One aspect of Dramatica still eludes certainty for me. It's illustration of (1) problem solving and (2) justification. I'd love to know how characters undergo these two during a movie. The Dramatica Theory book online presents the waitress' itchy nose analogy. So, I've applied that to my Main Character. My Impact Character is the one having justifications torn down signpost by signpost. Whoops. When seeing how these should be illustrated, I also found an audio recording of Melanie describing the 4 levels of justification differently. She says it starts with looking to environment then to self, then either logic or emotion handling things, then finally deciding it's the environment. I'm also wary of articles talking about MCs tearing down their justifications; mine is steadfast.
So, here is my list of the signpost illustrations. I'd like to know which understanding of how problem solving and justification is still viable (as opposed to earlier stuff by Melanie and Chris). Forgive the abstractness in the following list, but this lean version is for convenience in editing and I'd like to keep my story a surprise until it's ready for review. Thanks. Any help is appreciated.
Joe's problem of Disbelief, but he can’t directly deal with this. So, he tries to treat it with his preconscious by trying to get support. This becomes problematic, because there’s no support. So instead, he applies opposition.
Immediate impact on Joe: Tanya’s physical attractiveness and her celebrity-status.
Impact on Joe: Meanwhile, he learns what Tanya is going through being concerned about her career’s future and her legacy in the company now apparently invaded by this conspiracy (Objective Story). She’s being controlled. Context of The Past. She reacts with uncontrolled behavior. She also argues with him over whether he’s directly or indirectly trying to solve his problem. He says he’s doing the best he can.
Joe’s opposition becomes problematic because it hits on memories. So, he tries to tackle the memory related predicament with trying to get support. There’s no support. So, instead he applies opposition.
Impact on Joe: Meanwhile, Tanya confronts her symptom of control in the context of Progress. Response: uncontrolled behavior. She also argues with Joe over repetition vs framework.
This effort creates hurt in his subconscious. Again, no support. He tries to apply opposition.
Impact on Joe: Meanwhile, Tanya confronts her symptom of control in the context of The Future. Response: Uncontrolled behavior. She also argues with Joe over strategy vs analysis.
This effort creates problems for his conscious mind and contemplating what to do… considerations.
Impact on Joe: Meanwhile, Tanya, at last, confronts her control symptom in context of The Present. Tanya argues with Joe that he’s just been using justification and not getting at his true problem of Disbelief. He denies this.
Joe points out her problems have all been caused by Hinder. She needs Help.
Perhaps in the climax, he is confronted with this other ability of his to get some kind of life, but not the type he really wants. This possibility or offer comes up. This may relate to Tanya’s issue of choice impacting upon him or his signpost of Contemplation. He struggles with whether to go on faith that he has potential future in another job/lifestyle which won’t get him what he really wants, or rather to stick with disbelieving this potential future. He decides to ignore the potentiality. This opens him up to closure on getting to be hired by Tanya as an advisor.