rand, ayn. letter to kenneth macgowan - writing in tiers

7/29/2019 Rand, Ayn. Letter to Kenneth MacGowan - Writing in Tiers

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rand-ayn-letter-to-kenneth-macgowan-writing-in-tiers 1/3

May 18, 1934

Dear Mr. MacGowan,

Having heard that you are interested in my story - Red Pawn - I amtaking the liberty of writing to you a few words in connection with it.

There are a few ideas which I had in mind when I wrote that story and Ihave been very anxious to express them to someone in a position tounderstand them. It is not so much in regard to the value of the storyitself, as to a certain new theory of mine about motion pictures, whichthis sotry exemplifies and which, I believe, would be valuable andworth trying out.

In brief, my theory relates to making motion pictures appeal to all types of audiences. I know that it has been tried. I know also that ithasnot been tried successfully.

We have all heard a great deal about the fact that motion pictures intheir present form do not appeal, as a rule, to the higher or so-calledintellectual type of audiences. Without a doubt, there is a large andvaluable public which does not patronize motion pictures at present,for we must admit that few pictures have, or intend to have, anyintellectual appeal. On the other hand, the majority of so-called purely"artistic" films have been inexucusably dull. The unfortunate opinion isstill prevalent that to be artistic a picture has to be so vague andplotless as to become insufferable even to the highest of audiences. Iam firmly convinced that no amount of the best acting, directorial"touches" and camera work alone will ever hold anyone.

There is only one common denominator which can be understood andenjoyed by all men, from the dullest to the most intelligent, and that isplot. Everybody goes into a theatre to enjoy primiarily what they aregoing to see and not how it is going to be presented to them. If theyare not interested in what they see, they do not care how it is shown. The best manner of presenting nothing still makes it remain nothing.

That much is not new. The novelty of what I propose to do - and Ibelieve it is a novelty, for I have never seen it done deliberately -consists in the following: in building the plot of a story in such amanner that it possesses tiers or layers of depth, so that each type of

audience can understand and enjoy only as much of it as it wants tounderstand and enjoy, in other words so that each man can get out of it only as much as he can put into it. This must be done in such amanner that one and the same story can stand as a story without anyof its deeper implications, so that those who do not care to be, will notbe burdened with any intellectual or artistic angles, and yet those whodo care for them will get those angles looking at exactly the samematerial.



If th eplot of a story is simple and understandable enough to beinteresting, alone, by itself, to even the lowest type of mentality, if ithas the plain elements that can appeal to all, and if, at the same time,that plot carries a deeper meaning, a significance which can bereached only by the highest, then the problem is solved. I must

emphasize once more that it is not merely a matter of a plain story -for the sake of the "lowbrow" - artistically presented for the sake of the"highbrow." It is a matter of the plot, the story, the very meat of thefilm arranged ingeniously enough to satisfy both. Is there any reasonwhy a story cannot be built in such a way that it is convincing andinteresting to those who cannot analyze it and yet just as convincing tothose who can?

Let me illustrate just exactly what I mean on the example of Red Pawn.If you recall its plot, it is, on first glance, merely the story of a womanwho comes, at the price of a great sacrifice, to rescue her husband

from a life sentence in prison and of her worst enemy's great, unhappylove for her. There is nothing very intellectual or difficult to understandabout that. All the incidents of the plot are motivated by reasons andemotions which are common and sympathetic to all men. It does notrequire a great deal of intellectual effort to be held by the suspense,first, of the woman's mystery, then of her growing predicament, thenof her solution of the problem. Those who cannot go any further will beheld merely by these physical facts of the plot as it develops, merelyby the most primitive suspense of the story, by the quality they wouldenjoy in a plain serial.

But those who can see further, will have before them the spectacle of arather unusual emotional crisis involing the three characters of thestory, and the picture of a life and conditions which they have not seenvery often.

Those who want to go still further, will see the philosophical problem of the main figure in the story - the Commandant of the prison island -the clash of his belief in a stern duty above all with the belief in a rightto the joy of living above all, as exemplified in the woman. And thisclash is not merely a matter of details and dialogue. It is aninseparable part of the very basic plot itself.

As a rule, a consideration such as this last one would be enough to killthe chances of a story right then and there and to frighten everyoneaway from it. It does sound odd, to say the least, an attempt atphilosophy in a motion picture. But if that philosophy is there only forthose who want it, if it does not intrude for a single moment to borethose who do not care for any thinking in their entertainment, if thestory is still there, intact, unchanged, for those who will never suspectany breath of thought in it, then it can only add to the ranks of people



enjoying the picture a vast, untouched, unsuspected number of menwho do ask something besides puns and seduced virgins from theirentertainment, those countless people who have been, so far,neglected and forgotten by the movie world. This higher type of publicmay not be as numerous as the average kind, and I admit that one

could not make pictures for their tastes alone. But if a picture can bemade to satisfy them as well as the average audience, well then, whynot?

Most pictures have some kind of an idea behind them. Only, usually,the idea is inferior even to the plot. But if we can make a plot foreveryone and an idea for the "highbrows" - well, again, why not?

Such is my theory of a building in "tiers." It is, in a way, the sameprinciple as that of an airplane carried by three motors. If two of themfail, the third one is still enough to carry the plane safely. But howmuch safer the plane is, starting out with the three! As a matter of

fact, in the example in question, I am more than sure that neither of the three motors would fail.

This is a principle which I have applied to every story I have written sofar, but I have never developed it as plainly and obviously and, if I maysay so, as skillfully, as in Red Pawn. Also, I've never had a chance toattempt to explain my theory to anyone, as I have done it here. I haveno doubt that it will work. No doubt, but also no proof, for I have notseen it tried yet. It is my anxiety to see it tried which prompted me towrite this letter. It is, of course, difficult to have any new theory tried,for there is always an element of chance in the attempt. But in this

case, it occurs to me that there is hardly any chance at all, fordisregarding all my considerations, the story, I believe, is good enoughto stand on its own just as any movie. It can go on, as all pictures, with just the one motor. What the other two motors, which it carries, will do- that is what the experiment will show.

I have not the slightest doubt that this story will be made eventually,and that it will be one of the greatest hits ever made, and that it willgive an entirely new field to motion pictures. I do not say it merelybecause it is my story, for I would not dare to say it about all the thingsI've written. But I have such faith in this one, that I am willing to stand

for any accusations of presumptuousness, arrogance or bad tastemaking this statement.

I have no doubt that this story will be made. But it is only natural that Iwould like to see it made soon.

rand, ayn. letter to kenneth macgowan - writing in tiers

Documents