06 June 2011
Posted in TV

TV scriptwriter Bill Armstrong talks about getting his first break on Doctors, writing the Indian Doctor for BBC TV and why he has learned to love script editors.

This is the transcript of an interview by Darren Rapier for a Writers' Guild podcast

Darren Rapier: Could tell us a little bit about your background, and how you got into, perhaps, acting to start with, and then writing.

Bill Armstrong: Well, I come from a long line of undertakers so it was a bit of a leap. I think it was probably the one thing my parents couldn’t tell me how to do, and so it had a certain appeal to it. I came to this country from Canada in 1975 and I auditioned for drama schools, got in, decided to stay and go to drama school and then after drama school I got a job playing Hamlet, so that seemed like a good reason to stay. And then by the time I finished that I got a job at the RSC and by the time I’d finished that I was married and I had a flat and I had cats – and I mean you can divorce, you can sell the flat, but what do you do with the cats?  So that’s how I ended up being an actor in the UK.

Darren: And what led towards you writing, have you always written, or was it something that came from that?

Bill: Yes and no, I never wrote seriously. I wrote a lot when I was a kid.  Shortly after I became an actor I did an Open University degree and then from that I went on and did a PhD and I did an awful lot of academic writing obviously for that. And when I stopped doing the PhD there was a period of a few years when I found it very helpful, a lot of the jobs you do as an actor are incredibly humiliating, and I found it very therapeutic to see the funny side of what I was doing and write up and I used to send letters to friends detailing the idiocy of some of the jobs I had done and found that I quite enjoyed it and that developed on… I did a film in Poland in 1991 I think it was, an absolutely bizarre film, the first private film that had been done in Poland after the [Berlin] Wall came down. It was a complete turkey and absolutely bombed but I was 13 weeks in Poland at a time when there was no infrastructure, you couldn’t phone back home, and we were put up in this bizarre villa on the outskirts of Warsaw that had been a communist party member’s house and the whole job was absolutely extraordinary. There was me, an American actress and this 10- year-old kid from Soweto whose father was a Jehovah’s Witness and they’d never been outside Soweto in their lives. The kid was delightful, I used to go around with him and seeing Poland through his eyes was quite extraordinary.  When I came back to the UK I had this idea for a script and I wrote a script for that, and somebody at Sarah Radclyffe’s office read it and I did three or four drafts for them, and then I dropped it and I went and did my PhD. But then after that I then went back to writing – I wrote a couple of spec scripts, sent one of them away to [BBC TV series] Doctors and about a year later I heard back from them. About a year after that I got a chance to write a script for them and it sort of went from there.

Darren: What was your PhD in?

Bill: I used to go to parties and see how many people could stay awake for the duration of me telling them the title of my PhD, and generally most people would be asleep half way through.  The title was British, French and European Political Responses to the Global Commodification of Film and Television – and very good, you stayed awake!  That’s good, that’s good.

Darren: So Doctors was your first foray into professional writing?

Bill: Yes, well it wasn’t the first money I earned, I wrote a kidnap thriller and I sent it off to Warren Clarke, who liked it, and his business partner at the time optioned it.  By then I’d been writing for two or three years I guess, and I was doing a film in Prague at the time and, there were only two nights in the course of doing this film that I actually drank far too much, and this was one of the nights, and I came back and I had a hotel room on the second floor of the Hotel Intercontinental, which faces onto a major thoroughfare, and the morning rush hour traffic and pedestrians, masses of them going through, and this night I drank far too much, and came back to the hotel room and clearly had gone seven rounds with my clothing trying to get into bed, and I can’t stand closed hotel rooms, so I flung open these massive plate glass windows to get lots of air, and had fallen into bed, and woke up in the morning hearing my mobile going, and struggled to find the thing, and when I eventually found it and answered the phone, and there was the noise of the rush hour traffic going on and I could hardly hear, and I had just gotten to the window and closed the big window when this bloke said he wanted to option my script, which is, you know, the thing you always want to hear but never really believe will happen.  And I then had to deal with having a hangover, having to have a conversation that I’d never had before, not knowing what I was supposed to be saying, trying to sound intelligent, which was beyond me at that point, and I guess I was on the phone for about 10 or 15 minutes, and it wasn’t until I hung up that I realised I was standing in front of this plate glass window on the second floor of the Intercontinental facing the main thoroughfare stark bollock naked.

Darren: Has that worked its way into any of your scripts anywhere?

Bill: No, it hasn’t yet...

Darren: It’s in my next one! So then you moved on to Doctors, and how did you find that?

Bill: When I started doing Doctors I found it fiendishly difficult. And I thought it was them. And as I worked through, I’m now on my third script editor, the script editors seemed to get better each tim – and I’m slightly suspicious it might not have been the script editors getting better, it might have been me. But I now adore writing for Doctors, I really, really like it. I think it’s a fantastic opportunity for writers. It’s the space and the freedom that you’re allowed there, I don’t think you’d get it anywhere else in British television. I mean my experience is very limited, and it’s a wonderfully efficient set up and, yes, I’m a big fan.

Darren: Would you consider writing for other TV or is there a reason you would stay with Doctors?

Bill:  You’re offering work?

Darren: Well, unfortunately…

Bill: I’d write for anybody who paid me.

Darren: A good writer’s response, isn’t it?  So how long were you on Doctors before the idea came up of The Indian Doctor?

