Rationalization works for the relationship story.
Rationalization: An attempt to have your cake and eat it too; an alternative explanation used to mask the real reason.
Can’t we rationalize in many ways? maybe it is this, “Is honor and duty just an alternative explanation to mask that it is really our friendship that motivates us?" Under Rationalization are the elements; Consider/Reconsider again and Oppose/Support.
I am starting to see all sides. argh! I still like self interest as well.
What if Self Interest were the catalyst? This movie really resonates with people. It is one that we can watch over and over. Why? I believe it must have a really strong storyform. Isn’t it possible and maybe more interesting that this story isn’t as simple as Moral vs. Self Interest but an examination of Moral vs. Self Interest through the lens of Approach. The Kobayashi Maru test is not random. I am starting to think it is central to the theme. How does one approach death.
Things really heat up when Self Interest comes into play.
If I choose OS Issue>Approach I get RS Issue>Rationalization. Then my Issue choices for MC and IC are limited to two each. MC either Openness or Choice. IC either Closure or Dream.
Openness for Kirk gives me my Preconceptions in it’s dynamic pair. He doesn’t have a problem with Preconceptions, he needs them(some degree of preconception is necessary to benefit from the value of one’s own experience), but he has an issue with entertaining alternatives (Openness) e.g… (I wish Netflix hadn’t taken it off instant) Kirk has a problem with entertaining the idea that he could do anything else but fade away as an admiral; that his birthday is a funeral rather than a celebration; that he is old rather than as youthful as his imagination will allow.
What would I choose for Spock as IC? Well, Dream is already Kirk’s Critical Flaw so I feel Spock’s influence Issue is Closure. In this case closing the loop to Kirk as the Captain of the Enterprise. He is and always shall be the Captain of the Enterprise.
I was looking at Approach as well. The MC Issue of Openness is interesting, too. Kirk doesn’t like to lose.
These are all great discussions! Fantastic stuff. How about we take a look at the elements below to see if we can’t help support some of our arguments above. For instance, those who are for Approach as the OS Issue, how do you see Consider, Reconsider, Logic and Feeling playing out? Those who see Self-Interest as the OS Issue how do you see Pursuit, Avoid, Control and Uncontrolled playing out?
Likewise, let’s take a look at Kirk. Do we see more Pursuit, Avoid, Support and Oppose in him (Delay)? Or do we like Control, Uncontrolled, Help and Hinder? What about Faith, Disbelief, Consider and Reconsider?
Which elements seem to be at the core of what Kirk is dealing with?
Of the different story forms I played with, this is the one that, so far, sticks out for me:
OS: Activity > Obtaining > Self-Interest > Pursuit: The super humans seek to break free from their exile. Their leader seeks revenge for the death of his wife by killing the man who cast them in exile in the first place. The scientists seek to create habitable worlds for the federation. The crew of the enterprise seeks to maintain power and perceives anyone who upsets that balance (symptom of control anyone?) as a threat that must be dealt with.
MC: Situation > The Future > Delay > Pursuit: Kirk is an aging star fleet officer (situation) who is confronted with the end of his career (future) and sticks around, fulfilling different roles (delay) as he waits for one last chance at adventure (pursuit).
That gives Spock a Problem (Drive) of Logic… 
Bingo. And that’s the key, isn’t it. “Problem” for the IC is different from the other “problems,” it’s not an issue that must be resolved, it’s the drive, the IC’s raison d’être.
This looks good @Jerome I guess I should still argue the other side but I don’t know if I can now.
So Kirk with an issue of Delay. He never really says I am taking over the Enterprise does he? Am I remembering that right? It is by default that he takes the seat of the captain again. This is the definition of Delay.
Under Delay we have Support, which seems to be Kirks problem. Everyone is trying to assist the old man or coax me into a direction they want me to go. He reacts with Oppose—'Just leave me the F alone. My life is over.’ What he really needs to do Pursue what he wants but he seems to be having trouble doing that. The Answer is for him to STOP avoiding.
I would say Kirk is so wrapped up in the Overall Story that he does this without realizing it and not until Spock’s death does it all sink in for him in signpost 4 where he reunites with his past and his fate and destiny bring him back to his feeling of Youth.
