Character Chessboard Confusion

Come here to ask questions or give advice about the theory that forms the basis of Dramatica.
grgwrzbcki

Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby grgwrzbcki » May 16, 2008 6:58 am

While trying to come up to speed on Dramatica theory, I have become confused about the organization of the 64 element character chessboard.

Focusing on the 16 elements in the motivation set, I find the tutorials and manuals devote much attention to separating the 8 character archetypes into four motivation quads along the dimensions of action-decision and driver-passenger. The rationale for doing this appears to be pretty straightforward -- producing a four quad arrangement of action-driver elements (pursue, hinder, prevent, help), decision-driver elements (consider, tempt, reconsider, conscience), decision-passenger elements (faith, logic, disbelief, feeling), and action-passenger elements (support, control, oppose, uncontrol).

However, I notice in the 64 element chessboard that this arrangement is not continued. While the action-decision dimension remains intact, the driver-passenger dimension does not. Suddenly, and without the rationale being apparent to me, elements previously assigned to the driver quads are mixed into quads which include passenger elements.

Why? Does this have something to do with the nature of companion and dependent pairs? If so, please explain. If not, then what accounts for this shift?

Thanks.

User avatar
Chris Huntley
Site Admin
Posts: 722
Joined: Jan 25, 2008 5:19 pm
Location: Glendale, CA USA
Contact:

Re: Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby Chris Huntley » May 16, 2008 8:16 am

There is an inherent pattern in the quad structure. Position has meaning.

The four throughlines share the same element labels. The difference comes from the pairings of dynamic pairs. The Chess Set of 64 elements within a Class is broken into four Sets of 16 (which correspond to the four levels of character: Motivation, Methodology, Means of Evaluation, and Purposes). Each Set of sixteen elements is broken into four quads. When looking at any Set, the combinations of dynamic pair with co-dynamic pair is adjusted within each Class.

The closest thing to a "default" set of element pairings appears in the Activity (Physics) class. The pattern for the other pairing is specific but complicated. I'll give you a couple of examples from which you may be able to recognize the patterns.

Using the Activities:Understanding:Instinct: Knowledge--Thought dynamic pair as the root, you can see that the dynamic pair in the COMPANION (horizontal relationship) QUAD in the Set (Activities:Understanding:Senses: Actuality--Perception) that shares the same relative position in the quad, becomes the co-dynamic pair of Knowledge-Thought in the DEPENDENT (vertical relationship) CLASS (Fixed Attitude:Memories:Truth).

The pattern is that the relationship of the quads within the root set are matched with dynamic pairs in the same relative position but located in the companion, dynamic, and dependent quads within the same set. They are combined such that you get a multiplicity of dynamic, companion, and dependent relative relationships. The companion relationship of the dynamic pairs in the root set are combined in the dependent Class (Fixed Attitude). The dependent relationship of the dynamic pairs in the root set are combined in the companion Class (Situation). The dynamic relationship of the dynamic pairs in the root set are combined in the dynamic Class (Manipulation).

In essence, the pattern of relationships found within the simple four-square quad is repeated vertically and horizontally throughout the Dramatica structure at the individual item size, the quad size, the quad of quads (set) size, and even the quad of sets (chess set) size.

The use of drivers and passengers is an overt simplification of the relationship of items within the element level used to give writers a taste of the underlying "dramatic circuit" that exists within all relationships in the structure. It's simplicity does not hold up to the rigors of usage and more refined levels of complexity.

I hope this gives you a glimmer of what you were looking for.
Chris Huntley
Write Brothers Inc.
http://dramatica.com/
http://screenplay.com/

grgwrzbcki

Re: Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby grgwrzbcki » May 16, 2008 9:35 am

OK. My bulb seems to be glimmering somewhat more clearly, now. Thanks.

Now that you point it out I can see the varied patterns in which the 64 elements are distributed within each class (Universe, Physics, Mind, Psychology). But it's still not clear why the elements of the character chessboard need to be arranged identically to the elements of the Physics chessboard. Why not arrange the elements of the character chessboard to map identically to any of the other Class chessboards, or none of them at all? Why the Physics chessboard? Is there some necessary connection between the arrangements of the 64 elements within the Physics Class and the arrangement of the elements within the Objective Character matrix?

And, you mention that throughlines share the same elements. OK. But is this to suggest that there might be some relationship between elements and throughlines? If so, what? If not, what does it matter?

