Thematic encoding and 7-act structure

writing
#1

Okay, so the idea is that we want to put two of the six pairs in the quad that contains a Domain’s Issue into each dynamic act. Great—I’m good with that.

My question is about the dynamic pair of Issue v. Counterpoint and the other dynamic pair in the quad.

Say the OS throughline’s Issue is Analysis. We know that at the end we want to compare Strategy and Analysis directly and show at last how they measure up given the values of this story. That means that up to this point we have to put the following five thematic pairs into the three dynamic acts:

Analysis-Preconditions
Analysis-Prerequisites
Strategy-Preconditions
Strategy-Prerequisites
Preconditions-Prerequisites

But then here’s my question: do we encode the Analysis-Strategy comparison in one of the Journeys and then encode it again in the last Signpost? Or are we seeing the Journeys and Signposts as more overlapping/organic, and the encoding of Strategy v. Analysis in the last Signpost IS the encoding in the last Journey?

I feel like there’s a much simpler way to ask that question but my MO these days seems to be making things much more complicated than they need to be.

#2

Considering that Issue v Counterpoint is exactly the strategy that you can use to give your audience a clear analysis of how you view analysis vs strategy it’s a prerequisite that you draft out various strategies to encode this precondition into your story. Strategically, analysis of this precondition has the prerequisite of studying analysis and strategy in other stories.

Does that help?

#3

Analytically, I get where you’re coming from, at least as far as the strategy of prerequirements you lay out, but I think you may have a few preconceptions getting in the way of your take on the issue. Nevertheless, it’s a valuable counterpoint.

1 Like
#4

I think @MWollaeger was being funny (as he tends to be) in regards to you making things more complicated then they have to be. The tendency with Dramatica is follow every single rule and to make sure every single box is checked, you can always leave something out or double-up on something and not have any problem. It’s the overall message the audience gets that is important.

#5

Yes, @jhull has nailed in on the head. But I actually have something more useful to say I realized, so I’ll do it without being a comedian. :wink:

I think Dramatica appeals to analytical thinkers, and (given that it breaks down into elements, and is a computer program) it tends to be easiest to learn when approached analytically.

Theme (as Issue) however, tends to be something more etherial. It’s more about how this weighs against that, and while it can be “this scene is an example of analysis” and “this scene is an example of preconditions” – it generally isn’t. (Which is why the StoryGuide asks you to list how they conflict.)

I tend to think of theme as being something much more holistic. It’s weights and balances, and most events can’t be looked at through the lens of the Issue and the Counterpoint at the same time making the specific meaning one any one thing difficult to determine.

Add to this that most of the examples of how Dramatica works are created by filling in the storyform and breaking things into their constituent parts. This means we have a paucity of holistic examples to look at and study and understand. Ultimately, it’s a bit of a vicious cycle that reinforces analytical thinking and leaves holistic approaches to the side.

This is unfortunate, but understandable. As more people get fluent with the analytical side of things, more people will be available to start looking at things at the thematic level.

In addition, it’s hard to generate compelling dramatic scenes out of theme. But it naturally emerges when focusing on Problems & Symptoms & Responses – which makes them the smart go-to when generating material.

4 Likes