Throughline presentation in a single POV narrative

questions
#21

A couple of things. I don’t necessarily think that the PSR is too detailed, but you may be attacking it at the wrong time. Have you pegged where you think the major drivers are? Do you know which act you are in at each time? If you move forward without setting these anchor points, you may find that you move too quickly through the PSR. If you do that, what you will find is that you will cram scenes into places they don’t belong. It’s unsatisfying. That’s my experience anyway.

Second, the PSR is what the story feels like from the “inside” – how it is subjectively felt by characters in each domain. I think that level of understanding will require several readings of the book.

I would focus on the bigger points, at first anyway. Know the answers inside and out for the major dramatica questions. Then, my advice, would be to really get a good understanding of which moments are related to the Symptom/Response, Problem/Solution. Then the Issues. Then maybe the catalyst and inhibitor. Really get an understanding of where the IC exerts their influence on the MC.

These things are probably going to be your bread and butter for writing.

At this point, I would ask yourself if you have enough tools. If not, I’d look at the PSR. The PSR is really for intuitive writers, which – almost solely by looking at how you are approaching this – I am going to guess you are not. I’m not either. It’s neither here nor there. It’s just something that is, like being left or right handed.

#22

Mwakkaeger: These are good questions.

This is a fourth draft work. So I’ve got about 70,000 words already written. Also a full outline from previous drafts. I know what the inciting incident is, and the first and second act major turns. I like that those questions in the PSR focus on underlying motivation. But I must admit that juggling dependent plot points, character motivation, and the relationship throughline in a consistent way is difficult. I’ve really been slogging through this slowly. OTOH: I do think the effort is worthwhile.

Even if it ultimately turns out I throw away some of this work. I do want to give the process a fair shake. And I think there may be real benefit to follow through. I’ll come back to this thread in a bit with an update once I’ve finished this leg of the process and report.

Thanks for your help

#23

I’m glad you think the questions were good. They were actually aimed at your analysis of Jane Eyer, so I’m glad they overlap with what you are actually doing with them!

I’m not sure this is totally correct. I don’t think they have to do with motivation per se. Your character’s motivation is already driving them through the story. I think this is more like… what is that motivation putting them through?

#24

I don’t think they have to do with motivation per se.

Fair enough. Could you give an example? Say a single scene item from any random PSR. Just to give me an idea of what you mean. Here’s what I’ve got for one card. This is from the relationship throughline for Signpost 2. In this case, the task is to define: Changing one’s nature as it relates to:

Thought: Suzanne thinks Derek is stuck whereas she’s more versatile. Derek thinks she’s just being flighty.
Ability: Is Suzanne, Derek and the gang suited to investigating this crime? Derek thinks not. Suzanne can’t imagine being unsuited to anything she chooses to pursue.
Desire: Suzanne feels empty in her relationship with Derek. Derek wants Suzanne to be truly happy in her REAL goals and life.
Knowledge: Derek knows people ‘are good’. Suzanne knows perceived ‘self-interest’ in the moment.

Suzanne is the Main Character while Derek is the Influence Character.

Now I’m not sure this is the right way to go about this. But I do know it took me some time to think through and take notes along these lines. And even if I’m doing it wrong, I think this process has been helpful.

#25

I actually think your notes look pretty good

I almost never use the PSR, so I can’t do anything more than direct you to the Wrath of Khan thread where I believe they went through the entire movie.

#26

MWallaeger: Thanks much.

#27

From my experience, if you’re doing this all in one scene it’s helpful to use the “and, but, therefore” mantra to help establish some flow. I liked using the PSR for the one script I wrote and found the Z pattern most useful because the diagonal elements is where conflict is naturally occurring - therefore the perfect place for the “but” when creating your scene.

If you’re speaking of motivation for this scene, it really comes prior. Something has to propel them to this particular point, but what you have written tell me how they differ in each “beat,” using beat as a dramatic measure for each element. In other words, it’s fine to have their differences down, but it ultimately they need to be dramatized and put into conflict. What’s the goal of the scene? That goal is what’s going to drive the structure of that particular scene.