Thanks.

grgwrzbcki

Re: Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby grgwrzbcki » May 20, 2008 3:14 pm

OK. I've done more reading and have come to see the fundamental relationship between throughlines and character elements. Duh??? :roll:

But I'm still confused about why the elements of the Character chessboard are organized in a pattern that is identical to the elements of the Physics domain. I suspect this identical arrangement is not coincidental, but am at a loss to understand it. What might explain why the 64 elements of the Physics Class are arranged in the same pattern as the the 64 elements of the Objective Character matrix?

Also, I have noticed that 4 of the 64 character elements share their name with 4 of the 64 variations (ability, desire, knowledge, thought). What might explain this?

Thanks.

User avatar
szore
Writer
Posts: 23
Joined: Apr 19, 2008 8:28 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby szore » Jun 19, 2008 5:56 am

You are asking good questions, keep it up! This whole character element matrix thing totally baffles me too!

User avatar
Chris Huntley
Site Admin
Posts: 722
Joined: Jan 25, 2008 5:19 pm
Location: Glendale, CA USA
Contact:

Re: Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby Chris Huntley » Jun 26, 2008 3:15 pm

But it's still not clear why the elements of the character chessboard need to be arranged identically to the elements of the Physics chessboard.


Hmmm...I'm not sure I directly answered this issue, so here goes.

We picked the Activities [Physics] class as the default class to display character elements in the Build Characters Window when NO OVERALL STORY DOMAIN has been assigned. Once the OS throughline is aligned to a Class, the element arrangements from that class are used in the Build Characters window. This means choosing an OS for anything other than Activities [Physics] shows the character elements arranged differently than the default.
Chris Huntley
Write Brothers Inc.
http://dramatica.com/
http://screenplay.com/

dietelco
Published Writer
Posts: 43
Joined: May 09, 2008 12:21 am

Re: Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby dietelco » Jun 16, 2009 7:47 am

hey Chris,

you sure looked different from how i imagined you when i hear your voice in the podcasts!

there's another thing about the chessboard-variation thingy - some elements keep re-appearing in different quads and in different combinations. Could you explain that, please?

(btw, I'm kevin from the emails I sent you. i'm using the same email here)

dietelco
Published Writer
Posts: 43
Joined: May 09, 2008 12:21 am

Re: Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby dietelco » Jun 16, 2009 7:50 am

PS I must be dreaming, but did the 4 throughlines get re-named recently? I was playing around with the storyengine and I couldn't find my Action-Situation-Fixed Attitude-Manipulation throughlines anymore. Is there an auto-update thing going on? :?

User avatar
Chris Huntley
Site Admin
Posts: 722
Joined: Jan 25, 2008 5:19 pm
Location: Glendale, CA USA
Contact:

Re: Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby Chris Huntley » Jun 17, 2009 3:19 pm

I'll answer these questions in no particular order.

-- No, there is no auto-upgrading (though I wish there was--including an upgrade to upgrade to [it IS in the works]). You may have inadvertently set the preference that controls the original terms and the "new," friendlier terms (e.g. Situation instead of Universe). To change that setting, go into the preferences, click on the Term Swap tile, and click "Layman's Terms" to get the newer terminology.

-- The terms that show up more than once at different levels are Thought, Knowledge, Ability, and Desire. In a nutshell, every term in the structure is an expression of these four items as seen through different lenses. For example, Memory (Knowledge), Conscious/Considerations (Thought), Preconscious/Impulsive Responses (Ability), and Subconscious/Innermost Desires (Desire). The relationships between these items define the relationships found in all of the quads. We found using the "unadorned" versions at the Variation/Theme level and the Element/Character level to be useful in those contexts. That is why we left them in their "pure" form.

-- RE: Some elements keep re-appearing in different quads and in different combinations -- In fact, the difference between the 64 element chess sets IS the recombining of the dynamic pairs with their co-dynamic pairs. All of the element dynamic pairs are paired with different dynamic pairs in each class. Context creates meaning, and a co-dynamic pair creates a context within which one may evaluate the other dynamic pair. That is how you get different meaning without coming up with different labels for each element in each domain.

I think that covers it for now, right?
Chris Huntley
Write Brothers Inc.
http://dramatica.com/
http://screenplay.com/

seraulu1

Re: Character Chessboard Confusion

Postby seraulu1 » Feb 24, 2010 3:14 am

:) :) :) :) Thanks for that! :D :D :D


Return to “Dramatica Theory”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests