Are Screenplays Literature?
Part Two
by Charles Deemer (Oct-07-2002)


The argument against screenplays being considered literature begins with this: a screenplay is not a literary document because it is not written primarily to be read. It is written to be produced. Granted, screenplays get read, but even today when more screenplays than ever are being published (and most screenplays, of course, never get published at all), screenplays are read primarily by a specialized audience within the industry. A screenplay is a blueprint for a movie. The first readers of a screenplay read not for enjoyment but to make an important decision: should I recommend that this script be developed into a movie?

Whatever else can be said about literature, there is no doubt that literature is written to be read. Screenplays are not. Screenplays are written to be produced. They are not literature.


Screenplays vs. Plays

What about plays? you might ask. They, too, are written to be produced but surely many stage plays are treated like literature. Look at Shakespeare!

But plays have a clear author. In fact, screenplays do not -- certainly not the screenplays that get to the screen and get published. Playwrights, unlike screenwriters, always retain ownership, and therefore artistic control, of their creations. A number of years ago a theatre in a major city produced Edward Albee's play Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? in which George and Martha were presented as a gay couple, men in a homosexual marriage. When Albee found out about it, he had his lawyer close down the play. This was not his script, and they had no right to change it.

Screenwriters hear this story with considerable envy. How different their own professional reality! When a screenwriter crosses paths with a producer or director or star actor, he or she is flirting with getting fired. Screenwriters are collaborators and not very powerful ones at that, even though they start the process that may become a movie. Screenwriters are treated like hired hands.

A number of years ago, I optioned a script about the darkly comic misadventures of a shy teacher on his fiftieth birthday, including his involvement with a young call girl. As soon as I signed the option contract, temporarily signing away my rights, the producer announced the first change he wanted in the script: change the age of the teacher to 30. What a different story! In fact, nothing made sense if the guy was 30 instead of 50 (and nine months later the producer finally agreed with me). But my choice, suddenly, was to change the guy to 30 or get fired and let some other writer do it for me. That's how powerless a screenwriter is.

Max Adams, who wrote Excess Baggage, became so upset at how her script was changed (and she was fired from the project) that she privately sells her original script!

This is not the environment in which literature is written. Screenplays are not written to be read but produced, and the original author retains no control over the changes in the script during development. This state of affairs makes some sense if you understand that a screenplay is a blueprint for a movie, the first step in a long process involving many creative minds, the least powerful of which is the screenwriter's. A screenplay is not a literary document, and it is not literature.

In my next column I'll look at the opposite view.

 

 

Go to Part Three
Hit PREV to return