Bill: The idea for The Indian Doctor wasn’t mine, it was a bloke called Tom Ware, it was his idea. He read a spec screenplay that I’d written, and on the strength of that he asked me to write The Indian Doctor, so it wasn’t my original idea. But I’d been working on Doctors for about four years before that came up. And it came up very suddenly. I was working as an actor in a play and half-way back from Cornwall I got a phone call from my agent and he said they want you to do this thing but they want the first draft, and this was about three weeks before Christmas, and they want the first draft by 1st January.  So I said yes, why not?  Went home and wrote 10 hours a day every day of the week until it was done.  And then on the strength of that it got green lit, Sanjeev Bhaskar came on board and they asked me to write the other four episodes.

Darren: So, did that present a different challenge – suddenly having to write for that amount of screen time?

Bill: The challenges weren’t so much the script length, it was just a very different set-up. For a start, for budget reasons they decided not to have a script editor. And, although I appreciated script editors before, I now hugely appreciate the value of a script editor. Because that was very, very difficult. They were also comparatively inexperienced, they’d not done drama before, were learning as they went along, there were an awful lot of mistakes made and I didn’t have anybody else to fall back on for a long, long part of it. Fortunately, there was a director called Tim Whitby who came on, who is very experienced, and from that point on it became quite easy. But dealing with all kinds of problems that I’d never had to deal with on Doctors, there were all kinds of things that a script editor takes care of for you that you’re not aware of, that when they’re not there you become very, very aware of.  Every script went into double figures in drafts and it was just an awful, awful lot of work. And I think there’s the huge challenge of being on your own, because when you’re writing for Doctors, or I suppose any continuing programme, there is a continuation there. I mean, most of the characters were given me when I started, but they were quite two dimensional at the time, so it was a case of building an entire world, which you don’t have to do with Doctors or any of the continuing soaps.  So, there was kind of a lot more responsibility, things like I was never given any deadlines, it was up to me to set my own deadlines, and that’s again, not something that I was…..

Darren: There’s quite a lot of responsibility there, yes, especially when it’s a new series like that as you say.  So, essentially, what were you given as your starting point for that series?

Bill: They had quite detailed outlines for all five episodes. Unfortunately, the thing was originally conceived as a sort of three-hander and it became a one-hander because of casting reasons, and I suppose it’s the same with everything, we were trying to adjust the blueprints while we were decorating the rooms.  And they also had, for whatever reasons, the outlines were kind of packed with melodramatic incident, and I’m not sure whether it would be easier to come up with your own story or try to take that and rationalise it and make it coherent and make it all tie together. I kind of suspect that coming up with your own story would be easier.

Darren: Essentially on Doctors you have your story of the day, don’t you, which is yours, and you have your serial that you fit in, but here you were presented almost with a blueprint for a whole set of episodes that you then had to bring to life. 

Bill: Yes, and they wanted, the BBC wanted a kind of version of a story of the day for each episode but it wasn’t anything like the story of the day in Doctors. In Doctors the story of the day is sort of, I don’t know, about 60% of the programme, in this it would be 5-10%.  And sometimes, there were 10 main characters and an awful lot of interwoven, or an awful lot of sub-plots that needed to be interwoven to keep the thing together and to pull it back to the central character, which was incredibly difficult, you can imagine there are basically 10 sub-plots going on, or at least five or six sub-plots going on at any one time. And you want to keep trying to get it focussed on the main character, and there was something kind of intrinsically centripetal about it. I remember feeling at one point like I was writing with my head in a vice.  But it was a great, great idea, and I think if you’ve got a great idea it makes it so much easier to go from there.  If you have a mediocre idea you can kind of do any amount of work you like and it’s not ever going to pull together.  With a great idea you can lose it, you can blow it, but you’re starting with a huge advantage.

Darren: And how long from that first phone call before Christmas to the January when you had to deliver?

Bill: The first script I think we had done seven drafts in five weeks and that was delivered to the BBC and then there was a further two drafts went to them before they green-lit it, and then I think another two after that. I think it was green-lit in early February, and they started filming the second week in June I think it was.

Darren: Had they started filming before you’d finished writing the last episode?

Bill: Oh god yes. And I remember being phoned at 5.30 in the morning one time and the director said you know there’s a hole here, I apologise for not having seen it and everything, but we really need a scene here and I wrote this scene which he filmed at 8.30 that morning.  I text it to him on his Blackberry, it was mad.  A kick bollocks scramble is kind of the way it was.

Darren: You’d have been better off being in a sleeping bag on the set, really, wouldn’t you?

Bill: Probably, yes.  

Darren: It sounds, as often is the case, like a mad scramble to get everything finished and things; how did you find the whole process of seeing the show develop? 

Bill: Fantastic.  Because the first three episodes were in one block, and actually they were ready, pretty much. I’d never written anything and had anybody read it before, I’d seen things that I’d written broadcast but it’s not quite same thing to sit in a room with people and just an awful, awful feeling of embarrassment because when the lines didn’t work they kind of scream out at you and you just feel everybody in the room hating you and it’s just awful.  But suddenly seeing how the actors could take what I’d written and make it work was just wonderful, because when you’re writing you hear it all in your head and everything and you try to, I suppose you’re constantly trying to write the perfect script and you forget that when an actor gets hold of it they’re going to breath life into it in a way that you never imagined.  And most of the actors on The Indian Doctor were extraordinarily well cast and they did just an amazing job of it. And seeing them read it and seeing their appreciation of it was one of the best days of my life.

Darren: It sounds like you were involved a lot more than you would be on a daytime soap?

Bill: Much more.  I worked with Tim Whitby, he worked very closely with me, what was very interesting working with him. You know that thing when you’re writing you’re always struggling to get what is in your head down on the paper.  And it dawned on me there’s a second process, the person reading it has to get it out of the words and into their head, and both things are really quite a subjective process.  And there will be good directors who can read your stuff and just not get it, and that’s not because you’re bad or they’re bad, it’s just a matter of sensibilities. Tim fortunately had the sensibility to get what I was trying to say really well, and to be able to help me get it out, which is why he’s such a wonderful script editor among other things. And therefore talking with him, in a way it went beyond just developing the script.  It went into how he was going to film it, and indeed he would talk to me while he was editing and a couple of times I went down and sat in on the edit with him and it was fascinating watching. Watching the edits was almost as fascinating as watching the rushes, which is really crucifying because in the rushes there is nothing to hide the script and if you, a duff line just screams out. I would recommend any writer watch the rushes if they can because you really see which bits of your writing work and which don’t work, and you can really see when an actor is struggling with it, and that’s not always the actor’s fault.  It’s incredibly instructive.

Darren: And at what stage in the process did you know that Sanjeev Bhaskar for instance was going to be playing the doctor?

Bill: Quite early on.

Darren: So did you have him in mind when you were writing the lines for that character?

Bill: Very much so, yes.  But although, you know it’s a funny thing, because it’s tricky writing for somebody.  When you’re writing, the character tends to take over a life of it’s own, so I can’t say I was thinking of Sanjeev. I always knew that Sanjeev would be perfect for it, but I wasn’t tailoring the writing for Sanjeev, if that makes any sense?  I mean he’s kind of perfect for, what I loved about The Indian Doctor was that you have a series that’s set in this strange world, and the world is seen through the eyes of somebody who is an immigrant, and he’s kind of perfect, he has that wonderful sort of almost bumbling charm of somebody, like an innocent abroad drifting through this world of slightly mad people, and he knows they’re slightly mad but he’s kind of charmed by them, and that’s very much Sanjeev’s, I mean he has that kind of charm as a person and as an actor.

Darren: Yes, and going back to your own background, did you feel you started to recognise anything in your thoughts about that character, arriving in that little village, coming from Canada yourself, or?

Bill: Yes, I never really thought about it that much while I was writing it, but after it had been broadcast, there was a documentary called The Real Indian Doctors that Tom Ware did, and there was a couple in it, a very old couple, he was a doctor and she was his wife and she said during this interview that they’d had problems with his family that when they got on the plane she knew they were never going back. And that was the point that I realised there was a lot more about it that was autobiographical than I had realised, because I left Canada for very similar reasons, I’d never got on with my family. I can remember the first time I got on a plane to come to the UK, thinking this chapter of my life is closed and I won’t be coming back. It’s the difference between an immigrant and an ex-pat.  An immigrant is somebody who has cut the root, and an ex-pat never does.  And I did have a very strong feeling when I think back on it, at that moment, I mean, you know those moments in your life that you remember incredibly vividly, and that’s one of them and I think it’s because I had a very visceral sense of having cut off a root and starting something new, which was what all those Indian doctors did. It would have been a very, very huge move, and most of them ended up in places and they ended up in the back of beyond or in the worst inner city, so it was total antithesis of what they had known, urban sophisticated India.

Darren: I think for me that was what was interesting about the series. Immigration has often looked at people coming here to better themselves and to a better life, and a lot of those Indian doctors had actually quite good lives in India.

Bill: When I was doing the research I think the thing that struck me as most interesting is the number of doctors who talked about, you know, they’d had successful careers in India, but the real attraction was the NHS.  We take it for granted.  And we take it for granted that the NHS is a great thing for patients.  But I remember this doctor telling me about how, you know, you didn’t have to advertise for patients.  And you never think about that, but of course that is, and for them, it was a chance to do what they wanted to do without, you know it’s a bit like being an academic without having to struggle for research grants and all of that, they could just do what they loved doing and what they were good at.   So, in a way, that was bettering themselves.  But they were doctors, most of them came from upper middle class backgrounds, educated backgrounds, and obviously in the case of our story to end up in the back end of Wales, the Rhondda Valley, is a big leap, you know to end up in those sort of places was something of a shock to them, and also the weather.

Darren: As far as the process of The Indian Doctor and the way it panned out for you, would you want to repeat that? Would you want to have more control at an earlier stage?

Bill: Well, obviously one would always want more control, but the thing about television drama is that it is nothing if not a collaborative art and therefore however much control you have or don’t have, you are at the mercy of the people that you are working with, and it’s always a lottery. If you tend to find yourself with great people it’s going to be a wonderful experience and if you don’t then it’s not, and I think that’s probably true whether you’ve got control or not.  I’ve never done anything where I’ve had a lot of control but I suspect that from the 30-odd years that I’ve been doing television it seems to me that chaos is endemic and so it would be, the possibility for chaos is as great if you were in control as if you’re not.

Darren: Has doing The Indian Doctor led to other things on the horizon for you?

Bill: I think it’s too early to tell, because things do move quite slowly.  There isn’t much work around, it’s a difficult time.  It certainly, but it has opened some doors, yes, definitely.

Darren: And you’re still writing for Doctors?

