technical mastery. Clearly, screenwriting is both and thus it is art.

There's nothing wrong with chasing the often-illusive quality known as perfection. Some writers obsess over every word in a screenplay. Directors scrutinize every shot and frame of a film, as do editors, colorists and FX people. So do producers, and probably every other person who has a role in filmmaking.

But some writers sure can be pretty obsessive in their quests for perfection. I'd be more worried about a writer who doesn't chase the ideal state of perfection, and who doesn't try to make every word, line and scene "perfect", than those who do - and even if it's going to be changed in re-write by a producer or a studio anyway.

Best fortunes to you in your creative endeavors, Stephen!

Artists often try to do the best that they can, they reach and push for the best of their abilities either for the creative objective of a project or for their own development or both. Perfection itself is an illusion. And its pursuit is often fraught with damage and ruin.

Plato is vague. "Perfection" is just as subjective as anything else. When I was a ballet teacher, I told my students that you may never achieve perfection, but you should always strive for it. The idea was to work on small details so that they could be the best dancer they could be.

But in ballet, the perfection is in the skill, not the artistry. You can dance perfectly and not be very enjoyable to watch. In screenwriting, it's not so cut and dry. What even is a perfect screenplay?

I believe that art is the expression of one's passion, so I can see art in chess the same way I see art in baseball.

Owen, I don't think it's "completely pointless." I've done a lot of different types of writing throughout my life , and always worked my best to make something as perfect as I could. And the people who were non-writers in those endeavors - art directors, producers, directors, graphic designers, editors, publishers, political strategists, execs, business owners, venture capital people, etc. - they all strived to make every finished piece as perfect as they could, too. So I wouldn't exactly call that "pointless", but to each their own.

Best fortunes in your creative endeavors, Owen!

I think a perfect film is possible and already exists, though the definition in my mind is very subjective. If a film demonstrates the creative limits of a director, effectively communicates a singular vision and is of such quality that any notion of a re-make is laughable as pure vanity, I would say it is a perfect film. Examples include Seven Samurai, Mon Oncle, Hurt Locker, Kung Fu Hustle, Raiders of the Lost Arc. Again, totally subjective, but in my mind a perfect film is one that is exactly as it should be and needs no improvement or re-interpretation.

No, Plato is being rather specific and limited in his statement and thinking as if there are fixed criteria that must be met: "The perfection of art is ensured when all of its requirements are satisfied." Huh? I read that and my first thought: Wow, for a philosopher he really doesn't "get it." Lol! ;)

Have you ever heard someone say, "There's such an art to... whatever it is someone is doing or whatever they have created?" You can't quite put your finger on it but you sense something intangible, something that is special, unique, something that resonates. Well, that speaks to expression, something that incites or evokes emotion or thought or appreciation and/or celebration of skill, etc. So, yes, absolutely, you don't have to produce a piece of art to be artistic.

Sometimes all requirements are satisfied in a less than perfect way.

~Phillip, The Scribes Who Cares

The very nature of art is vague. We only know it when we experience it.

Beth Fox Heisinger Perhaps obtuse is a better word? What specific requirements are there for art other than to express one's vision of themselves or the external world? Skill is one thing, but art transcends skill.

A sculpture without form is just a rock. The means to create art is unbridled imagination and passionate expression, the medium by which it is created requires form/shape or methodology. The devotion to improve or "perfect" one's methodology is a natural impulse. Although I agree that an actual state of perfection does not exist, except in a subjective way. But Plato's words ring pragmatic not philosophical, to me at least. If you don't think that methodology matters, then why pay more to eat at a restaurant where a chef has elevated his food prep to an art form? And why not hire the cheapest lawn mower or house painter you can find, even if they can't trace a straight line to save their life? :) We seek the skills of those who have mastered or "perfected" their trade. So why would art - the most competitive field for subsistence - be any different?

p.s. - Unless an artist is creating art for art's sake, and not for commerce or profit, then we're really all talking about applied art. So that makes Plato's quote an apple-to- orange comparison, since i don't know too many screenwriters who write for the sake of writing, without the goal or hope of seeing their scripts produced. But I actually do think that scriptwriting can be a masterful example of applied art. - in the hands of a someone who sculpts a story and chisels their characters into a unique expression. I don't know about you guys, but I wouldn't pay to watch a rock, or its sequel..

No, I personally do not think "obtuse" is a better word, neither is "vague"—art's nature is not vague. Hardly. That notion was certainly not a part of my art degree and training. Lol! Sorry, JJ Smith, I just don't agree—which is okay, we can disagree. Sure, a particular individual artist's work may be hard to comprehend, but Art itself is not. If it was hard to comprehend, then art would not be as coveted, enjoyed, celebrated, appreciated, and sought after as it is and has always been. Artists work with purpose, with conviction, with care, with meaning, with intelligence, with skill, etc. Art has meaning. ;)

Reminds me of the old joke:

Studio exec calls a writer whose script they had purchased. "My boss gave me your script, and I've been assigned to produce it. I love your script - it's brilliant. The concept, the execution, the characters. It's actor-proof. It's director-proof. It's hip. It's classical. Everyone A-Lister in town wants to be a part of it. It's the perfect script!"

"Well...thanks." said the writer. "When do you think you'll start making it?"

"As soon as I get it back from re-write!" replied the studio exec.

The applied arts are the application of decoration and design to everyday objects to make them aesthetically pleasing—as usually defined by various resources—as opposed to the fine arts. Dunno what that has to do with Plato or anything, just thought it helpful to clarify. Lol! And making art or writing scripts for "art's sake" is a great thing to do! Some of those creative endeavors have become great films! Hey, anything and everything one can do to better hone their voice and craft the better, no?! :))) Speaking of which, I've gotta get back to work. Carry on artists!

I didn't say it was hard to comprehend. I said we only know it when we experience it.

The meaning of "obtuse" is either an acute angle, slow to understand, dull, blunt, rounded, dim-witted, hard to comprehend, etc. I took your suggestion of "obtuse" as a better word for art literally—seems like you meant it to be taken as such. Lol! ;) Like Owen, I'm struggling with the "know it when you experience it" thing too... I guess, for me, that's how I describe the intangible quality of something, something you can't quite put your finger on but you sense it, say, as in "voice" of a greatly written screenplay. I don't need to experience art to know something is art. But... to each their own! Best to you, JJ!

Clearly Beth, but it's also shorthand lingo among many artists (at least the ones in my inner circle) to designate commissioned art - created for purpose, function, or a private client. As opposed to art for art's sake, created for catharsis, expression or fun. :) We use the term to remind each other that such projects require multiple levels of approval. Code word for patience and humility under design/edit by consensus circumstances. Glad you agree that screenwriting is in fact an art form. Since a rock by any other name is still a rock. ;) Cheers.

Dimwitted works. I'm certainly not a fan of that quote. It just doesn't say anything. To me, it sounds like something a wannabe intelligent person would say because it sounds deep on the surface.

That's basically what I mean about experiencing it. It's not something that can be adequately described or represented outside of the work of art itself. I guess "I know it when I see it" works about as well. I chose "experience" to cover all the senses.

I'll do this to make my stance clearer:

“The perfection (what's that?) of an art (what is art?) is ensured (says who?) when all of its requirements (what requirements?) are satisfied (according to whom?).”

There are fundamental questions he ignored in this quote, therefore it is meaningless. He applied objective terminology to a wholly subjective forum. As I said before, skill is one thing, but art transcends skill. We can work on the skill of the craft all we want. That doesn't make what we have done art. But we can be lacking in skill and still make beautiful art. Look at Margot Fonteyn. She had no extension and couldn't straighten her knees fully, but she's still remembered as one of the greatest ballerinas of all time. It was her port de bras and expression that made her an artist, regardless of her lack of skill.