[quote=“Jerome, post:126, topic:46”]
OS: Activity > Obtaining > Self-Interest > Pursuit: The super humans seek to break free from their exile. Their leader seeks revenge for the death of his wife by killing the man who cast them in exile in the first place. The scientists seek to create habitable worlds for the federation. The crew of the enterprise seeks to maintain power and perceives anyone who upsets that balance (symptom of control anyone?) as a threat that must be dealt with.
[/quote] So then issues arise with too much self interest. causing problems for everyone. There seems to be a problem of Control. Who will control Genesis. Who is in control of this situation. The Protagonist response with Uncontrolled rage (or so he wants the Genetically enhanced leader to think) The Federation relinquishes control to the enemy. But the real problem is Pursuit. "It ain’t the snakebite that kills you it’s chasing the darned snake that bit ya that’ll bring you down.” Antagonist and Protagonist are both hell bent on getting the other. Moby Dick. So how is the solution Avoidance? Is it the Enterprise that goes into the nebula and allows the Reliant to come to them? It is fuzzy to me now, sorry. But if that is the case I guess that could work for avoid. Plus Spock fixes the Enterprise so they can hightail it outta there and truly avoid death.
I guess in my arguments for Openness and Approach above I used the elements but when it comes down to choosing symptoms and responses, problems and solutions those elements don’t ring true. I know I was all over the place but that has been my process. It wasn’t till I saw the problems and solutions of Pursuit and Avoid that I thought Self-Interest and Delay really works best for OS and MS.
I am not sure how to improve my process. I can argue any through line sometimes and then make an argument for each issue but then actually choosing the problems and solutions might be the breaking point.
I didn’t even consider Commitment for the Relationship Story but it is the essence of steadfast and that is what their friendship is. Steadfast. I wouldn’t say this is a problem for them. Can the issue be …_-light bulb!!! in a Steadfast relationship could it be the Problem (or issue) in this case could it be what drives them rather than pushes them apart?
I have trouble with this, too. MC Issue of Openness? 
I find it funny that we’re looking at my original choices again. I had nearly abandoned Delay as the MC Issue because Preconception seemed so compelling.
You just have to remember that it all works together as a cohesive whole – holistic in nature. It’s a balancing act where you have to be prepared to argue the different perspectives almost at once. I think we have a winner correct?
Did we have an argument for Kirk changing from Pursuit to Avoidance? In the OS, it’s clear…in Kirk…??
This is a negative arguement but does it work?
Did we have an argument for Kirk changing from Pursuit to Avoidance? In the OS, it’s clear…in Kirk…??
In Kirk it’s very clear, I think. Kirk races down to the engine room, bolts for his friend to save him when McKoy and Scotty hold him back, “He’s dead already.”
Kirk stays behind the glass and, brace yourself for the best scene in film history, watches as his friend dies.
Also, what do you say about the RS through line? Is the Issue of Commitment a problem for the relationship or a driver in a sense. What are your thoughts on the RS through line? Have you written any articles on it?
Before we wind this thread down, I’d recommend we complete the analysis of the film, going through all of the appreciations to help us develop a better understanding of the theory. Do others agree?
EDIT: My reasoning is Dramatica includes a lot of analyses of various stories, but for the most part, there’s no illustration behind each term to explain WHY each and every term was chosen. Wrath of Khan, I suspect, is a story we could break down point by point and find a clear illustrations for each appreciation.
What? you didn’t buy my argument for Openness? “Kirk has trouble with entertaining new ideas? It could happen (in another story form) but it could happen.
No, I was commenting on our own “stories” in which we are the MCs.
I think Avoidance in the OS boils down to the final strategy Kirk uses to stop Khan. Instead of chasing Khan in the nebula, he lowers the ship, Avoiding Khan, until he has a clear shot as Khan passes by unaware. He also must Avoid the big boom at the end.
In the software, Avoidance is described as “stepping around” or “escaping from a problem” and those definitions seem to fit.
Does this pass muster?
No, Spock hands him the keys. Spock is the acting Captain of the Enterprise and gives Kirk command of, technically, his own starship because that’s the way things were before, which to me clearly expresses Commitment, “commitment forms the essence of the steadfast character. When a character makes a commitment, it is a decision not to quit regardless of the obstacles that may come.”
It works for me. They’re trying to avoid having their matrix reprogramed by the genesis device.