Monthly Archives: March 2015

What Is Your Character’s Interpersonal Style? by Phil Lowe

Regular readers of my ScriptAngel guest blog (of course you are: Creating Conflict Using Personality TheoryCharacter Motivation) will know I divide my time between the world of business psychology and writing fiction, and use the former in the service of the latter. This time, a model to help you think about how your characters interact: the FIRO-B.

“FIRO-B” stands for “Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation – Behaviour”. It’s a measure of personal style which looks at an individual’s preferences for three different categories of interacting with others:

  •  Inclusion is about your level of social contact, belonging to a group, taking part in group activities. It tends to be driven by a need to feel significant. Some people want to be in the centre of things all the time; some prefer to stay isolated, highly selective about who they spend time with; and some will say “it depends”.
  • Control is about taking charge, taking responsibility, showing others the lead. It’s often driven by the need to feel competent. Where does your character want to be? Top dog all the time? Or do they abdicate responsibility to others, let others dictate what they do? Maybe it depends; or maybe they have an internal conflict about it, wanting both – or neither (more on that later).
  • Affection is about how much you want to be close to others; how much intimacy and openness you want in your interactions. Some people will tell anyone their deepest secrets on first meeting, others will be a closed book to most of their colleagues or acquaintances. And many will, again, say “it depends”.These three dimensions are “revealed in action” (as the dramatists like to say) in two ways: expressed behaviour (what I do to others) and wanted behaviour (what I’d like others to do to me).

Have a coffee and read the grid below, and I’ll see you on the other side:

Character Interpersonal Style

Were you to complete the psychometric questionnaire that goes with this model, you would be given a score in each of those boxes, which would represent the extent to which those statements apply to you. For our purposes, just think about scoring high, medium or low – this would reflect the range of people or situations for which the statement is true. For a fictional character, all scores have potential: a very high or very low score may border on the compulsive, useful for both comedy and drama; an “it depends” medium score can make the viewer curious: we see a character in their first scene surrounded by people; then we discover they’re a loner – so what’s driving the behaviour….?

As a practical example, while everyone’s raving about the BBC’s Wolf Hall, think about Thomas Cromwell:

Inclusion: Let’s start with his ‘wanted’ score: a ‘medium’. There are quite a few people in whose company he wants to be, in several situations; but he only wants to be with people who are useful to him, and generally those in Henry VIII’s circle. In terms of ‘expressed’ his score is lower – he’s highly selective about whom he invites into his own circle; generally his family, and individuals from whom he needs information. It’s a pattern we call “cautious association”.

Control: high Expressed Control clearly evident; do you ever hear him say “Actually, your idea is better, let’s do that”? And very low Wanted Control: notice how often Anne Boleyn in particular tries to pull rank on him and he just stands and refuses to give her the deference she craves. The scene that caps it all is when Henry loses his temper at Cromwell and accuses him – him, Cromwell (sorry, Mantell fans, couldn’t resist) – of using Henry to further his advancement. Cromwell crosses his arms, stands unmoved. You never see anyone telling him what to do. It’s a pattern known as “Mission Impossible” – a profile shared by high flying executives and tragic heroes. Cromwell is on the verge of discovering it isn’t possible to control everything.

Affection: Low on Expressed Affection, Cromwell is clearly highly selective about whom he opens up to (his immediate family) – mainly because of a lack of trust, which would be the prerequisite for a higher score. I would lay money that his ‘wanted’ score is much higher, a pattern known as “Cautious Lover” – in other words, “I’ll show you mine if you show me yours” (er, that’s “Affection”, obvs). There are many scenes in which a female character, such as Mary Boleyn, initiates the possibility of a warmer, more intimate relationship, and he – he, Cromwell (it’s alright, I’ll get fed up in a minute) – becomes warmer in response. That’s the key to the ‘wanted’ dynamic: someone else needs to initiate it, but the character’s responses to that initiation gives the clue.As you use the FIRO terminology to get a fix on your character, here are two aspects to think about:

