Me: Did you have a good evening? What did you get up to?Oh dear.
Colleague: Googled teacher's suicide rates.
The Hour: I wrote the musical score
11 years ago
Monday 14 November 2011
Fun post-work activities: A Teacher's Guide
Tuesday 8 November 2011
The Jury - ITV
I am sick and feeling sorry for myself. More so than usual, I mean. Spent the day making some attempt at work, with varying degrees of success. Have made inroads on reading for my essay What is English? but now have finally given in to the nausea and sneezing. Decided to instead watch The Jury from ITV this week, a drama following the twelve jurors on a murder case retrial. I am watching it as I type, ready for updates. Five minutes in I'm really enjoying it (despite ITV player's slight connectivity issues). The opening, with no dialogue, was strong and atmospheric. I always enjoy an ensemble piece where you gradually see how the characters entwine and see their actions from opposing points of view, utilised in films such as Crash and Magnolia to such great effect. That's why I am also currently enjoying The Slap on BBC4, but will save that for a different blog entry.
Twenty-one minutes in - so far the strongest aspect of the show is the writer's ability to character profile. The profiles of the three murder victums are delivered against the backdrop of the prosector's narration in court. This is a very effective device, though does have the effect of convincing the audience that the defendent is guilty because, although we are not seeing the murder happen, the incidents are being told by the prosecutor as though it is fact and we audiences are very susceptible to suggestions like that! This would also be a useful narrative device for radio plays as it is a straightforward but not too obvious way to develop plot and propel the story.
Thirty-eight minutes in - Ah, bit of a revelation during the break: just googled the writer. It's only bloody Peter Morgan. Now, I usually only list a few writing credits for these entries but he deserves a few more:Frost/ Nixon, The Special Relationship, The Queen, The Last King of Scotland I re-watched The Last King of Scotland a couple of weekends ago as it's one of my favourite films (and, I admit, because they were selling it on dvd for £3 in Tesco) and even though I knew what was going to happen I was just as shocked, saddened and intruiged as I was the first time I watched it. Amazing stuff. Though in The Jury I feel like maybe there's a few glaring lines which need a bit of editing down for the sake of subtlety and feel a little expositional. I hope Morgan isn't overexplaining for the benefit of the ITV audience. That would be a sad state of affairs indeed. Or perhaps I'm just concentrating on the script I'm becoming a little pernickety. Am really enjoying it though, and finding this 'review as I watch' idea a bit distracting, which can only be a plus point for the show.
Forty-four minutes in (and the end) - This is definitely a slow burn. I'm still getting to grips with the characters and looking forward to the next episode. I'm particularly interested in the character of Theresa, a high-flying businesswoman with an inflated opinion of her own importance, who sends her assistant Lucy to take her place and try to get out of jury service. Of course Lucy's plea to not take part is declined and she lies under oath. Well set up and perfectly believable. Though I hated myself a little there fore writing the phrase "high-flying businesswoman" as it sounds corny and a bit stereotyped - and indeed she did have leather-look trousers, spiky heels and a blunt fringe. I always enjoy watching Sarah Alexander (who plays Theresa) but there is a reason that her most successful roles are in comedy, and that's because I'm not sure she adds much depth. Will have to see how it develops as I think it's an interesting storyline.
I saw that Zoe Williams, one of my favourite journalists, reviewed The Jury in this morning's Guardian but I wanted to wait until post-viewing to read her opinion. When I did there's some things I agree with and some I'd have to take issue with.
However I do agree with the below:
I may disagree with some of Wiliams' points, but the way she formulates them is lovely to read.
Twenty-one minutes in - so far the strongest aspect of the show is the writer's ability to character profile. The profiles of the three murder victums are delivered against the backdrop of the prosector's narration in court. This is a very effective device, though does have the effect of convincing the audience that the defendent is guilty because, although we are not seeing the murder happen, the incidents are being told by the prosecutor as though it is fact and we audiences are very susceptible to suggestions like that! This would also be a useful narrative device for radio plays as it is a straightforward but not too obvious way to develop plot and propel the story.
Thirty-eight minutes in - Ah, bit of a revelation during the break: just googled the writer. It's only bloody Peter Morgan. Now, I usually only list a few writing credits for these entries but he deserves a few more:Frost/ Nixon, The Special Relationship, The Queen, The Last King of Scotland I re-watched The Last King of Scotland a couple of weekends ago as it's one of my favourite films (and, I admit, because they were selling it on dvd for £3 in Tesco) and even though I knew what was going to happen I was just as shocked, saddened and intruiged as I was the first time I watched it. Amazing stuff. Though in The Jury I feel like maybe there's a few glaring lines which need a bit of editing down for the sake of subtlety and feel a little expositional. I hope Morgan isn't overexplaining for the benefit of the ITV audience. That would be a sad state of affairs indeed. Or perhaps I'm just concentrating on the script I'm becoming a little pernickety. Am really enjoying it though, and finding this 'review as I watch' idea a bit distracting, which can only be a plus point for the show.
Forty-four minutes in (and the end) - This is definitely a slow burn. I'm still getting to grips with the characters and looking forward to the next episode. I'm particularly interested in the character of Theresa, a high-flying businesswoman with an inflated opinion of her own importance, who sends her assistant Lucy to take her place and try to get out of jury service. Of course Lucy's plea to not take part is declined and she lies under oath. Well set up and perfectly believable. Though I hated myself a little there fore writing the phrase "high-flying businesswoman" as it sounds corny and a bit stereotyped - and indeed she did have leather-look trousers, spiky heels and a blunt fringe. I always enjoy watching Sarah Alexander (who plays Theresa) but there is a reason that her most successful roles are in comedy, and that's because I'm not sure she adds much depth. Will have to see how it develops as I think it's an interesting storyline.
I saw that Zoe Williams, one of my favourite journalists, reviewed The Jury in this morning's Guardian but I wanted to wait until post-viewing to read her opinion. When I did there's some things I agree with and some I'd have to take issue with.
It's a dramaturg's delight, the sight of a bunch of professionals storming down a corridor, preferably dressed as doctors, but barristers are fun too, because of their wigs. I always worry when I see it; if you need to convey that something is dramatic by having people walking really fast, when in reality I bet barristers maintain rather a stately pace, it's the equivalent of having to use exclamation marks to alert people to the fact that you're joking. In an ideal world, it would be dramatic on account of all the exciting things that happen; just as, ideally, people would know you were joking because it was funny.Hmm...maybe it's a little cliched but professionals storming down a corridor IS exciting. They can't all be characters from This Life, staggering in late wearing yesterday's clothes and still coked off their face.
However I do agree with the below:
Morgan has a wonderful ear for formal intercourse and political devilment, but the dialogue he accords to ordinary families, trying their best in an imperfect world, sounds like an Oxo advert. Eighteen-year-old Rashid is called for jury service – "He can't! Not with his condition!" A businesswoman makes the radically improbable decision to pass her assistant off as herself because: "I'm in what is probably the most important business meeting of my life." It's like career-woman-by-computer-program, in which someone has omitted to tell the software developer that you can end up in prison for that kind of thing. There's a teacher who's in love with her 17-year-old pupil, who has made a decision I feel sure no human being has ever made in a real-life scenario. (She informs her superior of this unnatural passion – granted, the head is played by Meera Syal, and you'd tell her anything, wouldn't you? But still … ) The odd line of interesting dialogue (a lonely housewife says to her friend on the phone: "I'm like a cactus; all alone." I sort of like it because it doesn't mean anything) doesn't alter the overwhelming impression that this was phoned in, by writer and director alike. One big conference call of half-arsed prime time.I also liked the cactus line, primarily because it was said by a foreign character in subtitles (I don't know what nationality yet; I'm not just making a rather offensive sweeping statement) and for me this makes it more interesting; as though perhaps that is a rather poetic proverb from another country.
I may disagree with some of Wiliams' points, but the way she formulates them is lovely to read.
Monday 7 November 2011
BBC Radio 4: Opening Lines
A new opportunity below, as per the BBC Writersroom site, on their opportunites page:
The BBC Radio Drama Readings Unit welcomes unsolicited submissions from writers new to radio for their annual series, Opening Lines which is broadcast on BBC Radio 4.
As well as broadcasting the three strongest stories in the summer of 2012 they will be publishing transcripts of the shortlisted stories on a new Opening Lines webpage.
The next window for sending in material is October 17th – December 2nd, 2011. Stories submitted outside this time-frame will be returned unread. Your story will be read and responded to within three months of the submission deadline.
Content and format:
They are looking for original short stories which work being read out loud i.e. with a strong emphasis on narrative and avoiding too much dialogue, character description and digression. Pay particular attention to how the story opens and closes. They’ll be looking to see whether the beginning of a story successfully links to how it ends.
The Readings Unit are interested in seeing stories which cover a broad range of subject-matter but material which explores particularly dark, harrowing themes is not best suited to Opening Lines.
The BBC has a rigorous taste and decency policy and cannot accept stories of a sexist or racist nature, or those which use the stronger swear words. The time allotted for each story is around 14 minutes, which means stories must be between 1,900 and 2,000 words in length.
Submissions must be typed and double-spaced on A4 paper and it is important to put your name and address on the script itself. Please do not send a recording of the text.
Submission details:
When submitting your work, please include a SAE and a brief covering letter giving your name, e-mail address (if applicable), the story’s title, word count and details of writing track record. We regret that we can only accept one submission per writer and if we intend to broadcast your story we shall contact you.
Stories that fall outside these guidelines will be returned unread.
Please send us a copy of your story, not your original work.
If you would like to submit work to the London office please send it to:
BBC Radio Drama Readings Unit
Room 807, South East Wing
Bush House
Aldwych
London
WC2B 4PH
Deadline: December 2nd 2011
The BBC Radio Drama Readings Unit welcomes unsolicited submissions from writers new to radio for their annual series, Opening Lines which is broadcast on BBC Radio 4.
As well as broadcasting the three strongest stories in the summer of 2012 they will be publishing transcripts of the shortlisted stories on a new Opening Lines webpage.
The next window for sending in material is October 17th – December 2nd, 2011. Stories submitted outside this time-frame will be returned unread. Your story will be read and responded to within three months of the submission deadline.
Content and format:
They are looking for original short stories which work being read out loud i.e. with a strong emphasis on narrative and avoiding too much dialogue, character description and digression. Pay particular attention to how the story opens and closes. They’ll be looking to see whether the beginning of a story successfully links to how it ends.
The Readings Unit are interested in seeing stories which cover a broad range of subject-matter but material which explores particularly dark, harrowing themes is not best suited to Opening Lines.
The BBC has a rigorous taste and decency policy and cannot accept stories of a sexist or racist nature, or those which use the stronger swear words. The time allotted for each story is around 14 minutes, which means stories must be between 1,900 and 2,000 words in length.
Submissions must be typed and double-spaced on A4 paper and it is important to put your name and address on the script itself. Please do not send a recording of the text.
Submission details:
When submitting your work, please include a SAE and a brief covering letter giving your name, e-mail address (if applicable), the story’s title, word count and details of writing track record. We regret that we can only accept one submission per writer and if we intend to broadcast your story we shall contact you.
Stories that fall outside these guidelines will be returned unread.
Please send us a copy of your story, not your original work.
If you would like to submit work to the London office please send it to:
BBC Radio Drama Readings Unit
Room 807, South East Wing
Bush House
Aldwych
London
WC2B 4PH
Deadline: December 2nd 2011
Tuesday 1 November 2011
Update from the front line
For the first time in a couple of weeks I feel like I've had a GOOD DAY at school. Finally I have witnessed students engaged in debate, expressing opinions, and thinking about issues outside of their direct experience. I am going on a year ten trip tomorrow and some of my year ten girls whooped when they found out I was supervising - must mean I'm doing something right!
On the down side I feel overwhelmed by assessment objectives and foci, schemes of work and a mulitude of pointless acronyms (EAL, SEN, G&T, IEP, AOs, WWWs, EBIs, VAK, AFL...and the list goes on...) but am getting there, slowly but surely.
I had a meeting with another teacher today who seemed to talk entirely in metaphors - the children were plants, their education roots, and results their fruit. This became quite tedious quite quickly. By time he got to 'the classroom is like a game of Jenga; you move one building block and the whole lot comes tumbling down.' I felt like I was in a meeting with a fortune cookie maker.
Today I also had a year 7 student who, after hitting a fellow pupil, was writing an account of what happened (this seems to me to be an excellent punishment - getting them to write, whilst also avoiding fraught 'he said, she said'). He wrote the sad words "He came to the window of the classroom and stuck his middle finger up at me. Then came in and said "F your dead mum" so I got angry and beated him." Kids can be pretty mean.
On the down side I feel overwhelmed by assessment objectives and foci, schemes of work and a mulitude of pointless acronyms (EAL, SEN, G&T, IEP, AOs, WWWs, EBIs, VAK, AFL...and the list goes on...) but am getting there, slowly but surely.
I had a meeting with another teacher today who seemed to talk entirely in metaphors - the children were plants, their education roots, and results their fruit. This became quite tedious quite quickly. By time he got to 'the classroom is like a game of Jenga; you move one building block and the whole lot comes tumbling down.' I felt like I was in a meeting with a fortune cookie maker.
Today I also had a year 7 student who, after hitting a fellow pupil, was writing an account of what happened (this seems to me to be an excellent punishment - getting them to write, whilst also avoiding fraught 'he said, she said'). He wrote the sad words "He came to the window of the classroom and stuck his middle finger up at me. Then came in and said "F your dead mum" so I got angry and beated him." Kids can be pretty mean.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
