“Narrative Space” describes the complete breadth and depth of subject matter in which you seek to define a story.
Simply put, most authors don’t come to a story with a complete structure immediately in mind. Rather, they are attracted to the subject matter, which may include setting, time period, activities and events, personalities, snippets of dialog, situations and anything else that is not inherently part of the argument of a narrative. For example, take Santa Claus. You can have him be the main character or a victim or a villain. You can make him a spirit or a man. You can have him involved in a western, a science fiction, a romance, a buddy picture or a tragedy. In and of itself, subject matter is not part of a structure but just the raw material from which a structure is formed. That is part of the reason that in Dramatica theory we named a story’s structure the storyform as it brings form to story.
Think of subject matter as the interstellar gas and material from which solar systems are formed. This is the narrative space. Just because you carve out a piece of this space – enclose a particular cloud of star stuff – does not create planets that orbit in understandable patterns. The job of an author is to look into the nebulous nature of an area of subject matter – a particular historic event, an aspect of human nature – and to coalesce that material into a tale or a story. A tale in a given narrative space would simply explore the subject matter and make a statement about it. A story would transcend that and make the case for the best (or worst) of all possible ways to organize (or live through) that material.
As you might expect, there does not have to be a just one single storyform within a narrative space. In fact, there can be an infinite number of stories told within a given realm of subject matter. Some of these may exist in different corners, completely separated from each other. Some may overlap slightly, covering similar areas of subject matter with two complete different structures and messages. In fact, two completely different storyform arguments may actually occupy the exact same portion of the overall narrative space but form the raw material toward two contradictory purposes, much as two scepters might fashion artistically incompatible statues from identical pieces of clay.
As a final thought in this brief introduction to the concept, consider that when you are developing your story’s world, who’s in it, what happens to them, and what it all means, just because there are parts of the narrative space subject matter that are the reasons you want to write this story does not mean that they can all fit into the same storyform. Often, to make a complete argument, we must exclude favorite subject matter pieces that would have to be ham-handedly crammed into our story and would never truly fit. Further, we may have to include additional elements that really don’t inspire us, because if we went with only the parts we truly care about, our overall argument would be full of holes.
Lastly, take solace that you can always write a second story or a series of them about the same narrative space (subject matter) until you have devised enough structures to powerfully explore them all.
Let’s not kid ourselves. It’s not really possible to write a novel (or screenplay) step by step because that’s not how the creative mind works. Rather, we come to a story with a whole bag of bits and pieces of ideas, some complete, some half-baked. But, we can describe in step by step terms our own creative processes by which we assemble those ideas into a finished book or script.
To begin with, the ideas we have are from all across the board: a snippet of dialog, a setting, a bit of action, a type of personality for a character (even though we don’t yet have any idea if it’s a protagonist or antagonist or even if it is the Main Character).
You see, inspiration – the desire to write a story and an idea of what it will be about – comes from the subjects that interest us. But stories themselves come from the structure that holds them together. And that is the age-old author’s dilemma: “How do I turn my interests and motivations into a finished novel that makes sense?”
When embarking on a new writing project, it often seems as if the whole process is summed up in that old saying, “You can’t get there from here.” And for many writers, once the novel is written, they can’t really see how they did it, or more aptly, “You can’t get here from there.”
Yet, there is hope. There is an approach you can take that works with your Muse, rather than against her. And, it is a real step-by-step method that will actually take you from concept to completion of your novel or script.
So what is this miraculous “silver bullet” for banishing writer’s block and dancing merrily down the garden path to a finished novel? Simple. Rather than focusing on the needs of the story, focus on the needs of the author.
No matter what kind of author you are, no matter what kind of novel you want to write, you share the same sequence of creative steps with all other authors everywhere. Just like the stages of grief or Freud’s psycho-sexual stage, there is a common order to the creative process which drives us all.
This process can be divided into four Creative Stages: In order, 1 – Inspiration, 2 – Development, 3 – Exposition, 4 – Storytelling. Let me define each a little more fully.
1. Inspiration
Inspiration comes to us all, sometimes through great effort; other times unbidden. From the outside, it appears as if a person plucks an idea out of the ether, creating something from nothing. But in truth, every inspiration is just the synthesis of some combination of new and previous experiences.
Many inspirations aren’t worth pursuing. But, occasionally, a worthwhile concept pops into our heads that’s just too appealing to toss away. These little visions can be single grains of sand that require lots of time and effort to develop into a pearl. Or, they may be fragments, glimpses really, of something larger for which we do not yet see the full extent, scope, or shape. The most impressive of these little mental feats are those rare ideas which thrust themselves upon our conscious minds completely developed already, like a snap-shot of the whole shebang in a single big bang moment of creation, right out the head of Zeus, as it were, mature upon birth.
There’s many ways to help bring inspiration about, and I’ll be writing about those in articles to come. But for now, here are some links to previous articles I’ve penned on the subject:
For your convenience, I’ve also compiled all my best articles on finding inspiration into a twenty page booklet called The Case of the Missing Muse, available as a PDF Download and also in Kindle Book format on Amazon.com.
2. Development
As obvious as it may be, it bears repeating: You can’t develop an inspiration you haven’t had yet. And just as important: Inspiration doesn’t stop just because you move into Development.
You see, these four stages the creative process don’t follow each other one after the next. Rather, they are layered, like a layer cake or the floors of a building under construction.
No matter what the story, you have to start with Inspiration – there’s no way around it. Once you have that inspiration you can start adding depth and detail to it until it fleshes out in a fully developed story concept, or at least a part of one.
But even while you are developing one part or aspect of your story – perhaps because you are developing one part – new inspirations start popping up all along the way. The very act of enriching a previous inspiration add more concepts and new perspectives into the mix. Those bounce around in your head, run into each other, and merge and blend to create whole new inspirations.
So just because you have all your basic ideas worked out, don’t shut your mind to Inspiration just because you have started Development. It may turn out your best ideas are yet to come!
What’s more, you don’t have to wait until you have your whole story worked out to start developing the parts you have. There’s no reason why you can’t figure out the arc of one of your characters before you even know who the other characters are or what the plot is about.
It is more like weaving than building timeline. You follow one thread until inspiration runs dry, then pick up another and run with it for a while. And even these don’t have to be in story sequential order. You can jump to the end to dabble with a surprise conclusion to your plot, for example. You might not yet have any idea how you are going to get your characters there, but you know what kind of twist you want. So, just go for it. You can always rewrite later if you get in a bind.
You know, a lot of writers worry that if they don’t have everything figured out in advance, they may have to get rid of a lot of work they had already done that just doesn’t fit with the way the story turns out to be.
Hey, words are cheap. If you are any kind of an author at all, you’ve got an endless supply of them. It pays to remember that writing a novel almost always takes a long time. You’re going to spend hundreds of hours tooling it together. Don’t cry over a few hours or even dozens of hours that have to get ripped out later. It is all part of the process of finding your story.
Keep in mind the salesman’s creed: If you get nineteen doors slammed in your face before you make a $20 sale on the twentieth call, well then you made $1 each time you knocked on a door. Same with writing. It doesn’t matter how much work you have to throw away. By following each inspiration as far as it will go, even if that material is never used, it was a necessary step to get you to the material you WILL use.
We’ll get into this a lot deeper in articles to come, but for now, here’s some links to a few techniques that will help you during the development process:
Okay. So you had some inspirations and you’ve done some development. Perhaps you’ve even worked out your entire story and everything in it. You know your story up one side and down the other. But – your readers don’t. Exposition is the process of working out how and when you are going to reveal everything you know about your story as it plays out over time.
Perhaps the most common mistake made in Exposition is knowing your story so well that you forget to share that knowledge with your readers. It is so easy to leave out a critical piece of information because it is so important it never occurs to you to see if you actually conveyed it.
But exposition is much more than that; it is an art form in its own right. Intentionally holding back on information to create assumptions or misunderstandings can help set your readers up for jaw-dropping shockers. Putting information out of sequential order in flashbacks and flash forwards can force your readers to have to reevaluate characters and plot . This makes the “read” an active endeavor rather than just a passive experience.
There are two basic ways to approach Exposition: 1 – Work out an Exposition Plan in advance so that you know how and when each key bit of information will unfold. 2 – Just go ahead and write the story and then go back to make sure you put everything in that ought to be there.
The first approach works well when you want to keep the readers guessing, as in mysteries or conspiracy stories. The second approach is better if you are the kind of writer who likes to go with the flow and not feel too constrained while writing.
If you elect not to have an Exposition Plan in advance, here’s a tip that will still ensure all the crucial bits of information made it into your story: Before you write in fine literary prose, write a shopping list of all the elements of your story you want your readers to know. Describe your characters, plot, theme, and genre all in terse, concise terms.
Then, when you have written your story, refer to your list and find each element in the story as written, checking it off the list when you find the actual place at which you’ve conveyed that information. If any of these character and plot points doesn’t get checked off your list, you’ve gotten so wrapped up in the storytelling you forgot to put them in and need to find a place to insert that information as gracefully and dramatically as possible.
As before, Exposition is layered on top of Development and Inspiration. So, even while you are working out how to unfold your story, that very process may inspire whole new concepts to include the your novel and also suggest new details that can enrich the ones you’ve already got.
Here’s some links to some of the best techniques for solid exposition:
One of the best tools for working out an exposition plan is the new Outline 4D program from Write Brothers.
4. Storytelling
Finally, we arrive at the last stage of story development. This is the part where you actually put words on paper that you intend your readers to see. (Keep in mind that for a screenplay, your readers are not the movie-goers but the cast and crew who will interpret your words and present them to the audience on your behalf).
Now there’s no right or wrong way to tell a story, but there are more and less effective and involving ways. Of all four of the stages, this is the one most dependent on natural ability. Let me say a few words about that:
You are only as good as you own talent – get over it!
Most cases of writers block occur not because authors don’t have any ideas but because they don’t think the ideas and/or the way they expressed them is good enough.
Hey, we all want to be celebrated in our own time – the toast of the town, the person everyone wants to know. Dickens was a rock star of his age – revered by scholars and applauded by his fans, especially when he went on tour throughout England doing “one-man-show” performances based on readings from his “greatest hits” and acting out all the characters himself.
Not everyone can be Dickens. Hardly anyone can be Dickens. In fact, only Dickens could be Dickens and only Shakespeare could be Shakespeare. I’m sorry but that’s the way it is.
Some folks, like the aforementioned, are notable for many fine literary works. Others, like Mary Shelly, Margaret Mitchell, and Ralph Ellison really only had one superb novel in them. (Ellison might have had two but his entire manuscript burned up in a house fire and he had to reconstruct it from memory).
Fact is, if you aren’t good or lucky enough to be a Dickens or a Shakespeare, you’ve go two choices: 1 – labor over one single work all of your life until it is as perfect as you can make it. 2 – Write a lot of books (or screenplays) and hope one of them turns out to be great.
It really depends on whether you are writing to ensure how you will be remembered, or writing because you want to share something with people today.
Either way, there’s still only one cardinal rule in the art of storytelling: Never bore your audience! Someone once said, “They won’t remember what you said and they won’t remember what you did. They’ll remember how you made them feel.”
To be sure, there are all kinds of tips, tricks and techniques you can use to improve and hone your storytelling skills. Just don’t get hung up on whatever level of ability you’ve go. Rather, make the most of it. After all, the more you write, the better your writing will become.
Here’s a link on storytelling that can help grease the wheels of self expression:
Naturally, the less that gets in the way of your writing process, the more smoothly it can proceed. When you write novels or screenplays, consider Movie Magic Screenwriter. It is not just for scripts, but automatically formats your novel, script, or stage play while you write.
Here’s a little “white paper” I tooled together for the government when we were working for the CIA, NSA, NRO and the Joint Chiefs of Staff a few years ago, using narrative modeling to map the motivations of terrorists and terror organizations and to project their likely future behavior. Enjoy.
Application of Dramatica Narrative Theory and Technology to
Analysis of Multi-Source Intelligence Data
& Prediction of Target Group Activities
Based on theories developed by
Melanie Anne Phillips & Chris Huntley
Introduction to Dramatica Narrative Theory and Applications
The Dramatica Theory of Story is a model of the mind’s problem solving processes which has been successfully employed for seventeen years in the analysis and construction of fictional stories ranging from major Hollywood productions to novels, stage plays, and television programs.
Software based on the Dramatica Theory is built around an interactive Story Engine which implements the problem-solving model as a method of determining the meaning and impact of data sets and of predicting motivations and actions based on potentials inherent in the data.
This is achieved by creating a Storyform – essentially, a schematic of the problem solving processes at work, their interactions, their outcomes, and the future course they will take.
The Dramatica system and its problem-solving algorithms can be applied with equal success to the analysis of real-world situations as well, specifically in determining the motivations behind the actions of a target group and in the prediction of their future actions and potentials for action.
Scalability and the Story Mind
To illustrate this methodology let us consider a generic target group. This might be a clique, club, movement, political faction, tribe, or nation. This highlights an important benefit of the system: Dramatica is scalable. It works equally well on individuals or groups of any size.
This kind of scalability is described by a Dramatica concept referred to as the Story Mind. In fiction, characters are not only individuals but[M1] also interact in stories as if they are aspects of a larger, overall mind set belonging to the structure of the story itself.
If, for example, one character may emerge in group actions and discussions as the voice of reason while another character, driven primarily by passion, becomes defined as the heart of the group.
Stories reflect the way people react and behave in the real world, and when individuals band together as a larger unit, they fall into roles where the unit itself takes on an identity with its own personality and its own psychology, almost as if it were an individual itself, in essence, a Story Mind.
Fractal Storyforms in the Real World
Similarly, if several groups become bound, as when factions join as members of a larger movement, the movement begins to take on an identity and the factions fall into roles representing aspects of individual problem solving processes.
Dramatica can move up and down the scale of magnitude from the individual to the national and even international level, while retaining an equally effective ability to analyze and predict based on its underlying model. This phenomenon is referred to the Fractal Storyform.
In actual practice, many groups of interest are ill defined, have blurry edges and indistinct leadership. Still, the core motivations of the target group can be determined, and from this the edges of the group can be refined sufficiently to create a storyform of the appropriate magnitude to suit the task at hand.
Memes and StoryPoints
Dramatica makes a key distinction between the underlying structure of a story and the subject matter that is explored by that structure. For example, every story has a goal but the specific nature of the goal is different from story to story. Elements such as a goal which are common to every story and, hence, every problem solving process, are referred to as Story Points.
Similarly a culture, ethnic group, religion, political movement, or faction will employ the same underlying story points but will clothe them in unique subject matter in order to define the organization as being distinct and to provide a sense of identity to its members.
Once a story point has been generally accepted in a specific subject matter form it becomes a cultural meme. Efforts to analyze and predict a culture based on memes alone have largely been unsuccessful.
Dramatica’s system of analysis is able to strip away the subject matter from cultural memes to reveal the underlying story points and thereby determine the specific storyform that describes that group’s story mind.
