I think the primary MC for the show is Dolores. And the primary IC is a combo of both Arnold(her personal plot line) and Ford (For the show). Ford’s influence is felt almost throughout the show. Down to his new narrative for her. Arnolds is to get her to awaken. Especially with the whole maze fiasco. Kindly correct me if I’m wrong. Cheers.
Almost positive Ford is the Protagonist with the Company as the Antagonist. That’s where you’re feeling his influence. Arnold makes perfect sense.
2 Likes
I’m totally on board with Dolores as primary MC, and Arnold as primacy IC. (That choice of IC seems ‘tricky’ to me, due to him being dead during most of the IC signposts. But also really cool. Maybe it helps to think of Arnold as a force of influence rather than a person? His ‘ghost influence’ is perhaps more subtle than Obi-Wan’s voice in signpost 4 of Star Wars!)
2 Likes
To move this analysis along, let’s make sure we’re on board with the descriptions of the 4 throughlines, then move on to questions like Resolve, Approach etc.
Overall Story: The park’s control of the hosts, and the hosts’ struggle to break free of that. (The Company’s attempts to control the park also fit here.)
Main Character Throughline: Dolores struggles with consciousness.
Influence Character Throughline: Long-dead Arnold influences everyone through his core programming of the hosts.
Relationship Story Throughline: Creator / created, almost like a father/daughter relationship.
I’m struggling a bit with the IC description, let me know if you think of something better, or just want to leave it at “Arnold” for now. (And I wrote “long-dead” but it’s possible the first IC signpost is when he’s still alive, or his death itself.)
Please voice any concerns with these descriptions or different ideas … we probably should have done them one at a time but I was trying to speed up the delay of waiting for responses etc.
Is it a given that the mc will be change then? I haven’t seen the show, but the dead Ic concept hooked me.
Not necessarily – there could be an IC handoff or a way that the “force of influence” Changes somehow. But it’s certainly a good guess!
Hi guys, been away from this topic for a while. I stumbled on a very interesting video(take) on the throughlines. Not specifically in Dramatica terms or appreciations but they seem to have some interesting insights on the show. So @jhull @mlucas @jhay give this a look and let me know what you think. P.S This video makes me appreciate Dramatica so much. It’s like cheating. You know almost everything and get to predict it. I had a laugh at their misconception (Perception) of Ford’s role. @jhull called it eons ago.
1 Like
I watched that video about halfway … the stuff about Dolores seemed totally wrong to me. My feeling was that Dolores does reach true consciousness in the final episode, when she grasps that the voice inside her head is actually her. Although Maeve is certainly important I felt like consciousness was most deeply and personally explored in Dolores. (Also, he said a bunch of stuff about Maeve that I wasn’t sure where it came from – maybe I missed something? How does he know exactly what’s part of her ‘script’ and what isn’t?)
So are we going to move along with the analysis or what!? 
What did you think of the throughline summaries I posted?
You bet! I concur on your descriptions of Throughlines. Although I think you should finish watching the video. They seem to struggle with the fact that Ford is indeed the Protagonist of the show. They’re on to it, but the concept seems strange to them(The Video guys). I’m up for our breakdown. I believe identifying the Domains is in order. NEXT!
Actually before we identify domains, let’s identify the Character & Plot Dynamics (Resolve, Approach, Outcome, Judgement, etc.).
MC Resolve: I believe Dolores is a Change character – if you compare her at the end of the final episode to the beginning, it’s a night and day difference. I believe early on she mentions that she “wouldn’t hurt a fly”, (which is why the scene where she slaps the fly on her neck has such significance). But at the end she executes Ford and begins shooting people left and right, a clear change. She also seems suddenly sure of herself.
Note: I’m not sure I agree with various opinions that Dolores was just following Ford’s programming at the end when she killed him. It seemed more like Ford helped set things up so that she could finally achieve consciousness and free will, and that’s what allowed her to kill him, to use real bullets against humans. But maybe I’m wrong.
2 Likes
Dolores is a change character. She’s changed her resolve, changed her worldview as well. But here’s the thing. Perhaps I’m jumping the gun but in the overall series story(not that we know it) she might become steadfast going forward(season 2,3 —) or something. That aside, at the end, she did make a choice. The gun was on the table and she chose to pick it up. Her Mental sex could be Female(holistic), as she seems to be piecing up fragments of consciousness from living through so many Loops. All of it culminating in the last story driver of Decision. Ford’s Decision to offer her the opportunity to choose, her decision to kill him, Maeve’s decision to return to the park(thus foregoing freedom) etc. Judgement I think is Bad. She doesn’t seem to solve her problem. She obtains consciousness but not in the form she’s been programmed to Desires. And eventually she “Becomes” Wyatt. Any thoughts?
1 Like
Wow! That was lot in one post!
Note: This is kinda tricky because it’s been a while since watching it…
Story Driver
I agree that Decision seems to be Story Driver, but it would be great to have more examples. I think there are a few cases where there seems to be an Action without a Decision driving it, but we find out about the Decision later on. For example, the Man in Black appearing and killing Dolores’s father, but I guess we find out later that was driven by William’s decision to return to the Park and seek further meaning.
There are several times when the Park admin staff (including Bernard) have to make decisions regarding whether to take misbehaving hosts out of commission. These decisions do seem to be decisions on their own, i.e. not directly forced by the hosts’ behavior, but also taking various other factors into account.
But why does Maeve suddenly start remembering her ‘deaths’ and reconstruction? That would be an Action … although I guess all of the hosts who begin to remember things are triggered by the Reveries programming, which was a Decision? I don’t recall actually seeing the decision to introduce the Reveries though… hmm …
MC Mental Sex
As for Dolores’s mental sex of Female, I agree she feels like a Holistic character but again, more examples would be great. When does she try to solve a (personal) problem by adjusting the balance of things? I’m having trouble remembering examples of either type of problem solving right now!
Story Judgment
I’m not sure about Bad here … is anyone really left with regret or angst? I feel like Maeve would feel like she made the right choice to come back for her daughter, that Arnold would be glad to see Dolores truly alive, that Ford got to go out the way he wanted (without relinquishing control), and that William was kind of glad to see the hosts attacking. And Dolores seemed to have gotten over her issues of repressed guilt and seemed sure of herself at the end…
Certainly, there are huge Costs, which can sometimes make it seem like Bad or Failure.
Idea for season 2: maybe that wasn’t actually Ford who got shot, maybe he tricked everyone and made a host that looked like him?
1 Like
Is Young WIlliam not a MC for a portion of the show, with his brother-in-law as his influence character? We certainly see from his perspective from the second episode on through most of the rest of the show as he changes from white hat to black hat.
I think perhaps the RS deals with inequity. The disparity between conscious humans and unconscious robots as a master/slave relationship and the reversal of that being the super capability of conscious robots relative to conscious humans. Ford looks to resolve the master/slave relationship by leveling the playing field of consciousness, creating equity.
Hmm also I noticed several people pointing to Arnold as Delores IC, but I think it must be Ford, no? Arnold’s initial attempts to get Delores to “solve the maze” proved ineffective. It was Ford who orchestrated the events, set the stage and gave Delores the final shove to conscious awareness — illustrated by her use of unscripted violence.
I’ve not proven very good at analysis, so forgive me cherrypicking these spots to contribute
1 Like
Story Driver
@Khodu’s arguments for decision are very good, but I’m leaning toward action. I can list dozens of actions but only motivated decisions (AKA precipitated by actions).
- The first robots malfunction – leading to decision to cover it up with a massacre on the town.
- Dolores’ father finds a photo and malfunction – leading to decision to retire him from service.
- Maeve’s interaction with Dolores leads to her having visions – leading to decision to take her to maintenance.
- Elsie and Stubbs find the stray host in the ravine – leading to Cullen’s decision to take over the investigation.
That’s just the first 3 episodes that I read on Wikipedia.
MC Mental Sex
This is my weak point. I also agree on Holistic but as a man, this is alien to me.
