SHORT CUTS – the backstory

SHORT CUTS (Robert Altman, 1993) has a multi-character multi-strand storyline put together from a series of short stories by Raymond Carver. Many of the stories are conflated or overlapped to create a larger unity, but the following scene is the climax of a single storyline taken from a single short story called So Much Water So Close To Home.

Stuart and Claire have a solid, long-standing marriage, but without children. They believe that they know each other deeply and accept each other for who they are. Stuart tolerates Claire’s aspirations to culture and cultured friends, and Claire tolerates Stuart’s joking misogyny and his need to go away fishing with his male friends.

In short, they believe that they rub along together in a strong and trusting but ‘real’ marriage.

Then, on one of Stuart’s fishing trips, at the end of a long hike to a ‘secret’ location, they discover the naked body of a young woman floating in the water near their campsite. Dusk is falling, it’s too late to walk out again that night, and step by step the men persuade themselves that it’s ok to finish their weekend of fishing before they hike out to report the body.

But when Stuart gets home at the end of his weekend fishing, with the trout he promised Claire, he’s got a problem. He needs to tell Claire about the dead woman before she finds out. He needs to control the narrative, as they say.

He doesn’t want to tell her, but he can’t risk her finding out from someone else.

I ask myself ‘What’s his deadline?’ And I imagine it’s when she turns the radio on while she makes breakfast. And it’s already the small hours of the morning.

He’s got a bit of time, but not a lot. So, he doesn’t jump straight in.

First, he sets the scene – waking Claire up, showing her his catch, waltzing her around the living room, and then taking her to bed. And now he has his chance.

INT. STUART AND CLAIRE’S BEDROOM – NIGHT

Stuart and Claire lie in their bed together. They have just finished making love. It has been good for both of them.

CLAIRE

You make me very happy.

Stuart is staring at the ceiling.

STUART

Claire?

CLAIRE

Hmmmmm?

STUART

We found a body up there.

A girl. Guess she was murdered.

He’s got it out. Now all he has to do is make sure Claire thinks he always did the right thing, and any dubious actions or choices come from the other guys. He wants her to think “Poor Stuart. What else could he do?”

So, who’s got the problem now?

Clearly at the beginning of the scene, Stuart has the problem. He has to get Claire to buy his version of the events on the river, and he has to get her forgiveness and understanding. And he has to do it before she finds out from someone else.

So far, so good. What he doesn’t count on is the new problem he is creating for Claire – and ultimately for himself.

The first problem for Claire is that, although she takes for granted that Stuart would have done the right thing, she can’t help putting herself in the position of the dead woman.

Which she reveals by asking a non-sequitur about the age of the dead woman.

CLAIRE

How old was she?

STUART

Huh?

CLAIRE

How old was she?

STUART

I don’t know. In her twenties maybe. You couldn’t tell.

Claire has a problem, but it’s a bigger problem for Stuart. He needs her to be thinking about him, not about the dead woman. On balance, the problem stays with him.

But then it starts to shift more substantially.

CLAIRE

It must have been horrible. What did you do?

STUART

Nothing.

CLAIRE

Nothing?

She sits up.

CLAIRE

After you got her out of the water. Did she drown?

STUART

We don’t know. I didn’t think we should move her. You know.

CLAIRE

You left her in the water?

STUART

Yeah.

Claire’s problem is starting to grow. Her picture of what happened is starting to change, and with it, her picture of what Stuart did is changing. More importantly, it’s forcing her picture of who Stuart is to change.

But unlike many scenes, this doesn’t mean that Stuart is gaining the power here. Instead, it’s making his problem worse, and for a while there’s a kind of competition going on about who has the bigger problem. Claire is struggling with understanding what happened, and what it means, and Stuart is struggling to keep the conversation on his terms.

CLAIRE gets up and walks to the bathroom. This is very disturbing to her.

CLAIRE

For how long?

STUART

‘Til we left and reported it. I tied her to the bank.

CLAIRE goes to the bathtub and runs the water. She pulls up her nightgown and sits on the edge of the tub as she washes herself. She is trying to reach an understanding. She stops washing and comes to the door.

CLAIRE

How long did you leave her in the water?

At this point, Claire’s problem briefly overtakes Stuart’s problem, and then it snaps back to Stuart, triggering a non-sequitur from him as he loses control.

STUART

Claire, she was dead! We didn’t think we should move her.

It was dark. We made a decision to leave her there until we could report it.

She was already dead.

But that just makes things worse.

Claire’s problem keeps growing — not just trying to understand what happened, but in what it means. The clearer her picture of that weekend becomes, the more she has to face the terrifying realisation that her husband is not the man she thought he was.

CLAIRE

And when did you report it?

STUART

This morning. Today.

CLAIRE

Today?

STUART

Yeah.

CLAIRE

And when did you find her?

STUART

I told you!

CLAIRE

Well, when did you catch the fish?

… until, round about here, Claire’s growing problem becomes Stuart’s problem again, triggering another, stronger non-sequitur from him.

STUART

Christ, that’s what we went up there for! To fish.

Which gives the problem back to Claire again.

CLAIRE

You fished while she was in the water? You just left her there?

STUART

Claire…

STUART falls back and stares at the ceiling. CLAIRE slams the bathroom door.

CLAIRE

You’re making me sick.

And now, at the end of the scene, the problem is squarely back with Stuart, but it’s transformed.

It’s no longer about what he did on the river. It’s about who he is, and whether Claire can live with that.

Key Takeaway

• In a well-constructed scene or sequence, the problem keeps changing hands.
• Sometimes this is complemented by a change in power.
• But sometimes both people have the problem, and the shift is driven by the relative intensity of the problem.
• Sudden shifts in ownership of the problem often trigger irrational responses that reveal emotional subtext.
• In this case, through non-sequiturs.

Related Essays

• 1. Subtext and Non-Sequiturs – How illogical dialogue reveals hidden emotional truth.
• 2. Who’s Got the Problem Now? – Using problem ownership to shape POV and tension.
• This essay, and the two essays above refer to an excerpt from the script for SHORT CUTS (Altman, 1993), available as SHORT CUTS: scene for analysis