Not sure if this question makes sense or not, but I’m in the middle of outlining a story about a detective who peels back clues in search of a killer.
In the storyform, the overall story catalyst is “sense of self” and the inhibitor “suspicion.” At first glance, it would seem like the opposite is better suited for the story – it’s his suspicion that drives him to pursue the man who is the actual killer, but the detective’s dire financial situation (sense of self) is what prevents him from succeeding.
I’m wondering, if the story ends in failure, does that mean that the catalyst propels the story toward failure (he fails to catch the killer) and the inhibitor is the element that holds the protagonist back?
The official definition seems to suggest that the catalyst is the element that moves a story toward a “positive outcome,” or at least, that’s how I’m interpreting it.
Catalyst • [Variation] • The item whose presence always pushes the story forward toward the climax • The Catalyst is what creates breakthroughs and seems to accelerate the throughline it is affecting. In both the Objective and Subjective Stories there occur dramatic “log-jams” when things seem to be approaching a halt. This is when the Catalyst is necessary, for its introduction will either solve the puzzle that’s holding things up or else make the puzzle seem suddenly unimportant so the story can continue.