Bill: I’m still writing for Doctors,  andI’m still writing spec stuff that I’m pitching to the BBC. Because I think the difficulty with being a writer these days is that you’ve got to really scramble to get work, and even while, I’m sure you know, writing for Doctors, deadlines are quite sharp but at the same time, scrabbling to make a living you have to keep writing spec work to move forward, so it’s a ridiculously time-consuming business.

Darren: And it’s quite difficult to allow yourself the time to write those spec scripts, isn’t it?

Bill: Yes, to find it, but I think, I haven’t been writing very long and I don’t know that many writers but the few that I know I think probably most of us probably need professional help, probably, we probably should be committed really.

Darren: And do you think your experience on writing The Indian Doctor has changed the way you look at either your own work or the way you write for Doctors?

Bill: Definitely. It’s made me much thicker skinned and therefore things that would have flummoxed me don’t.  I mean the last episode of Doctors that I wrote was an abuse story, and I had written it from the point of view of the girl who was abused and my script editor had the very good idea that it would be more interesting to write it from the point of view of the mother of the girl who was abused. It was a great idea, but involved a kind of 90 degree turnaround at very short notice.  I’m not sure I could manage that before The Indian Doctor ,so that’s what I mean about being thick skinned, I can cope with a lot more. Partly just because I think doing The Indian Doctor there was big element of taking a deep breath and just trusting it would come out the other end.  And the fact that it did and the fact that it was a ratings success and won an award, all of that sits in the back of your head and you think, well, actually you know, that thing if you sit down and look at the blank screen or the blank piece of page and you think, who am I kidding, I can’t do this, but somewhere in the back of your head there’s a little person saying, well you did, and that helps a little bit, certainly.

Darren: And has it made editing your own work any easier?

Bill: I’ve always found editing easy, it’s getting to the end of the first draft that’s hard!

Darren: Do you have any advice for anyone who is starting out writing?

Bill: Well, for anybody starting out or trying to start out I think the best piece of advice a friend of mine ever gave me was that writing is like a muscle, the more you do it the stronger you get.  I would say get to the end of whatever you write, first of all plan it out, don’t start writing straight away, plot it out and plan it out well before you start writing, but get to the end of the first draft before you start re-writing, otherwise you’ll never ever stop re-rewriting and you’ll never get to the end of the first draft.  For somebody starting out in something like Doctors, I suppose thinking about my experiences, as hard as it may be, the script editor is on your side and wants you to succeed , because I think, the difficulty about being a writer is that nobody can teach you how to be a writer, you’ve got to learn for yourself, and it’s a bit like, the learning process is a bit like the Battle of Britain, if you survive you’ll be a writer, but if not you’ll crash in flames. I think there’s a limit to how much anybody can help you, you’ve got to do it and you’ve got to do it for yourself, but while you’re doing it don’t get paranoid about your script editor and the people giving you notes, they’re working under a lot of pressure and sometimes the notes don’t always add up and make a lot of sense, but they are on your side and they are trying to make your stuff work.

This is the transcript of a podcast that can be heard on the Writers’ Guild website, via iTunes or through the Guild’s app for the iPhone and iPad.

20 May 2011
Posted in TV

Adroddiad S4C: BargenBBC-Llywodraeth ‘mewn argyfwng’

S4C report: BBC-Government deal ‘in crisis’ (English version below)

Grŵp ymbarel yn galw ar i’r darlledwyr i dynnu allan o’utrafodaethauMae grŵp ymbarél o undebau a mudiadau iaith wedi galw ar i’r BBC a S4C tynnu allan o’u trafodaethau am ddyfodol darlledu Cymraeg yn dilyn adroddiad hynod ofeirniadol grŵp trawsbleidiol ASau heddiw.

Yn ol adroddiad pwyllgor diwylliant Tŷ’r Cyffredin, mae cynlluniau'r Llywodraeth ‘yn swniomwy fel [y BBC yn] cymryd trosodd na phartneriaeth’. Mae grŵp ymbarél, sy’n cynnwysBECTU, undeb newyddiadurwyr y NUJ, Undeb yr Ysgrifenwyr, Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg ac Undeb y Cerddorion, yn gwrthwynebu cynlluniau’r Llywodraeth i dorri grant S4C o 94% ac uno’r sianel â’r BBC.

Mewn llythyr agored maent wedi galw ar i’r Llywodraeth, S4C a’r BBC ddod ar eutrafodaethau i ben. Dywed y llythyr:

'Mae’n amser i ddiddymu’r cynlluniau annoeth i S4C sydd wedicael ei beirniadu gan arweinwyr y pedair prif blaid yng Nghymru, y Pwyllgor Materion Cymreig, degau o undebau a mudiadau iaith,degau o filoedd o bobl sydd wedi llofnodi deiseb, mynychu ralïauac ysgrifennu at wleidyddion a nawr pwyllgor diwylliant Tŷ’rCyffredin. Mae’n amlwg erbyn hyn eich bod chi fel sefydliadaucyhoeddus wedi cael eich ynysu'n wleidyddol, mae eich holldrafodaethau nawr mewn stad o argyfwng - dydyn nhw ddim ynddilys yng ngolwg y cyhoedd. 

'Am ba mor hir ydych chi'n bwriadu parhau i anwybyddu barn yrholl bobl a grwpiau hyn? Nid oes neb eisiau hyn, nid yw’n beth dai’r iaith Gymraeg, i ddarlledu yn y Gymraeg na darlleducyhoeddus yn gyffredinol. Mae’n debyg mai Jeremy Hunt a Mark Thompson ydy'r unig bobl ar ôl ym Mhrydain sydd dal i feddwlbod uno S4C a'r BBC yn syniad da.

