Hi,

There are quite a few examples of team-writing [especially for TV series] (the Simpsons, for example) where the whole is greater than the sum of the talents of those involved.

The trouble is, team-playing doesn't seen to be a natural trait for writers, and certainly not for me. On the rare occasions I have tried to collaborate, it has generally resulted in either:

a) an incredible consumption of tea and biscuits combined with unpublishable hilarity

b) a cold, featureless concept that nobody wants to take ownership for or care about

Either way, the projects drifted towards an inevitable halt through lack of interest. Has anybody managed to collaborate successfully, and if so, how did you get it moving?

How did you maintain the balance so that the work remained creative, but still resulted in words on the page?

G

I guess not. Ah well, I'll leave it for the Americans so.

Sorry, just got to this, sidetracked by Revolutionary Road.
I've written collaboratively to some extent and it didn't work at all for me I have to say- nothing but arguments, territorial and otherwise, and then extremely unpleasant situations afterwards about who wrote what, who 'owns' what, etc- I think though that is because we didn't ever agree upfront that we were writing on an equal basis- and clearly we didn't feel we were!- if I ever did it again I'd be much more clear about that before beginning, and lay out the boundaries as much as possible.
BUT I have written collectively as in devising and improvising with actors, directors etc for theatre, composers, singers, and found that an overwhemlingly delightful, creatively stimulating process- quite different. But that may be cos any competitive element had been removed- these were people from other disciplines, so...
I think site expert Jubbly has collaborated with other writers, including Jenny Eclair, it might be worth WWmailing her?

The legal bit was the one thing that worked for me - we agreed at the outset that everybody (uh... both of us) had different talents and was equal in all commercial respects for any output. So, if we had ever completed anything we would probably have been able to celebrate the sale in the same room at least!

Your second paragraph interests me because I see the benefit of team writing is to bring in people with complementary and very different talents - the whole reason I tried a partnership in the first place. I think this should be the basis of all partnerships.

Can you tell me a bit more about how the sessions worked? Did you have a group leader? How many would be in a group? I presume you did a fair bit of the writing in your own time, outside of the group?

<Added>

(By second, I kinda mean third... eg: para talking about collaboration with actors etc.)

I'd love to collaborate.
Probaly not with novels but certainly scripts.
However I think you have to lay the rules down early on and it needs to be with someone you trust. Perhaps that's why husband wife teams are so popluar.
HB x

you have to lay the rules down early on

In a marriage, you say? Wow, gotta try it one day...

I'd love to collaborate. Probably not with novels but certainly scripts.

The projects I tried before were scripts for a sitcom...

It's a whole different way of thinking to novel writing, although it helped my novel writing to think in such a descriptive and visual way. Trouble is, the structure and storyline that I (as a writer) unconsciously imposed quickly became a strait-jacket that prevented the humour from flowing.

The trouble is, it's easy to talk about writing in a way that implies
a) "this is the way"
and b) "I know what I am doing"

Whereas, something like comedy is ethereal and personal and creative in a way that is very difficult to have the same confidence about. So, without a very strong-willed and confident funny man in the team, it is easy for the comedy to be overpowered.

I guess the initial spur for my thread was finding ways to ensure that there is enough structure to make a series rather than a sketch-show without overpowering the free-form stuff.

Can you tell me a bit more about how the sessions worked? Did you have a group leader? How many would be in a group? I presume you did a fair bit of the writing in your own time, outside of the group?

well...in theatre, I've always worked with a director- at least one, who would usually lead the devising/improvising/etc- as an example, I worked this way last week. Me and the director agreed on some characters, sample catchphrases/matras, a rough framework of the story, and then we got together with 8 actors and let them loose on the idea. I wrote down what they said, verbatim- some of which was based on what I'd supplied, some not- and then I will pull out the most interesting ideas from that, flesh them out, and then give the same actors plsu more some sample dialogue/more concrete stories and characters and some definite scenarios. They will them work in more detail, I will then create a script from that. In my experience that's fairly typical- the actors don't get credited as co-writers, nor does the director, because they aren't writing- they are providing some starting points and good ideas, but to be honest, actors always do that on new plays anyway, it's just a given. It's great fun to see actors bring something alive so quickly, and a good test of whether the idea/characters/setting etc works from the get-go.

That sounds like fun!
I can see how that would work well and it gives a good mix of structure (director acting as group leader and starting with a basic story) with free-form creativity (the improv) while allowing a single voice (you) to pull it together as a coherent whole. It sounds much easier to do that than to try to merge two different writing styles and by separating the writing role from the leadership role, you can concentrate on what is important. I might try to contact a local drama group to see if I can sit in on a rehearsal or two.

by separating the writing role from the leadership role, you can concentrate on what is important

Exactly!
It can have massive drawbacks as well- actors being furious that you don't use their words verbatim when you feed back some scenes after an improv/devising session, but the key is a good strong director who can focus and channel the work and try to create an ensemble feel rather than one where actors feel they 'serve' the writer than are somehow edged out.

an incredible consumption of tea and biscuits combined with unpublishable hilarity

That really made me laugh! Oh, how I identified! I've collaborated on comedy scripts and found there was an awful lot of this involved! How we quite managed to get past it I'm not sure - I suppose a shared sense of knowing that if we could just move on from all the tea and biscuits and laughing at our own jokes, and actually get those jokes typed up and into some kind of structure - we'd have something that others would find funny too. Writing humorous stuff I find much better with two (or more) - you get a to-ing and fro-ing going, a bit like an improvising double act I guess, and when it escalates until you BOTH have fits you know you could be onto something. On your own, you just have no idea if anyone else will get it or if you just have a terrible sense of humour.
When I've collaborated though, it's been on projects that we came up with and developed ourselves, so I've known at the outset I 'click' with the other writer. It must be harder when you're thrown together - I imagine everyone knowing their own roles must be a bit of a jostle to start with - and perhaps a competitive element comes in?

but still resulted in words on the page

In answer to this - make sure someone keeps typing!
Interesting post!
Love JC

I wrote down what they said, verbatim

make sure someone keeps typing!

Am I the only writer who can neither type nor write as fast as an excited group can talk? :0

I took notes alright, but I maybe got one in ten... less if the idea was mine because I was so busy giving it my everything. I found the bits I got gave some great ideas for storyline when writing it all up, but no way could I capture the bits we spent so much time laughing about.

I imagine everyone knowing their own roles must be a bit of a jostle to start with

I think we had the opposite problem. I was never challenged in my "director-esque" role... despite being eminently unsuited.

In fact, I think the problem could have been that we were too comfortable. We laughed a lot, but I don't think we challenged each other enough to get to any exciting new ground.

In fact, I think the problem could have been that we were too comfortable. We laughed a lot, but I don't think we challenged each other enough to get to any exciting new ground.

Hmn - interesting. Is it the writing as a team/partnership that you feel has failed, or that the material didn't 'have legs' (sorry, I hate that expression, but you know what I mean!) - or did it fizzle out through lack of direction (too comfortable together in a cosy doesn't-matter-if-it-succeeds-or-not kind of way)?
Was it a character/situation based script? Did you get a treatment together to send out, etc?

A bit of both.

We got as far as a story outline and some characters for a series of six episodes and we had the first five minutes of one of the episodes we even had some stuff that seemed funny at the time...

But it never got beyond that, I think I was too obsessed with structure and Steve, despite my protests to the contrary, was too willing to believe that I actually had a clue while simultaneously refusing to believe that "ordinary people" could get anything published.

So... we kinda ended up with nothing that legs could grow on.

It's a shame because I think it would only have taken a slightly different dynamic (which, unfortunately may mean somebody who irritates the bejasus out of me) to get a lot further.

So... we kinda ended up with nothing that legs could grow on.

!!!
Aah - that is a shame tho'. It does sound like a question of, as you say, 'dynamics'. You sound as though you weren't happy in the directing/leading role that your partner wanted you in, while he also didn't have faith in it getting anywhere... Tricky!
Have you tried or thought of 'embracing' that leadership role?!!! Being the one who's in charge and moving it forward, perhaps collaborating in a different way - e.g. you write a first draft, send to partner for opinion/further edit/material, etc...? (that's worked for me once!)
Or, controversially, attempting it single-handed?!
Or have you lost heart?!!
Best, JC

No, not lost heart and I wrote another outline on my own for another series... But my humour is... Um... Not always mainstream so going it alone is not an option and although I'd be happier embracing a lead role with more resistance, I think the improv / theatre idea is the most suited to me... Probably.
Something to try anyway.
Thanks,