Changing an Illustration: Conceiving to Conceptualizing

[Lakis]

Okay, so here’s the kind of thing I get stuck on.

I have a rough draft (well, I’m not sure you can even call it a draft) and the plot is a mess. I’ve been hesitating to change the storyform because I’ve already done so much encoding/illustrating – and have scenes I like based on this – but I just realized if I make it a decision driver I can change the order of the OS signposts in a way that might make more sense. But that does mess up some other signpost orders. If I start changing those, I’m afraid I’ll really get stuck in the weeds (and this is the point where I wonder if Dramatica is doing more harm than good!)

So the first part question is: how much do I need to worry about this? If I have an illustration that was created for one signpost, should I take the time to re-encode it (and potentially rewrite the scenes or fragments), or trust that it will work out based on context?

Here’s my example from RS Signpost 1. The current Signpost is Conceiving. The new Signpost order would have this as Conceptualizing. Here’s what I have for an illustration:

"A good role for an army vet"

In their conversation, Connelly tells Mike that there’s no role for him at the Lifeboat. “We have enough farmers,” he says. They have enough farmers and he has no experience, but there might be a role that Mike could be suited for: security. The idea hits Mike like a ton of bricks; the last thing he wants to do is run security on a pacifist farm, so he rejects Connelly’s offer – but not before Connelly slips him a piece of paper with instructions on how to come the Lifeboat if he changes his mind.

---

What do you all think?

[mlucas]

What do you see is going on in the relationship in that scene? It feels like it could be Conceiving because maybe they get the idea that they’ll see each other again, but your summary seems to focus more on Mike’s need for a job etc.

[Greg]

I think I might see the seeds of Conceptualizing in how they seem to be looking at how Mike could fit in. “I can’t be a farmer, but I might fit into a security role”. That works for Conceptualizing doesn’t it? It would just need to relate to the relationship.

[Lakis]

Originally I thought of this as a point where Mike’s personal problem of Progress (needing work) intersected with the RS, where MIke and Professor Connelly are Conceiving of what a role for him would look like–and this causes problems because they don’t have the same idea.

@Gregolas

I think I might see the seeds of Conceptualizing in how they seem to be looking at how Mike could fit in. “I can’t be a farmer, but I might fit into a security role”. That works for Conceptualizing doesn’t it? It would just need to relate to the relationship.

Maybe that’s the answer – I need to focus on how it affects the relationship. In general I continue to have trouble encoding/illustrating RS points probably for the same reason other linear thinkers do.

I guess this also relates to a bigger meta-question on how to best use Dramatica. I actually debated deleting the original post a little while after I posted it because I decided to go back to the original storyform – or at least, decided that the new storyform wasn’t solving my problems any better than the original.

Specifically, I still don’t have a middle build and ending that I’m happy with. The problem with changing the storyform is that then I end up feeling like I have to re-conceptualize all of these little points that I thought made sense. The goal is to come up with a better story, but the result is unraveling and questioning everything (e.g. whether a scene can fit as Conceptualizing rather than Conceiving).

I know there’s no one answer to this, but when is it time to drop Dramatica and try a different approach? Or is there a different way to use the theory creatively to repair a story without getting lost in the details? Or should I just push forward?

I feel like my understanding of the theory has grown immensely in the last few months but I’ve yet to fully apply it successfully to my own work. I don’t question the validity of the model, but I sometimes wonder if the way I’m using it is doing more harm than good for my creative process. (Or maybe I’m just in a resistance/self-questioning phase).

Thanks @mlucas and @Gregolas for your responses.

[Greg]

@Lakis

In general I continue to have trouble encoding/illustrating RS points probably for the same reason other linear thinkers do.

RS has always been my biggest blind spot in regards to perspectives. Still have some ways to go, but I finally feel like I’m getting somewhere in this area. When I say something like that is usually when I find out otherwise.

@Lakis

but when is it time to drop Dramatica and try a different approach?

Every time I get frustrated and decide to give up and move on, all I can do is think about whatever aspect has me frustrated until I finally figure out a way to make it work and I come running back to do it again. I tend to love theory. With everything, not just Dramatica. And I feel like I get most of the theory pretty well. I don’t know if I’ll ever get a handle on the practical side of it, though.

[Lakis]

@Gregolas

I tend to love theory. With everything, not just Dramatica.

Yeah, this is my thing too. And yet, the only reason I’m doing all this is to figure out how to tell awesome stories faster. I know myself well enough to know that theory is a vector for resistance – I could spend all of my time reworking outlines and storyforms and never finish anything. But if the story doesn’t feel right, I lose all motivation and inspiration.

Watching Jim or Armando or @mlucas develop stories is so amazing that I keep getting inspired to come back to Dramatica. I guess I’m still trying to have faith that at some point it’ll get easier or I’ll figure out how to make it work better for my own creative process.

[mlucas]

@Lakis

Originally I thought of this as a point where Mike’s personal problem of Progress (needing work) intersected with the RS, where MIke and Professor Connelly are Conceiving of what a role for him would look like–and this causes problems because they don’t have the same idea.

I think this can work. When you talk about a role for Mike and their conflicting ideas about that, it makes me wonder about relationship roles. You know how Jim and others always talk about labelling the type of relationship using the roles within it, like mentor/student, father/son? Maybe at this point the relationship is facing conflict over defining those roles – conceiving what they will be to each other. I’m not sure if that fits, whether “professor & security officer” is tangibly different to the relationship than “professor & farmer” or something.

@Lakis

I decided to go back to the original storyform – or at least, decided that the new storyform wasn’t solving my problems any better than the original.

I think this is good.

@Lakis

when is it time to drop Dramatica and try a different approach?

I don’t know that you have to drop Dramatica altogether but maybe just put it aside for now, and try to enrich your story the old fashioned way? It may be that the problems you have aren’t structural problems. Or even if they are structural, you may only be able to fix them by freeing your muse and not worrying about structure for a while – letting loose and giving your muse free rein to get excited again.

Not sure if any of that helps. I’ll try to think about this more.

@Lakis

or @mlucas develop stories is so amazing that I keep getting inspired

I’m blushing, and kind of laughing too because I’m having so many problems with my own story right now!

[Lakis]

@mlucas

Maybe at this point the relationship is facing conflict over defining those roles – conceiving what they will be to each other.

Yes, I think this exactly it. That helps to think of it that way actually.

@mlucas

try to enrich your story the old fashioned way?

I made a list this morning of different ways I could approach this problem, some of them Dramatica-related and some not.

On the Dramatica-related side, one thought I had was to experiment with encoding this material into a completely different storyform – like OS Universe or Psychology–and see what happens. I got this idea from re-reading Armando’s chapter where he describes revising a treatment by (among other things) switching the Domains (and creating an awesome story that should be a movie).

Doing this would be ironic – the backstory to this book is that it started as an experiment last November following @jhull’s gist-Nano process (he had a couple of podcasts on this). But now I wonder if my subconscious isn’t trying to tell a different story and but I’ve just been refusing to entertain that as a possibility.

Anyway, I’ll let you know how it goes.

@mlucas

I’m blushing, and kind of laughing too because I’m having so many problems with my own story right now!

So it’s not always magic. I’m going to take that as encouragement!

[mlucas]

@Lakis

Specifically, I still don’t have a middle build and ending that I’m happy with.

Would you be willing to go into a little more detail on this?

@Lakis

So it’s not always magic.

I still think it’s magic, but it’s merely helpful magic as opposed to wish-fulfilling magic! (i.e. you still have to do the hard work of actually writing the thing)

[Lakis]

@mlucas

Would you be willing to go into a little more detail on this?

Well, the short version is that I have a bunch of events that may or may not be connected, that I may or may not keep. The girl escapes, the girl decides to return, the main character (maybe?) kills someone who threatens to reveal his past, the characters blow up the gas plant, the characters try to prove something to each other … in each case, I can point to a Dramatica story point, and each event I think is problem-causing. But how do these problems connect? It would seem that Dramatica should help me with this, but I just end up either a) generating too many ideas in one area and/or b) having no ideas for a crucial story point.

