I'm exploring humorously bickering MC and IC (i.e. What's Up, Doc?, Who's That Girl?, Dragnet, Get Smart 2008). I'm paying attention to where their characterizations of each other are deriving from. One labels the other as a control freak. Strebek mocks Joe Friday for his fixed attitude in Dragnet. Even the Dramatica Users podcast discussing Star Trek 2009 provides clues how these character elements ought to be encoded when writing one's own story.
Relying on my memory of the film, Spock points out how Kirk opposes everything (MC problem), seemingly to his own detriment. Kirk mocks Spock's fixation on logic (IC response) , sometimes in context of recognizing what Spock's blind spot is: the Vulcan's own uncontrolled behavior.
I am also recalling how Joe Friday constantly ridiculed Strebek's care-free, messy lifestyle and behavior. Pep Strebek, likewise, mocks Joe's proverbial stick up his rear end.
Is this projection in action? Dramatica's report gives us their individual problems, solutions, symptoms, and responses. In psychological terms, projection is when we characterize someone in context of our own problem.
So, when encoding bickering characters, would it be accurate to have Person A ridicule Person B's problem and symptom while projecting Person A's worldview onto it? Example: Strebek's problem is perhaps "inaccurate" (just guessing) and Joe's problem is perhaps "control". Strebek keeps ridiculing Joe over his problem, but it's while Strebek projects his own inaccurateness (meaning "outside of acceptable norms") perspective onto Joe. Likewise for Joe Friday.
And by the way, the Get Smart scene entering Act Two when Max and Agent 99 have landed in Eastern Europe is a clear example of arguing their Dramatica values with an author's point. Agent 99 tells Max to follow her lead because she's the one with the experience. Max has none. He says he's skilled in martial arts. Agent 99 then punches him in the face unexpectedly. "I wasn't ready." "That's my point."