Scott, I read with keen interest your series on formulaic writing. I agree with you on the primacy of writing from the inside-out. I say this as someone who learned the hard way, as a recovering formulaholic, someone who came to admit that he was powerless over paradigms and formulas -- that my writing had become unmanageable. And to (finally) realize that no guru, no formula could restore me to sanity. That there is only one immutable rule about screenwriting, the (William) Goldman rule: nobody knows anything. And as for recovery steps #3 through #12... I'm making them up one page at a time. That said, I would still recommend a more expansive reading list than you suggested. Why? Because, in the context of the preceding caveats, rightly understood and used, paradigms can be useful tools. Some are very useful; others not so much. Some are new and improved, suited to modern times and venues; others are obsolete. If all you have is a hammer, you have to treat everything like a nail. If the only paradigm I have in my tool kit is the Hero's Journey, then that's the way I have to treat every story I write. That may work for others, but it doesn't work for me. I need various tools in my kit and even then adapted to my own style and purpose. As you said, every story is different. Every writer is different.

pgronk, Field and Vogler (sounds like a law firm!) are my bare minimum safe choices. As noted in the OP, it's possible this guru or that could benefit a writer, so while I don't generally recommend people diving into a bunch these systems and approaches, as it may end up just confusing them [I deal with this a LOT in my interface with writers as a blogger and teacher], in the end whatever it takes to facilitate the writer's grasp of the craft.

Lots to say... First off, this was one of the best series of articles I've ever read on this site: tenacious, iconoclastic, rebellious. It's one of the best series of articles I've ever read anywhere for that matter. Scott, this is what you should be doing. In life, when I get that feeling (the "This Is What I Should Be Doing" feeling), it often comes in a spontaneous moment as life, love, reality and sense of self come crashing together when I'm traveling or hiking or experiencing something inspiring along those lines. The fact you do this as a job, to spread this wisdom to other people and help so many people out there trying to pursue their dream -- I'm just thankful. You really do enlighten an entire faction of denizens on this earth. I hope you know that. (Sorry, I just got back from a weekend of weddings, so if the spirit of speech comes manifesting itself here, that's why.) Here's my take on this whole thing: First, people don't write books -- successful, timeless bestsellers -- based on flawed ideas and erroneous theories that don't work. All the paid writers in Hollywood can denounce these till the cows come home, but the fact is they all use elements from these books everyday in their writing, especially guys at Pixar and Disney. The problem isn't the book or seminar or CD or whatever else. It's not somebody putting thousands of hours of their time, their whole career and entire library of knowledge into a book that summarizes esteemed beliefs and methods. In no way is that the problem. The problem is the people who do not understand how to digest the knowledge, the people who do not understand how to consume an opinion or belief, use whatever positives they can find to assist them in their quest, and promptly discard of the waste (or items they deem unnecessary or overabundant). In no way is reading bad. In no way is the consumption of well-researched, professionally presented information harmful. I don't care who you are, how successful or smart or revered you've become -- if you ever tell me reading will be harmful to me in any way I will simply dismiss your sentiments with haste and carry on with my life. The point of learning about structure, plot points, acts, arcs and all the other technicalities that go along with screenwriting is so that you have them in your tool box when the time comes to use them. NOBODY is a worse writer for having a large toolbox. No architect is worse off for having studies different designs throughout history from around the world. No car technician is worse off for having worked on Fords than Alfa Romeos or Saabs. The problem becomes when all you want to do is build your house with a foyer, living room, kitchen, master and two guest bedrooms because that's what most houses have. Or when you only want to use certain types of wrenches to fix a specialty engine because that's what most common cars require. Or when you predetermine that your protagonist is going to be reluctant yet handsome and heroic because that's what you've seen in movies growing up in the '80s. The entire point of a large toolbox is to use the RIGHT tools at the RIGHT time. To know that you have them if you ever need them. And to diagnose problems then search deep into your arsenal to find what exactly you need in order to fix them. In this sense, if you know what to use and when to use it, you're never ever going to get permanently stuck in the mud. Build your house using every last sense of creative energy that exists in your body. Make it how you want it, by drawing on your most innate sense of style, but also rely on the years of research you've done that will inform you of solutions when you run into your deepest, darkest, most challenging problems. Knowledge and balance, knowledge and balance. Know when to hold em, know when to fold em. Use the right tools at the right time. Sometimes, don't use them at all. Or use every last one in your toolbox to make an entirely knew contraption altogether. Whatever gets you where you're trying to go. You're the captain of your own ship. The world is your ocean. But the one undeniable fact of all this is that you will eventually get lost. If you can read the stars in the night sky, the clouds, know your directions and how to manage your resources, your chance of survival increases greatly. Finding paradise is not about taking the route everyone else has; it's about your own personal journey to get there, carving a new path to whatever destination you desire. And if for brief moments you pass along the same pathway as others did before you, that's OK. It should be encouraging, in fact, knowing you're on the right course. Just as long as you remember as quickly as you enter: This is your journey, your paradise, your life -- not theirs.

Kalen, thank you for taking the time for this thoughtful response. And let me just say, for years when people asked if they should read this or that book by this or that 'guru,' my response was always this: If you have the time and discretionary income, why not read them all? You never know which language system or set of ideas will click with you. So in a sense, at least historically, I concur with your sentiments. But as I have been blogging now for 6+ years and interfacing with a LOT of writers (I get an unreal amount of email every day), I read and hear personal stories that disturb. Somewhere along the way, either through the sales pitches of some screenwriting program outfits or, as you suggest, that a large percentage of people "do not know how to digest the knowledge," a lot of writers end up writing stories that are uninspired and formulaic, or they become completely baffled about how to even begin to write. I mean, we are talking about writers who have spent significant amounts of money on seminars, software, and programs who tell me they feel as if they REGRESSED as writers. Fundamentally I think you are onto something, which is that a significant part of the problem may lie in the fact that a lot of writers simply don't know how to process the knowledge. It's like what I suggested re Vogler's book: I know he doesn't state that the 12 stages of The Hero's Journey he details in "The Writers Journey" are meant to be normative in a linear fashion, but evidently that is what is happening in a big enough way to generate a comment from a Hollywood producer saying he hates Joseph Campbell because his ideas have resulted in formulaic scripts. So then my question for you is this: What is the responsibility here on the part of the people promoting their ideas about screenwriting theory and practice? Is it just enough to write a book? Tape a 75 minute webinar? Fly in for a weekend seminar, then fly out? In other words, is their sole responsibility simply to present the 'knowledge' or is there something more they should be doing to increase the chances people WILL process those ideas properly? I can't answer for them, but I've already answered that question for myself: I am not a guru. I am a TEACHER (as well as continuing to be a screenwriter). What I do on the blog, or at least try to, is to create an ongoing daily conversation with the online screenwriting community to explore my own ideas about the craft precisely so people will understand them. To dig deeply into the principles and practices of the craft grounded in my own professional experience as a screenwriter for 27 years. A reader may not like my ideas or resonate with them, and that is fine. I have never once suggested my way is the right way as I consistently note there is no right way to write. The content here is absolutely free. I don't even run web ads to make sure that everyone who visits here knows there are no strings attached. You are free to participate or track what goes on here as much or as little as you like, free to take any ideas you see here that connect with you, or walk away unscathed. For those who want to dig more, I offer courses through Screenwriting Master Class, an online resource that Tom Benedek, who has over 30 years of screenwriting experience (he wrote Cocoon among other movies), and I launched in part because of the confusion and frustration we saw over and over again among aspiring writers created by them getting lost in the wilderness of screenwriting gurus. And at SMC, I am involved hands-on and in an immersive way, so every theory, every concept, every idea I present, we discuss extensively in online forums, teleconferences and workshops. It's my goal to not only help each participant write a solid script, but also to engender in them an understanding of what it takes to be a professional screenwriter. So in theory, I am in complete agreement with you: People should feel free to read anything, even everything. As I used to say and still subscribe to: You never know when something will connect with you, perhaps becoming THE KEY to your grasp of the craft. But in practice, it's a much more complex situation largely because of what you have identified: Large swaths of people who read, hear watch, and use all this stuff are not processing the information properly or well. My guess is that phenomenon will continue unabated as long as the purveyors of that content don't do more than simply present their programs and systems, then do little in the way of showing how they can be in the actual practice of screenwriting on a consistent day-to-day basis. As for me, I'll keep blogging and teaching, a humble attempt to provide what I hope is something of a life preserver to help those who have been left adrift at sea by their experiences in the online screenwriting universe thus far. Final comment: I'm glad you liked the series. I wish I had more time to devote to analysis and reflection pieces like this, but blogging is only one thing I do with my day. I continue to write. I teach, not only at SMC, but also at the university level. I am engaged with some initiatives with Black List. I support the efforts of The Black Board. In short, I am extremely busy. So I do the best I can here on the blog. Kalen, would you mind if I used your comments in a blog post? I want to make sure that your perspective and pgronk as well, who is saying something similar to you, gets its day in the sun. Again thanks for your insightful comments. And forgive any typos or grammatical errors, as I just literally did a brain dump.

pgronk, I see that your comments are much in alignment with Kalen's. Would you mind if I used yours for a blog post? As I noted with Kalen, I think your perspective of the value of a more "expansive reading list" deserves to be shared in a larger forum. And again, thanks for your comments.

Of course Scott! I'd be honored. A few points... On writers regressing due to bountiful information: It makes sense. What do you love to do? Watch movies? Hang out with friends? Plant flowers? Well, watch too many movies and you'll get enervated due to inactivity. Hang out with your friends every night and you'll become annoyed with them, often focusing on their flaws rather than their strengths. Plant too many flowers and you'll get sunburned. Excess of anything is dangerous and unhealthy. I read screenwriting books often; I also read Edward Abbey to experience his stories of adventure in the American Southwest, and John Steinbeck to taste the nectar of masterful prose. It's not hard to imagine screenwriters drowning in their own craft as they become myopic in their pursuit of success. I think as screenwriters it's important to remember we're the heralds of life stories. If we do not live life we will not have stories to tell. Experiencing challenging obstacles, complex characters, pivotal plot points and all-is-lost moments in life, then learning from them, can often inform you of a solution in a script just as well as anything you'll learn in a screenwriting self-help forum. On the responsibility of teachers, gurus and other purveyors of screenwriting information to assist in the proliferation of better stories: I don't know, really, as I'm not a teacher, but in general I'd like to see more emphasis on creativity, character development, tone and prose. If you go into a story with these elements nailed down, everything else will often work itself out. I think sometimes there's too much concern towards fixing trivial, more outward issues when the fact is the story is internally broken at its core, its characters and writer flawed from the start. We need more WRITERS dedicated to the art of prose, to the FEELING you get when you watch a movie, to EXPLORING the limits of human imagination. But of course, these are just my observations as a consumer of mass amounts of screenwriting tips and techniques. The problem really isn't with the people conveying the information. As I said before, it's with the way the consumers are processing it. I mean, just think of how many times on a weekly basis you stress the fact that there is no RIGHT way to tell a story. I can't even begin to count how many times Vogler says the same thing in his book. On the formula and craft and how they intertwine: Again Scott, at the crux of this issue is this: Every day there are thousands of writers in pursuit of the same chest of gold. They all want to arrive on the same big red "X" on the map. Simultaneously, there is a blueprint out there that's led many treasure seekers to the big red "X" and continues to on a daily basis. It is proven. It is successful. It works. What's happening then is that because one way is proven, we have given up trying to find new routes. There are simply not enough explorers out there, not enough adventurers willing to risk everything they've put into their journey (all the time, energy, money) on navigating an unfamiliar route, only to suffer a miserable death at open sea. And can you blame them? If your end goal is the gold, and you've put everything into your quest, and there is a map that's reliable and proven, why take any other route? Why risk facing sharks, pirates or stormy seas, all ready to capitalize on your misfortunes at any moment? To end, I'll say this: After ruminating much on this over the last few hours, my conclusion would be that we're trying to turn art into science. Creativity cannot be defined through algorithms. The art of storytelling relies not on input-output equations, but on the interpretation of our own personal life experiences and emotions. The more we try and mechanize writing the more we subtract from its organic nature as a tool used for thousands of years to entertain around campfires, convey life lessons, push and pull on our inner heartstrings and connect with unfamiliar people and customs. If there's one thing I took away from Save the Cat, it wasn't any of the numerous suggestions about plot points and on what page they should occur, but the fact that all stories should be primal, universal, something every human being on this planet can relate to. And that, Scott, is my entire harangue in a nutshell: Digest information the right way, use what you need, discard what you don't (as the body does), and when it comes time to write, forget about it all, free your mind, tell a story that matters to you, and know that when problems arise you have the toolbox required to overcome adversity and succeed in spreading the message you want the entire world to hear.