If I were to self diagnose (long version), I could point to a few issues:

1. I have a story goal, but it’s not encoded specifically enough. “Stop working for the land baron” – okay, but how do you do that?

2. Along with this, what are Prerequisites and Requirements? (Conceiving and Learning). I really have no idea what those are in the story. Also, what’s the OS story solution? Unproven – “they decide to rely on the unproven member to save them” – is very non-specific and thin.

3. Weaving in the different throughlines messes up cause and effect. I’m not sure how this is really supposed to work. If you have, for example, Learning, Understanding, Doing, Obtaining – but between whatever you learn can lead to what you understand, you have a whole bunch of Conceiving and Preconscious and Progress that you have to deal with.

4. I have too many characters who each need to have their own motivations and fall into place at exactly the right time, and it’s too confusing. BTW a lot of these characters were created because I needed to fill a story point. Then they sort of took over whole sections of the book, to the point where I’m wondering who’s doing what, when?

5. Overall, I feel my ideas are kind of dumb right now. Blowing something up is a very Physics way to solve a problem and it’s also been done ten billion times. So I keep trying to figure out twists and unexpected things, but none of the ideas I come up with are that good, or it feels like they need to be developed way beyond the scope of the book, which I’m trying to corral! (This was supposed to be a 50-80K book, not a 200K one!)

6. There are multiple personal resistance issues going on here which I won’t get into, but they have to do with what kind of a writer am I/do I want to be etc.

7. Finally, related to above, the thought I’m working around today: I wonder if I’m actually trying to force myself to write something that I fundamentally don’t want to write. From a Dramatica perspective, maybe the problem is the narrative argument, or maybe I really am not that interested in writing OS Physics stories. My first novel was OS Universe, Concern of the Past. My favorite shows and movies these days are psychological thrillers. So why am I trying so hard to write an OS Physics story? Armando has a process for using the story query system to revise a treatment of a first draft. In the example he gives, he changes the OS from Physics to Psychology. So I’m thinking of experimenting with something like that and see if the material actually fits better.

Anyway, sorry for the huge answer! It was actually helpful to try to think it through…

[Greg]

@Lakis

I have a bunch of events that may or may not be connected, that I may or may not keep

I read a post on Dramaticapedia a little earlier today. Melanie was discussing a client with a similar issue. Her answer? Pick the events you want to write about and put the rest in a sequel.

[mlucas]

@Lakis

Well, the short version is that I have a bunch of events that may or may not be connected, that I may or may not keep. The girl escapes…

Have you written the scenes for all those events already? Or are you still in the outlining stage for the middle/end?
I’m not sure that Dramatica can help very much with the disconnectedness. It may just be the hard work you have to do to figure out how things tie together… It may be easier than you think, because following a storyform will have kept them all “connectable” (it’s like you only used real Lego, no knock-offs that don’t connect).

Have you tried something like this? Take the ones you want to keep (the ones you really want to write, or at least want to be in the story) and draw them in boxes on a large piece of paper. Looking at them like that, your muse will immediately start offering connections. Some might be as easy as drawing arrows because they connect obviously. For others you can add in new boxes that will allow connections to make sense.

Like this (I would use paper but googled and found sketchboard.me, pretty cool):

The blue is something new I added to brainstorm a connection. It might not have the right Driver but you get the idea.

When laid out like you’ll hopefully find your muse offering suggestions for connections. I’m staring at the gas plant and Mike kills nodes and thinking, does someone learn about Mike’s past at the gas plant? Does one of the employees there know him? Or maybe Mike convinces the others to blow the gas plant in order to kill someone who works there? etc.

When doing this do NOT worry about the storyform, just let your muse suggest things and write down the ones you like, and/or ask yourself further questions about them, writing down the questions and answers as needed. Judge ideas based on coolness and gut feel. The storyform alignment can be adjusted later (though you’ll probably find it’s there already if something seems cool).

Also, don’t worry about “rules” in terms of story-weaving. If something happens in the MC throughline that sets up something in the OS, or whatever, that’s totally fine. At the level of logically connecting events in the story, you’re supposed to be weaving the throughlines together. (e.g. in my story the MC has an argument with his dad in the car and his dad leaves him by the side of the road (MC throughline), which makes him late to meet the IC and deliver a warning message to her, so she ends up getting abducted by her alien-controlled professor, which is super important for both IC and OS throughlines.)

[mlucas]

@Lakis

This was supposed to be a 50-80K book, not a 200K one!

I feel for you on this. Mine was supposed to be 100-140 and looks like it will be over 200, at least before I started editing it down.

But when you say you have a lot of characters, maybe you need to take a step back and ask yourself about the vision for this book. How big and epic does it want to be? A 50-80K book has a much smaller scope and fewer characters. Did yours grow beyond what it should be, and you need to reel it in, or is it just taking on its proper scope?

---

@Lakis

There are multiple personal resistance issues going on here which I won’t get into, but they have to do with what kind of a writer am I/do I want to be etc.

Well, I can’t help much here as this is similar to my own struggles. I should make a descriptive post like yours about my current issues … The story was going great up until the midpoint, but it’s a two-act structure (slide-BUMP-slide) and things changed a lot at the midpoint, as they should have. However, in hindsight I think I kind of chickened out on writing the “different stuff” that the second half needs, because I was afraid of writing it. Now I need to inject that stuff in somehow so that I have the right tools to go forward!

---

@Lakis

I have a story goal, but it’s not encoded specifically enough. “Stop working for the land baron”

I do think trying to develop your Story Goal and OS Solution will be helpful.
From what I know of your story, your Goal seems to work very well! It even fits the Stop growth.

@Lakis

Along with this, what are Prerequisites and Requirements? (Conceiving and Learning). I really have no idea what those are in the story.

It’s weird that you can’t think of anything. Have you considered similar storyforms where the Benchmarks are different? I think changing Driver often affects these; wondering how clear you are on Driver.

That said, don’t they have to go through certain learning processes in order to stop working for the land baron? Training people, studying the details of farming, learning how to use equipment, etc.?

[Lakis]

@mlucas

Have you written the scenes for all those events already? Or are you still in the outlining stage for the middle/end?

For the middle and end I have a bunch of half-written, stream-of-consciousness stuff … not sure if you can call them scenes.

@mlucas

Have you tried something like this? Take the ones you want to keep (the ones you really want to write, or at least want to be in the story) and draw them in boxes on a large piece of paper. Looking at them like that, your muse will immediately start offering connections. Some might be as easy as drawing arrows because they connect obviously. For others you can add in new boxes that will allow connections to make sense.

Okay, this is a great idea. I’ve been using MindNode for mind-mapping but using something like Scapple (I think I have an old license for it) which would work better for this (or I might just put it on paper like you said). If I have time I’ll work on it later today.

@mlucas

When doing this do NOT worry about the storyform, just let your muse suggest things and write down the ones you like, and/or ask yourself further questions about them, writing down the questions and answers as needed. Judge ideas based on coolness and gut feel. The storyform alignment can be adjusted later (though you’ll probably find it’s there already if something seems cool).

This is my BIGGEST problem right now. I’m so in the Dramatica mindset that I find it really hard not to think/worry about the storyform, even when I know doing so is probably detrimental.

@mlucas

Have you considered similar storyforms where the Benchmarks are different? I think changing Driver often affects these; wondering how clear you are on Driver.

Lol that’s what started this thread I changed the driver and ended up with different story points. I guess this brings up the question – when trying on different storyforms for size, is it better to tweak at the margins or see what happens if you change the big things like the quad or the domains? I know there’s no simple answer to this – obviously it’s case-by-case.

In my case though I fear I could spin around on variations of Problem/Solution/Symptom/Response and/or changing the Driver and end up tweaking a hundred storypoints and still not come up with something that fits.

Of course this could mean that the problem is not storyform-related.

