Is the Inciting Incident always motivated by the OS Problem?

theory
#1

I have a question regarding the Inciting Incident (using the Dramatica definition of that term, i.e. the first instance of the Story Driver which starts the story and creates the inequity). Is it always motivated in some way by the OS Problem element?

I can think of lots of examples where it does seem to be:

  • In Star Wars the Empire’s attack on the consular ship is a way of Testing what it can get away with
  • In The Fugitive the badguy’s (Dr. Nichols’s) decision to send an assassin is motivated by Helping the RDU-90 drug’s approval. Alternately, if Dr. Kimble’s decision to report the problems with RDU-90 is the inciting incident, well, that’s obviously Helping people.
  • In The Matrix Morpheus’s decision that Neo is The One seems to be motivated by the OS Solution of Faith, not the OS Problem of Disbelief. However, you could quite easily see it as a “lack of Disbelief”.

But, I’m not sure if it’s just often the case that this association exists, rather than a hard and fast rule. Any thoughts?

#2

Hmm, I had a few more thoughts about this (though I’m probably getting ahead of myself, or maybe just plain wrong :slight_smile: ).

Maybe it doesn’t have to be related to the OS Problem, but will almost certainly be related to at least one of the Issue, Concern, or Domain.

Also, I’m not entirely sure that the Inciting Incident is always presented through the OS Throughline, but it does seem easier to understand that way…

2 Likes
#4

I suspect this is the case. You can certainly argue that the OS Problem motivates the First Driver, but I think it’s also possible to argue the reverse. Some notes from the software (emphasis added):

"When everything in a potential story is in harmony, there is no conflict, no message, no progression. It is like a deck of cards sitting solidly on a table. However, if we use that deck to build a house of cards, we have created potential. No matter how well we construct it, gravity is always waiting to pull it down beginning at the first weak point that occurs.

The Dramatica Engine is like the deck of cards. When we answer the first eight Essential Questions, we build a card house of dramatics. Still, it is balanced, although potential exists. The choices of Throughline, Concern and Issue establish weaknesses in the structure. The choice of Problem picks the card that starts to buckle threatening to bring the whole house down.

Problems are at the heart of a story’s troubles. Sometimes a Problem is shown as the central cause of a number of troubles. Other times Problems are shown as the imbalance that triggers a domino effect. If a number of seemingly unrelated items all go sour, the common connection will turn out to be the Problem. If a chain of events results in disaster, the Problem can be seen as the force that started it all.

When telling a story, an author has a choice of focusing on the Problem or its effects. In the first case, where the Problem is at the center of troubles, the storytelling might begin with the Problem and then show how its ripples impact everything they touch as they grow around it. Conversely, the storytelling might first explore the seemingly unrelated troubles, slowly spiraling in on the source, which is only discovered at the end.

In a more linear story, an author might begin with the Problem and follow its impact step by step to its ultimate effect. Or, working backwards, the author might begin at the effect, and trace its roots back until the original Problem is identified."

My take-away from this is that the OS Problem is the biggest crack in the foundation, but has been justified away by the characters in the back-story. The First Driver comes along and exacerbates this weakness in such a way that it can no longer be ignored, like a wrecking ball to the building.

3 Likes
#5

I think it is genre dependent, or what throughline you plan on focusing on. In the romance books, the focus is on the relationship throughline, so the inciting incident would be the ‘meet cute’ scene where the love interest’s run into each other the first time. Every film you listed above is more of a thriller/action movie. So it would make sense that the inciting incident would be motivated by the OS. As a rule of thumb. Food for thought. Anyone feel free to correct me?

#6

Thanks everyone. Alex (@narrativebeast) that definitely sounds right – I had been thinking along those lines but couldn’t find a way to express it clearly.

Brant (@LunarDynasty), I love the crack in the foundation analogy. It seems to fit the story I’m currently working on really well, since there are several significant events in the backstory that could be seen as motivated by my OS Problem (Oppose). But thanks to the justification process those events don’t upset the equilibrium enough to put things out of balance, they just make the balance a little more precarious. They’re like small perturbations that widen the cracks but the characters continue to ignore them.

What’s really fascinating to me is that each of those events is of the same type as my Story Driver (Decision) though being in the backstory I don’t think there’s any rule that they have to be. I guess maybe your subconscious knows what type of event drives the story, even for backstory stuff?

#7

I’m going to go with No here, but I’m not sure my No is really that relevant, because it gets caught up in the storytelling.

Details below, but first, I’m going to make my semi-annual pitch to stop using the term ‘Inciting Incident’.

• When the term was invented (by Syd Field), it referred to an event on or about page 30. But since we have the idea of the Driver, I never know if people are referring to the First Driver or the Second Driver when they use ‘Inciting Incident’.
• The Inciting Incident, according to Field, is when things go wrong. It’s all good, and then it goes bad. Again, we know this isn’t the case (Vader shows up really early). Why perpetuate a term that isn’t very good?
• It refers to an incident, which implies an Action Driver. Again, this is limiting.
• It refers to a storytelling moment, not a storyforming moment. That’s why it’s always on page ~30.

So, anyway, back to my No, the First Driver is not motivated by the OS Problem Element, Issue, Concern or Domain."

