I lured you in.  I did.  I put up a title that I didn't think you could resist.  A bit controversial and based on something familiar so you'd be even more compelled to read (a takeoff on the guru book Your Screenplay Sucks!) I shamelessly manipulated you into reading this but I did it for a good reason.  More on that later.  See, I did it again.  I created a mystery so that you'll stick around to find out what it is I have to reveal later.  Either that or you're already bored with me and you're moving on.  But you won't.  Oops - another shameless manipulative writing technique.  I can't help myself it seems.

Now you owe me thirty bucks.

A compelling, marketable title, setting up questions in a scene that the audience wants answered, and some reversals.  There's three writing tips I used in the opening that you actually probably already knew - all things you certainly could have discovered on your own had you just spent a little more time writing and less time reading about it.  But if I stuck those pearls of faux wisdom in a book you'd probably give me the money and thank me for the privilege.

 I've been writing professionally for almost twenty years.  Been studying writing for longer than that, obviously.  When I started, there was one, maybe two books on writing scripts.  Somewhere along the way, someone figured out that there was a lot of money to be made putting lipstick on a pig.  In other words, let's dress what's a very fundamental set of storytelling constructs in new clothes and tell people that we've figured out a better way to do it.

Wrong.  Wrong times ten.

First, what is a "writing guru" - I define them as any of a hundred "geniuses" who purport to tell you the "secrets" of how to write a script or a novel or whatever.  A writing teacher is different.  Why?  Usually because a writing teacher sticks with you for a period of time and tries to help you shape not only your material but also your writing process on a one-to-one basis.  They tend not to be these quick-answer, seminar-types who throw up a dog and pony show that is fundamentally  for the purpose of selling a book, software, or  a more expensive weekend seminar.

Now that we've defined terms (setting the mythology in script parlance) ask yourself this one simple, burning question:  if these people have it so right that they can write books about writing, why aren't they themselves selling anything?

 Answer:  they're too busy writing books on writing and not actually doing the one thing they're advising you to do - write a script.  And you're too busy reading these books to write so they're not only sucking you into their bull, they're ruining whatever chance you have at a career by distracting you from what's really important.

A quick survey reveals the following about some top scriptwriting book authors:

Your Screenplay Sucks! by William Akers - a somewhat credible source since he says he's been writing for 20 years.  But what has he been writing?  He's only had a few minor films made so take all that with a grain of salt.

Screenwriting Goldmine by Philip Gladwin - he's written some TV stuff but not much and not anything that I'd be watching.

Making a Good Script Great by Linda Seger - she's done "script consulting" mostly - not much writing of actual scripts.  

Screenplay: Writing the Picture by Robin U. Russin, William M. Downs - Russin has one film (in 1998) and Downs isn't listed in IMDB but perhaps he's done some plays.

Save the Cat! by Blake Snyder - two films, nothing since 1994 and yes, I know he passed away recently so don't get all up in my face about his lack of productivity.

The Screenwriter's Bible by David Trottier - two movies, nothing since 2001.

Syd Field, Michael Hauge (who I can't actually find anywhere on IMDB as a writer,) Robert  McKee ("Mrs. Columbo"  Seriously?) - all these men and women are not scriptwriters that I can tell.  They talk a good game but when it comes down to it, they haven't even dressed to take the field.

Is it impossible then for someone who isn't a writer to teach you how to write?  Anything's possible.  And some people are just better teachers than writers.  I'm all for studying the process, like Syd Field did, and reporting the results.

The problem is two-fold:  First, there isn't much more than can be said about writing scripts.  Most of these books spend a ton of time simply redefining terms like "Act I."  Second, when these gurus run out of their "pearls"  then the advice they give is next to worthless because they're guessing or pretending they know.

You need a plumber.  Who are you going to put more faith in?  Someone who has only touched the tools or someone who actually has legitimate butt crack?  A doctor?  Do you want the guy who wrote a book on anatomy or a surgeon that has done hundreds of heart operations (okay so that's not a perfect analogy but it almost works.)

Why in the world do you trust these people who just write books or put on seminars?  Honestly, if you can't watch 100 movies on your own and figure out what they're saying in the first three chapters of a book or 30 minutes of a seminar then you're sunk - you've already abrogated your writing soul.

I'm going to give you an example of why I think there is no substitute for a real scriptwriting teacher - one who has written and continues to write and sell stuff.  

I was watching a (in retrospect) dumb documentary on Agatha Christie's work.  Scientists had gathered to do a "Concordia" which is basically a word by word, phrase by phrase, book by book examination of how the famous author wrote and continues to sell more books than just about anyone else.  

What secrets will a "scientific" examination reveal?

Actually, nothing all that exciting and certainly no big surprises.  But while I was working out on the elliptical I figured I'd let it run.

It came to about the last ten minutes and the big reveal that had these scientists moist with excitement is the fact that Agatha manipulated the reader's speed thereby controlling the story experience.

Gasp!  A gem! A pearl!  

A load of dung...

The lead scientist said with scientific certaintly that Agatha controlled her readers by speeding up and slowing down said reader to get the effect she wanted.  Their proof?  Agatha wrote much denser material in the beginning of the book, thereby slowing the reader down and sped up the reader toward the end of the book when the prose was that much less dense.

I stopped, gob-smacked, as they say in Agatha's England.  All they had was a simple writer thing but because this brain trust had never written anything like an Agatha Christie novel they had no frame of reference.  Any writer of moderate experience knows the answer to why the prose is thicker in the beginning of a book (or script) - you have to describe more to do the setup.  Once a parlor is described, it's done.  You don't repeat that description again.  Plius, given the time period in which Agatha wrote (middle 1900's) and the inability to correct easily, I'm sure as she continued and became more comfortable with the work, she did far less searching for and exploring plot and character concepts but didn't see a reason to go back and do any trimming.  It's a lot harder to fix with a pen than it is with a word processor.

It's not a revelation they stumbled on, but rather an ordinary circumstance that most working writers find themselves in.  All they had to do was include a real writer on the team and that little bit of nonsense would not have made the final cut.    A working writer - not some theorist.  A similar situation to anyone writing books about writing who hasn't actually done much scriptwriting themselves.  How valid will their "revelations" be?  And because you haven't done much of it either, you're going to say "wow - that's cool" about something that is totally unworkable in real world terms.

I could go on and on about this but  I know I'm overstaying my welcome as it is.  Let me cover a few more things and I'll be done with it  (a  promise of an ending so you'll actually stick around until the end.  It's called "Act Three.")

We're basically lazy so we want someone else to do the work.  Don't.  Don't let these gurus convince you that they have something you can't get yourself.  Do the work and you'll be richer for it.

Having said that, it certainly doesn't hurt to use these "geniuses" to fill in some of the blanks and open your mind to possibilities.  But trust me, your time is better spent reading philosophy, mythology, psychology, and some core literature and scripts than a book about writing.

Another point: I differentiate between writing teachers and gurus but the truth is some teachers are simply MFA's and have no good knowledge of how to write a script.  Try to find a teacher who has actually written and sold some stuff and avoid the MFA trap.  Everyone always says that work muscles are tighter and tougher than gym muscles.  Believe it.

Figure it out yourself because, folks, like I said, if these people at these conferences really had it figured out then they would be doing it successfully instead of writing books about it.   

Writing isn't easy and your style, ideas, voice, and output cannot be found in a guru book.  To become a good writer you simply must write.  There - that's the secret.  

Now give me $29.95, quit reading this and go write something.