CROSS PURPOSESComplications Ensue
Complications Ensue:
The Crafty Game, TV, and Screenwriting Blog


April 2004

May 2004

June 2004

July 2004

August 2004

September 2004

October 2004

November 2004

December 2004

January 2005

February 2005

March 2005

April 2005

May 2005

June 2005

July 2005

August 2005

September 2005

October 2005

November 2005

December 2005

January 2006

February 2006

March 2006

April 2006

May 2006

June 2006

July 2006

August 2006

September 2006

October 2006

November 2006

December 2006

January 2007

February 2007

March 2007

April 2007

May 2007

June 2007

July 2007

August 2007

September 2007

October 2007

November 2007

December 2007

January 2008

February 2008

March 2008

April 2008

May 2008

June 2008

July 2008

August 2008

September 2008

October 2008

November 2008

December 2008

January 2009

February 2009

March 2009

April 2009

May 2009

June 2009

July 2009

August 2009

September 2009

October 2009

November 2009

December 2009

January 2010

February 2010

March 2010

April 2010

May 2010

June 2010

July 2010

August 2010

September 2010

October 2010

November 2010

December 2010

January 2011

February 2011

March 2011

April 2011

May 2011

June 2011

July 2011

August 2011

September 2011

October 2011

November 2011

December 2011

January 2012

February 2012

March 2012

April 2012

May 2012

June 2012

July 2012

August 2012

September 2012

October 2012

November 2012

December 2012

January 2013

February 2013

March 2013

April 2013

May 2013

June 2013

July 2013

August 2013

September 2013

October 2013

November 2013

December 2013

January 2014

February 2014

March 2014

April 2014

May 2014

June 2014

July 2014

August 2014

September 2014

October 2014

November 2014

December 2014

January 2015

February 2015

March 2015

April 2015

May 2015

June 2015

August 2015

September 2015

October 2015

November 2015

December 2015

January 2016

February 2016

March 2016

April 2016

May 2016

June 2016

July 2016

August 2016

September 2016

October 2016

November 2016

December 2016

January 2017

February 2017

March 2017

May 2017

June 2017

July 2017

August 2017

September 2017

October 2017

November 2017

December 2017

January 2018

March 2018

April 2018

June 2018

July 2018

October 2018

November 2018

December 2018

January 2019

February 2019

November 2019

February 2020

March 2020

April 2020

May 2020

August 2020

September 2020

October 2020

December 2020

January 2021

February 2021

March 2021


Thursday, January 12, 2006

I've been listening to bits and pieces of the Alito confirmation hearings, and it's fascinating to hear very smart people talk at cross purposes -- sometimes intentionally, sometimes just because of the chair they're sitting in.

A senator asks Alito if Roe v. Wade is the "settled law" of the land. Alito says it's a ruling that has the weight of 30 years behind it, it has been upheld repeatedly, and people have been relying on it for years. But is it "settled law", asks the Senator. Well, no, says Alito, cases keep coming in front of the Supreme Court, so to that extent it's not settled. Well that worries me that you wouldn't consider Roe v. Wade settled law, says the Senator...

A senator asks if someone's been convicted and is going to be executed, and last-minute DNA evidence exonerates him, is it unconstitutional to execute him? And Alito goes into a detailed discussion of what the guy should do to avoid being executed.

The senators are talking politics. Alito is talking law. They are at cross purposes. The senator wants Alito to say (or fail to say) that he'd uphold Roe v. Wade. Alito is discussing whether it is in fact, settled law. I have to side with him on this legalistic point: it is obviously not settled law since cases relating to it keep coming before the Court. The senator wants Alito to say that executing an innocent man is a Bad Thing, but he's asked Alito whether it's constitutional. The Constitution says it's illegal to deprive someone of rights without due process. It does not say it is illegal to deprive an innocent man of his right provided the poor sumbitch has been given due process. It is wrong to execute an innocent man, but it is perfectly "constitutional."

The point here, in a screenwriting blog, is that people are often talking about different things. They think they're in the same conversation, but they're not. They're hearing what they expect to hear and interpreting it accordingly.

This is a classic comedy situation: Lazar Wolf visits Tevye to ask for his daughter's hand in marriage; Tevye thinks Lazar wants to buy one of his cows. Hilarity ensues.

But it's also a way to inject reality into dramatic situations. People tend to behave as if everyone is equally interested in what they themselves are focused on. Have your coroner take a morbid fascination in the corpse, or compliment her beauty. But more than that, have your secondary characters talk at cross purposes to your protagonist. Make your protagonist have to pull them into the conversation she wants rather than the conversation they think they're in. And so on.

Technorati tags: ; ;


It is politics for sure; the Dems are trying to get Alito to unequivocally state whether or not he'll overturn Roe. That way, with support of a majority of people, they'll filibuster him. Of course, he's been coached by the other side to be ambiguous.

Nice way to bring it back to writing. I thought yesterday’s Kennedy-Specter blow up was great comedy.

By Blogger Shawn, at 10:43 AM  

Yeah... it's not real cross-purposes, they all know what they are talking about, they are just fencing.
Here's the real translation:

Senator Teddy: "Now comeon Alito buddy-boy, you're really a whacked out, bigoted, religious nutjob aren't you? You're sitting here stonewalling us and first chance you get you're gonna outlaw abortion and fry blue collar workers isn't that right?"
Alito: "Screw you, you bunch of Hippy Baby Killers, you liberal pansies ain't ain't gettin' nothing outta me and that's all the settled law you're a'gonna see ... and Teddy you can stick your silver spoon where the sun don't shine".
This here is the case here where the possible religious fanatic is on his way to Washington to do extreme harm. It's the "Terrorist with an Abortion-Bomb Scenario" ... a clear justification for use of torture during interogation.
God save us from the Believers.

By Blogger blogger, at 4:34 PM  

Screw the politics - this is a superb lesson on dialogue. It'll have to go into Blog Fu.

By Blogger Webs, at 5:10 PM  

Post a Comment

Back to Complications Ensue main blog page.

This page is powered by Blogger.