In Lord of the Flies the First Driver is pre-book and is the crash of the boy’s plane into the island. This is neither not definable by Work or Induction or even Situation. What it does is set up a story for those things to be important.

In 12 Angry Men, you certainly set up a playground where Production and Mind become important, but actually going off to the jury room is none of these things.

I think it feels like these things are all connected because in good stories, things feel connected. It’s easy to look at Lord of the Flies and say, “Oh, the first driver puts them on an island, so it’s motivated by Situation.” But that’s focusing on the The Story and not the Driver. I also think these things line up because of economy. It’s a faster way into the story to make everything connected – if you wanted to tell a romantic story about people meeting in Hawaii, it’s wise to introduce Hawaii and the Romance together, but you could easily have a guy get to Hawaii, get fired from his job, go to a bar to get a drink and meet a gal there.

4 Likes
#8

The first Story Driver is not motivated by the inequity (OS Problem). It is the cause (Driver) that leads to the effect (Problem).

3 Likes
#9

The inciting event (Driver #1) disrupts the balance in the story world and/or the main character. Prior to the inciting event, an inequity may exist but it will be in a place of balance, which we call a balanced inequity. The driver tips the balance and reveals the inequity underneath the apparent serenity.

Alternatively, the inciting event (Driver #1) may introduce an inequity into either the OS or the MC, which creates new imbalances between the throughlines and may reveal existing balanced inequities.

Inequity exists at all levels within a storyform, not just in the “problem quads”. By disturbing the balance, the driver reveals/releases the inequity inherent in the narrative. How you choose to reveal the imbalance/inequity to your audience is a storyweaving choice (yours), since the inequity exists at the class, type, variation, AND element levels.

The storyform story points are your tools to reveal the inequity to your audience at whichever scale you wish to show first. Eventually you will reveal the inequity at all levels and all contexts before the narrative (story) is completed.

5 Likes
#10

Hi Jim,

Sorry to revive an old topic but I was reading your Narrative First Post about the Inciting Incident/Story Driver in Star Wars. You wrote that the Physics Quad, with story problem of Test is what contextualizes the Action Story Driver in Star Wars. That seems very intuitive and apt for that story. So, would you say it’s fair when looking to employ the Story Driver at the beginning of a story that it falls along these lines:

Action Driver = start with Physics or Psychology Domain with associated Problem
Decision = start with Universe or Mind Domain with associated Problem

And is there any consideration for Steadfast versus Change characters since Steadfast characters look more to the Symptom/Response story points for the source of inequity?

I ask because I’m working on a rewrite and my MC is Steadfast - Physics. It seems to make sense that her actions should cause the inciting incident but I’ve written it differently and it’s going to take a bit of work to rewrite. It does seem logical though.

Thanks

Chris

#11

First off, no worries about reviving an old topic–with Dramatica, there are no old topics…

To answer your question -

I think it would be strange to somehow tie the Story Driver to a particular Domain in the way you suggest. The Story Driver used to be called Story Work–in other words, what must be done to “work” your way through the narrative model.

In the article you’re referring to, Uncovering the Major Plot Points of a Functioning Story I was looking at the Overall Story Problem, the Overall Story Domain, and the Story Driver all at once–from a more holistic perspective, where you see everything at once.

So it isn’t so much that the Physics Domain is contextualizing the Action Driver as much as it is that the narrative set Action as the way through the story (Story Driver) while simultaneously positioning the Overall Story perspective from a context of Physics (actions). It follows then that the first instance of the Overall Story Problem–a Problem of Test in this case–would somehow fall under this Physics context.

Hopefully that makes sense the way I wrote it – the Physics quad isn’t calling for an Action driver, a Physics Problem in an Action Driven story is looking for a physical manifestation of that Problem of Test.

Let me know if any of this is helping…

#12

Hey Jim,

Thanks for the reply.

Yes, I think that makes sense. Let me see if I’m getting it right. So, for example, if I’m opening a story with the Universe Quad and my story driver is Action then the problem element should correspondingly be illustrated/established via Action. Or if I’m opening up with the Psychology Quad and the driver is Decision, then the problem is caused by or the result of decision making. It doesn’t matter what the Type of the Domain is because the given problem will already be a subset of that perspective. It just matters that the problem arrives via the chosen driver. Is that correct?

#13

No - you can have Action drivers in Universe, Physics, Psychology, or Mind.

You can have Decision drivers in Universe, Physics, Psychology, or Mind.

The work of the Driver is not dependent upon the context of the Overall Story Throughline.

#14

Yes I think we’re saying the same thing. The Story Driver simply indicates the cause/effect relationship leading to the problem no matter what the chosen quad is. Correct? But that choice will definitely define the means of storytelling e.g. Star War Objective Story - Physics - Test leads to the boarding of the ship in the intro.

It is interesting though that Star Wars opens with a Objective Story of Physics with a problem of Test. It makes me wonder if genres have certain qualities inherent in them that make them identifiable by these correlations.

Thanks

Chris

#15

If they do it is because of storytelling conventions and cultural norms, not likely something inherent within the storfyorm itself.

#16

I think of it more as a door that opens into a future that wouldn’t have happened if that door hadn’t opened. Scottie Ferguson gets that simple phone call from Gavin Elster. Just a drink, a little talk, a favor. Nothing wrong with that.