Characters/Characteristics/Archatypes

Come here to ask questions or give advice about the theory that forms the basis of Dramatica.
User avatar
Clint541963
Published Writer
Posts: 83
Joined: Jan 22, 2011 11:24 am

Characters/Characteristics/Archatypes

Postby Clint541963 » Feb 26, 2011 8:13 am

I haven't tried it yet but I was thinking, if in telling the overall story (as a preliminary exercise), would it be useful to plug in all the archetype characters and tell the story (as the general on the hill) using only the archetypal terms. eg:

The main character is thinking about killing himself and the antagonist creates fear and doubt in his mind. The contagonist is playing on his thoughts of lust and desire so he procrastinates his suicide and explores the contagonist's home at least to think about it some more. Meanwhile, the guardian, who was busted cheating on his wife because of the protagonist/main character's actions, is searching for the protagonist/main character.
or
the guardian/impact character and protagonist/main character are in the bar arguing about about the path the P/MC is on. Reason and Emotion are flirting with the two friends. P/MC is talking to all the patrons in the bar (sidekicks and skeptics, reasons and emotions) convincing them to take action on their hopes and dreams but the Antagonist is holding them down, using fear so that they resist taking action. P/MC gives Emotion money to seduce his buddy (G/IC) and Reason wants to seduce P/MC because he may be her way out of here. Now the Skeptic wives walk in. Also the Contagonist arrives as she is to perform tonight at the bar. etc. etc

I came up with this idea because I am having trouble dividing the the character elements and I was thinking if I told this story from the "General on the hill" point of view I would have the elements in the right spot and just plug in the characters who would embody the right elements at the right time.
WorkingMan Productions
Sam Potter
Screenwriter

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

Re: Characters/Characteristics/Archatypes

Postby Chris Huntley » Feb 26, 2011 10:02 am

Yes, using objective labels, such as the archetypes or job descriptions, works well in getting the objectivity needed for understanding the Overall Story throughline properly.

Notice in your example, you reference the Main Character and Impact Character. I recommend NOT using those labels when discussing the OS because they are not part of the OS. By using the MC and IC labels you introduce subjectivity into an otherwise objective perspective.

Also, do not center the actions around what the protagonist is or is not doing. Center the actions around the story goal.
Chris Huntley
Write Brothers Inc.
http://dramatica.com/
http://screenplay.com/

User avatar
Clint541963
Published Writer
Posts: 83
Joined: Jan 22, 2011 11:24 am

Re: Characters/Characteristics/Archatypes

Postby Clint541963 » Feb 26, 2011 11:55 am

Okay, that makes a lot of sense. this really takes some practice. Of course writing out the story (Step outline) in every throughline will be the goal so that when it comes time to weave it all together the WHOLE story could be quite fulfilling.
Again it will take some practice to keep objective objective and subjective subjective.
WorkingMan Productions
Sam Potter
Screenwriter

User avatar
Clint541963
Published Writer
Posts: 83
Joined: Jan 22, 2011 11:24 am

Re: telling the Impact Character story

Postby Clint541963 » Mar 10, 2011 4:40 pm

When telling the Impact Story the "YOU" story would one tell it from the point of view of the Main Character? You did this and you did that. You impacted me this way and/or that way? Or would it be told in the 3rd person? Or from the perspective of the impact character?
WorkingMan Productions
Sam Potter
Screenwriter

User avatar
phillybudd
Best-Selling Writer
Posts: 140
Joined: Dec 12, 2009 3:24 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Characters/Characteristics/Archatypes

Postby phillybudd » Mar 11, 2011 5:01 am

Great question. I think I like the idea of the "you" perspective for the MC. Would help keep the "impact" thing straight in my mind. Anxious to see what Chris says.

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

Re: Characters/Characteristics/Archatypes

Postby Chris Huntley » Mar 11, 2011 10:01 am

It is the YOU perspective, meaning it is an alternative perspective to MY perspective. This could be illustrated by the Main Character saying "You did this, or you think that" to the Impact Character, or it could be the Impact Character saying "You did this or you think that" to the Main Character.

The point it that it is a contrasting perspective to that of the personal, I perspective.

NOTE: Do not confuse this with telling a story in the second person voice. That is a storytelling device and is not tied to any particular perspective. For more on this, see this Dramatica tip:

"WRITING POINT OF VIEW"
http://www.dramatica.com/theory/tip_of_month/tips/tip1209.html
Chris Huntley
Write Brothers Inc.
http://dramatica.com/
http://screenplay.com/

User avatar
Clint541963
Published Writer
Posts: 83
Joined: Jan 22, 2011 11:24 am

Re: I, You, We, They Perspectives

Postby Clint541963 » Mar 13, 2011 6:13 am

I have to admit I was hoping for a more definitive answer. :wink: but the more I think about it I think I understand. So, is it like this?:

"I" Perspective - MC: I have got to get to that cave to win this battle and maybe the war. If I do I will prove to everyone I am not a coward.

"YOU" Perspective possible #1- IC: You are on the wrong path! Do not go in that cave! It's a trap! If you go in there you will betray everyone and lose the war!

"YOU" Perspective possible #2 - MC: You are in my way. Let me pass. I have to get to that cave. You are causing me to doubt myself and what I know to be true. You are leading me away from what I need to do. If I have to I will hurt you to get to what I believe I need to do. I wonder if you are even truly on my side.

"WE" Perspective- IC&MC: We are fighting this battle in this war. We are fighting over the correct way to win the battle. We don't even agree on whether we should be fighting this battle. We do agree that we are on the right side together. or do we?

"THEY" Perspective - General on the hill: Everyone is fighting the battle. They must win this battle or they lose the war. There is a headquarters around here somewhere that if they find and destroy they will win for sure. They are outnumbered.

Not great stuff but my main question is regarding the "YOU" perspective. Are both those examples acceptable or accurate?
WorkingMan Productions
Sam Potter
Screenwriter

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

Re: Characters/Characteristics/Archatypes

Postby Chris Huntley » Mar 13, 2011 8:31 am

Yes, they are accurate.

The WE perspective should be about their relationship, so it should be something like, "Look at what this war is doing to our marriage/friendship/relationship."
Chris Huntley
Write Brothers Inc.
http://dramatica.com/
http://screenplay.com/

User avatar
Clint541963
Published Writer
Posts: 83
Joined: Jan 22, 2011 11:24 am

Re: You Perspective

Postby Clint541963 » Mar 13, 2011 9:56 am

Thank you Chris, I just read the article. Thank you for that too. It actually offered another choice telling the "YOU" Perspective from an observers POV

FROM THE SECOND PERSON VOICE: You were skipping along the path completely unaware of the danger you were in. You didn’t see the Wolf until you’d practically run into him. If you’d known he was a wolf, not a Wolf, you would have run screaming. But this Wolf charmed you instantly. You told him you were going to grandmother’s house, but you could hardly hide your attraction to him. His hunger for you was equally obvious, but the promise of having you AND your grandmother gave him an idea. He convinced you to take another path, “A short cut to grandmother’s house,” he said. And so you took it.


I can see the advantage of this as the writer could keep objective and tell how the IC impacts the MC even though the IC and/or MC may not be consciously aware of the impact. (am I over-thinking again?)
WorkingMan Productions
Sam Potter
Screenwriter


Return to “Dramatica Theory”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest