As I've said before, I really like the 'Meet The Writers' strand and do want to support it. There are plans afoot to give the interviews more prominence on the new site and make the archived ones easier-to-find too, don't worry 
Meet the Writers: Ariane Sherine Page 3
Great interview again, well done! And also, Ariane is stunning!
Quote: SlagA @ July 8 2008, 5:38 PM BSTIt's a minor point as I've enjoyed the series but would prefer that meeting the writers meant meeting BSG writers that we know, rather than lurkers we don't. This is only a personal opinion but I'd want to know what makes Charly or Chappers tick rather than hear the successes of someone I don't know.
I suggest after the great Baumski (who is a superb choice), we ask the team behind the Newmans script (Jude / Charly / Gav / Chappers) to tell us how they manage writing co-operatively over the net. The process, the inspirations, who does what, their strategy for getting it produced, etc. There's a few other BSG contributors I'd want to know know more about too. I'd suggest Leevil but he'd wander off to play on the Wii halfway through his first sentence.
My intention, when I picked up the reigns on this, was to use the format to talk with writers who have experienced some level of success in the industry. I'm interested in how writers break in and how they've managed to sustain a career. I've tried to restrict my choice of interviewees thus far to users of the forum, but obviously there's a limit to that. I now have two choices ahead of me. I can either keep things cosy and stick to asking questions of members of the BCG, regardless of their status as writers, or look to professionals outside the community, perhaps working my way up to some 'names'.
Personally, I know which way I'm leaning. What do the rest of you think?
There might be room for both, of course. It's the internet, so there's plenty of space.
Quote: David Bussell @ July 9 2008, 10:09 AM BSTMy intention, when I picked up the reigns on this, was to use the format to talk with writers who have experienced some level of success in the industry. I'm interested in how writers break in and how they've managed to sustain a career. I've tried to restrict my choice of interviewees thus far to users of the forum, but obviously there's a limit to that. I now have two choices ahead of me. I can either keep things cosy and stick to asking questions of members of the BCG, regardless of their status as writers, or look to professionals outside the community, perhaps working my way up to some 'names'.
Personally, I know which way I'm leaning. What do the rest of you think?
It's an intresting point there is limit food source for interview on the site so for the idea to be able to be able to be substained it would need input from external sources. But also nice to chuck in a "Local BSG" face in occasionally just to see how other writers in the same situtation are going about their business learning from others in the same situtaion as our selves.
Just a thought. I love the interviews so far, and outsourcing I think is vital to look outward at the more successful guys as well though because we don't want it just to be "In" do we
Room for both approaches. I am interested to hear how writers with more success achieved it, but I am also interested to hear from writers on the fringes for whom things are just starting to happen.
Thanks to the gorgeous and talented Ariane.
Agreed. Using both unknowns and someones would give us a nice diverse range about "making" it.
I too agree. We need writers from 'outside' to guide and offer some helpful advice as we attempt to climb the slippery pole, and we need interviews from 'inside' to see just how qualified these people are to start rubbishing our hard work in critique! 
Late to the party as always, but just want to say this was a great read, thanks for putting it up!
Does Ariane still lurk?
I saw her being interviewed on BBC Three last night about the adverts she put on buses saying God probably doesn't exist. I was shocked to hear how much money was raised for this campaign (around £100k I believe they said). Wouldn't this money have been better spent elsewhere by humanists? As the lovely Will Self said on the programme, it seems daft going to all that effort to tell people not to believe in god.
Quote: SlagA @ July 8 2008, 4:38 PM GMTI'd suggest Leevil but he'd wander off to play on the Wii halfway through his first sentence.
Hey! I'll have you know...
*Super Mario theme*
Quote: Dolly Dagger @ November 5 2009, 1:20 PM GMTDoes Ariane still lurk?
I saw her being interviewed on BBC Three last night about the adverts she put on buses saying God probably doesn't exist. I was shocked to hear how much money was raised for this campaign (around £100k I believe they said). Wouldn't this money have been better spent elsewhere by humanists? As the lovely Will Self said on the programme, it seems daft going to all that effort to tell people not to believe in god.
The campaign was a response to these fire-and-brimstone Christian ads you sometimes see on buses.
Surely Christians could find better uses for that money. It seems daft to go to all that effort to tell people to believe in an invisible friend who is watching you all the time and will let you live forever if you only believe that he's also a man whose mum was impregnated by an angel who died a couple thousand years ago (but was resurrected) in order to atone for the sin of eating a piece of fruit under duress from a talking snake.
Quote: Kevin Murphy @ November 5 2009, 1:35 PM GMTThe campaign was a response to these fire-and-brimstone Christian ads you sometimes see on buses.
Surely Christians could find better uses for that money. It seems daft to go to all that effort to tell people to believe in an invisible friend who is watching you all the time and will let you live forever if you only believe that he's also a man whose mum was impregnated by an angel who died a couple thousand years ago (but was resurrected) in order to atone for the sin of eating a piece of fruit under duress from a talking snake.
Well, when you put it like that...
Quote: Kevin Murphy @ November 5 2009, 1:35 PM GMTThe campaign was a response to these fire-and-brimstone Christian ads you sometimes see on buses.
Surely Christians could find better uses for that money. It seems daft to go to all that effort to tell people to believe in an invisible friend who is watching you all the time and will let you live forever if you only believe that he's also a man whose mum was impregnated by an angel who died a couple thousand years ago (but was resurrected) in order to atone for the sin of eating a piece of fruit under duress from a talking snake.
Christians do it because they genuinely believe that they're helping other people find salvation. I just couldn't see a point to this campaign - who did they think would read those ads and say "yes, I'm not going to believe in God anymore" ? I would like to think of humanists as sensible people who would concetrate on making this world and this life better for people.
Quote: Kevin Murphy @ November 5 2009, 1:35 PM GMTThe campaign was a response to these fire-and-brimstone Christian ads you sometimes see on buses.
Really? I suspect only you see these ads, Kevin.
Churches put up slogans and message boards outside their churches. They are rarely, if ever, "fire and brimstone" though. And they don't cost any money other than some print and paste.
And, as I recall, there was no mention by the atheists that their campaign was in direct response to any "pro religious" advertising. However their campaign did provoke a response in the form of some (fairly mild) counter-ads by a Christian group - who merely suggested that people make up their own mind. No "fire and brimstone" there, either. (Who in this country has even preached "fire and brimstone" Christianity in the last 40 years anyway?)
And that atheist campaign was fairly wishy-washy, wasn't it? 'God probably doesn't exist' - why so half-hearted in coming out stating their belief that God doesn't?