For example, say they want to cross a dangerous canyon. Suzanne thinks (THOUGHT) she can’t make it across by herself (ABILITY). Derek believes she can, but rather that her fear of failing is what’s keeping her from even attempting to go after the things she wants (DESIRE) and illustrates via anecdote how that pattern of negative thinking is what got them into this mess. Realizing this to be true (KNOWLEDGE), Suzanne is able to make the attempt across and succeeds by focusing on what she wants instead of what she doesn’t want to happen and changes her nature in the process via Derek’s influence.

The idea here is the scene starts out with a negative value and the conflict sends it onto a positive value resulting in change while moving toward the goal of the scene. You could also build each element out to be a scene of its own (scene being a different setting/time) so that it becomes more of a true sequence - here everything is pretty squished together just to make a quick example. Nevertheless, the key really does come down to causation.

If you haven’t read Armando Saldaña-Mora’s Dramatica for Screenwriters, I’d highly recommend it as he goes into detail of how best to use the PSR.

#28

Love that. Trey Parker gave a wonderful lecture to Columbia University film students where he and Matt Stone outlined that approach to beat design in scenes. Look up “Every Frame a Painting” on Youtube too. There’s a video essay on Orson Welles’ F for Fake that picks apart his classic film essay using ABT and statements by John Sturges on parallel plotting to manage pacing and build and release tension.

#29

Here are the two:

And

“If you’ve written ‘and then this happens, and then this happens, and then this happens…’ you’ve written shit.”

#30

JBarker:

I’d also like to point out that the beat interaction and value assessment methods you propose seems to come straight from Robert McKee’s Story. A book I absolutely love. So, I want to agree in general with you there too. However, the task for answering these PSM questions is different from per scene beat breakdown and analysis to tighten up dramatic potential in a scene.

What you’re missing is context on the details of the story. Which I intentionally didn’t reveal. So the proposal you make using the snippet I did provide doesn’t really work in the circumstance of this story. Even though - in general - it’s absolutely right. And I agree completely.

Once I have text copyrighted I’ll open up much more about these development details - the corkboard in particular - if anyone actually cares. But I really like this story idea. It has a concept I think will be commercially viable to a particular ‘known book buyer’ audience segment. So I’ll hold my cards tight for the moment.

#31

Yes, that’s what makes helping out difficult sometimes - the scene in and of itself lacks context in the bigger picture. We don’t know what lead to that point and we don’t know where you’re going, and it very well could work better if some of your other throughlines are weaved in between. It’s kind of like having a recipe without the directions; you have a bunch of ingredients, but need to find the order they go in to finish with something that satisfies the audience and keeps them turning the pages.

And yes, I blended the whole +/- thing from McKee because it just seemed naturally. The “and/but” as well, which was also explored in the book Connection: Hollywood Storytelling Meets Critical Thinking. They’re all techniques that work very well with one another.

1 Like
#32

Hey, is there anything in this book beyond ABT? Is it worth reading?

#33

It was ok, but hard to recommend to anyone who has been writing for a while. A portion was spent on WSP method: summarizing an idea with a word, then expanding it into a sentence then a paragraph. Some discussion of vertical attributes of storytelling, such as head/heart/gut/sex organ. Also taking information and transforming it into a narrative.

The second part of the book focuses on writing loglines and gives you a formula. While it was an interesting approach, I don’t consider the end-results “loglines” because they’re way too wordy.

The last part was mostly on improv, which was probably the least useful section.

The best book I’ve read over the last few years on writing would probably be Lisa Cron’s Wired For Story: The Writer’s Guide to Using Brain Science To Hook Reader’s From the Very First Sentence. There is some stuff in there that feels very Dramatica-like.

#34

I really blew off these kinds of approaches for a long time. Now that I have a solid foundation in Dramatica, I’m finding them more productive. They no longer lead me astray, because I can fence them in.