Essentially, Dramatica is able to distill critical story points from raw data and assemble them into a map of the target group’s motivations and intentions.
Passive Participation and Active Participation
One of Dramatica’s greatest strengths is that it works equally well in constructing stories as in analyzing them. We refer to analysis as PassiveParticipation and construction as Active Participation.
When dealing with a target group of interest, these two approaches translate into the ability to passively understand the target group and anticipate its behavior, and also to actively create courses of action by which to intervene in and/or influence the group’s future activities and attitudes.
To understand, we determine motivations and purposes.
To anticipate, we project actions and intent.
To intervene, we define leverage points for targeted action.
To influence, we determine nexus points for focused pressure.
Analysis
The passive approach is comprised of Analysis and Prediction. Analysis is achieved by first identifying independent story points and then determining which ones belong together in a single storyform.
Identifying StoryPoints
In addition to cultural memes, story points can also be derived from the target group’s public and private communications, in news publications and vehicles of propaganda, in works of art (both authorized and spontaneous), in popular music and entertainment, in the allocation of resources, and in the movements and gatherings of individuals. In short, any data can directly or indirectly provide valid story points.
Identifying a Storyform
Once a collection of story points has been assembled, it must be determined which ones belong together in the same storyform. Each storyform represents a different state of mind, but there may be many states of mind in a single target group. These are not different mind sets of individuals, but different mind sets of the group itself:. And just as stories often have subplots or multiple stories in the same novel, target groups may have a number of different agendas, each with its own personality traits and outlook.
This can be illustrated with an example from everyday life: a single individual may respond as a banker at his job, a father and husband at home, a teammate in a league and a son when he visits his own parents. Similarly, a target group may have one storyform that best describes its relationship to its allies and another that describes its relationship to its enemies.
It is crucial to determine which storyform is to be analyzed so that an appropriate subset can be selected from all derived story points.
Results from Limited Data
The Story Engine at the heart of the Dramatica software cross-references the impact and influence of different kinds of story points as they interact with one another, both [M2] for individual story pointsand for groups[M3] of story points.
Once the scope of the storyform is outlined, the software can actually determine additional story points within that closed system that had not been directly observed as part of the original data set. This creates a more detailed and complete picture of the situation under study than is evident from the limited data.
Spatial Data vs. Temporal Data
Unique to Dramatica’s software, the Story Engine is able to determine the kinds of events that must transpire and the order in which they will likely occur, based on the static picture of the situation provided by the complete storyform.
In stories, the order in which events occur determines their meaning. For example, a slap followed by a scream would have a different meaning that a scream followed by a slap. Similarly, if one understands the potentials at work in a storyform derived from story points pertaining to the target group, the Story Engine is capable of predicting what kinds of events will likely follow and in what order they will likely occur.
Conversely, if the originally observed data set includes sequential information, such as a timeline of a person’s travels or of the evolution of a sponsored program, the Story Engine can convert that temporal data into a fixed storyform that will indicate the motivations and purposes of the group that led them to engage in that sequence of events.
Prediction
The Dramatica theory and Story Engine (when properly used by experts) is able to translate the spatial layout of a situation into a temporal prediction of how things will unfold from that point forward.
Signposts and Journeys
The Dramatica storyform breaks events into Signposts and Journeys. These concepts are similar to the way one might look at a road and consider both the milestones and the progress being made along the path.
In stories, this data is described by Acts, Sequences, and Scenes, concepts which represent different magnitudes of time. Acts are the largest segments of a story, sequences one magnitude smaller, and scenes are even smaller dramatic movements.
Wheels within Wheels
It is commonplace to think of story events as simply being driven by cause and effect. A more accurate model may be roughly visualized as wheels within wheels, where a character sometimes may act in ways against its own best interest. For example, larger forces may have been brought to bear and might carry greater weight.
The outside pressures that are brought to bear on the target group build up these potentials as if one were winding a clock. In stories, this creates potentials that make each wheel (such as an act of a scene) operate as if it were a dramatic circuit.
Each story point within a given dramatic circuit is assigned a function as a Potential, Resistance, Current, or Power. Determining which of these functions is associated with each story point is essential to accurately predicting the nature and order of a target group’s future activities based on an understanding of the different magnitudes of motivation at work.
Closed Systems and Chaos
Storyforms are closed systems. They are snapshots of a moment in time in the mindset of a target group. But just as an individual or a character in a story is constantly influenced by outside events, new information, and the impact of others, so too is the target group. To the ordered world of a storyform, such outside influence is seen as chaotic interference.
The accuracy of a storyform analysis and its predictions has a short shelf life. The more volatile the environment in which the target group operates, the more quickly the accuracy of the storyform degrades.
Fortunately, storyforms can quickly incorporate new data to be updated in real time to give a constantly refreshed accuracy to the analysis.
In addition, just because a target group’s motivations and agenda is continually being altered by outside events does not mean the effects upon it are completely chaotic.
Some influences, such as an earthquake, an unexpected death, or a surprise attack are truly chaotic, while other influences only appear to be chaotic because they are not part of the closed storyform. Rather, they are part of a larger story.
Applying the concept of the fractal storyform, it is possible to create additional storyforms of both larger and smaller magnitudes to surround the target group so that it is seen not only by itself, but also as a player in a larger story or in terms of individual players within it. In this manner many events which previously appeared chaotic can be predicted and the accuracy of the target group storyform is enhanced.
Movie Frames
Another method for minimizing inaccuracy in prediction is to create a series of storyforms for the target group over a given period. These are then assembled in sequence, like frames in a movie, to determine the arc of change over time.
Truly chaotic events will largely cancel out, but ongoing influence from larger and smaller storyforms with their own individual agendas will create a predictable curve to the manner in which the target group’s storyform is changing, thereby allowing us to anticipate not only what the target group might do on its own, but what it is likely to do as the situation in which it operates continues to evolve.
Direct Intervention
In contrast to Passive methods, with Active methods we consider altering the actions and attitudes of a target group by either direct intervention or indirect influence.
Identifying a Problem
Once a storyform has been created and analysis and prediction have been employed, an assessment must be made to determine if the target group is currently of a mindset contrary to our interests and/or if it will be in the future.
Before a response can be developed, the specific nature of the problem must be fully defined. Again, the storyform and its component story points offer an accurate mechanism for determining the specific nature of the problem: the story point or story point arrangements that are in conflict with our interests.
Identifying a Solution
Some solutions simply require the alteration of a single story point to a different orientation within the storyform (corresponding to a slight shift in attitude, motivation, or actions by the target group). Often, once the specific nature of the problem is understood, a direct surgical impact on that story point may alter the direction of the story. Modifications to the storyform must be approached with caution, because a single small ill-advised move can sometimes do far more damage than the original problem. More complex problems may require replacing the current storyform with a completely different one.
“What If” Scenarios
Fortunately, Dramatica’s Story Engine allows for altering one or more story points to see the nature of the new storyform that will be created as a result. A large number of alternatives exist by simply altering a few story points, resulting in the ability to game out “what if” scenarios in real time to determine a wide variety of alternatives that would accomplish the same end.
Risk Analysis
By comparing the effectiveness, ramifications, and projected timelines of each alternative storyform solution, it is possible to create an effective risk analysis of each available option to ensure maximum impact with minimum risk.
These alternative storyforms can indicate the kinds of risks involved in each potential response to the problem, as well as the magnitude and likelihood of each risk.
Indirect Influence
Direct intervention may be inadvisable for any number of reasons. Also, if the problem with the target group is its overall attitude, the strength of its motivation, or its unity of purpose, any overt action might prove ineffective or even counter-productive, resulting in a response opposite to that intended.
In such cases, it may be more prudent to exert a gradual influence or series of influences over an extended time. Here again, Dramatica is able to provide tools to know when and for how long to apply specific kinds of visible and/or invisible influence to ultimately obtain the desired changes in the target group’s mindset.
Identifying Problem Qualities and Directions
At times, there may currently be no problem, but the storyform may reveal that, if left unaltered, the course of events will lead the target group into an undesired orientation. This allows for the allocation of our own resources in advance so that we might prevent the Target group from taking that particular course and opting instead for one more consistent with our interests.
Again, the first step is to create a storyform from available data and then determine the qualities of the target group’s story mind that are contrary to desired attributes.
Determining Desired Qualities and Directions
Once the problem qualities and/or directions have been defined, alternative storyforms can be created using “what if” scenarios and risk analysis to determine the best choice for a new storyform we would like to see in place.
This storyform may represent a new state of mind for the target group as a unit, or a different path that will take it through an alternative series of actions than it would otherwise instigate.
Context and the Larger Story
One method of manipulating a target group into a new outlook or attitude is through the subtle placement of the psychological equivalent of shaped charges. Rather that the direct impact of intervention, a number of small, seemingly unconnected exposures to information or manipulated environments can combine to create a single and powerful influence that will provide an immediate course correction to the undesired qualities and directions of the target group.
To effect such a subtle and undetectable influence is possible due to the depth and detail of the Story Engine’s ability to calculate the collective influence of many small magnitude story points on the overall storyform.
Movie Frames
Returning to the “movie frame” concept in a proactive, rather than analytical manner, it is possible to create a series of storyforms, each of which is slightly different that the previous one. As with individuals, the mind of a target group is more open to accepting small changes and establishing a new normal than to larger immediate changes which raise resistance.
Over time, subtle influences can follow a planned arc of change that leads the target to a new mindset, perhaps even diametrically opposed to its original viewpoint.
It is important to recognize that any long-term arc must be constantly updated and adjusted so that new influences are brought to bear to limit or leverage the impact of chaotic influence on the chosen alternative course.
Potential Future Implementations
Currently, the story engine requires manual operators versed in the Dramatica theory for processing and creating storyforms for purposes of Analysis, Prediction, Intervention, and Influence.
In the future, natural language processing can be coupled with the story engine’s operations to bring a degree of automation to the identification of story points using hub theory to locate them in large quantities of raw data.
Influence networks can be employed to determine which story points are likely to belong to the same storyform and to assemble them into alternative storyforms which may co-exist in the same raw data.
Employing a real-time version of Dramatica’s Story Engine could allow for real time analysis of ongoing data flow and indicate new storyforms as soon as they manifest in the mindsets of target groups, alerting operators when existing storyforms have dissolved or altered due to ongoing influences.
Natural language output can provide continuously updated options in time-crucial situations with a series of live “what if” scenario suggestions.
In Summary
The Dramatica Theory of Story and the software that implements the theory in an interactive story engine has, for the last seventeen years, successfully enabled accurate analysis and creation of story structures in motion pictures, novels, stage plays, and all forms of narrative communication.
By identifying the crucial story points in the mindsets of target groups of any size, the Story Engine is equally effective in analyzing and altering a target group’s current and future attitudes and behavior in the real world.
Narrative is not an artificial construct imposed upon fiction, but a model of the way we organize information in our efforts to extract meaning and project likely scenarios.
More and more corporations organizations, and government entities are employing narrative to analyze the motivations of individuals and groups and to determine their future behavior.
Of the models available for such analysis, the Dramatica model of narrative structure has proven to be most accurate and most specific.
Introduction to Dramatica Theory and Applications
The Dramatica Theory of Story is a model of the mind’s problem solving processes which has been successfully employed for seventeen years in the analysis and construction of fictional stories ranging from major Hollywood productions to novels, stage plays and television programs.
Software based on the Dramatica Theory is built around an interactive Story Engine which implements the problem-solving model as a method of determining the meaning and impact of data sets and of predicting motivations and actions based on potentials inherent in the data.
This is achieved by creating a Storyform – essentially, a schematic of the problem solving processes at work, their interactions, their outcomes, and the future course they will take.
The Dramatica system and its problem-solving algorithms can be applied with equal success to the analysis of real-world situations as well, specifically in determining the motivations behind the actions of a target group and in the prediction of their future actions and potentials for action.
Scalability and the Story Mind
To illustrate this methodology we let us consider a generic target group. This might be a clique, club, movement, political faction, tribe or nation. Which brings us to the first benefit of this system: Dramatica is scalable. That is to say that it works equally well on individuals or groups of any size.
This kind of scalability is described by a Dramatica concept referred to as the Story Mind. In fiction, characters are not only individuals but come to interact in stories as if they are aspects of a larger, overall mind set belonging to the structure of the story itself.
So, for example, one character may emerge in group actions and discussions as the voice of reason while another becomes defined as the heart of the group and is driven primarily by passion.
Stories reflect the way people react and behave in the real world, and so we find that when individuals band together as a larger unit, they fall into roles so that the unit itself takes on an identity with its own personality and its own psychology, almost as if it were an individual itself, in essence, a Story Mind.
Fractal Storyforms in the Real World
Similarly, if several groups become bound as when a number of factions join as members of a larger movement, the movement begins to take on an identity and the factions fall into roles representing aspects of our own problem solving processes.
Like nested dolls, Dramatica can move up and down the scale of magnitude from the individual to the national or even international level and its ability to analyze and predict based on its underlying model is equally effective. This phenomenon is referred to the Fractal Storyform.
In actual practice, many groups of interest are ill-defined, have blurry edges and indistinct leadership. Still, the core motivations of the target group can be determined, and from this the edges of the group can be refined sufficiently to create a storyform of the appropriate magnitude to the task at hand.
Memes and StoryPoints
Dramatica makes a key distinction between the underlying structure of a story and the subject matter that is explored by that structure. For example, every story has a goal but the specific nature of the goal is different from story to story. Elements such as a goal which are common to every story and, hence, every problem solving process, are referred to as Story Points.
Similarly any culture, ethnic group, religion, political movement, or faction will employ the same underlying story points but will clothe them in unique subject matter in order to define the organization as being distinct and to provide a sense of identity to its members.
Once a story point has been generally accepted in a specific subject matter form it becomes a cultural meme. Efforts to analyze and predict a culture based on memes alone have largely been unsuccessful.
Dramatica’s system of analysis is able to strip away the subject matter from cultural memes to reveal the underlying story points and thereby determine the specific storyform that describes that group’s story mind.
Essentially, Dramatica is able to distill critical story points from raw data and assemble them into map of the target group’s motivations and intentions.
Passive and Active Modes
One of Dramatica’s greatest strengths is that it works equally well in constructing stories as in analyzing them. We refer to analysis as the Passive mode and construction as the Active mode.
When dealing with a target group of interest, this translates into the ability to not only passively understand and anticipate the group, but also to actively create courses of action by which to intervene in and/or influence the group’s future activities and attitudes.
To understand, we determine motivations and purposes.
To anticipate, we project actions and intent.
To intervene, we define leverage points for targeted action.
To influence, we determine nexus points for focused pressure.
Let us look more deeply into the methods employed in the Passive mode, then return to do the same for the Active mode.
Analysis
The passive mode is comprised of Analysis and Prediction. Analysis is achieved by first identifying independent story points and then determining which ones belong together in a single storyform.