@mlucas

Did yours grow beyond what it should be, and you need to reel it in, or is it just taking on its proper scope?

I wish I knew the answer to this. I keep having this problem! (And I keep putting aside projects when they grow to unmanageable scope). Not to go too much into detail, but the whole point of this series was to see if I could crank out something shorter and tighter and more “thriller-like” before I (eventually) looped back to my less-commercial-and-harder-to-market Cyprus series. But it’s possible that I need to accept that my muse just wants me to write bigger and more complex books.

@mlucas

I think I kind of chickened out on writing the “different stuff” that the second half needs, because I was afraid of writing it.

This is absolutely part of what I’m struggling with.

@mlucas

That said, don’t they have to go through certain learning processes in order to stop working for the land baron? Training people, studying the details of farming, learning how to use equipment, etc.?

Absolutely – but somehow it’s just not the novel I thought I was writing (or wanted to write)? Not sure if that makes sense. This could all just be resistance though.

Anyway thanks for giving all this detailed help and feedback! Hopefully working through these ideas will get me unstuck (I will let you know).

[Lakis]

Thanks Greg – do you have a link to that article? (I’m sure I can find it…)

[Greg]

Smothered in an Avalanche of Ideas

[Greg]

@Lakis

But how do these problems connect?

Is the problem that you’re not sure logistically how to get from the girl returning to the plant blowing up? Or that you’re not sure what the girl returning even has to do with the plant blowing up? If the second one, this is probably going to be too on the nose to be helpful, but, assuming that’s all OS, then they’re connected by a goal to “Stop working for the land baron”. Within the story, the girl returning could lead to an attempt to blow up the plant OR the girl returning could be a failed attempt to stop working for the land baron forcing a new plan of blowing up the plant, or the girl returning could be completely unrelated to blowing up the plant. Even if they aren’t connected in the story such that they look like separate threads, I’m thinking the reader would still connect that they are all attempts to stop working for the land baron.

@Lakis

for example, Learning, Understanding, Doing, Obtaining – but between whatever you learn can lead to what you understand, you have a whole bunch of Conceiving and Preconscious and Progress that you have to deal with

You’re talking about a non-physics throughline being explored between two physics sign posts? Depending on how tightly woven the stories are in storytelling, one could have an effect on the other, but wouldn’t have to. Here’s a scenario. John is at work Learning about a new project. His wife calls to tell him to start Psychology-ing. After the call he starts Doing. That call might have affected the character, might have caused him to Do, or might not have affected anything. So it doesn’t necessarily effect the Doing.

@Lakis

So why am I trying so hard to write an OS Physics story?

So I’ve been thinking about something the last week or two and I can’t tell if it’s super obvious, super stupid, or maybe potentially just a little bit helpful. Look at the times someone will say something like ‘this throughline looks like Psychology because of all the lying and manipulating’ and then Jim will say ‘no, it’s physics.’ I think what’s happening is that Dramatica storyforms are about the source of the problem, but Dramatica stills contains any process a mind could use to react to a problem. Wreck-it Ralph has an OS in Physics, but all the OS characters react in ways that look like Being. Or imagine an asteroid is headed for earth. One character decides to Develop a Plan to destroy it. Another starts Doing a crime spree, and another starts Contemplating the existence of God. Point is, I’m thinking you can write a story that is structurally objectively about the Physics but that looks or feels more psychological because of character reactions.

[mlucas]

@Lakis

(or I might just put it on paper like you said)

Definitely use pen and paper!!! Paper is way more muse-friendly than a computer screen. You can always take a picture of it after to back it up to the cloud. And use a pen not a pencil – no fear!
If you want you could use sticky notes for the boxes (allowing them to be moved around) but personally I like drawing the boxes.

Oh, another thing that can help spur ideas is to draw a map or two. Not fancy, not to scale, just a super rough thing that lays out important places in your story world, like the Lifeboat colony and the gas plant. Again, use pen!

@Gregolas

Point is, I’m thinking you can write a story that is structurally objectively about the Physics but that looks or feels more psychological because of character reactions.

