This comedy writing stuff looks like it takes hard work and talent.
And thanks for the Ross Douthat and Rachel Maddow joke. It’s just like what Aristotle (a big hit in the Athens Tonight writers’ room) had to say about metaphor: “by far the greatest thing . . . That alone cannot be learnt; it is the token of genius. For the right use of metaphor means an eye for resemblances.”
Interesting. To the extent that I ever imagined what the script writers do, I would have thought they wrote the jokes out in prose and that someone else did all this set-up stuff.
There's a lot of clip-parsing in late night writing. You have a team feeding you clips, and they're very good, but you still need to make decisions about which clips to use and how to splice them together because that's really part of the writing.
I'm glad we could co-ordinate with you on the assassinations ahead of the time so you had plenty of time to get this set up and so be first out of the gate with your packet. Even though they weren't the targets we would have chosen, we couldn't have done it without access to your intelligence network.
Yes, the hosts are more-or-less who they appear to be -- no one is doing a character. And no, a host would not voice an opinion that they don't actually hold.
I know that audience capture is a real thing. I imagine that there are some areas where there is a disconnect between what the host thinks and what is popular, although I could also believe that these people are morally and principally flexible enough that their values are entirely based upon polls (which would make them hobbies, according to Mr Stewart).
Thank you very much for this Jeff, it's very interesting to see what the audition process for a humour writer actually looks like. Regarding the fact that hundreds of writers will submit a packet any time there's a call, so any individual writer's chances are low : that reminds me of academia as well.
I feel sorry for anyone who tries to read this aloud, what with all the marginalia, links, explanations, color coding, etc., not to mention any listener who tries to make sense of an audio version. Maybe this will be the one time that 90 percent doesn't mean it's a sure thing (as Nate Silver has tried to tell us for four years).
On the Rule Of Three: I get that it’s very useful and I like it when it’s baked deeply into a story, like a folk tale. When it’s right on the surface, especially in a sitcom (and ESPECIALLY if it’s single-camera and intended to sound conversational), I tend to find it a bit meh.
When “Veep” switched from the London writers to LA in season 5, Rules of Three were among the sitcom cliches that suddenly appeared way too often.
Speaking of assassinating people for yucks, I read where someone wrote that if God had a hand in Trump's assassination attempt, he wouldn't have missed.
I wish this were still the norm- being mostly non-partisan/bothsidesey (all while still referencing Obama’s huge appendage) while being funny. I guess we can’t have communal nice things like this anymore.
This is a short desk piece (three beats, probably about four minutes on-air, whereas a desk piece is commonly in the 6-10 minute range these days), so if you're given the clips and the research (which is huge), you should be able to bang this out in less than a day. But what will actually happen is that you'll write your draft and another writer will also write a draft, then they'll splice them together, and then (if there's time) they'll give it to the whole room to add jokes.
The packet is very much like writing an episode of the show, which is definitely the point: They want to see you do the job. My second round Last Week Tonight packet was actually sent to me on a deadline -- I had to turn in a draft 48 hours after I got the assignment -- because they wanted to see me write on a deadline.
The biggest different is definitely the footage. With the packet, you just have to do your best with the footage.
This comedy writing stuff looks like it takes hard work and talent.
And thanks for the Ross Douthat and Rachel Maddow joke. It’s just like what Aristotle (a big hit in the Athens Tonight writers’ room) had to say about metaphor: “by far the greatest thing . . . That alone cannot be learnt; it is the token of genius. For the right use of metaphor means an eye for resemblances.”
I was definitely thinking of Aristotle when I wrote that joke about Douthat and Maddow bumpin' uglies.
I laughed very hard at the idea of Douthat and Maddow…
Interesting. To the extent that I ever imagined what the script writers do, I would have thought they wrote the jokes out in prose and that someone else did all this set-up stuff.
There's a lot of clip-parsing in late night writing. You have a team feeding you clips, and they're very good, but you still need to make decisions about which clips to use and how to splice them together because that's really part of the writing.
The hard part always comes after the inspiration. Music, prose, whatever.
Thanks for sharing this version, and good on you for doing the work, there and here.
Thanks, it's always great to see the back end considerations that go into writing stuff like this.
Jeff,
I'm glad we could co-ordinate with you on the assassinations ahead of the time so you had plenty of time to get this set up and so be first out of the gate with your packet. Even though they weren't the targets we would have chosen, we couldn't have done it without access to your intelligence network.
All Our Love,
Mossad
I'd prefer some funnier angles next time. Assassinate someone with a whoopee cushion or something -- I'm just spitballing.
I like this Behind the Scenes stuff. I'd read more if you'd like to share.
Next column: "Inside my process of being overcome with self-doubt and panic until one hour before the deadline."
Interior monologue includes stuff like “Should I have listened to my parents and become a chiropractor like my cousin Sheldon?”
Cool.
When it comes to "takes", is the host we see on TV actually the person? Will a funnier "take" be used, even if it's not the person's actual opinion?
Yes, the hosts are more-or-less who they appear to be -- no one is doing a character. And no, a host would not voice an opinion that they don't actually hold.
Do you have a working theory as to why The Problem with Jon Stewart was so far removed from TDS stuff? Did he succumb to the zeitgeist?
That's a great question Shaun!
I imagine their opinions would have to be in the ballpark or it would lead to self loathing.....
Some of them are full of self-loathing but that's for different reasons.
I know that audience capture is a real thing. I imagine that there are some areas where there is a disconnect between what the host thinks and what is popular, although I could also believe that these people are morally and principally flexible enough that their values are entirely based upon polls (which would make them hobbies, according to Mr Stewart).
Thank you for the recognition JorgeGeorge!
I always wanted to know how this looked. Cool insight.
Thank you very much for this Jeff, it's very interesting to see what the audition process for a humour writer actually looks like. Regarding the fact that hundreds of writers will submit a packet any time there's a call, so any individual writer's chances are low : that reminds me of academia as well.
I feel sorry for anyone who tries to read this aloud, what with all the marginalia, links, explanations, color coding, etc., not to mention any listener who tries to make sense of an audio version. Maybe this will be the one time that 90 percent doesn't mean it's a sure thing (as Nate Silver has tried to tell us for four years).
I feel sorry for me, too! As you note, I've given myself that 10 percent wiggle room.
This one actually calls for a video version.
It was so small I had to use my magnifying glass to read it on my phone.....
This was extremely interesting and eye-opening!
On the Rule Of Three: I get that it’s very useful and I like it when it’s baked deeply into a story, like a folk tale. When it’s right on the surface, especially in a sitcom (and ESPECIALLY if it’s single-camera and intended to sound conversational), I tend to find it a bit meh.
When “Veep” switched from the London writers to LA in season 5, Rules of Three were among the sitcom cliches that suddenly appeared way too often.
Speaking of assassinating people for yucks, I read where someone wrote that if God had a hand in Trump's assassination attempt, he wouldn't have missed.
Did you interact much with Rusty Foster when he worked at Scripto? Based on Today in Tabs he seems like the kind of leftist who would drive you nuts!
I wish this were still the norm- being mostly non-partisan/bothsidesey (all while still referencing Obama’s huge appendage) while being funny. I guess we can’t have communal nice things like this anymore.
One thing I'm curious about Jeff.
How long does this take to write?
Is time a huge issue on a weekly show?
This is a short desk piece (three beats, probably about four minutes on-air, whereas a desk piece is commonly in the 6-10 minute range these days), so if you're given the clips and the research (which is huge), you should be able to bang this out in less than a day. But what will actually happen is that you'll write your draft and another writer will also write a draft, then they'll splice them together, and then (if there's time) they'll give it to the whole room to add jokes.
Thanks! All this is fascinating!
On this question, how does writing one of these packets compare to the actual job of writing on the show?
The packet is very much like writing an episode of the show, which is definitely the point: They want to see you do the job. My second round Last Week Tonight packet was actually sent to me on a deadline -- I had to turn in a draft 48 hours after I got the assignment -- because they wanted to see me write on a deadline.
The biggest different is definitely the footage. With the packet, you just have to do your best with the footage.