Dolores is definitely trying to maintain some kind of balance in her relationships: she tries to be home before dark so her father doesn’t worry (and keeps Teddy away from him); she tries to brush off the photograph with a ‘doesn’t look like anything to me’ and also ignores the little boy that tells her she isn’t real – to maintain the world she knows.
I could be dead wrong on these examples being holistic – it’s my biggest weak point in Dramatica.
Story Judgement
Lots of people die. But Dolores has confidence in the man that loves her:
I found someone true. Someone who loves me. His path will lead him back to me. And when he finds me, he’ll kill you.
So I think she’s content. Albeit murderous.
This was exactly my thinking after the finale. Seems a bit obvious, though.
Ooh, that’s a really good one. There’s no way that Action (happening to find the photo) could be driven by a Decision.
@jhay . Your examples are spot on. But this is why this show rocks! So rich and skillfully woven. But I feel that the element of the picture being there wasn’t random. It was a Decision by Ford -the puppet master- to trigger that response. Also if you would remember, it was Ford’s unilateral Decision to introduce the reveries( the lines of code that caused the entire system to melt down). You notice the Hosts didn’t start breaking down before we got introduced to the reveries. We saw the reveries a few scenes before the first host broke down. The Sheriff. And if you recall, Bernard stated that they hadn’t had a Critical condition on the park in the last 30years. And as we would note Ford is indeed the Protagonist/apparent villain of the OS. Thus this was excellent foreshadowing. It’s also hinting at a Consequence of “Doing” as well to me. I read Armando’s book and there was something he said about hiding parts of a Throughline if not the whole thing in order to create suspense/mystery.
You’re not kidding! This show is so hard to pick apart.
I’m not sure about that one. If I remember correctly, it’s explained in the finale (during the pre-Man in Black timeline) how the photo came to be within the park:
The photo is seen in William’s jacket when he leads Logan around behind his horse. As the horse moves forward the photo slips out of the jacket’s pocket and lands on the ground, before being blown away.
Source: Westworld Wikia
That’s an unmotivated action. Unless there’s some kind of information we’ve been left out of.
Your other points, however, make me think – particularly Ford’s reveries introduction. I’ll have to give it another think. I think this one could go either way.
1 Like
@jhay I had a rethink. And you’re right about that picture. I think it was just an element of the storytelling. A way to invoke the erratic action from the host(Dolores’ father). It was totally random but it makes his response plausible. Especially from a scene-building standpoint.
I’m on board with Decision. The photo might be a red herring … or as @Khodu suggests we can look at Peter’s (Peter is Dolores’s father) odd behavior after finding the photo as still having been driven by Ford’s decision to introduce the Reverie programming.
The thing about Decision is that it really seems to give meaning to the hosts’ struggle – all the things that look like actions and happenstance to them are in fact controlled by the Decisions of unseen men running the show. Here is a good example from Episode 1:
They [Dolores and Teddy] are caught up in a newly-scripted massacre of townspeople by the bandit Hector, intended to disguise the removal of the hosts affected by the update.
That Action – the massacre – definitely sounds like it was driven by the Decision to remove the affected hosts and to disguise it with a scripted attack by Hector.
(It would be good to watch one of these episodes again though, just to be sure it’s really shown that way.)
2 Likes
I like that too, but I cannot get onboard with the idea of such a big off-screen driver. It feels too much like speculation.
I’ll make one final counter argument to the decision driver you pitched, @mlucas, from the same episode:
Soon Walter malfunctions and slaughters a number of his fellows in an off-script tirade, convincing Theresa to pull all of the updated hosts out of Westworld. Elsewhere, the Man in Black tortures card dealer host Kissy with an unrevealed agenda. After scalping Kissy, the Man in Black examines a drawing under the scalp.
Dolores’ father Peter Abernathy begins behaving strangely after finding a discarded photo of the outside world. He whispers something to Dolores and she goes to town seeking help where she runs into Teddy. They are caught up in a newly-scripted massacre of townspeople by the bandit Hector, intended to disguise the removal of the hosts affected by the update.
The massacre is absolutely a decision, but it’s a decision in response to the actions of the hosts malfunctioning. If the hosts did not malfunction in the first place, there wouldn’t be that massacre.