Good points Greg. I also wanted to add, that I think authors tend more like to gravitate toward a particular Concern quadrant (upper left, bottom left, etc.) since that affects the story’s feel so much.

My first story I worked on with Dramatica was OS Physics, MC Universe. My current story is OS Psychology, MC Mind. But both have bottom-left Concerns with many of the same elements showing up (Help, Hinder, Control, Uncontrolled). Also both have Steadfast MCs, that might be an author preference too?

[Lakis]

@Gregolas

Is the problem that you’re not sure logistically how to get from the girl returning to the plant blowing up? Or that you’re not sure what the girl returning even has to do with the plant blowing up?

Here’s the kind of problem I create for myself. I had the idea that the plant would be blown up, seems like a good climax thing. Having the MC blow it up seemed too on the nose (as you say). I had some other ideas. Then I started wondering if maybe the girl returning blew it up, and of course the question is why, so I think maybe she’s part of a plot that the child-slaves concoct. All good, but now the girl’s POV is taking over, and it’s becoming less and less clear what the MC is even doing in relation to the story goal! (He’s supposed to be the Protagonist as well – but is he even pursuing the goal anymore?) There was a whole side story by the way where he got locked in the abandoned prison near town (Obtaining!) but which no longer seems to have any relevance to the bigger story.

@Gregolas

You’re talking about a non-physics throughline being explored between two physics sign posts? Depending on how tightly woven the stories are in storytelling, one could have an effect on the other, but wouldn’t have to. Here’s a scenario. John is at work Learning about a new project. His wife calls to tell him to start Psychology-ing. After the call he starts Doing. That call might have affected the character, might have caused him to Do, or might not have affected anything. So it doesn’t necessarily effect the Doing.

Okay that’s really good to keep in mind and might solve some problems. (Good examples).

@mlucas

I also wanted to add, that I think authors tend more like to gravitate toward a particular Concern quadrant (upper left, bottom left, etc.) since that affects the story’s feel so much.

So as an experiment, this morning I created an alternate storyform keeping as many storypoints as possible but flipping the OS/RS Domains (so now it’s OS Psychology). Not sure if I’ll use it but it was really interesting – whereas before the Goal was to stop Doing (working for the land baron) and the Consequence was Being (continuing to be stuck in the role of a vassal farmer), now it’s Goal of Being (stop playing the role of vassal), Consequence of Doing (having to continue working for the tyrant). So it’s really similar in a weird way.

@Gregolas

Point is, I’m thinking you can write a story that is structurally objectively about the Physics but that looks or feels more psychological because of character reactions.

I’m re-reading Lexicon which is one of my favorite recent novels. It’s interesting because the whole book is literally about a secret society that uses special words to manipulate people – and yet I would be surprised if it’s not a Physics/Obtaining story.

@mlucas

My first story I worked on with Dramatica was OS Physics, MC Universe. My current story is OS Psychology, MC Mind. But both have bottom-left Concerns with many of the same elements showing up (Help, Hinder, Control, Uncontrolled). Also both have Steadfast MCs, that might be an author preference too?

So… this storyform was actually random and used gists. The way I encoded it fit with the larger series world that I’ve been working on, so I thought that was cool. But now I’m wondering now if doing it that way is actually a mistake – like maybe I’ve created an argument that’s just not that inspiring to my muse and I might do better with something in the upper left. (But at some point I have to draw a line in the sand and stop abandoning projects!)

[Greg]

@Lakis

Here’s the kind of problem I create for myself.

It’s tempting to throw out a lot of “maybe this and maybe that” scenarios in response to this, but that’s not really helpful. This is the kind of thing where it might help to have someone willing to get down into the weeds with you and work it out. I wonder if you might find anyone on this board willing to do that?

@Lakis

Okay that’s really good to keep in mind and might solve some problems. (Good examples).

To be honest, I think i deleted part of that example, but the idea was that you can be at work, going through your work throughline, be interrupted by your homelife throughline for a minute, and then go right back to work without messing anything up or confusing it. Surely the point came through, but, well, there it is again.