Identifying StoryPoints
As described earlier, story points can be derived from cultural memes, but are also evident in the target group’s communications (both for internal and external consumption), in new publications and vehicles of propaganda, in works of art (both authorized and spontaneous), in popular music and entertainment, in the allocation of resources, in the movements and gatherings of individuals – in short, any data can directly or indirectly provide valid story points.
Identifying a Storyform
Once a collection of story points has been assembled, it must be determined which ones belong together in the same storyform. Each storyform represents a different state of mind, but there may be many states of mind in a single target group. These are not different mind sets of individuals, but different mind sets of the group itself or, put in a different way, just as stories often have subplots or multiple stories in the same novel, for example, target groups may have a number of different agendas, each with its own personality traits and outlook.
This can be illustrated with an example from everyday life where a single individual may respond as a banker at his job, a father and husband at home, a teammate in a league and a son when he visits his own parents. So too, a target group may have one storyform that best describes its relationship to its allies and another that describes its relationship to its enemies.
Crucial to this aspect of the process is to determine which storyform is to be analyzed so that the proper story points can be selected as a subset of all those that were derived.
Results from Limited Data
The Story Engine at the heart of the Dramatica software cross references the impact and influence of different kinds of story points upon one another, both individually and in groups.
As a result, once the scope of the storyform is outlined, the software can actually determine additional story points within that closed system that had not been directly observed as part of the original data set. Some story points are more influential than others, but the bottom line is that Dramatica is able to create a far more detailed and complete picture of the situation under study than is evident from sparse data by itself.
Spatial Data vs. Temporal Data
Unique to Dramatica’s software, the Story Engine is able to determine the kinds of events that must transpire and the order in which they will likely occur, based on the static picture of the situation provided by the complete storyform.
In stories, the order in which events occur determines their meaning. For example, a slap followed by a scream would have a different meaning that a scream followed by a slap. Similarly, if one understands the potentials at work in a storyform derived from story points pertaining to the target group, the Story Engine is capable of predicting what kinds of events will likely follow and in what order they will likely occur.
Conversely, if the originally observed data set includes sequential information, such as a timeline of a person’s travels or of the evolution of a sponsored program, the Story Engine can convert that temporal data into a fixed storyform that will indicate the motivations and purposes of the group that led them to engage in that sequence of events.
Prediction
As described, the Dramatica theory and Story Engine (when properly used by experts) is able to translate the spatial layout of a situation into a temporal prediction of how things will unfold from that point forward.
Signposts and Journeys
In Dramatica storyforms, events are broken into Signposts and Journeys, just as one might look at a road and consider both the milestones and the progress being made along the path.
In stories, this data is represented in Acts, Sequences, and Scenes. Each of these is a different magnitude of time. Acts are the largest segments of a story, sequences one magnitude smaller, and scenes are even smaller dramatic movements.
Wheels within Wheels
As a loose visualization, one might think of story events as not being driven by simple cause and effect, but rather being wheels within wheels, in which sometimes a character may act in ways against it’s own best interest (for example) because of larger forces that have been brought to bear and carry greater weight.
In fact, it is the outside pressures that are brought to bear on the target group that build up these potentials as if one were winding a clock. In stories, this creates potentials that make each wheel (such as an act of a scene) operate as if it were a dramatic circuit.
In fact, each story point within a given dramatic circuit is assigned a function as a Potential, Resistence, Current, or Power. Determining which of these functions is associated with each story point is essential to accurately predicting the nature and order of a target group’s future activities based on an understanding of the different magnitudes of motivation at work.
Closed Systems and Chaos
Storyforms are closed systems. As such, they are flash photographs of a moment in time – a snap shot of the mindset of a target group. But every group, just as an individual or a character in a story, is constantly influenced by outside events, new information, and the impact of others. To the ordered world of a storyform, such outside interference is chaotic.
The accuracy of a storyform analysis and its predictions, therefore, has a short shelf-life. The more volatile the environment in which the target group operates, the more quickly the accuracy of the storyform degrades.
Fortunately, storyforms can quickly incorporate new data and changes in older data and update literally in real time to give a constantly refreshed accuracy to the analysis.
In addition, just because a target group’s motivations and agenda is continually being altered by outside events does not mean the effects upon it are completely chaotic.
While some influences, such as an earthquake or an unexpected death or a surprise attack are truly chaotic, other influences only appear to be chaotic because they are not part of the closed storyform. Rather, they are part of a larger story.
Applying the concept of the fractal storyform, it is possible to create additional storyforms of both larger and smaller magnitudes to surround the target group so that it is seen not only in and of itself, but as a player in a larger story and also in terms of individual players within it. In this manner many events which previously appeared chaotic can be predicted and the accuracy of the target group storyform is enhanced.
Movie Frames
Another method for minimizing inaccuracy in prediction is to create a series of storyforms of the target group over a given period. These are then assembled in sequence like frames in a movie to determine the arc of change over time.
Truly chaotic events will largely cancel out, but ongoing influence from larger and smaller storyforms with their own individual agendas will create a predictable curve to the manner in which the target group’s storyform is changing, thereby allowing us to anticipate not only what the target group might do on its own, but what it is likely to do as the situation in which it operates continues to evolve.
Again, this method allows for real-time updates so that the most accurate prediction of the likely motivations and actions of the target group can be both anticipated and acted upon.
Direct Intervention
Turning our attention from Passive methods to Active methods, we consider altering the actions and attitudes of a target group by either direct intervention or indirect influence.
Identifying a Problem
Once a storyform has been created and analysis and prediction have been employed, an assessment must be made to determine if the target group is currently of a mindset contrary to our interests and/or if it will be in the future.
Before a response can be developed, the specific nature of the problem must be fully defined. Again, the storyform and its component story points offer an accurate mechanism for determining the specific nature of the problem – the story point or story point arrangements that are in conflict with our interests.
Identifying a Solution
Some solutions simply require the alteration of a single story point to a different orientation within the storyform (corresponding to a slight shift in attitude, motivation, or actions by the target group). Often, once the specific nature of the problem is understood, a direct surgical impact on that point may alter it by direct force alone.
Still, this is not certain and (especially in more complex problems that require replacing the current storyform with a completely different one) a single small ill-advised move can do far more damage that the original problem and perhaps in ways not anticipated.
“What If” Scenarios
Fortunately, Dramatica’s Story Engine allows for altering one or more story points in a storyform to see what kind of new storyform will be created as a result. In fact, a large number of alternatives exist by simply altering a few story points. This results in the ability to game out “what if” scenarios in real time to determine a wide variety of alternatives that would accomplish the same end.
Risk Analysis
By comparing the effectiveness, ramifications, and altered projected timelines of each alternative storyform solution, it is possible to create an effective risk analysis of each available option to ensure maximum impact at minimum risk.
In fact, alternative storyforms can indicate not only the kinds of risks involved in each potential response to the problem, but also their extent, their magnitude, and their likelihoods.
Indirect Influence
Often, direction intervention is inadvisable for any number of reasons. Further, if the problem with the target group is its overall attitude, the strength of its motivation, or its unity of purpose, any overt action might prove ineffective or even counter-productive, resulting in a response opposite to that intended.
In such cases, it may be more prudent to exert a gradual influence or series of influences all at once or, alternatively, put into play over and extended time for a less obviously directly influence. Here again, Dramatica is able to provide tools to know when, and for how long to apply specific kinds of visible and/or unobserved influence to ultimately obtain the desired changes in the target group’s mind set.
Identifying Problem Qualities and Directions
Again, the first step is to create a storyform from available data and then determine the qualities of the target group’s story mind that are contrary to desired attributes.
