Are there two types of emotional connection for the audience in a story?

theory
#1

According to the Dramatica theory the audience sees the story through the MC’s eyes and connects emotionally to the story through the MC, IC and M/I throughlines. However, outside of Dramatica authors also care about their readers connecting to the characters, and not only the MC.

For me these are two different kinds of emotional connection and as far as I understand Dramatica focuses to the emotional connection to the argument of the story. Do you guys also see this difference between the emotional connection to the characters on the one hand and the emotional connection to the story through the subjective throughline on the other?

I’m not sure how to express my struggle. I feel that the emotional connection to the characters is blurring my vision on the story form, I feel like I can’t see the emotional connection to the throughlines because of the emotional connection to the characters.

#2

There are only two storyforming Dramatica dynamics that inherently effect an audience’s emotional connection to a story and its characters: MC Problem-solving Style (i.e. MC Mental Sex) and Story Limit. These two dynamics effect an audience’s likelihood of empathizing with the story – particularly the MC. Here are the four combinations the two dynamics create:

  • LINEAR (Male) Problem-solving + Optionlock = Broadest male and female audience empathy
  • LINEAR (Male) Problem-solving + Timelock = Male audience empathize, female audience less empathic (more sympathetic)
  • HOLISTIC (Female) Problem-solving + Optionlock = Female audience empathize, male audience less empathic (more sympathetic)
  • HOLISTIC (Female) Problem-solving + Timelock = Least male and female audience empathy

By definition, Overall Story characters are seen objectively. However, strong emotional storytelling can give them greater emotional depth and empathy than are structurally necessary.

I’m not quite sure what you mean by “I can’t see the emotional connection to the throughlines because of the emotional connection to the characters.” Characters are not separate from the throughlines in which they exist. By throughlines do you mean plot lines?

2 Likes
#3

Permababy, I think what I offer below is cohesive with what Chris Huntley has shared from his profound expertise. If not, then ignore my take and go with Chris’s.

So, I think audiences should definitely feel multiple “types of emotional connection[s]” to the characters in a story, from a very deep emotional connection to the MC, to an almost-as-deep connection to the IC, to a deep-but-not-committed emotional connection to most of the other principal characters in the Overall Story.

Everyone’s battling some inequity, so we can at least sympathize…

And, as the writer, you are God in your story, creating and offering us (the audience) a variety of different perspectives – some more emotional than others.

Thus you need to keep moving back and forth between the intensely involved perspectives (the MC’s, then the IC’s), then fairly often pull out to the semi-involved “Objective” perspective (the Overall Story view from on high, which ranges across all the principal characters, including the MC and the IC in their objective roles).

Indeed, as Chris says: “Characters are not separate from the throughlines in which they exist.”

That’s why great stories always contain ample amounts of both “plot” and “character study”: IMO, the clashing combination of those two is what makes for the strongest conflicts and the most-emotional, most-meaningful connections between audience and characters!

3 Likes
#4

Key, I like your description of the multiple types of emotional connections.

#5

Thanks, man. I’m honored.