 |
|
|
||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
|
        |
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
|
||||
 |
|
|||||
|
|
|||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
|
|||||
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
||
|
|||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|||
|
REVIEW: WRITERS ON COMICS SCRIPTWRITING
Reviewed by Antony Johnston Read that title again. This isn't a comic, it's a book. It's not even a book about comics. So why is it here? Because it's about comics scriptwriting. And if you're even slightly interested in how a comic writer works, you should read this book. It's is a collection of interviews with some of the most prominent and influential writers working in the medium today; Kurt Busiek, Peter David, Chuck Dixon, Warren Ellis, Garth Ennis, Neil Gaiman, Devin Grayson, Dan Jurgens, Joe Kelly, Jeph Loeb, Todd McFarlane, Frank Miller, Grant Morrison and Mark Waid. The interviews are thankfully unformulaic; though many writers are asked essentially the same questions, such as "How do you go about writing a script," their separate answers are sufficiently different (and often tangential) enough to prevent a feeling of repetition. They are also at times extremely candid; Grant Morrison's carefree references to drugs, magic and higher dimensions are worth the price alone, while Todd McFarlane's revelations on how he constructs layouts and page sequence had me in stitches (though I admit to not being surprised). Others are just as worth reading. Devin Grayson, the only female writer featured in the book, is lucid and heartfelt; Peter David spins a good editor-writer-slugfest yarn or two; Warren Ellis does a very good impression of Spider Jerusalem; and Garth Ennis comes across as (Shock! Horror!) a fairly decent chap, the sort of guy who would start the drinking games down the pub. Which, by all accounts, he does. Salisbury has done his research -- if he hasn't actually read everything by every writer in this book, he does a very good job of bluffing it. His questions are to the point, and boxouts are scattered through the book to help anyone unfamiliar with a writer's work understand the relevance of subjects raised, or just give some background information. There are also examples of scripts, layouts and even in Ennis's case a jotter pad page of scribbled notes to further give an idea of what makes these people tick (an awful lot of crossing out, by the looks of it). Arguments are given for and against full script vs. plot style, editorial processes are discussed and even fan reaction gets in on the act. In short, there is everything a fanboy could want, and more than enough for the merely curious. One thing which struck me as odd (and I know I'm open to accusations of bias here) is how candid the British writers seemed compared to their American counterparts. This is unfortunate, not for want of dirt-dishing but because it makes the Brits seem so much more... well... interesting. There are a few glaring omissions -- Alan Moore, Peter Milligan and others are conspicuous by their absence -- but this is inevitable in such a book. Salisbury admits that many of the writers he approached simply could not commit, and were he to produce a book with everyone he wanted in it, the project would have taken years to produce and be many times the size. That should in no way put you off. I have never even read anything by half of those interviewed. But as a writer I found it a fascinating insight into other writer's minds and methods, and as a naturally curious person it more than satisfied my desire for anecdotes. Recommended (with reservations: if you have no interest in the craft of writing at all, you won't enjoy this)
|
Writer: Mark Salisbury
