John Truby on the 3 act structure

[Steve]

Re: 3 ACTS...

Just to clarify something Couch brought up, Truby is absolutely not railing against structure. He's all about structure. He's just saying that the 3 act structure is too simplistic. It's like saying every story must have a hero and an antagonist, and the hero has to either win or lose at the end. Not untrue, but not necessarily to key to a story that works.

Also, Truby is not a writer. He's a teacher. Many great artists will cite the influence of a teacher or mentor who no one has ever heard of. Great writers aren't necessarily great teachers and visca versa. I don't think his lack of writing credits disproves his theories about writing.

And KSK, you mentioned Freida Khalo which brings up a good point: Maybe what a woman really needs to succeed in the art world is a moustache.

[Dragonslayer02]

Re: 3 ACTS...

Steve,
Right on about your point on not all writers are great teachers and not all teachers are great writers. Two completely different skill sets.

I don't think Truby is saying structure is unimportant, but he's dead on that the three act structure doesn't tell you much. Beginning. Middle. End. Duh. Far more interesting was an article on structures in Creative Screenwriting (I think March/April edition).

DS2

[mazzini]

Re: 3 Acts

Lew Hunter says the first act should end around page 17.

[ksk2]

Re: 3 Acts

http://members9.clubphoto.com/_cgi-b.../jpg/10/10.jpg

[TonyRob]

Re: 3 Acts

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

You owe me a computer monitor, Kosk, because I was drinking diet pepsi when I read that and I laughed so hard that...

Oh, wait a minute, Blue Parrot's already used that line or a variation of it. Two or three times. Maybe more... :lol

Anyway, bloody bril Kosk!

Tony

[Steve]

Re: 3 Acts

That one is an instant classic.