Thank you.
It was my mistaken understanding that “Dramatica” referred to any or all of those whereas “Dramatica Theory” referred to the theory.
Now I understand my error.
1 Like
Hm, I’m not sure I agree with this. It seems like even including Propp in the software is causing confusion.
Do you mean in comparison to other story paradigms? If so, I would disagree. My own experience (so far) is that the Dramatica learning curve is much steeper, but the toolset is both far more precise and flexible. It just requires a different way of thinking. But ask me again how I feel when I finish my current draft. 
/to my way of thinking, the steeper learning curve detracts from its strength in creating new stories. While I will always say that Dramatica is useful in creating stories, I don’t think that’s its strong suit. Its strong suit is in analyzing stories. I’m simply amazed at how well it helps give insight in that.
1 Like
It’s funny because my first thought to this was that the same learning curve should probably apply to creating the same as it does to analyzing. But really, I felt good about creating stories with it way before I felt like I had any ability to analyze a story with it.
2 Likes
Yeah, but if you’re trying to write a story that doesn’t fit neatly into one of the other story paradigms – like you have a steadfast main character or a non-mc protagonist, or you have multiple storyforms or whatever – those other paradigms are of limited use. So then you’re left with either trying to figure it out yourself by trial and error or using something like Dramatica. That’s what happened to me anyway, and I suspect that’s not at all uncommon.
They kind of go hand-in-hand, don’t they? I have to say trying to puzzle out Cars with you and Hunter was a great learning experience for me – I was starting to get the feel of how Dramatica worked much better than I had from just looking at pre-analyzed storyforms or working through the query system. I’m quite sure that having done that will help me a lot the next time I try to storyform and outline one of my own stories.
3 Likes
That’s my opinion as well. Dramatica is great at analyzing stories and experience analyzing stories with Dramatica helps you get ready for the much harder work of creating stories with it.
1 Like
Same here. After you pointed out Hinder as a problem and then I started looking at it scene by scene I kind of felt something click. I’ve been looking for something new to analyze but haven’t had much time to watch anything yet and it’s driving me crazy.
1 Like
Whether creating or analyzing, what Dramatica does is look for the source of conflict. It doesn’t tell you to have your characters storm the castle, so in that sense it doesn’t create at all. You do. What Dramatica does is make sure the argument you are making is coherent and cohessive.
2 Likes
I like that. I think I mostly agree with it. Maybe I’ll agree with it more as I gain more experience, but I’m not yet convinced that Dramatica looks for THE source of conflict as much as I am convinced that it looks for A source of conflict.
Actually, both articles are correct: Definite and Indefinite. There is one single definite conflict at the core of a given narrative. And, all the rest are indefinite fractals of it. For the most part, it is easier for us to look at the four conflicts as a domain quad by discussing throughlines.
In logic, one operator is enough to create all others. Just like you could build a computer chip out of all NOR gates. But, it is a lot of work 
1 Like
Also, The Writer’s Journey is a beat sheet like Save the Cat and all that other subjective outline stuff. Why notjust use the PSR for your outline?
The Hero’s journey is a set of archetypes tracking the central inequity. It is often misunderstood and it is much better to learn the Hero’s journey last as Dramatica informs it. Take it from someone who learned it in the wrong order—like me
2 Likes
I gotta say, I find these references to “cookie cutter” approaches a bit nonsensical from a creative standpoint. I’ve yet to meet a writer so accomplished in their ideas and execution that the limiting factor was the structure they chose to follow. I’d rather see a great idea well-executed that follows Save The Cat or The Hero’s Journey than a weak idea poorly-written regardless of how innovative the framework. You use the tool that gets you where you want to go. There are no points for effort in art.
From an analytical standpoint (i.e. developing a more useful understanding of a set of stories) a bog-standard beat sheet approach doesn’t really do you much good. I mean, who really cares how well Star Wars fits into someone’s beat sheet? So a tool like Dramatica that gives a more sophisticated (or even just different) way of looking at a movie or book is likely to be more thought-provoking, which is kind of the point of doing analysis in the first place.
