College 3
Life is unusually quiet in College towers. Time to sit back in the leather armchair and enjoy the wood panelling, or take a turn around the cloisters while meditating on why words with a 'k' in are funnier than those lacking the hard consonant.
Last week was quite frenzied as I wrote to people who nearly made the final cut, nearly all of whom responded graciously and wished the scheme well. A few people expressed their disappointment quite forcefully, which is understandable.
However, the important thing to realise is that this is just one scheme. Failing to make the final six, or even the long-list, doesn't mean the end of a career, or indicate lack of talent. Since the entry requirements called for some record of achievement, then talent is a given. For the unsuccessful, it's a matter of keeping going, and recognising that rejection is an unavoidable part of the writing life. Of course, that's easy for me to say. What hasn't been easy has been the process of putting applicants in categories, recognising the hope and expectation which accompanied every submission.
The final 20 applications have now been given to senior colleagues in the comedy department and the writersroom, and all being well I should have their views by the end of the week. We will then be able to invite people to come and meet us to talk about their ambitions and what they want the scheme to give them, as well as what we want to achieve from it.
It's good that this blog has been collecting comments, and I'll continue to respond as and when I can. It's particularly helpful to hear how the scheme could have been run better, because I hope it will continue. Ambiguity in entry requirements and more clarity of communication can certainly be addressed.
Comments
or to comment.