Hi everyone,
Trying to work through outlining a novel series that I think will need to incorporate multiple storyforms. So if I have a complete story for Book 1 and my MC changes, can she then be a steadfast MC (or influence character) for the next storyform going forward? I think the answer will be yes … but I’m having a little trouble working it out. Wondering if anyone has examples that work?
Lakis: I believe the answer is “yes”, a character can change in one storyform and remain steadfast in another, as evidenced by the two storyforms present in the film Jerry Maguire described here: http://dramatica.com/analysis/jerry-maguire.
I’m curious to see more examples of stories with two story forms too.
Brendan
Oh, excellent @MiggsEye. I read that analysis but had forgotten about it, thanks. What seems to work there is to have the area of growth/change be in a different sphere of life in one line and then the other (romance vs. professional life).
I was wondering also about series characters who seem to face the same issues over and over again.
Thinking aloud: so could Spiderman (for example) have a resolve of change in Movie 1 (he changes from selfish teenager to an adult who learns that “with great power comes great responsibility”) and then be steadfast in that understanding (in spite of forces that try to convince him otherwise) for Movie 2? (Or is messing this up why so many sequels don’t work?)
But maybe that’s different from Jerry McGuire where both stories are happening in parallel and there’s a greater chance of confusion.
Lakis
Yes. To put it succinctly, being Steadfast or Changing is inherent to a storyform, not a character. I would even argue the same thing for the Approach and the Problem-Solving Style. I think characters can be Linear Be-ers in one context, then Holistic Do-ers in another. It really depends on the situation and what feels most appropriate.
I don’t see why not. It’s the same character, but two different stories. Can’t think of an example at the moment, though.
But I’d be wary of making the sequel focus on the MC’s ‘steadfast’ resolve carried over from the story before. If I made a hit spy movie about a rogue assassin with control issues that learned to let go in the field; and then followed it up with a sequel where SHE is the steadfast one telling another agent that they have control issues and should let go in the field, I’d probably be inundated with some angry tweets. Because it’s basically the same movie, but reversed.
You can probably get away with it once, but… always better to create an entirely new storyform for an entirely new story, in my opinion.
Hm … that opens up a whole new set of things to think about!
@jhay - I hear you about the not doing the same thing but reversed (love your spy thriller example).
Thanks
I do agree with @jhay, conditionally. It’s possible to do that sort of thing, so long as the feel is different. Perhaps the first OS could be, say, Situation/Future/Preconception/Control, while the second could be Manipulation/Becoming/Responsibility/Control. Alternatively, it may be as simple as giving the IC different OS traits than the MC did–for example, the MC might have been Control/Temptation, while the IC might be Control/Reconsider instead. You might even be able to get away with just switching the Growth: a character Stopping Control feels different from Starting Dyscontrol.
(This is an interesting topic I’ve been thinking about lately, though I’d been focusing on IC handoffs. The new IC should threaten the same square, but do so with a different attitude or tone.)
Very interesting to think about. It sounds like there are a lot of possibilities if you know what you’re doing. Not saying I know what I’m doing, and probably the mulit-storyform structure isn’t the best idea for someone who is new to Dramatica. On the other hand, I discovered Dramatica in search of a creative solution to this particular problem …
This is an interesting paradox about Dramatica. It’s both the most detailed and specific approach to story structure I’ve looked at–and also the most open and flexible.
I don’t want to mislead you; I make up a lot of it as I go along. 
Dramatica does one thing, but it does that one thing really well: setting up the argument spine of your story. The question you asked, that of tying two stories together, isn’t really in that wheelhouse, unless you’re putting those stories into a meta-story. So, like any good bullshitter narrative engineer, I took what I know about Dramatica and wrangled it into an answer for your question. If you want the 100% best answer, you’ll have to wait for someone who has “Dramatica Story Expert” or “Dramatica Co-creator” next to their handle. 
Haha, no worries about misleading me–I do that for myself.
Totally. Different context, different storyform. It’s not a person, it’s a point-of-view–a unique perspective on how best to approach solving problems. A different story will likely bring up different sources of conflicts and therefore different approaches to solving problems.
I’ve been working with another client for several years on his novel series and the MC Resolve switches from Change to Steadfast and back to Change. There may or may not be an animated television series currently running where the same thing happens season from season 
Aha, thanks Jim. You’ve written that before recently I’ll have to keep it in mind!
Now the only question is if I can pull it off…