From the standpoint of trying to write a successful work (with successful here being what the author wants to get out of it), all that matters is what pushes or prompts you to come up with your best ideas and express them coherently and compellingly. If you’re trying to write the next Star Wars: A New Hope, there’s a decent chance you’re going to find yourself following something that ends up looking a lot like the Hero’s Journey regardless of how you intended to proceed. If you’re trying to subvert those familiar structures, you’ll get more from something like Dramatica that can encompass them more naturally.
I guess what I’m saying is that being against formulas or cookie cutter approaches only has meaning if the thing you’re trying to create doesn’t fit within them. An awful lot of new writers are very much creating works that fit those kinds of beat sheets.
7 Likes
You should have seen what I had to read in film school
1 Like
Great thread, I have to read this forum more.
I just did the 30 second Dramatic practice and wrote out my 4 paragraph story in about an hour (okay, after a couple of months of brainstorming and digging up material). I am amazed. I spent last year reading the theory and reading the screenwriter’s book and kind of got lost. I guess it was all cooking inside while I wasn’t using it, if that makes sense.
I’m feeling all ecstatic I wonder if my editor will like it. Stay tuned.
scratching chin you know why I like Dramatica? I’ll tell you why. Because it gives me little things to do and little goals and little targets. And if I just do those and don’t worry at first about the whole canvas, I get a story emerging from the activity.
People were telling me to stop worrying about the theory and now I get the point. Just use it. It’s like music. You’ll get it eventually. You don’t have to get it at once.
4 Likes
practically defines most television writing. among other things, writing is a profession. Nothing wrong with having professional tools that helps you do your job better. Bill Shakespeare would have killed to have had Dramatica.
Yes, I said it. So there.
As with all things Dramatica, maybe the notion of cookie cutters or formulas can be redefined a bit to make a little more sense.
I’m pretty sure both Wreck-it Ralph and The Elf used Save the Cat, at least for a few beats. In Elf you have the Bad Guys Closing In scene in Central Park where the Black Riders or whatever they’re called show up without any prior mention, close in for one scene, and then disappear. It works well enough to inject some action, maybe a bit of conflict or tension, but I don’t get a lot of extra meaning from that scene. It just feels like a scene that’s meant to get the characters from one point to another. I get that Santa and Buddy are Christmas and bright and the riders are more dark for contrast or whatever, but it just doesn’t add much to the message of the movie for me.
In Wreck-it Ralph we get the Save the Cat scene where he gives Q-Bert one of the cherries from Pac-Man. It fulfills the STC beat, but doesn’t come across as saying “here’s our good guy, root for him”. At least not for me. Instead, because it follows the Bad-Anon meeting where all the bad guys want to be good guys, this scene is more about proving that yes, this bad guy is a good guy. He’s not just some random guy the audience should root for because he gave some fruit to a homeless guy like Aladdin. He’s the guy we root for because he’s been dealt a bad hand and he wants to improve himself and even though he’s programmed to destroy within the game, outside of the game he wants to help others who have been dealt that same bad hand. Meaningful to the story and meaningful to this audience member.
Traditionally speaking, they both follow the same formula. But one uses the cookie cutter to create a generic shape to follow and creates what is a workable but drab scene in the midst of an otherwise fun film while the other uses the cutter to guide its own purpose and meaning. One uses formula and creates a formulaic scene. The other uses formula and adds a bit of specialness to the story. One shows off the very familiar shape of a gingerbread man cut from sugar cookie dough (and presumably covered in syrup and crumbled over spaghetti) and the other hides that same shape with…whatever meaning a cookie can have? I’m going to be honest, I should’ve worked through that analogy before I started typing. But you get the point.
TL:DR-cookie cutter forms are just as valid as 32000+ other forms as long as they have meaning. Maybe the new definition of formula should include stories that have formula for formulas sake and exclude stories that use formula to enhance meaning.
…or I could be full of it. Who knows.
This is great advice. My experience backs this up. Worry about theory after you’ve made several stories with it, all the way to completion.
1 Like
How to Train Your Dragon was definitely written with Save the Cat! Their initial pitch to us animators were just the fifteen or sixteen beats from that book. Dean, one of the directors, was in Blake’s NY writer’s group and he had no problem speaking about the influence.
Definitely not a cookie cutter result.
3 Likes
So are you any closer to being fully on board?