The balance between Expressed and Wanted scores. The simplest characterisation in terms of Inclusion or Affection is where the Expressed and Wanted scores match. For example, If I score high on both Expressed and Wanted Inclusion, that suggests I want most people to include me in what they’re doing, and I regularly include most people in my activities. Everything matches; people will see me as sociable, so will tend to reciprocate; I get what I want. But what if I had low Expressed but high Wanted Inclusion? I really really want people to include me, but I’m uncomfortable initiating social contact. What will I do? Well, I might hang around by the water cooler at work, making it easier for people to notice me. For a recent example of Low Expressed and High Wanted Affection, try Spike Jonze’s Her, in which our protagonist achieves intimacy with his computer operating system (and not a single “expansion slot” gag in 120 minutes).Control, by the way, works slightly differently in terms of Expressed versus Wanted: the simplest profiles are high on one and low on the other (if I want to tell others what to do, it’s easier if don’t also want them to tell me what to do, and vice versa). Low on both can be interesting (“Don’t tell me what to do, and I won’t tell you what to do”) and high on both even more so (someone who wants to both be in control and be controlled; unless they’re a sergeant major in the army this will cause internal conflict, and in real life can lead to alcoholism or drug dependency, where the artificial substance is what the character abdicates control to).

How the three dimensions interplay. This is a huge topic, so for now think about which dimension most defines your character: do others experience them most as sociable, as controlling, or as affectionate? Notice also how scoring high on all of them would make a character a real “ball of fire” (as played by Jim Carrey), while low on all makes them highly self contained, a rock (the ‘outsider’ of the Western genre).Remember, as with all the models I share, a little learning can be a dangerous thing in real life; please don’t go psychoanalysing your friends. But your fictional characters can be as messed up as you like – and their imperfections will affect their relations with others.

The FIRO-B is published in the UK by www.opp.com, and in the US by www.cpp.com

Phil Lowe is a scriptwriter and novelist with a professional background in business psychology. http://www.phil-lowe.com. Follow him on Twitter @grumpyrabbit.

Advertisements

Screenwriter Interview – Nicholas Gibbs

Script Angel’s very first Mentoring client in 2013, Nicholas Gibbs, was signed by an agent in January this year. Here Nicholas kindly shares his experience to-date of that journey towards a long-term screenwriting career.

Hayley: Huge congratulations on signing with an agent last month. Can you tell me a bit about how that came about?

Nicholas Gibbs signs with agent - 5 March 2015Nicholas: I approached Elizabeth Dench at the Dench Arnold Agency in mid-September with an introductory email and my writing CV. About an hour later, she responded and invited me to send a writing sample. She asked to read a second script that led to a meeting with Elizabeth and Fiona Grant. The meeting was scheduled for late October but did not take place until the following month. From that, they asked for documents relating to the scripts they had read plus another script I had. We were then scheduled to speak on the phone about representation in early December but for various reasons – not least, the festive holiday break – we didn’t have the conversation. I thought at that stage that the interest was gone. Then on Sunday January 4th, I got an email from Elizabeth rearranging the call. In that call, she made a verbal offer of representation. I had a think about it and accepted and then we officially signed. It sounds all straightforward and easy but as all the writers out there know it is not. At the time of approaching Elizabeth, I had also approached other agents – some of whom said no. What was in my favour was at that time I had three different scripts being read by three different production companies all of whom responded positively about the scripts and kept the door open to read again.

HM: Can I take you back and ask, what was the first script you finished and what did you do next with it (agents, producers, etc)?

NG: Once I have finished a script I show it to three trusted writer friends who do give honest feedback, which then leads to rewrites. At that stage, I would then pass it on to a script consultant like, for example, that rather good Script Angel. Then I work the script to its best possible incarnation before sending it out to producers. On occasion, those producers will provide valuable feedback. In this business, everyone has notes and everything is subjective.

I would like to say I wrote all three scripts in a week and it was really easy. It wasn’t. There were many drafts of all those scripts. And before that, there were other scripts that were what I regard now as learning scripts. Some were dreadful but there is a progression of quality not just in terms of the latest polished draft but also with the first draft. I have always leaned towards approaching Indies and producers first rather than agents and have had a good response and as I said before prior to getting an agent I had opened doors with some of those sample scripts. Those little breakthroughs end up on the writing CV, which impresses the indie, or agent you approach next. It also helped that I had done the BBC Script Editing course and written a book on Writing Television Drama.

HM: Have you always written stories? When did you realise you wanted to be a writer/screenwriter and that it could be a career?

