Subjective & Objective Throughlines

theory
#1

Hi everybody,
this is my fist post. First of all, compliments for the great work. I’ve been reading the Dramatica Theory book (and the Lost Theory book too) for quite some years now (on and off, in my free time) and had the chance to use the software on a friends’ PC. I find the theory very fascinating, and it makes a great deal of sense to me. But most of all, I was impressed by how Dramatica is able to predict in detail the storyforms of well formed books and movies by just answering a few questions.

My question here pertains Subjective and Objective throughlines. I’ve read the books over and over again, but I’m been left in need of confirmation regarding this issue.

It is clear that OS Througline is Objective, and MC Throughline is Subjective.

I haven’t quite understood if IC and M/I Throughlines are Objective or Subjective. On the one hand, I tend to think that M/I is Objective, because you are seing the interaction of MC and IC externally. As for IC, what confuses me is the description that presents his throughline as “You”, which leaves me in dobut if his throughline is Subjective or Objective—but I tend to believe it to be Subjective.

So, my understanding is more or less like this:

  • OS Throughline : Objective, all characeter are seen from “above”, dispassionately, including MC and IC, which are seen here for their objective functions (which limits them to their Character motivations in the Overall Story).
  • M/I Throughline : Objective, it concentrates on the interaction between MC and IC, from a dispassionate view, not too close not to far above. MC and IC are seen here not only for their objective functions, but neither in the full depth of their subjectivity — more like a compromise between their subjective and objective story roles, from a special angle, dispassionate.
  • MC Throughline : Completely Subjective, we stand in his shoes and see the story through his eyes and bias. Not just his overall function, but with the full potential of all character elements at his disposal.
  • IC Throughline : Subjective. But not sure if we stand in his shoes. I wonder if it depends on writing style and the adopted point of view in the final novel/movie, which might involve different ways of being inside or outside characters. Do we see the story through his eyes? or do we see him very closely but from the MC point of view? And not sure weather the IC througline is dispassionate or passionate.

I’m grateful for any clarifications on the issue. I know that throughlines all occur interweaved in a story, and often simultaneously or overlappingly, and that the story medium and weaving style can lead to different implementations of these concepts, but I am asking this from a purely Dramatic-Theoretical point of view.

Best regards

Tristano (Italy)

#2

At one point, the Relationship Throughline was called the Subjective Throughline. Technically, that answers your question, but I’ll dig a little deeper.

The usual description goes like this: If we look at a problem from the outside, we can see the general situation, the effect of the Influence Character on the MC, and the Relationship between the MC and the IC, but we can’t see inside the MC’s mind. If we think about our own lives, we know our own minds, how our ICs affect us, and the relationships we share, but we can’t be truly objective about our situation due to our inherent bias. The magic of storytelling is the ability to at once tell both that distant story and that personal story. We see all four Throughlines, something normally impossible in regular life.

So in the end, I think you’re talking about two different things. There is the Objective Throughline and the Subjective Throughline, but you can also kind of look at them based on how “objective” or how “subjective” they are. Kind of.

#3

Thanks for the reply!
I now that with Dramatica Story Expert the Terminology has been slightly varied again, but I tend to use the Dramatica 4 “layman” terminology, just because I had bought the 10th anniversary edition of the paperback Theory book and I’ve got used to it. But I guess that all terminology are still in use, after all its an issue of chosing which synonims one likes best (like: Sympton/Reaction, which have now become Focus/Direction in the DSE and the new digital edition of the book, but they actually were thus named in the early days from what I gather).
As you mentioned, the IC has also his bias, and a Resolve as well (if MC is Steadfast he’ll be Change, and viceversa). Either MC or IC will take the role of Pivotal character, and the other Primary. And it is exactly from this issue that my question stems: I was wondering if these symmetries between MC and IC throughline (their both having a resolve and a personal problem) makes them both subjective.
I know in the theory book it clearly states:

It is important to be clear about the difference between the Main Character and the
Impact Character. The audience looks through the Main Character’s eyes, and through
them looks at the Impact Character. Through the Main Character, we feel what it is like
to be in a particular predicament. With the Impact Character we see an external view of
what someone else looks like in the same predicament.

But I am still in doubt about wether the IC or M/I could also be considered a Subjective throughline.

#4

Objective == Overall Story, Influence Character and Relationship
Subjective == Main Character, Influence Character, and Relationship Story

Objective is looking from without, Subjective is looking from within. If you take the They perspective (objective) you can’t be within (main character). Likewise if you take the I perspective (main character) you can’t be without.

From objective you can see them, him (or her) and that couple.
From subjective you can see me, him (or her) and we.

We can’t see both at the same time. Stories can.

1 Like
#5

The IC is seen from the POV of the MC – it is the MC’s subjective POV.

Jim & I had an offline argument about the IC in Mad Max: Fury Road – I saw Furiosa as a Do-er: she wants the wives out of there, and she kidnaps them. Jim’s (winning) argument was that Furiosa’s emotional impact on Max had to do with something else: her determination to help the wives. This is what makes her a Mind character. This is what changes Max from someone who leaves problems behind into someone who stays to fix problems.

#6

Thanks a lot @jhull and @MWollaeger, your replies clarified the issue.

I did suspect (from the quote that I reproduced above) that the IC would be seen from MC subjective view. But I wasn’t sure about whether or not there would also be an objective view on IC and M/I. And I was confused about the subjective view of M/I througline.

It does make a good deal of sense now. “Switching” (as it were) from objective and subjective perspective on those throughlines helps the reader/audience appreciate the argument both dispassionately and passionately.

I guess that in the “end product” it all boils down to subtle nuances on how the media presents them. I don’t have any expertise on filming techniques, but I guess that in novels the subjective point of view would (also) take advantage of “sequels” (reaction scenes, as some call them) to offer the reader with MC’s afterthoughts on what has happened in the previous “scene” (action scene)—such sequels should only apply to subjective characters then, for they offer an inside view of their feelings and thoughts, and motivations and purposes regarding the story progression, all within the limited framework of their bias.

If I’ve understood correctly, the main point about the objective viewpoint is to offer the audience a broader view, transcending the limited knowledge of subjective characters (and, in this respect, IC is a subjective character because he carries a broader role than objective-only characters) and their bias — thus creating a contrast which enhances the bias, struggle and dangers the MC is traversing through his journey.

And I gather that both MC and IC are ALSO presented to the audience for their objective roles in the Overall Story — ie: the basic objective functions they represent in the OS Throughline (which would be limited to their Character Building constitutional elements).

I think this issue of objective vs subjective throughlines deserves further clarification in the Dr. Theory Book — its one of the subjects that pops up first in the book, but I was personally left wondering with these (maybe trivial) questions for quite a while, unsure about their detailed definition — yet the answer was rather simple after all.

@MWollaeger: I haven’t seen the Mad Max: Fury Road movie, but when I’ll have a chance to watch it I’ll keep in mind your explanation and try to “dissect” it in Dramatica terms.

Thanks

Tristano

#7

Yes, they generally exist in both their throughline and the OS.