Interview: Vernon Lott, Director of Bad Writing

Vernon Lott, director of the movie Bad Writing, knows his way out of a sticky situation. When Lott was in his 20s, he wrote a lot and drank a lot and thought a lot about how he wanted to be the next Arthur Rimbaud. Back then he was just a high school dropout intent on manifesting his dreams of becoming a star-studded author. Then things got sticky. Turns out his writing was kind of, um, lousy. Now married and in his 30s, Lott is once again intent on manifesting his dreams, only this time he’s using a film and interviews with authors as a means to better his prose. If the film (which Vernon was kind enough to share with us in its entirety) is any indication of his strengths as a writer, we expect one day to be reading stories and poems that brim with black humor, compelling narratives, and vivid character portraits. Recently Vernon answered our questions about the movie and writing. We thank him for this. — Kevin Murphy

Dark Sky Magazine: First, for those not in the know, give us a synopsis of your film. How did the project start, what were your motivations?

Vernon Lott: I’m a creative writing major, and a couple years ago I found a bunch of old poems that I had written in my early 20s. Rather than ceremoniously burning them, I decided to make a movie. My guess was that other writers also had literary skeletons in their closet, and I wanted to find out if bad writing was a necessary step toward good writing. However, the film ended up being about much more — about the creative process, about the place of writing in the technological age, about why writing even matters.

DSM: After I watched the trailer, I thought the film was going to be 90 minutes of you getting hammered and laughed at by writers/critics/academics. Of course those elements are in the film, but there’s much more. Watching it made me feel encouraged/discouraged, happy/sad, satisfied/uncomfortable, all at the same time. Was it your intention to bring these feelings together?

Bad Writing: The Trailer

VL: Yes, absolutely. I’m not interested in making a film that’s all schadenfreude. It was my hope that these juxtapositions would add more complexity to the narrative — not to mention that this is the way the story really unfolded. I take the subject matter very seriously, but I try not to take myself too seriously.

DSM: You’re a brave man, Vernon Lott. Not only do you expose your younger self as a lousy writer, but the film also captures your struggle to find your voice as an interviewer. Was this a conscious decision, the notion that you had to work through these things in order to grow as a writer/director?

VL: This is my first feature film, and the first time I’ve had to be on camera. The mistakes that I made as an interviewer were not intentional and were not planned to make it into the final cut of the film. It’s something that came about in the post-production stage, something that seems to mirror the creative process and hopefully add another layer of complexity to the film.

DSM: At first it was uncomfortable watching you struggle. But I liked how you kind of let it air out, just as you’ve done with your writing. It was almost like you’re saying, for better or worse, here I am. By the end of the film, I think your struggles and accomplishments endear you to the viewer. Can you comment on that?

VL: I’m glad you feel that way. However, after about 100 vile YouTube comments, I’m not sure others feel that way. I guess we’ll see how endearing my persona is. After all, one person who saw the trailer on HTMLGiant said the film looks like “one-third ad hoc prescriptivism, one-third fat man hamming up his mantle as the fool and the dunce, and one-third something good, maybe.” (I think this may be our new tagline for the film.)

DSM: The film discusses more than just the mechanics of writing, or what makes writing bad or good. You also ask writers about the state of publishing (digital vs. print) and for their thoughts on the abundance of MFA programs in the US. What were some of the big-time lessons you pulled from these conversations?

VL: I learned that you can struggle to learn how to write, and if you’re lucky become a good writer and still not have a place for your work. That was depressing as hell. Of course, that’s always been true, but it seems even more so now that there are some serious changes going on in the publishing industry. This subject came into the film organically as well — it just came up in a lot of conversations.

DSM: I thought some of the writers you interviewed answered better than others. George Saunders was excellent, as was Steve Almond. Did you have a favorite, why?

VL: It’s hard to pick a favorite. I met so many super people, and there was a lot of great material from all the writers that didn’t make it into the film (hopefully that stuff will surface on the DVD). But if I had to pick one person, it’d be Steve Almond — after all, he read his own bad poetry, and he was also so honest in his response to my questions.

DSM: What’s going on with the film now?

VL: It’s looking like it’s going to be out on DVD by the end of the summer (provided I’m not in debtor’s prison).

DSM: How has the film helped your writing?

VL: More than anything, it’s given me confidence. Also, in making the film, I’ve learned how to construct a long narrative. 90-minutes can seem like four hours if you don’t have a clear structure and compelling story.

DSM: What’s in the future — more films, a book, what?

VL: Right now, my wife and I are writing a screenplay about a man in his early 20s who’s obsessed with the Russian poet Mayakovsky.

DSM: Anything else? Think of this as your very own Vernon Lott soapbox.

VL: We have a fan page on Facebook — probably the best place to get updates about the film, see outtakes, etc. Also, people can check out our website: www.badwritingthemovie.com.

Bad Writing: Outtakes with George Saunders