(AKA: pgronk -- I'm having account validation problems via Twitter at the moment.) No problem using my 2.5 cents worth for a blog post. And I take your point about getting bogged down and confused by too much information, too many competing ideas.

Unfortunately, I find that the writers that do not read "formulaic" books are actually worse writers. You are going to have some bad scripts anyway. These writers are going to write some god awful scripts...and it's not because of these formulas peddled by gurus, it's the writers themselves. For anything you do, from fixing your kitchen to playing basketball, there are going to be people that have put thought into it and experimented and are just giving you their perspective based on that experience of mistakes and experimentation. Why oh why would you not educate yourself? These writers lost in the woods with a blank page--are they suddenly going to come out of it on their own--what are they Amadeus? No....most likely they are not. The gurus only offer perspectives from years absorbing stories and figuring out the best way out of it. Some aren't great, but others like Story, etc are actually pretty good. The formulas are merely training wheels. You have to get to competent before you start trying to play like Jordan. Now, all of these writers are going to take the anti-formula and use it as an excuse to "improvise" and write incoherent scripts. I know because I had to sift through thousands until I volunteered to dunk my head in a bucket of cold water. Even the basics would help--if they had even tried some of the stuff they teach you. Even the pro writers that decry this, they actually have benefited from formulas themselves. They digested it early on, read a ton of screenplays and internalized it. Now, they are suggesting otherwise--it's alot more sexy to feel like the rebel. I just picked up a pen and wrote Chinatown by "improvising." Formulas, seminars, tips are all merely guides like youtube instructionals or college textbooks for you to try out on your own. The real reason writers are writing these awful scripts is because: 1. screenwriting is f'ing hard and they will write terrible scripts anyway. Is some book going to help you come in and slam dunk like Michael Jordan? It's just a helpful resource. It's really hard to play at that level. Just like it's really hard to write a good screenplay, much less a great one. 2. they are unprepared. Let's face it, a lot of the writers aren't prepared to write. They wouldn't have the capability to properly digest and use the guru's principles anyway. Some of the great writers have been reading and drilling the fundamentals since age 6. So by the time they pick up a pen, they are already oozing story. Some of these other writers watch a movie and think they can just win the lottery ticket by spending all day at seminars and reading scripts for a year. Well, they are way behind their competition. The sell for a million dollars promises are merely marketing tools...that should be separated from the actual content, which are the teaching of fundamentals that writers should at the very least know. You can delude yourself into thinking you're just going to go in and start improvising on your own...and you out of the millions are the one who is touched with such genius, you do not need formulas--but you do so at your own peril.

Shonaussy M, I'll take that as another vote for the value of at least familiarizing oneself with screenplay formulas. I acknowledged that point in the OP with my nod to Field and Vogler. And your point about separating marketing tool angles from the content echoes points made by Kalen, how the issue isn't so much about the content as the way that writers come to understand the knowledge in the content. For example, equating the formula with structure as some arbitrary rule or paradigm. And yes, I hear you about the opposing danger, whereby writers can just leap into penning script without any sense of structure whatsoever, an equivalent 'sin' to writing formulaic stories. To this last point, it is entirely possible, and perhaps even more beneficial, for a writer to learn structure by reading scripts, as opposed to relying on secondary sources. If you look at my series of posts How to Read a Screenplay, if a writer were to use this approach analyzing 100 movie scripts, they would not only be able to identify how structure works story to story as well as some common patterns to many of them, they would also see the VARIETY of patterns that exist, which speaks to the organic nature of stories, and spend a lot of time see how the External World (Physical Journey) and Internal World (Psychological Journey) interplay. Plus they are reading scripts which on the whole is probably better than reading a book about scripts. Thanks for your comments. If I may include excerpts from your post in a blog feature, that would be groovy.