The more i try, the more i get stuck

#1

Hi All enlightened ones,
I am writing a love story based on love legend of a Hindu god. An elder girl who is engaged to be married always loved this young boy who lived in the neighborhood. But she never expressed it to him. They both get a chance to partcipate in a concert. Where they sleep together. Their relationships change forever, since the neighbourhood lived like one extended family. They decide to elope, but before that the boy gets a chance to be in a band. He leaves the girl and goes. she gets married and goes too. He becomes a rockstar , unfortunately he meets with an accident and is unable to communicate anylonger. He always knew that only the girl will accept him. he returns to her and she nurses him back to glory, in the process losing her familyforever. The boy is healed. He yet again chooses art over love.

I just want to understand how dramatica can be used here
boy= mc, protagonist
stroke= antagonist
girl= ic
relationship story= unfulfilled love story
I am really stuck in the throughline appreciations.

also, isn’t MC’s story = OS story. because the story is about the boy and his journey.
so OS story spills in the mc story and viceversa.

Please guide me !

Thanks

Knight

#2

Hey, welcome to the site! Let’s see how much we can clarify for you.

I think what you need to do before you can go much further is determine what the Goal of your story is. This is something all of your characters are concerned about. One way or another, they all want to see some sort of resolution towards it. Step away from the personal mindsets of the characters and look at what’s at stake here. The relationship between the two characters is just a small slice of it. For example, let’s say your Goal is, “Become recognized as a great rock star.” Then we can see where the lines are drawn: the boy is the Protagonist, the snooty townspeople are the Antagonists, and the girl is a Contagonist, perhaps.

The difference between the MC story and the OS story is this. Remember how I said to step back and look at the story as a whole? Now we’re going to jump into the Main Character’s mind and see what his personal struggle is. In this viewpoint, we don’t care at all about what the other characters are thinking or what they’re trying to do. We just care about the Main Character thinks or does. Say for example I want to write a story about a character who’s trying to complete an important assignment, but keeps getting distracted by their own neuroses. The OS part is the completing the assignment part (it doesn’t care about the neuroses); the MC part is the neuroses part (it doesn’t care about completing the assignment). (This split is much more obvious when the Main Character isn’t also the Protagonist.) Again, this is much easier to do when you’ve firmly established the Goals of these two Throughlines.

I hope that’s not too dense for you. Do you feel like you understand what I’m getting at?

#3

The “stroke” that you refer to as an Antagonist – that really describes the Main Character Throughline and the kind of personal conflict he goes through. An affliction doesn’t work as an Antagonist in the Dramatica sense. In Dramatica the Antagonist purposefully prevents the Protagonist from achieving the Story Goal while also trying to get him to reconsider trying to solve things at all.

#4

Hey many Thanks@ACtingpower and jhull
what I understood is that occurences comes in the OS story and the thought process comes in the MS story.
But here is another confusion. Say for example there is an event in the OS of which the main character/ protagonist is the part. He has to feel, act and react in that given incident. And then again when i go to his personal throughline I mean MC throughline. He is going to again act, react, feel. So won’t it be just the extension of the feelings of the OS event. so then why need the MC throughline at all. At the end of it all, the MC throughlines will also be storyformed into events.
My story is about the boy, who choses art over love , even though when he is down and out , the love of his life salvages him . In the interim many sociatal dynamics change. Now in the OS story, its the boy who is acting , reacting and being in the event. In his MC and Relationship story. Again he will be doing the same things because, all his events are generated because of his main story. I am really getting frustrated not being able to crack the throughlines .
Acoording to me,
OS= the boy has to chose between love or art
MC= the boy has to chose between love and art( as you said ’ neuroses’ involved.
IC = story of the girl who loves the boy to death and is ready to sacrifice everything for him.
RS= love story of the girl boy.

now MC= will have the love story and the rockstar issues.
IC= will have love story and rockstar issue
RS= will have the same thing.

Because eventually all the throughlines will be put into scenes, events.

I know i am asking too many questions. I really feel embarrassed and am self- doubting myself. Will my story ever come out to be whole. People kindly guide.

Thanks,

K

#5

Yes, Knight, “eventually all the throughlines will be put into scenes” where they overlap and intermingle with elements of the other throughlines — just like cooks using recipes that mention flour, sugar, eggs and milk solids have overlapped and intermingled these ingredients into many a great cake.

Using that analogy, the benefit of Dramatica theory is that it helps you make sure you’ve got enough of each ingredient so the eventual cake tastes just the way you want, and that it will hold up under the examinations of many other cake eaters (or story viewers, in our case).

For example, by forcing you to look at the MC throughline as distinct from the OS throughline (though they will ultimately intermingle), Dramatica theory helps you show the audience the Main Character’s personal perspective as distinct from the Overall Story’s detached-and-objective perspective.

This gives your audience that delightful experience of seeing the same event/s from two different perspectives! And of course Dramatica will help you also give your delighted audience the distinct perspectives from inside the Impact Character’s head, and the shared perspective of the MC and IC in relationship, as they work through their varying interpretations of these same events.

Your audience will get a delicious “cake,” where they can sense the nuances of the multiple ingredients, but also enjoy how they co-mingle into a scrumptious combination with a satisfying end.

Study some of the Comprehensive Analyses on the Dramatica.com website — http://dramatica.com/analysis/comprehensive. These in-depth write-ups will help you start seeing how the four throughlines should be distinct, yet also how the story-writers cleverly overlapped them.

In many cases, the Comprehensive Analysis consists of a podcast or videocast of a Dramatica Users Group, discussing a movie they have just watched. You can see the list of the recent videocasts here: http://dramatica.com/video/users-group.

So pick one of those movies, and watch it. And as you watch, keep the four throughlines — OS, MC, IC and RS — in mind. Your “taste” for the four will quickly become enhanced as you watch how they are distinct yet still intermingle.

Finally, go to the videocast for the movie you just watched, and you will be able to watch and hear as a group of Dramatica users (led by a Dramatica expert) reach a conclusion of how that story set up its four distinct throughlines, but also wove them together into “a scrumptious combination with a satisfying end.”

#6

Hey many thanks Keypayton,
I think i am getting to understand a bit of what you are saying. But what I am confused is, when we are exploring the events in the OS throughline, does that mean that it will be robotic?. I mean just happenings like how machines work. But then there will be live people participating in those events who will act react etc. or did you mean to say, that only the MC 's approach will be dispassionate and others archetypes/ complex characters will express themselves in the OS situations events and then the MC will take his own time to analyse and react.
If you please can clarify …
OS = situation / conflicting situations
Signpost-1 = the future = characters feel that abandoning the past is the best way to go to future. Past act as shackles. MC believes, past is the base for future. so they quarrel over it.
MC= manipulation/ problematic ways of thinking
Signpost-1 =playing a role = main character feels outnumbered and so to keep the community members happy, he pretends to have abandoned his thoughts but in reality he is pursuing past to decode future.
IC= activity= challenging activities
Signpost-1= understanding = the ic is showing others about the importance of some stuff from past but does not want to be a stickler to it. He also wants to encourage MC to come out and experiment.
M/I= fixed attitude= troublesome fixed ideas
Signpost= innermost desire = MC does want but thinks that if he comes out with his principals he will be shunned out from th ecommunity. So he pretends to be following others much to the frustration of the IC.

Now my problem is,
OS=1
characters will quarrel about their thoughts and stick to it or probably get into conflict by doing something ( but if they do, aren’t they in the activity domain)

MC = playing a role. So he will pretend to be like them by following what everybody is doing. But won’t he be all the time inside his head reasoning and talking to himself, because he is in the manipulation domain. And if he does something, won’t be again some sort of activity.
IC= Activity = so the IC is organizing events showing the importance of some aspect of past. That’s perfect. Again the characters here who are OS will have to react . will their reaction fall in the situation category and how will that happen? will they put themselves in some kind of situation ?
MI= inner most desire.
both MC AND IC will fight to be true to their innermost desire. But then again fighting will be an activity.

I know i have got it all wrong. I have been getting it all wrong since last 6 months. I have abandoned so many stories becasue of this frustration.
none of the characters behave according to their domains/ throughlines. Or probably i am doing it all wrong.
I think i am slow, I even studied the dramatica for screenwriters and even had the book hand hold me to creating my story. But while forming the story, it is all over the place. disjointed, similar and with no soul.

I will appreciate help from all you dramatica experts, who have been using it to create well rounded stories. I am very keen to learn and that is why i have kept on trying it for many months now…

thanks,
K

#7

Dear Knight:

Have you tried doing the watch-a-movie-then-watch-a-Users-Group-videocast thing?

Most have found that this process greatly helped them apply the Dramatica theory correctly; they could see and hear how successful productions align with the theory, then use that learning to apply the theory better to their own stories.

So if you haven’t yet done the watch-a-movie-then-watch-a-Users-Group-videocast thing, start there. And again, study some of the Comprehensive Analyses, whether on the Dramatica.com website or in in the software! (Do you have the software?)

If you already have done all the above, and still struggle so much with the theory, then I don’t know if I can help you.

#8

Dear Keypayton,
I haven’t done the watch-a- movie- then - watch a- user-group videocast thing. But am definitely going to do that. Hope this helps. Thank you !

K

#9

Sounds good, Knight. Of the movies on the Comprehensive Analysis list, I’d say do the watch-and-then-watch thing with at least a couple of them that you like, so you can see how well Dramatica theory works with your kind of sensibilities.

We look forward to hearing more from you…

#10

Thanks Keypayton. will surely share my experience and achievements with you all.
Must congratulate you all ," you guys rock!!" :smile: