Not For an idiot
The last point David Hare made on Thursday was a really good one.
He said that on The Hours, Stephen Daldry asked him to write several scenes more than fifty times. This was so that he could choose from the very best (and is in direct contravention of David Abbott’s assertion that such behaviour turns creativity into a commodity).
However, there is one giant corollary to this: Hare added that ‘you wouldn’t do that for an idiot’.
And there’s the rub: if you know someone good is choosing then there’s really no downside to working harder – the best solution you reach cannot get worse. Unfortunately, if you are doing this for most clients (and a few dumb ECDs), you will be doing it for an idiot, and therefore wasting most of your time.
Daldry is a very good director, so giving him more good stuff to choose from will result in more good things, but if you were writing for, say, Michael Bay, you would have no confidence in him choosing your best work.
I had a direct experience of this earlier in my career: if I had to write a line for, say, Nigel Roberts, then I would often be asked to have another go. And I was happy to do this, because if Nigel chose my line then I knew it was good; I thought my ad might have a shot at awards and I left his office quite pathetically pleased with myself.
On the other hand, if I had to do the same for (other person who has judged my work in the past) and they rejected it, I’d just stand there thinking, ‘yeah, but you’re shit. In fact, I’m better at this than you are, so why should I give a cat’s bollock about your opinion?’
So the best plan is to work for really good people, then the latter situation never happens.
Alas, though, in this day and age the odds are far higher that you are going to be showing your work to an idiot.
Hi Ben,
Here’s an interesting link to a blog (not mine) that makes the same point, again in an advertising context.
Fuckwit, I forgot the link, sorry: http://adaged.blogspot.com/2010/09/bill-bernbach-story.html
That’s an interesting link, kind of making a double point: hard work counts but the ability to spot the diamond in the turd is equally important (and much rarer).
Leading me to ask the question: does anyone think they work for a brilliant diamond spotter these days? Or is diamond spotting a relegated task because brilliance is undervalued and, coming full circle, quantity tends to trump quality because any old fool can unarguably measure the former, while the latter remains maddeningly subjective?
When creatives reach a certain age and standard they either become creative directors, or they resent creative directors.
Did presenting clients with loads of options start with ’tissue meetings’?
Steve Henry says tissue meetings were never meant to be like that.
My old boss said that tissue meetings were called that because they were ‘a load of wank’.
Now, indeed, they are the norm.
Blood, sweat and tear diamonds no doubt.
I’m guessing it wasn’t David Abbott that said “Tissue meetings are just a load of old wank.”
I find ‘brainstorms’ particularly galling.
They are usually organised by light-fingered charlatans who will shamelessly rip off your idea when the spotlight is turned on them at a later date.
Nope, he said they were a ‘proliferation of masturbatory excesses’.
Grrr…don’t get me started on brainstorms.
No, do get started on brainstorms.
Worth a post.
i refuse to contribute in brainstorms.
for those exact reasons blah mentioned. your idea gets ripped off and claimed by someone else.
i’ll happily give away ideas – plenty more where they came from. but i certainly won’t help a fellow human being get promoted.
Dave Droga is a diamond spotter and I’m pretty sure his creative department would gladly do 50 versions of whatever is needed for him. Likewise DDB, Wiedens, Mother. And these are the agencies regularly churning out the best work.
Hey Ben I’ve got an idea – just to elaborate on what ‘you don’t fool us’ was saying, but didn’t QUITE articulate; why don’t you do a post on brainstorms?
strategy,
i was just thinking that.
Strategy, I get the hint: one post about brainstorms coming up (eventually).
i too have an aversion to “brainstorms”. actually i have an aversion to the type of people who usually show up at them. it can all too often become amateur hour.
diamond picking is the real skill. but once you’ve defined the problem accurately surely the need for the shotgun scatter approach goes away.
in my experience (at bigger agencies) all too often creative idea generation is used in lieu of strategic thinking. that used to piss me off no end.
Brainstorms?
Know what I call ’em?
Yes, that’s right. Bastardstorms.
‘‚Ķused in lieu‚Ķpiss‚Ķ’.
Vinny is taking care of business.
[…] Monday’s post was about avoiding showing your work to idiots, but for some reason the commenters seemed keener to discuss brainstorms and exactly how fucking shit they are. […]