'Nid yw’n syndod nawr nad yw’r BBC am gynnal ymgynghoriad cyhoeddusar eu cynlluniau - mae’n ofn barn y cyhoedd sydd yn deall bod y cynlluniau yn abswrd.Galwn arnoch felly i ddod ar eich trafodaethau i ben gan nad oes neb ffydd ynddynnhw.'

 Fe fydd y grŵp ymbarél yn cynnal protest “Rhaid i Cyw Fyw!” ar faesEisteddfod yr Urdd ar ddydd Mawrth Mai 31 am 1yp.

14 May 2011
Posted in TV

The Commons Welsh Affairs Committee has insisted that the Government must ensure the operational and financial independence of S4C - the Welsh language broadcaster - under the proposed deepened partnership with the BBC.

In their new report, published on 11 May, the Committee also expressed concern that the focus on Welsh-language programming could be lost. 

The report states: 'We are concerned that the BBC, a national broadcaster and much larger organisation than S4C, will not necessarily have the particular interests of Welsh language programming as its primary focus. We note the possibility that under any new structure, S4C's distinctive voice will go unheard. We call on the Government and BBC to guarantee publicly that S4C remain solely a Welsh language broadcaster.'

The report continues: 'We recommend that under any partnership made between the BBC and S4C, careful thought needs to be applied to any role played by the BBC Trust, to ensure that S4C's editorial and managerial independence is not compromised. We call on the Government to consider the appointment to the S4C Authority of individuals of sufficient independence and stature. Under any future management structure that is put in place, the management team responsible for the day to day operation of the channel, should comprise only S4C personnel.'

The Chair of the Committee, David T.C. Davies MP, added: 'We are determined that S4C maintain its central position in the Welsh economy, commissioning more quality and popular programming from Welsh independent production companies, providing only Welsh language services and reaching a greater share of the approximately 600,000 Welsh speakers in the United Kingdom. In this new phase for S4C we want to see an increased focus on efficiency and improved audience figures for S4C’s output. We note that S4C itself recognises that it must raise its game in these areas.'

03 May 2011
Posted in TV

For all screenings of The Nation's Health, a fascinating new season of films and discussions on television's love affair with the NHS, and BFI Southbank is offering Writers' Guild members tickets at reduced BFI-members' prices - simply quote "Writers' Guild" when booking by phone.

 (Photo: Bodies, written by Jed Mercurio)

23 April 2011
Posted in TV

By Gail Renard

Award-winning writer and WGGB member, John Sullivan, has died. The son of a plumber and charlady, Sullivan always wanted to be a writer but first had to earn his living in a variety of jobs, including  in the used car trade. His loss at the time became writing’s gain, and Sullivan’s knowledge of everyday people was reflected in his work for the next 30-plus years.

During that period, Sullivan kept submitting his scripts to the BBC but without any luck. He decided to apply for a job within the Beeb itself, confessing he was hoping to meet someone who might be able to help him. The BBC gave Sullivan a job as a scenery shifter, on the condition that he didn’t pester any stars. He did.

Sullivan went on to create and write, amongst other series, Citizen Smith, Just Good Friends and the classic Only Fools And Horses, which ran for 22 years and spawned the sequels, The Green Green Grass and Rock And Chips.

I had the privilege of speaking to John Sullivan on a few occasions and I’m glad I told him what a brilliant writer I thought he was. He deserved every word of praise and more.

Gail Renard is Chair of the Guild's TV Committee

• Tributes to John Sullivan on BBC News
• Obituary in the Daily Telegraph
• Obituary in the Guardian

07 March 2011
Posted in TV

Darlledu yn y Gymraeg:

Gweledigaeth newydd er mwyn achub ein hunig sianel deledu Gymraeg

Papur ymgynghorol ar y cyd rhwng BECTU, NUJ, Undeb yr Ysgrifenwyr, Equity, Undeb y Cerddorion, a Chymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg.

Cyflwyniad

Mae dyfodol ein hunig sianel deledu Gymraeg yn y fantol.

Mae S4C yn wynebu toriadau i’w chyllid o dros 40% mewn termau real.  Mae’r llywodraeth yn Llundain yn cynnig bod y BBC yn traflyncu S4C ac maent yn bwriadu newid y gyfraith er mwyn rhoi’r grymoedd i weinidogion San Steffan gael gwared â’r sianel yn llwyr.

Mae’r sefyllfa yn argyfyngus.  Mae polisi’r llywodraeth yn peryglu S4C ac yn taflu amheuaeth dros ddyfodol y sianel wedi 2015.

Yr unig beth sy’n sicr ar hyn o bryd yw’r gostyniad i gyllid S4C dros y 4 mlynedd nesaf.  Wedi 2013 fydd y llywodraeth yn arbed 94% o’r arian yr oedden nhw’n arfer gwario ar S4C.

Rydym o'r farn y bydd y toriad i gyllid S4C yn niweidio gallu unig sianel deledu iaith hynaf Ewrop i ddarparu gwasanaeth cyflawn safonol i'w gwylwyr ac yn tanseilio statws y sianel fel begwn ar gyfer darlledu mewn ieithoedd lleiafrifol yn rhyngwladol.

‘Na’ i doriadau

Ystyriwn y toriadau i S4C fel gwahaniaethu yn erbyn grŵp ieithyddol lleiafrifol gan mai S4C yw’r unig ddarlledwr cyhoeddus yn y D.U. i dderbyn toriadau o dros 40% mewn termau real.

Bydd y toriadau hyn yn cael effaith negyddol uniongyrchol ar yr iaith Gymraeg. Enghraifft brin yw S4C o fuddsoddiad economaidd sydd wedi ei wneud drwy gyfrwng yr iaith Gymraeg. Mae hyn wedi hybu’r iaith Gymraeg yng Nghymru ac ar draws y byd.

Credwn y bydd y toriadau’n gyffredinol yn cael effaith ar iechyd yr iaith Gymraeg oherwydd y sgil-effeithiau mewn cymunedau iaith ac ar aelwydydd lle mae sianeli Saesneg eu hiaith hefyd yn cystadlu am sylw teuluoedd a phlant.

‘Ie’ i S4C newydd

Mae’r mudiadau a’r undebau sydd wedi dod at ei gilydd i baratoi’r papur hwn yn cynrychioli miloedd o weithwyr yn y diwydiant teledu a miloedd o garedigion yr iaith.  Os yw S4C am adeiladu dyfodol diogel a llwyddiannus i’w hun mae’n angenrheidiol bod y sianel yn cydnabod ewyllys y rhai sy’n gweithio i greu rhaglenni, y gwylwyr a’r rhai sy’n dymuno dyfodol disglair iddi.  Mae’r papur hwn yn mynegi barn y rheiny.

Er mwyn sicrhau’r dyfodol gorau a mwyaf teg i’r sianel Gymraeg ar ei newydd wedd, rydym yn argymell bod y Llywodraeth yn cyflawni’r canlynol:

 I. Annibyniaeth dros reoli ac annibyniaeth olygyddol lwyr i S4C heb ymyrraeth oddi wrth y BBC na’r Llywodraeth mewn statud.

 II. Fformiwla gyllido annibynnol ar gyfer y sianel Gymraeg, ar sail chwyddiant ac mewn statud.

 III. Ychwanegu at yr adnoddau sydd ar gael i’r sianel drwy godi ardoll ar ddarlledwyr preifat yn dilyn esiampl gwledydd eraill.

 IV. Sicrhau rôl i Lywodraeth Cymru yn y sianel fel bod modd manteisio ar synergedd buddsoddiad presennol y llywodraeth datganoledig mewn cyfryngau, megis Golwg360, adnoddau addysgol a radio lleol i’r eithaf.  Gresynwn y dirwyiad difrifol yn allbwn Cymraeg ar radio masnachol a credwn ymhellach bod modd i S4C gynnig rhagor o wasanaethau cymunedol aml-gyfrwng, ar yr amod bod rhagor o adnoddau ar gael i’r sianel.

24 February 2011
Posted in TV

Writer and producer Tony Garnett (left) has been appointed by the BBC as an ombudsman responsible for handling complaints against the Corporation by writers of long-running series.

The appointment is part of a joint initiative between the Writers’ Guild and the BBC’s controller of drama production, John Yorke.

Commenting on the appointment Gail Renard, Chair of the Guild's TV Committee said:

'I'm thrilled that Tony Garnett, esteemed producer of some of television's finest, is to be the first ombudsman for BBC Continuing Drama. Mr Garnett has always been a staunch defender of the writer's individual voice as well as fair play and I can't think of anyone better to fill the role.

'I'm also pleased because this appointment highlights the great working relationship between the WGGB and the BBC when it comes to solving our members' problems. Many thanks to Ben Stephenson (Controller, Drama Commissioning) and John Yorke for agreeing to such an elegant solution.'

The Guild will, of course, continue to support members with concerns or complaints, but the hope is that the ombudsman will help such problems to be resolved more easily.

18 February 2011
Posted in TV

An edited transcript of a Writers' Guild podcast

Andrew Ellard and Jane Bussmann discuss sitcom, approaches to comedy and the secrets of successful pitch meetings

Jane, how did you get started as a TV comedy writer?

Jane Bussmann: I had the good fortune to meet Jonny Speight when I was about 20. He was doing one of those weekend workshops on sitcom writing, and it was packed out with really angry housewives. He was trying to explain how he created Alf Garnett and these women were saying ‘I don’t think that’s funny,’ and taking him on. But outside was his Rolls-Royce with the number plate ‘Moo’ as in [Alf Garnett’s catchphrase] ‘You silly Moo’, and I thought that was so cool, to have a catchphrase for a number plate and to be taking on these ghastly bats from Chipping. I think he’s brilliant and I just try to reinvent him in everything I do.

So was it sitcom that you were always interested in?

Jane: Yes. I realised that if you can come up with the perfect situation then it can run and run and run. Another thing I learned much later working with the South Park guys was this thing called the meta-joke, which is the idea of the central joke of the situation that is always funny. So you get a ratty little powerless runt like Garnett who thinks he’s Churchill and it’s always funny. You get a child like Cartman talking about herpes, it’s always funny. So you’ve just got to find the right meta-joke. People ask what’s wrong with television comedy and it’s that the meta-jokes are shite.

Andrew, what was it that got you started in TV comedy?

Andrew Ellard: I came in through a series of false starts. Coming out of university I was adamant that TV drama was going to be my thing but then I did one episode of Doctors and didn’t enjoy it much and had a rather unfortunate and clumsy relationship with the script editor –

Jane: Never have a clumsy relationship with a script editor. Fumbling and tactile perhaps, but clumsy no.

Andrew: So I kind of went and hid at Grant Naylor doing Red Dwarf DVDs, but somewhere along the line I did notes for the Red Dwarf movie and that got me recommended to ITV to do comedy stuff. And I just feel so much more comfortable with comedy.

Jane, do you have  a set approach to your writing?

Jane: If you boil it down to the simplest thing, a comedy character is someone who doesn’t know what they’re like. You know, like Bill and Ted don’t know they’re in love. It’s about walking down the street, seeing someone doing something funny and thinking: ‘They haven’t got a clue.’  It’s being able to look at something from the outside and distil that into something that will ideally run for four or five series and a DVD. And then you get trawled in with a load of hapless writers into some godawful vehicle for a clapped-out sitcom start or someone whose been in a commercial or someone who won Big Brother. I have been in a meeting with Channel 4 where they said: ‘It’s great. We love it.’ Long pause. ‘Is there a part for the girl who won Big Brother?’ No, she’s a sodding reality start. Fuck off.

Tell us a bit more about those meetings with producers and commissioners.

Jane: I’ve had a drink, I’ve got flu, I’m past caring – I’ll tell you. Obviously all pitches are difficult, but with comedy there’s the expectation that you will be funny. It’s a contradiction in terms because being funny requires being relaxed and confident, which you’re never going to be if your finances depend on what that person’s reaction is. What you do in the States, where there’s an industry and people actually want to make shows, is lots of homework and be professional. If you’re having a meeting with the most important person at NBC you don’t rock up 15 minutes late. You even rehearse your small-talk. One meeting I had was with the boss of a network and we’d been told he’s had a rotten year and never laughed. I’d rehearsed the pitch 19 times, several times in French – and I don’t even speak French – but I didn’t know how to deal with the fact that he wouldn’t laugh. Then, that morning, a copy of Variety came through my door with an article on the 10 Young Screenwriters To Watch. There’s no smugger person than a screenwriter who has gained public attention and the idea that you are ‘to watch’ made these people revolting. So I tore out these 10 headshots of people looking at me like I was scum, taped them to the wall of my office and pitched to them. So by the end of it I was bullet-proof. 

Andrew, taking a step back in the process before the pitch – how do comedy writers even get noticed?

Andrew: A lot of the people who get in touch with me on Twitter have written a sitcom script but nothing else. But these days I don’t know any sitcom writers who have got their shows made without having done something else first. I recommended to one person in particular to try writing sketches; like everything else, you have to practise.

And where are the places that people can get sketches on?

Andrew: I thought Peter Serafinowicz did a really clever thing pre-Oscars when he did parody interviews and put them on YouTube. If you do that, then you can go to a broadcaster and show them what the idea looks like. Nobody wants to read scripts, so it’s better to have something they can see.

Jane: I had a meeting once pitching a sitcom where I was told: ‘If you really believe in it, just write it.’ And I thought, did you ‘just’ acquire this office? And then he said: ‘And of course, once they’ve given you money they just resent you. Is that what you want?’

Andrew: As if it cheapens the whole thing!

Jane: That’s right. As if no writer in history has ever written in exchange for money. As if Shakespeare would just take a play along to the Globe, hand it over and then trot off to write another one for free. 

Andrew: It is getting to be the case that they want more and more done for nothing.

It is the case. But I know, Andrew, you have done some work speculatively yourself?

Andrew: I had this sitcom and a couple of companies were interested but it wasn’t going anywhere. I knew I wasn’t likely to get the first sitcom I’d written on telly, so I adapted it for radio and rather than going through all the endless script submissions, I thought I’d actually make it. I called in a lot of favours for recording facilities and got a really good cast. It didn’t get picked up but I put it online and it’s already had 14,000 downloads. I don’t know what that means or where it will lead, but I have had phone calls and emails from people who’ve heard it that might lead to work.

Thinking more broadly, what sort of state is TV comedy in at the moment, both here and in the US?

Jane: I have had TV execs tell me that comedy is dead, that nobody’s laughing and they will never laugh again. My advice is not to listen to anyone. They will tell you how awful it is. They will tell you they want x, y and z. But just carry on doing your own thing and when you think you’ve got something vaguely amusing write it down. Also, as well as doing the kind of thing Andrew has done, which I think is brilliant, try and do things live. Even if it’s just eight of your mates, at least you can make someone laugh. Walk down the streets handing out bits of paper saying come along here on Tuesday and we’ll make you laugh for free – then film it and you’ve got something. And you’ll learn a lot from the experience. In terms of breaking in, there are established channels through the BBC and whatever, but ultimately have something you love and be prepared to wait 10 years, because that’s how long it might take. So get a day job – at the risk of sounding horrid, I think a day job really helps.

Andrew: You have to watch a lot of TV.

Jane: No you don’t, you’ll end up killing yourself!

Andrew: Look at the credits...

Jane: OK, just the credits.

Andrew: Because you want to send things out not to the stars but to the producers and the production companies.

Jane: Yes, find a show you like and contact the producer – not the executive producer, he’s just a bloke who lives in Oxford and doesn’t even know he produces that show.

And what are the shows that you’re currently enjoying?

Andrew: American Family. The Trip was good fun. Miranda is great fun – putting her in the middle of that show gives it a weird energy. Peep Show is always a joy. And Phone Shop did very well.

Jane: I just watch The Wire and Peep Show. I think The Wire is the funniest show on TV. People are always saying it’s so dark; it’s not dark, it’s hilarious.

18 February 2011
Posted in TV

Rachel Flowerday (left) and Dana Fainaru talk about writing for long-running medical drama series

How did you come to write for medical drama series?

Rachel: Well, my career as a Casualty writer started with the BBC Writers’ Academy. I joined that in its first year and that was how I became a writer of BBC continuing drama. Before that I was on a show called Dream Team, which was a football drama on Sky 1, so that was really where I cut my teeth.

Dana:  I was with Rachel on their first year of the Academy. Before that I was a theatre director – I wrote one thing and then got an attachment to the National Theatre Studio. So I kind of fell into it.

Rachel: The whole Academy experience was a complete revelation to me, because I had been very much a kind of instinctual writer before that and it was really interesting being able to sit down and talk about the structure and principles of a story.

02 February 2011
Posted in TV

BBC launches new competition for narrative comedy

From BBC Writersroom:

BBC Writersroom and BBC Comedy Commissioning are joining forces in a nationwide competition to find new comedy gold. If you can invent characters that make us laugh out loud, tell stories that keep us on the edge of our seats, and tease the audience to come back for more, then we want to hear from you.

Write it, send it in - and you could be in line not just for a comedy masterclass but also an intensive week away developing your idea hand in hand with BBC comedy producers and established comedy writing talent. This is an opportunity not to be missed - if your idea leaps every hurdle then you may even get the chance of having your work performed at our Sitcom Showcase in the newly opened Studio in Media City, Salford.

The challenge is to write an original narrative comedy script with series potential. We’re looking for writers that reflect modern Britain, comedy voices that have not yet been heard, and talent that’s just bursting to get out. 

You will need to send us a script that’s between 15 – 30 minutes/pages long and a one page outline of how your series would develop. The work must not have been previously commissioned, optioned or produced and this opportunity is for writers who have not yet had a network commission.

CLOSING DATE: Monday February 21st 2011

24 January 2011
Posted in TV

Gail Renard reports on the Guild's involvement with the British Comedy Awards

The British Comedy Awards bid a fond farewell to ITV and moved to C4 this year. The WGGB’s Writer(s) of the Year award went right along with them. Steven Moffat and I represented the Guild on the jury this year, alongside television execs and media journalists. Can there be a better way of spending a day than discussing comedy? 

The actual awards ceremony was fascinating on many levels. As a welcome addition, more writers were honoured, including Roy Clarke, for shows such as Keeping Up Appearances, Open All Hours and all 27 years of Last Of The Summer Wine. It’s always good to remind people that actors don’t make up the lines as they go along and sometimes they don’t even change them.  As Roy Clarke received the Lifetime Achievement award, his acceptance speech was more a benediction to everyone else and he deservedly got a standing ovation.

Other winners were Sam Bain and Jesse Armstrong, recipients of the Guild’s prestigious Writer(s) of the Year award. Together and individually Sam and Jesse have created, written and/ or contributed to The Peep Show, Four Lions, The Old Guys, Thick Of It, Mitchell and Webb and much more. This is an important award for the Guild because it’s writers honouring writers, and there’s no higher praise.

There were also surprises on the night. The Best Sketch Show award was won by Horrible Histories, a series made by CBBC which proves that great children’s shows defy restrictive, and often arbitrary, age classifications. A great show is a great show and this highlights how important it is to save British kids’ TV. It’s both cultural and financial suicide not to.  

Another innovation was that for the first time tickets were sold to members of the public, who sat up in the gallery. I was riveted by their responses to various comics and programmes, which often differed greatly from that of the black-tied executives below.  It’s good to remember who our real bosses are: the audience, without whom none of us would have a career. All the focus groups and questionnaires in the world won’t tell you what a real audience will; what they love and hate; in natural conditions and not contrived ones. Writers should take heed because anything else is just playing Chinese Whispers.

Which reminds me of a story Russell T. Davies recently told. When he wanted to revive Dr. Who, BBC Worldwide formed focus groups to garner opinions. The study showed the new Dr. Who wouldn’t work. Enough said.

Gail Renard is Chair of the Guild’s TV Committee

24 January 2011
Posted in TV

Jayne Kirkham reports on the lobbying done by Save Kids' TV (SKTV) during the autumn party conferences

You know how it feels when everything is coming together nicely: you can see the soufflé rising, the wheat harvest ripening and the Government about to do something? Then somebody opens the oven door, the storm clouds burst and we have an Election.

So for Save Kids' TV there was a bit of a hiatus over the summer while we waited for the Government to emerge and for the Opposition to change its leadership. The autumn conference season gave us an excellent opportunity to observe the new political landscape so, thanks to the financial support of the Writers’ Guild of Great Britain, I was duly despatched to Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham on a fact-finding mission.

First up, the Liberal Democrats. This was perhaps the friendliest and certainly the most accessible conference, with ministers and deputy prime ministers still able to contribute to fringe meetings (as opposed to just doing the meet and greets). The Lib-Dems in the House of Lords have given us strong support so I mainly met with MPs that I didn’t know.

Despite the Lib-Dems fully understanding the value of good children’s media, it was clear that the Department of Culture Media and Sport comes very low in the departmental food chain. The power lies with the Treasury (obviously) but also with Business, Innovation and Skills and… Vince Cable. He talked a lot about ‘fairness’ and also about young people. He listened as others spoke about repairing broken markets and cultural failure, about modernising education and the use of IT. And I must admit it gave me a glimmer of hope. In fact, the whole conference seemed filled with hope.