Throughlines | Perspective | Not Character

[MWollaeger]

@chuntley

I have a collection of different ideas for a story that may or may not be connected.

I have an idea for a man, BOB, who has personal issues with troubles in his career.
I have an idea for the difficulties a father has in his relationship with his son.
I have an idea for a young man, ERIK, who’s having difficulties leaving home.
I have an idea about an unstable political system that threatens to tank the economy.

This might be an interesting way to start the story building in December.

[museful]

I was referring to conflict when I said “it”. In Jim’s articles, I think he basically says there is no conflict within the RST. So, my example wouldn’t be in the RST:

@museful

“I’m your boss first and your friend second.”

But, maybe, it could be a consequence of the RST?

In regard to currency, it could probably be used to define a relationship.

Also, I was thinking about the RST being subject to the circumstances of the OST. Relationships are often a product of our environment. For example: Speed.

Anyway, I think the takeaway is that the RST should add something that cannot be supplied by the three other througlines.

[didomachiatto]

@chuntley

The objective perspective
The subjective perspective
The personal perspective
The impersonal perspective

I find this the most helpful explanation of the throughlines. I/You/They/We has always been a brain-twister. But this is clear. Thank you.

[jhull]

@museful

In Jim’s articles, I think he basically says there is no conflict within the RST.

This was brought up in the Writers Room in Subtext today…

There IS conflict within the Relationship Story Throughline. It’s less Problem and Solution, and more Inequity and Equity, and that’s likely where the misinterpretation of a lack of conflict comes from.

Inequity and Equity is not equivalent to no conflict – it’s simply a recognition of the imbalance, rather than an assignation of “problem” to what is the same exact thing (inequity).

The imbalance exists regardless of Inequity or Problem.

Hope that clears things up!

[didomachiatto]

@jhull

Inequity and Equity is not equivalent to no conflict – it’s simply a recognition of the imbalance

This sounds like a definite holistic element within an otherwise holistic/linear story. Finding balance of that thing they differ over.

But…it’s hard for me to distinguish what makes this RS imbalance different from the IC/MC crucial element difference-of-opinion. Especially if the RS is between the IC & MC.

[jhull]

The RS isn’t between the IC & MC.

The Relationship Story Throughline is about a relationship.

Sometimes (most times) this refers to the relationship between the characters supporting the Main Character & Influence Character points-of-view. Other times it can be an entirely different relationship.

The Relationship Story Throughline is not an argument - it is the inequity of a relationship.

The “argument” between the MC and IC is found in the competing points-of-view (Main Character Domain and Influence Character Domain). And even then, they’re not always arguing about it with one another.