Story – Robert McKee's Creative Storytelling Magazine Issue 005 – Drew Carey | Page 36

MCKEE
INTERVIEWS
MARK WHITNEY
RM: It suggests to me a kind of
mind.
MW: It’s about the questions.
RM: It suggests to me a kind of
mind that looks at the totality of it and begins to see a superstructure, begins to see an
abstract form that holds all of
this together and then goes to
fill it in. I think that’s genetic—
most people don’t think like
that.
MW: There are people that say
that. I’ve read stories about
that—people who have letters after their names and study these
things and believe that the need
to really get down to what it is
and understand what it is. I’ve
read that mostly in the context
of entrepreneurs, people who
start companies, people like
Charles Ferguson who produced
Inside Job—why does he wake
up someday and decide, “Jesus,
these people blew up the world
and I’m going to make a documentary about it.” What is it that
makes him want to do that?
RM: There are two ways to
think, basically: induction and
deduction. Most people think
inductively. This happens, that
happens, this happens and that
happens—da da da da. Therefore, and they draw a conclusion or they try to make sense
out of things. Other people

think deductively. They have
a premise—the law works this
way in a democracy under
the constitution, right? Now,
is that the case? This bit, that
bit, this bit, that bit, this bit.
It seems to me that you think
deductively. You start out with
a premise, you have a big idea,
and then you start to fill it in,
as opposed to what most people do which is just let experience slap them across the face
enough times until they finally get it.
MW: With the law, I want to know
how it’s meant to be, not how it
is.
RM: Yes, that’s the premise.
MW: That’s what I want to know.
It’s like my show is all about how
things were meant to be in contrast to how they are, and that’s
what’s at stake in my show. There’s
a set of intangible ideals that are
at stake that can’t be measured
by mathematicians and scientists. Ideals that defy measurement and the ideals speak to the
core of individuality. That’s what
at stake to me, and as an artist,
as an entrepreneur, and as somebody who has spent 30 years
creating things from nothing, I
don’t want to see that lost. That
is so upsetting to me to see that
lost, you know.
When I see people dressed up in

Story Magazine // Issue 005

powdered wigs and throwing tea
over the boat talking about how
they ’re afraid of “Sharia” law because they care about the constitution—I’m like, “You couldn’t
find a fucking constitution if it
was in your ass! You worry about
Sharia law—why don’t you learn
your own fucking law first, okay?
Why don’t you tell me, you fundamentalist asshole, what the
first amendments is, okay? Tell
me that. Tell me you know that
and then you can lecture me
about Sharia law.” It’s like cognitive dissonance. So I live in this
alternative universe as a result of
my experience.
RM: You start with the ideal,
and then you find all the really
upsetting exceptions to that.
MW: Exactly.
RM: How do you know this is
funny? A lot of people—once
again, they don’t think like
you do. But there are people
who think like you do, but they
don’t find it funny.
MW: There have been people
that have had some tremendous
influence on me in terms of that.
People who have given me permission to do what I do. If you
start with the world of stand-up
comedy in Southern California,
it’s a poisonous world. You go
down to the Comedy Store on a
Sunday night and you throw your