Theme classes, types, variations, elements

theory
#22

I’ve done them, and this frankly hasn’t been my experience. I’ve found every way to incorrectly use a term. I mean, Gists help a lot, but if you can’t write your own gist for the element correctly then how is that better than being overly prescriptive in the defining?

I tend mostly to stare at my storyform paralyzed by uncertainty about how to use the elements, what they impact, how they’re related, what the terms mean in their context. I go back and forth and debate with myself… “Well if I use it this way am I really exploring a different element entirely? If I use it this way it will be cliche but will technically work… I think? If I use it this way does it serve my argument?” and I write and rewrite the gist, then sometimes and illustration, then I scrap the illustration and the gist and go back to the base term.

This reliance on faith that if you just have the right storyform you can’t do it wrong doesn’t feel helpful. I have done it wrong. A lot. I feel most questions I ask result only in defeating my current understanding without offering an obvious path to forming a better one. It seems as if people keep pushing me to think more like an artist and less like a rationalist, and that isn’t going to work for me at this step. It’s WHY I’m embracing a theory that’s so heavily structural. I’m building a machine of narrative elements. I need to understand the way the parts function together to have faith in it.

How does going in order from top to bottom help? This isn’t a challenge veiled as a question but a genuine question. I jump around a lot.

#23

Thanks for the honest response, Sean.

What I meant was that if you understand what the Main Character Throughline is (a first-person perspective or worldview on personal issues)… and you can see and write down how the source of the Main Character’s issues is Activity (Physics), Obtaining, and Self Interest … then when it comes time for you to illustrate the Main Character’s Problem of Pursuit, you’ll be fine – you won’t have to worry about the ‘flavor’ of Pursuit.

If you get the ‘flavor’ of Pursuit wrong, it won’t be because you got Pursuit wrong, but because you got Activity wrong. That’s the reason it helps to go from top to bottom – as you zoom in on the various levels of conflict, you align yourself to what’s really driving things.

Does that make sense?

Regarding uncertainty about how to use elements, etc., remember that there are a LOT of “right” ways to use all the different elements – there’s a lot of overlap. If you think you’re exploring a particular element, and you like that part of the story – then great, you almost certainly are exploring that element. Even if you were wrong, the whole point is to tell a good story so if it still works, just go with it.

Also, on this:

If the storyform isn’t helping, put it aside and just write (or plan your story if you aren’t ready to write just yet). It may be that the storyform isn’t the right one, and the only way to get to the right one is to tease more story out of your right brain (aka Muse).

When I say put it aside though, you don’t have to put everything aside. If you’re certain your IC is in Situation, for example, then you can definitely keep that in the back of your head. That way when you suddenly realize the IC was part of a human cloning experiment you can nod your head and say, “good idea, that fits”.

4 Likes
#24

Really great response, thank you!

1 Like
#25

I’m a newbie and have been through the panic. May I recommend “Dramatica for Screenwriters” book? It’s given me a very effective method and explanation of the option in the Story Guide. At a certain point, it’s also been my experience that you just shove the panic aside, focus on “one item a time” (which feels odd and unnatural for a writer but produces results) and trudge through the QnA. We learn by doing, to quote Star Trek II. (Kirk’s response to humor: it is a difficult concept).

But I completely identify with what I would call “annoyed bafflement.” I’m a very intelligent fellow. It’s part of my identity. I like FEELING smart as well as being smart and, well, Dramatica took some of the wind out of my sails. Eventually, I promise, it lets you feel smart again :slight_smile:

1 Like
#26

Has there been any attempt with AI to rename the elements to come up with 256 unique labels? I know it’s not a necessary endeavor, but sounds like a fun exercise nonetheless.
Here’s a conversation I had with the free version of ChatGPT earlier…i looked at some other elements as well, but many of them, particularly Pursuit, were not especially compelling:

Nonacceptance appears under Permission, Attraction, Preconditions, and Reappraisal. Can you describe the difference in each of those and rename them to better fit each context while maintaining their definitions?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Certainly! In Dramatica theory, NonAcceptance appears across different contexts, each with a slightly different nuance. Here’s a breakdown of how NonAcceptance functions in each context and how it might be renamed to better fit its role:

  1. Permission: In the context of Permission, NonAcceptance represents restrictions or obstacles that prevent a character from acting freely. This could be due to rules, societal expectations, or personal limitations that inhibit their ability to pursue their goals.
    Renamed Context: Obstruction – This term emphasizes the barriers or limitations imposed on a character’s actions or decisions.

  2. Attraction: Within Attraction, NonAcceptance involves the rejection or denial of a character’s desires or interests. This might manifest as the unavailability of something they want or an inability to connect with it.
    Renamed Context: Rejection – This term captures the essence of being turned away or not having one’s desires or attractions fulfilled.

  3. Preconditions: For Preconditions, NonAcceptance refers to the failure to meet required conditions or criteria necessary for certain outcomes. This involves not fulfilling the necessary prerequisites for a situation or action.
    Renamed Context: Ineligibility – This term highlights the state of not meeting the required conditions or criteria needed for success.

  4. Reappraisal: In Reappraisal, NonAcceptance signifies the process of reassessing or re-evaluating something that was previously accepted but is now questioned or found unacceptable.
    Renamed Context: Reevaluation – This term conveys the idea of reassessing or questioning something that was once considered acceptable or valid.

Each renamed term focuses on the specific role NonAcceptance plays within its respective context, clarifying how it affects the narrative or character development.

You said:

can you try again with 4? There is already another dramatica term called “Reevaluaton”

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Certainly! Let’s refine the terminology for NonAcceptance in the context of Reappraisal, avoiding overlap with existing Dramatica terms:

Reappraisal: In this context, NonAcceptance involves reconsidering or rejecting an earlier evaluation or belief. It reflects a change in perspective or the re-evaluation of something that was once accepted or believed to be valid.

Renamed Context: Disillusionment – This term conveys the idea of a shift from a previously held belief or acceptance to a state of doubt or reconsideration.

#27

That’s a super cool idea! I’m not sure if anyone has tried it, but you’re basically making your own set of “gists” which is a great idea–especially if they help you understand those forces better.

I’d still want to keep track of the original terms as there is some meaning to the idea that they are found/repeated in separate Throughlines; the idea that we’re looking at the same thing just from a different point-of-view.

But I would say, if it works for you - go for it!

1 Like