NG: I have always loved stories from a kid playing Batman – the Adam West version not the moody cinematic versions – in the playground. I vividly remember at primary school writing a story about Neil Armstrong landing on the moon and meeting dragons. I did drama at university and in my last year I wrote a book on the England football team which was endorsed by the FA and the then England manager Bobby Robson did the foreword, that was picked up and published that led into journalism. I went freelance and got involved with BBC RaW and a whole range of theatre and radio projects. I can’t say I have a screenwriting career yet. Now, I just have access to a wider group of people who can say no.

HM: Did you have a plan of where you wanted to be in five years’ time?

NG: I didn’t have a five-year plan but I would like to think I could have a returnable series up and running by then. That may sound optimistic but you have to believe it is possible or else what is the point? That is in contrast to two or three years ago when I seriously thought of abandoning the notion. It combined with a difficult period in my life where loved ones were lost. Out of that period was an all or nothing approach. I contacted you, we did a six-month stint working on a number of scripts that were enhanced, and the response has been positive.

HM: What was your experience of trying to get the industry to read your scripts?

NG: I must say that I have had more success getting scripts read than those who say no from the outset. I am always appreciative of any industry figure who takes their time to read my scripts given that it is often an unsolicited approach. And I am always delighted when people take time to give feedback. To have people of that experience and with such demands on their time to be willing to do such a thing is a boost every time. The truth is no one is obliged to read anything and there are perfectly good reasons for people to say no.

It is hard for all writers to get read so when you do make sure that script is the best you can make it. However, to get the script read there is a need to sell you along with a commitment to screenwriting. Enrol in courses, enter good competitions, and attend industry events as your time and budget will allow.

HM: How many projects are you actively working on at any one time?

NG: At the moment, I have two half-written scripts one of which will be completed when I am away with a couple of writer friends in a remote part of West Yorkshire next week. I am story lining an ambitious epic series, which is a mighty, complicated task to make it work and understandable. I also have a file of story ideas, which range from a sentence, a paragraph or a two page documents. I have also taken writing down scenes, scenario or sequence ideas which may end up in a script. I also have on-going book projects as well.

HM: Are you focused on television drama or writing for other platforms, like feature films? What attracts you to those media, as opposed to writing novels or radio?

NG: I prefer television drama because I love multi-episodic storytelling. There is nothing better than watching an emotionally engaging and inventive TV series. That is not to say I don’t like single self-contained stories. I do. Indeed, I have some story ideas that best suit the one-off show. I have a little experience in radio and I have written non-fiction books. I am writing, on the sly, a novel based on one of my scripts.

HM: Do you always have to write a spec script to pitch a project to a producer or are you pitching with a two-line idea or a treatment? Do you think that will change in the future?

NG: I am at the stage where it comes down to the script because the truth is I do not have an on screen credit. Unlike most of the books I’ve written, which have been pitches first, and then you are commissioned and given a modest advance. In the future, I hope the commission comes first from an idea and they pay me to write the script.

HM: How do you think getting an agent will change things for you? Will you still have to network / get yourself and your work out there?

NG: Based on a couple of sample scripts an indie has put me forward for one of their shows. The producers of that show will decide whether, based on the sample script, whether they think I maybe suited for the show. That probably would not have happened if I didn’t have an agent.

I am still going to continue doing what I have been doing because it has proved to be successful. What having an agent does is open you up to a wider set of industry figures that you previously didn’t have access to. It also means you can target your scripts to the right individual producer, production company or broadcaster. It gives the writer an endorsement and says to any producer that what they are going to read has had quality control. Networking remains important because you still have to show you are not an arse! That no matter how good your writing is, you are someone people will want to spend time and work with.

HM: What do you want to be doing in five years’ time? Do you have a plan of how to get there? Does your agent help in this?

NG: Ideally, I want to do this job for the rest of my working life and the only way to achieve that is to continue to have good ideas and write.

HM: What’s the one piece of advice you’d give to someone starting out?

NG: It is a long a commitment. Learn the craft and you can only learn that by doing it. Read the books, attend the courses but more than anything Write, Finish, Rewrite. Do not be afraid to put your work out there. It is unlikely to happen overnight and when you get the inevitable rejection (it happens to every writer) be miserable for no longer than eleven minutes (the length of the average TV act).

HM: Thanks Nicholas!

Nicholas Gibbs is represented by The Dench Arnold Agency and his book  “Writing Television Drama” is available to buy now.