Equity vs Inequity

questions
#1

Was reading @jhull’s awesome analysis of the awesome movie “Get Out” (which I just watched over the weekend). So much to unpack, but one question relates my own story: how do you tell the difference between equity and inequity? I’m struggling a bit with this especially because Dramatica lets you reverse the appreciations.

From Jim’s post on Get Out:

While the Armitage family works to balance the intellectual superiority of white people with the physical advantages of the black community, Chris holds himself back–participating in the modern tradition of African-Americans to blame a lack of agency on a system that just isn’t fair. Agreeing to produce a State I.D. when it isn’t warranted, merely for the sake of keeping the peace? Chris, like so many men and women in his position, fails to take action because of a Problem with Equity.

Couldn’t this also be a problem with Inequity?

So in my story (at the moment) I have a main character with a Issue of Interdiction: ”Failing to intervene to protect your brother” and _“Refusing to get involved in saving the world”

Her problem I had initially as Inequity: “Being treated unfairly because of your family’s history.”

But we also see that her brother is treated unfairly (falsely accused). She responds to this by failing to take a stand in his defense, choosing instead a “go along to get along” approach, a decision that she will regret for the rest of her life.

So is this encoding a Problem of Inequity (failing to take a stand at an unfair situation) or is it a Problem of Equity (failing to take a stand in order to keep the peace)?

I did have an idea to try this as symptom/response instead but Dramatica doesn’t give me that option with my other choices so far.

2 Likes
How to frame Problems in throughlines
#2

Yeah, some of the dynamic pairs are hard to suss out because the lack of, or “too little” of one, looks so much like the presence or “too much” of the other.

In these situations I find two things that can sometimes help:

  1. Try looking at the thing as a Drive as well as Problem. (this works for OS as well – “everyone is driven by X”) So is your MC more driven to keep the peace, or driven by her failure to take a stand?
  2. Don’t select the MC Problem for now (leave both choices available in Dramatica), and continue storyforming looking at the other story points. I think if you select the Symptom/Response, and figure out what your throughline Domains are, it will tell you which is your problem element.

A question on your MC – is that episode with her brother part of the backstory or part of the actual story? If it’s backstory, it could be the beginning of her justification process. “I failed to take a stand before, I won’t do that again, I won’t let these inequities stand” – a drive/Problem of Inequity. But it happens during the story, it might represent her MC perspective of wanting to keep the peace – a drive/Problem of Equity – and the fallout and regret from it is the difficulties caused by that.
Is she Steadfast or Change?

1 Like
#3

Change.

Interestingly I was having the same problem in the OS – the various groups of people are all driven to “get their own” – which means they could either be driven by a sense of resentment (at the very real inequities of this dystopian society-inequity) or justice (need for equity). One thing I suddenly thought of as a possible hint: the antagonist is trying to create more inequity – he is sure that only a small number of people will survive collapse, and he wants them to be his people – so in a way, he is fighting against equity, which maybe makes the OS problem inequity. (Not sure if that makes sense).

Yeah, I was going to do that but I was trying to get more clarity on my IC, which forces a choice. In his case, it’s Problem/Solution of Change/Inertia. I chose Change because Inertia didn’t seem right as a source of his drive, but now I realize I might be confusing that thinking with his role as Protagonist in the OS…

But as as an influence on the characters around him, I see him as “arguing” (through his actions) for to overcome inertia and work toward change.

This is so interesting. I’ve waffled a lot on whether to have that whole arc as part of the narrative or part of the backstory – now it’s almost like Dramatica is hitting on this ambivalence from another angle.

In answer to your question, in the current version I imagined it as backstory, but I didn’t see her justification process working out that way – I was thinking she still needs to stand up and intervene (Issue of Interdiction) which she doesn’t do until the end of the story. But if the backstory is part of a justification process, I might need to rethink this.

Thanks again!

1 Like
#4

I also struggle with a problem of equity. Two analyses that helped me were Amadeus and The Dark Knight Rises. In short, it could be seen as a conflict between “pro-status quo and anti-status quo” camps.

http://dramatica.com/analysis/amadeus

But how exactly this can distinguished from a problem of inertia (i.e. “pro-inertia vs anti-inertia” camps), I’m still not sure.

2 Likes
#5

A Knight’s Tale might help, and it’s a fun watch…great acting. I’m no analysis expert, but it sure is solid in equity-nonequity as a major theme of one, and maybe most, if not all the throughlines.

2 Likes
#6

When I encounter this, I just attack it from every angle:
Is it a lack of equity?
Is someone motivated to keep an inequity? Is someone motivated to undo an inequity?
Does anyone specifically care about equity or inequity?
Does too much equity prevent something from happen?
What does the Guardian character think?
Is Chris (in Get Out) responding to Inequity with Equity (it’s all the same to me if I give him the ID)? Or is the scene really about his girlfriend’s reaction to the lack of Equity? What would the opposite reaction look like?

I usually get nowhere, and then two days later, something new occurs to me.

5 Likes
#7

Another way to think of the Equity/Inequity pairing is Balanced/Unbalanced, or Fair/Unfair.

To check if it is the problem or the solution, use the phrase, “Conflict is caused by…[PROBLEM], and can only be resolved or neutralized by… [SOLUTION]”.

We tend to be biased toward thinking the Inequity is inherently problematic. However, think of teaching a class that has average and exceptional students in it. If you give everyone the same test and grade on an absolute performance level, then ‘average’ students are disadvantaged by comparison to the ‘exceptional’ students.

If you teach and test for the average student, exceptional students may end up with more behavioral problems due to boredom or loss of attention. So, depending on the standards set:

  • The solution may be to teach the two sets of students using different levels of materials and expectations. This would be a problem of Equity resolved with a solution of Inequity.

  • Or, you could teach both sets of students using the same materials and expectations and end up with a problem of Inequity, but grade on a curve to end up with a solution of Equity.

11 Likes
#8

Thanks Chris. That example makes sense to me.

I think where I get tripped up is when I think about reversing the appreciation (I’m probably overthinking this).

So if my main character lives on a farm where she and other young people are essentially slaves, is this a problem of:

Inequity – they’re slaves
Equity – they are living in a fundamentally unjust (un-equal) system

Or to put it another way with this example: would it be possible to encode this as:

In a dystopain world, the Children on the Ranch live as slaves (Problem of Inequity), until they realize they can no longer accept the status quo (Solution of Equity) and rise up to overthrow their masters.

I’ve been trying to encode it as “they decide to fight for justice” but that’s not exactly right. They’re not looking for justice – they’re looking to break the (bad) system.

1 Like
#9

If by saying “they’re slaves” you mean that they are not treated equally and that creates conflict, then yes.

Your Equity example sounds like another example of Inequity as a problem because of the use of “unjust”, which implies unfair.

2 Likes
#10

Your example makes a lot of assumptions. Overthrowing their masters does not imply equity – it could just be a further extension of inequity (slaves become new masters). I think it would be more accurate to say that the slaves revolted until the masters give them equal rights in all things.

4 Likes
#11

Thanks Chris – that actually clarifies a lot!

2 Likes