At times, there may currently be no problem, but the storyform may reveal that, if left unaltered, the course of events will lead the target group into an undesired orientation. This allows for the allocation of our own resources in advance so that we might prevent the Target group from taking that particular course and opting instead for one more consistent with our interests.
Determining Desired Qualities and Directions
Once the problem qualities and/or directions have been defined, alternative storyforms can be created using “what if” scenarios and risk analysis to determine the best choice for a new storyform we would like to see in place.
This may simply be a new state of mind for the target group as a unit and/or a different path that will take it through an alternative series of actions than it would otherwise instigated.
Context and the Larger Story
One method of manipulating a target group into a new outlook or attitude is through the subtle placement of the psychological equivalent of shaped charges. Rather that the direct impact of intervention, a number of small, seemingly unconnected exposures to information or manipulated environments can combine to create a single and powerful influence that will provide an immediate course correction to the undesired qualities and directions of the target group.
To affect such a subtle and undetectable influence is possible due to the depth and detail of the Story Engine’s ability to calculate the collective influence of many small magnitude story points on the overall storyform.
Movie Frames
Returning to the “movie frame” concept in a proactive, rather than analytical manner, it is possible to create a series of storyforms, each of which is slightly different that the previous one. As with individuals, the mind of a target group is more open to accepting small changes and establishing a new normal that to larger immediate changes which raise resistance.
Over time, subtle influences can follow a planned arc of change that leads the target to a new mindset, perhaps even diametrically opposed to its original viewpoint, that would be impossible to achieve immediately, even with the most powerful influences brought to bear.
It is important to recognize that due to the effects of chaotic influences (as described earlier) any long-term arc must be constantly updated and adjusted so that new influences are brought to bear to limit or leverage the impact of chaos on the chosen alternative course toward a more desirable storyform for the target group.
Implementation
Currently, the story engine requires manual operators versed in the Dramatica theory for processing and creating storyforms for purposes of Analysis, Prediction, Intervention, and Influence.
In the future, natural language processing can be coupled with the story engine’s operations to bring a degree of automation to the identification of story points using hub theory to locate them in large quantities of raw data.
Influence networks can be employed to determine which story points are likely to belong to the same storyform and to assemble them into alternative storyforms which may co-exist in the same raw data.
Employing Dramatica’s real-time Story Engine (in operation since 1991, but not included in the commercially available version of the software) can allow for real time analysis of ongoing data flow and indicate new storyforms as soon as they manifest in the mindsets of target groups and alert operators when existing storyforms have dissolved or altered due to ongoing influences.
Natural language output can provide continuously updated options in time-crucial situations with a series of live “what if” scenario suggestions.
In Summary
The Dramatica Theory of Story and the software that implements the theory in an interactive story engine has, for the last seventeen years, successfully enabled accurate analysis and creation of story structures in motion pictures, novels, stage plays, and all forms of narrative communication.
By identifying the crucial story points in the mind sets of target groups of any size, the story engine is equally effective in analyzing and altering the target groups’ current and future attitudes and behavior in the real world.
Story structure is something we all feel, but when it comes to defining its parts and how they work to create a sound narrative, the simplicity vanishes. Still, if we are to be able to use structure as a tool when our intuition fails, the more we know about the elements of structure the more we can improve our stories.
The following transcript is from a series of online story structure classes that present the Dramatica approach to story development.
Topics covered in this class include:
The Story Mind
Why the Main Character does not have to be the Protagonist
Does your Main Character “change” or “remain steadfast”?
Does your Main Character grow by “starting” something or “stopping”something?
Is your story brought to a conclusion by a “timelock” or an “optionlock”?
Dramatica : Welcome to the Dramatica class! Dan, do you have any questions you’d like to pose before I bring up some topics?
Dan Steele : None, just am here to see what you have to say.
Dramatica : Okay, well, let me get started. We didn’t put out a lot of advance notice, so I don’t expect a large crowd. Normally, we teach our classes here at Screenplay Systems in Burbank. We have a four-hour Basics class in the theory, followed by eight two-hour Focus Workshops.
The Dramatica Theory of story was developed by Melanie Anne Phillips and Chris Huntley, and was implemented into software by Chief Software Architect, Stephen Greenfield.
The focus workshops cover Character, Plot, Theme, Genre,Storyforming, Storyencoding, Storyweaving, and Reception theory. That’s 20 hours of material, spoken; so as you can see, we’ll just scratch the surface tonight. Please feel free to jump in at any time with a question or comment.
First off, let’s separate the Dramatica theory from the Dramatica software. The Dramatica theory has been in development for over 15 years, the software implements the theory. This class focuses on the theory, though I will answer questions about the software you may have. The Dramatica theory is not a theory of screenplay, but a theory of story. As such, it can be used equally well for novels, plays, song ballads AND screenplays.
The central concept of the theory is called The Story Mind. This means that Dramatica sees every complete story as an analogy to a single mind, trying to deal with a particular inequity. In fact, stories are an analogy to the mind’s problem solving process. With me so far?
Dan Steele : yes
RDCvr : Yes
Dramatica : Is this boring, or an okay rate of information for you?
RDCvr : good.
Dan Steele : I can take it in as fast as you wish to deliver it.
Dramatica : Great! Here goes… stop me if you have questions… The theory sees Character, Plot, Theme, and Genre as being the thoughts of the Story Mind, made tangible, so we can look at our own mental processes from the outside, more objectively. Characters are the motivations of this Story Mind. Plot is the problem solving methods the Story Mind uses. Theme is the standard of values the Story Mind uses to determine what is favorable or unfavorable. And Genre describes the nature of the Mind itself: what kind of mind is it?
We think the Story Mind came into being as follows: First of all, no one would ever sit around trying to create an analogy of the mind. Rather, the first stories were simply statements that a particular path led to a particular outcome. In and of itself, this statement (or what Dramatica calls a “tale”) is great for that one particular situation that it describes. But what about extending that?
Suppose we as authors want to say that what happened in our tale was true for all such similar situations? Well, our audience might not buy that kind of blanket statement. They would question us and ask, “what about THIS particular case”, or “what about THAT case”? If we were telling our story “live” in front of the audience, we could counter each rebuttal to our blanket statement one by one. If our argument were well thought out, we would eventually address the concerns of everyone in the audience so that they would buy into what we were saying.
However, when we record our story, either as written words, or a screenplay or book, we are not there to counter the rebuttals to the blanket statements we might make. So, we have to incorporate all possible counters to all possible rebuttals in regard to the point we are making, right in the body of the work itself. This way, any issue anyone in our audience might take with us is covered already and dealt with. This is what makes a story complete: That the central issue of the story is seen from all essential logical and emotional points of view.
When we create a work of that nature, it is not a statement or tale, but a full argument. And that is how Dramatica defines a story. Since all the ways anyone might look at the issue have been incorporated, Since all the ways anyone might look at that particular issue are incorporated, the story actually maps out all the perspectives and considerations ANY mind might take on the issue. This is what creates the analogy of the mind.
Dan Steele : bacl – AOL just booted me off
Dramatica : No problem, Dan!
Dan Steele : wait
Dramatica : Yes?
Dan Steele : obviously you cannot give in the story all possible outcomes of an event.
Dramatica : True, outcome is the author’s bias on the issue.
Dan Steele : do you perhaps mean that the story maps out the end result of all perspectives?
Dramatica : The author chooses which outcome out of the infinite number will occur in HIS story. But the road that leads to that outcome must be fully described.
Dan Steele : oh, so at the story level all the outcomes exist, but at the presentation level one is selected by the author to be shown.
