Storytelling solutions for novel writers: character backstory vs character past

[Khodu]

Hi everyone.
Been doing a tonne of studying and have found something that works for me when developing characters. In keeping with developing a further understanding of Dramatica, I wish to share this as one of the my many contributions going forward.

Although the concept isn’t groundbreaking , its clarified things for me. What is it, you ask?

It’s the differentiation between a characters backstory and their past. Not THE PAST in a Type level appreciation kind of way. This is a more subjective view from a storytelling perspective.

A characters past is everything you’d use in standard character development. Their care’s , family history , hopes, and so on. Digging into it will give you a wide spectrum of color to paint your characters into memorable entities. This should be used in from the Class level to the Issue level in the Throughlines. These elements can yield those kinds of story material. Personally I use it strictly in MC , IC and RS throughlines. Never in the OS. Just to give it a different feel.

And suddenly, a comet strikes the peaceful ground( the characters past)!! A convulsive series of violent waves terraforms the landscape, scaring it forever. The land isn’t the characters Past anymore. It is now Backstory.

Backstory is birthed the instant the inequity is introduced into the characters life. From then on justifications pile up as they navigate their way away from the troubled landscape toward the beginning of your story. For change characters, they have their justifications torn down. For steadfast characters, they have them reinforced.

From my study, backstory is usually tied to Plot. This can be illustrated from the Problem level all the way down in your storyform (although officially Plot starts from the type level…hehe). Backstory really ties us to the underpinnings of the character’s woes.

So when encoding storypoints, we could use this thinking in creating some of the more interesting portions of our characters’ lives.

Cheers.

[Greg]

Backstory-someone killed Andy Dufresne’s wife and Andy went to prison for it.

Past-Andy is a rock hound. At least, he was in his old life.

[Khodu]

Precisely @Greg. So in the story, we can show bits and pieces of his skillset as a rock hound. Maybe show a set of drums and have him play with excellent skill, thus wowing the other prisoners. Adds a nice layer of character.

Backstory: He went into a mad rage and killed the guy who killed his wife. And true to his rockband roots, he skewered the guys corpse with his steel guitar.

Your reader will get a fuller experience of your character. Where he is coming from, how it all changed and where he’s at ,presently.

[jhull]

@Khodu

Backstory is birthed the instant the inequity is introduced into the characters life. From then on justifications pile up as they navigate their way away from the troubled landscape toward the beginning of your story. For change characters, they have their justifications torn down. For steadfast characters, they have them reinforced.

When thinking of story in terms of Dramatica, it can be helpful to remember that characters are not real people—they’re aspects of a single human mind processing a single problem.

With this in mind, Backstory is an analogy for the justification process. In other words, Backstory explains why a Main Character Problem is a Problem.

I find it helpful to think of the justification process of Backstory as the “opposite” to the Main Character Resolve for the narrative in question.

For instance, if this is a Changed Character then the Backstory would explore the Steadfast narrative that led to the justification now seen as a Problem. Same with Steadfast Characters—Backstory is seen as the “Changed” story before.

In truth, narratives are a constant wave of Changed to Steadfast to Changed to Steadfast and so on for all eternity—for a SINGLE MIND. A narrative—or story—is simply an arbitrary moment in time when the Author sets out to determine beginning and end for that one mind’s consideration.

[Khodu]

Well said @jhull. Thanks for the deeper insight/ integration of my findings with Dramatica. Although I was coming from a storytelling approach, your insight is invaluable. Funny thing is I was on Melanie’s site just now and saw something similar to what you’ve stated here. I’m glad. Thanks Jim.

[dbareford]

@jhull

In truth, narratives are a constant wave of Changed to Steadfast to Changed to Steadfast and so on for all eternity—for a SINGLE MIND. A narrative—or story—is simply an arbitrary moment in time when the Author sets out to determine beginning and end for that one mind’s consideration

Jim –

That’s a fantastic way of looking at things, and I think is really useful for ongoing characters in serial novels or episodes. Their resolve can change between narrative arcs, but still allow their basic natures to stay recognizable to readers/audiences.

[Lakis]

@dbareford

Their resolve can change between narrative arcs, but still allow their basic natures to stay recognizable to readers/audiences.

I had an epiphany about this listening to the Dramatica user’s group analysis of The Bourne Identity when Chris pointed out that the moment in Jason Bourne’s backstory when he was about to assassinate Wombosi but didn’t was a change character moment from a previous story – after that (for the narrative of the movie) Bourne was Steadfast.