Dramatica : Absolutely correct. If a path is not taken that is an obvious alternative, the audience will cry, “foul” and you will have a plot hole. In other words, all the possible considerations along this path must be addressed, to make a complete argument. Now, even after making the argument, the audience may discount your concept and reject it out of hand, but they cannot argue with the internal logic of your message or claim that the characters are not consistent.
Okay, that’s the first concept out of several hundred. How we doing?
Dan Steele : okay so far
RDCvr : hanging in
Dan Steele : Obviously you have to condense things a lot, but okay so far.
Dramatica : Alright, lets take this concept of the Story Mind, and see what it does for us as authors. Let’s take this mind and hold it out in front of us. Kind of like a visible mind. We have two views of that mind: One view is from the outside looking in. This is the Objective view of the mind. Its kind of like a general on a hill watching a battle., You care about the outcome and the pain of your troops, but you are not personally involved in the action.
But there is a second view of the Story Mind that we share with the audience. That is the Subjective view. It is as if we take the Story Mind and make it our own, so we think its thoughts and feel its emotions. This is more like the view of the soldier in the trenches. He can’t see the whole battle like the general on the hill, but he is much more personally involved with the guy coming at him with the bayonet! This is the view through the eyes of the Main Character of the story. The audience sees through their eyes and feels through their heart. The other character coming at him, by the way, is what we call the Obstacle Character. Any questions on this part?
RDCvr : I’m okay.
Dan Steele : No,no questions.
Dramatica : Okay, Now the Main Character is not necessarily the Protagonist. First of all, a Protagonist is an archetypal character, and although archetypes work just fine, there are an infinite number of other kinds of more complex (and more simple) characters that can be created. But suppose we have a story with a Protagonist, and the Protagonist is NOT the Main Character… A story like To Kill a Mockingbird.
The Protagonist of a story is the driver of the Objective story. In other words, they are the most crucial soldier on the field. But we don’t have to see they battle always through their eyes. Just like we don’t always have to identify only with the quarterback in a football game. In To Kill a Mockingbird, Atticus, the Gregory Peck part in the movie, is the Protagonist. He is the driver of the Objective story – the story all the characters are concerned with. He is the one who wants to have the black man wrongly accused of rape freed. Do the two of you know the story?
Dan Steele : Unfortunately, not too familiar with the plotline.
RDCvr : Sort of, saw the movie a long time ago.
Dramatica : Well, the parts we are interested in are pretty simple, so it shouldn’t hold things up. The antagonist of the story is Bob Ewell, the father of the girl who was supposedly raped. He wants to have the man executed or at least lynched. But, the Main Character, the one through whose eyes we see the story through is Scout, Atticus’ little girl. The audience identifies with her, and even the camera angles in the movie are from her eye level whenever she is in a scene.
In this story, the Obstacle Character is not the antagonist either. The Obstacle character is Boo Radley, the “boogie man” from next door. The author of the work, in dealing with prejudice, did a very clever thing, in separating the Main and Obstacle from the Protagonist and Antagonist. No one wants to admit they are prejudiced. So, in the Objective story, the audience looks AT Atticus and Bob Ewell, and passes judgment on them. But at the same time, we are sucked into being prejudiced ourselves from the very first scene, because of the way Scout feels about Boo.
At the end of the story, we realize emotionally, that we were just as wrong as the objective characters were. Very clever technique! About to change subject, any questions?
Dan Steele : Okay, clear on the functions/differences of Main/Protagonist/Obstacle Chars.
Dramatica : Great!
RDCvr : what is the difference between obstacle character and antagonist?
Dramatica : The Antagonist tries to prevent the Protagonist from achieving the story’s goal, the Obstacle character tries to get the Main Character to change their belief system.
RDCvr : Okay.
Dramatica : They do this by building an alternative paradigm to the one the M.C. has traditionally used. More often than not, the M.C. and Protagonist characters are put in the same “body” and so are the Antagonist and Obstacle.
Dan Steele : Fine, but what if the antagonist is the protagonist, as in man against himself?
Dramatica : In Dramatica, we call any body that holds a character a player. Actually, you have touched on some very important theory points. First of all, when it comes to the Antagonist and Protagonist and all the other “objective” characters, the audience sees them “objectively” from the outside. Therefore, we identify them by their function in the story.
Again, we can feel for them, but we must see their function in order to understand the meaning of the battle. So, putting two objective functions that are diametrically opposed into the same player, mask the function of each, and make it VERY difficult to see what their purpose is. However, in stories like “Dr. Jeckyl and Mr. Hyde”, or Sibyl, there are many objective characters in the same body, but not at the same time!
In fact, each is identified as a separate character, and each has its day in the sun. But the Main and Obstacle characters are not identified by function, but by point of view. The Main Character is I to the audience, first person singular. The Obstacle character is you. Second person singular. So, the Antagonist might be the Main Character, or the sidekick, or the Guardian or any objective character.
Dan Steele : Hmm. Am wondering though how this copes with internalpsychological conflicts of a “tormented” Main character no, make that a Protagonist.
Dramatica : Well, the Main character, being a point of view is where all that internal conflict is seen.
RDCvr : But usually you also have external conflict which reflect or push the internal, no?
Dramatica : It is important to remember that when you combine a Protagonist in the same body as a Main character, the Protagonist part tries to drive the story forward to the goal, but the M.C. part is the INTERNAL conflict of the story, and can be full of angst.
Dan Steele : Okay.
Dramatica : They just don’t HAVE to be in the same body. Dramatica needed to separate the Objective or analytical part of the story’s argument, from the Subjective or passionate part of the argument in order to map out all of each side. In a finished story, of course, they are all ultimately blended together through storytelling.
Now, to jump ahead, Now that we have an understanding of how the Main Character differs from the Protagonist, Dramatica has four very important questions it asks about the Main Character. These questions are used by the software to arrange the relationships between character, plot, theme, and genre. Its kind of like a “Rubik’s” cube of story, as it were. These answers twist it into your unique arrangement.
Question one: Main Character Resolve. At the end of your story, has your Main Character changed or remained steadfast? Change or Steadfast is the question. Now some stories have a leap of faith where the M.C. must consciously choose to stick with their guns, or realize THEY might be the cause of the problems and CHANGE.
Scrooge is a change character. So is Luke Skywalker. Dr. Richard Kimble, or Job in the Bible are STEADFAST characters. Hollywood often has it that a character must CHANGE to grow. But Dramatica sees that a character can grow in their resolve as well. That’s why James Bond doesn’t seem to change but still works as a character. But there is always someone in the story who WILL change. In fact, if the Main Character changes, the Obstacle character will remain steadfast, If the Obstacle character changes, the M.C. will remain steadfast.
Who is Dr. Richard Kimble’s Obstacle? Who changes in The Fugitive? Any thoughts?
RDCvr : The policeman.
Dan Steele : Yes.
Dramatica : Right, Gerrard, the Tommy Lee Jones character. He starts out the first time he meets Kimble saying, “I don’t care!” And Kimble even brings it up to him in the police car at the end. And he says to Kimble, “Don’t tell anybody”, meaning that now he cares, he has changed. But Kimble didn’t! He never gave up… NEVER! In Goldfinger, if James Bond is steadfast,who changes? Who is the Obstacle Character?
Dan Steele : So one char. or the other HAS TO change their belief system by the end.
Dramatica : Yes, Dan, that is the nature of the author’s bias in the argument.
RDCvr : Goldfinger.
Dan Steele : Does Goldfinger dying count as a change in bel sys?
Dramatica : No, Goldfinger is an objective character – the Antagonist, in fact. Actually, Its Pussy Galore, the one who flies the plane – Honor Blackman.
Dan Steele : Oh, okay – yes
Dramatica : She changes from helping Goldfinger to helping Bond. Its not big, but it is there! It HAD to be there! Of course it is downplayed in an action story, and also the Obstacle character change is often underplayed because the M.C. is more important to the audience. But even Bond is asked at the end why she did it, and he replies, “I must have appealed to her maternal instincts”. It was important to make sure the audience knows that Bond was the one that changed her.
Dan Steele :So the antagonist provides the force against the main goal, but the obstacle char provides forces for belief system change?
Dramatica : Yes, Dan, exactly! That is the essence of the first question of Dramatica. Which kind of story do you want? The one where the M.C. sticks with their guns, or the story in which they are convinced to change? By making that choice, you not only know a lot more about your story and where it will go, but you have also had some impact on theme, plot, and genre as well. This doesn’t mean the M.C. will end up in a story filled with success. For example, by changing, they might give up just before they were about to win! So, outcome is a completely different thing. The question is not what they SHOULD do, but what they actually DO!
Dan Steele : So Resolve: change means MC sticks to guns, but Resolve:steadfast means either : 1) MC is convinced to change, or 2) MC changes another?
Dramatica : Right, Dan, that’s how it works.I don’t know how long you want to hang out tonight, but I can do another question if you like.
RDCvr : Yeah.
Dramatica : Okay, question number 2.
Dan Steele : An hour is plenty for a volunteer effort by you, thanks! But continue as long as you wish!
Dramatica : Question 2: about the Main character: Direction…. Start or Stop? This question means something different depending upon whether you answered change or steadfast. For a change Main Character, the question is: Do they have to grow by Starting something they aren’t doing, or stopping something they shouldn’t be doing? In other words, Do they have a chip on their shoulder or a hole in their heart?
We’ve all seen stories in which the M.C. is causing problem because of what they do, and other stories in which they allow a problem to grow because they don’t do anything! The Direction of character growth is just as important as Change or Steadfast. For a steadfast character, the question is different. Since the character is not changing, the question is, are they working or holding out for something to stop, or something to start?
In other words, is there a problem they are trying to get rid of, or is there something good they want to make happen. A simple question, but one that carries a lot of clout on your dramatics!
Dan Steele : Okay, makes sense.
Dramatica : Now, I’ll jump ahead for a moment and look at a couple of plot questions…. First of all, is your story forced to a conclusion because your characters run out of time, or run out of options? This is Timelock or Optionlock. We all know what timelocks are…The ticking clock, 48 hours, etc. But what about stories like Remains of the Day? What was the time limit in that? There was none. So why didn’t the story go on forever? Because it was set up to have a limited number of opportunities for the characters to try and make a relationship happen. And when all the opportunities were exhausted, that’s when the story ends. Its important for the audience to know this right up front… they have to know the scope of the argument.
In Speed, the movie, they actually change from one lock to the other and this is confusing…The set up is, that the bomb will go off at 11:30 no matter what. So, the audience gets their sense of tension from the ticking clock. They expect that to be the moment win or lose will happen. All the other “constraints” about the speed of fifty miles per hour, and not being able to take anyone off the bus, are just that, constraints, but the bus could keep going forever with refueling, if it were not for the time bomb. But at the end of the story, what brings the moment of truth? Not the time bomb…. In fact, the bus slows down below fifty as it hits the plane. The LED numbers that are ticking down are the speed, not the time! So, the timelock is not honored.
Then we don’t know WHEN the story is going to end for sure. We assume maybe when the bad guy gets it. But that wasn’t where our tension was headed. Where the tension was built toward at the beginning, and therefore its something of a cheat and bit of a disappointment.
Dramatica : Actually, barring questions, I’ll have to stop there for now, as I have a class of 30 eager writers coming here to Screenplay for a class tomorrow morning.
Dan Steele : is “reception theory” the psychology of the audience?
Dramatica : Yes, Dan, its like this.. We, as an audience, can see pictures in clouds, wallpaper, constellations…We try to order our world, When we see a finished work, we look for pattern. Sometimes we see what the author intended, Sometimes things the author never intended that may or may not be in conflict with the intended message. And sometimes, we see no pattern at all. It may be the Storyform was flawed, missing apiece. Or it may be that the storytelling just didn’t convey it, or it may be that the audience just isn’t tuned into the symbols the author chose to use.
Dan Steele : Well, thanks, Melanie
RDCvr : Okay, next week.
I’ll be here next week, and please, tell your friends, if you think they’d like this class.
Dan Steele : I’ll come by next week and I’ll see if I can motivate others to stop by.
Dramatica : Great! Have a terrific weekend, both! Niters!
The Dramatica Storyforming Newsletter contains Writing Tips, Analyses of popular books and movies, and materials to help your create a perfect structure in your novel, screenplay, or stage play.
In this Issue:
“Building a Better Dinosaur” – a creative criticism of Jurassic Park
Objective vs. Subjective Story Perspectives
Story vs. Tale
The Story Mind
Storyforming vs. Storytelling
Leap of Faith
The Main Character
The Obstacle Character
Problem Element and Solution Element
Author’s Proof
Change Characters vs. Steadfast Characters
“One Woman’s Problem Solving is Another Man’s Justification”
This article is excerpted from Dramatica Story Structuring Software.
Some of the characters you create as an author will be Do-ers who try to accomplish their purposes through activities (by doing things). Other characters are Be-ers who try to accomplish their purposes by working it out internally (by being a certain way).
When it comes to the Main Character, this choice of Do-er or Be-er will have a large impact on how he approaches the Story’s problem. If you want your Main Character to prefer to solve problems externally, choose Do-er. If you want your Main Character to prefer to solve problems through internal work, choose Be-er.
THEORY: By temperament, Main Characters (like each of us) have a preferential method of approaching Problems. Some would rather adapt their environment to themselves through action, others would rather adapt their environment to themselves through strength of character, charisma, and influence.
There is nothing intrinsically right or wrong with either Approach, yet it does affect how one will respond to Problems.
Choosing “Do-er” or “Be-er” does not prevent a Main Character from using either Approach, but merely defines the way he is likely to first Approach a Problem, using the other method only if the first one fails.
USAGE: Do-er and Be-er should not be confused with active and passive. If a Do-er is seen as active physically, a Be-er should be seen as active mentally. While the Do-er jumps in and tackles the problem by physical maneuverings, the Be-er jumps in and tackles the problem with mental deliberations.
The point is not which one is more motivated to hold his ground but how he tries to hold it:
A Do-er would build a business by the sweat of his brow.
A Be-er would build a business by attention to the needs of his clients.
Obviously both Approaches are important, but Main Characters, just like the real people they represent, will have a preference. Having a preference does not mean being less able in the other area.
A martial artist might choose to avoid conflict first as a Be-er character, yet be quite capable of beating the tar out of an opponent if avoiding conflict proved impossible.
Similarly, a school teacher might stress exercises and homework as a Do-er character, yet open his heart to a student who needs moral support.
When creating your Main Character, you may want someone who acts first and asks questions later, or you may prefer someone who avoids conflict if possible, then lays waste the opponent if they won’t compromise.
A Do-er deals in competition, a Be-er in collaboration.
The Main Character’s affect on the story is both one of rearranging the dramatic potentials of the story, and also one of reordering the sequence of dramatic events.
By choosing Do-er or Be-er you instruct Dramatica to establish one method as the Main Character’s approach and the other as the result of his efforts.
Dramatica tracks more than 70 individual story points
and cross-references their combined impact
to create your perfect story structure.
You must be logged in to post a comment.