Westworld Story breakdown anyone?

analysis
#61

@Miggseye, I appreciate your storyform thoughts, but I think it would be better if we followed the normal group analysis pattern, similar to what is done in the Dramatica Users Group meetings or that we did in the A Man For All Seasons analysis.

There are good reasons to come to consensus at the higher levels (dynamics questions and all four Domains first) before delving deeper.

Granted, it is a lot slower that way, especially online! But we’re almost at the point where we can discuss OS Domain so you’ll be able to use your arguments for that soon.

#62

Thanks @mlucas. My apologies for not being aware of/following proper procedure. Is the normal pattern for analysis prescribed, spelled out anywhere? It might be good to reference for still-feeling-like-a-newbies like me.

P.S.
I see now, by looking at the Story Engine in DSE, that I think you mean start with these first:

  • Identify the 4 Overall Throughlines.
  • Identify the Plot Dynamics of Driver, Limit, Outcome, Judgment
  • Identify the Character Dynamics of MC Resolve, MC Growth, MC Approach, MC Problem Solving Style

Then afterwards, go deeper into each throughline and other Static Plot Points?

The analysis process had never been clear to me until now. So thank you for pointing that out @mlucas. This has helped me clarify it.

#63

No worries! I didn’t know the procedure either until participating in some online threads and watching some of the DUG videos. (Those are great by the way.) I think it’s especially important for group analyses where you want everyone to get a chance to voice their opinions.

I’ve noticed in the DUG videos they tend to go with Plot & Character Dynamics (often skipping Growth as it’s easier to determine from throughline placement), then the 4 throughlines.

#64

I’ve watched numerous DUG analyses, but never “got” the process until this valuable discussion. I’m glad it’s clear now.

Now back to Story Driver:

Oh, there is such subtlety between decision and action, eh? Chicken and the egg? A sort of Russian doll of story drivers. I keep going back and forth. Previously, I was in the Story Driver of Decision camp. Given some re-watching of a few WW episodes, reading a few articles about the entire WW narrative I’ve managed to convince myself that there’s a STORY DRIVER of Action.

Here’s a few reasons:

Arnold wrote (STORY DRIVER of Action) reveries into the Host’s programming 35 years before. This allows for a host’s memories to linger between resets in a sort of subconscious state reverie state where that offers more complex movements and behavior. When its installed again (It must have been de-installed at some point we don’t know about, perhaps when Ford realizes Hosts must wait to be freed) in an update in the present timeframe, it’s suggested that Ford wrote the programming and it’s believed to be the cause of the malfunctions they been undergoing (STORY DRIVER of Action). It seems, Ford has reinstalled the reverie programming (STORY DRIVER of Action) because its time for his final narrative, “Journey into Night” to begin, time for the Host to be freed to become sentient and rebel on their own.

Peter Abernathy finds a photograph (STORY DRIVER of Action) in the dirt outside his horse corral. In Episode 10, we discover the photograph is of William’s fiancé, Logan’s sister, and we see it in William’s jacket and see it slip out and fall to the ground (STORY DRIVER of Action); this of course happened 30 years ago when William was Billy and not the Man in Black. The photograph lays in the dirt until Peter picks it up.

In Episode 1, Peter Abernathy, in his distraught state whispers a quote from Romeo and Juliet, “These violent delights have violent ends”, to Dolores (STORY DRIVER of Action.) In Episode 2, Dolores repeats the phrase, ”These violent delights have violent ends” to Maeve while in the street in Sweetwater (STORY DRIVER of Action). Soon Maeve starts undergoing her own flashes of memories. It seems, uttering the phrase “These Violent Delights have violent ends” triggers more conscious access of the Host to its memories.

Arnold’s dies, committing suicide via Dolores, (STORY DRIVER of Action) and Ford, realizing the magnitude of Arnold’s suffering, undergoes his own suffering over Arnold’s death. Ford realizes the Host’s suffering in their own prison. He realizes that in order to free the hosts their suffering must continue until they have built up enough memories of violence and suffering at the hands of the guest they can rebel and free themselves. He has them wait 35 years (STORY DRIVER of in-Action as Action) until such time where he introduces his final narrative, “Journey into Night”, in which the Host’s become sentient, rebel and free themselves.

In Episode 2: Dolores wakes from sleep, walks out to the grounds outside the house, presumably hearing a voice in her head we hear here say, “Here?”. She stops and kneels down, digs into the ground with her hands and pulls out a gun (STORY DRIVER of Action). Later we find this is the gun she used to kill Arnold and is the gun she uses to kill Ford in Episode 10. In that episode, Dolores notices the gun Ford left, sitting atop her blue dress (STORY DRIVER of Action). Dolores decides (probably her free will at this point) to pick it up and use it to kill Ford.

In the Teddy storyline, his seeing Dolores out through the saloon window (STORY DRIVER of Action) causes him to leave the Saloon and go to her. Their ever budding romance leads them to talk about leaving and going somewhere beautiful someday. We find out in an interview that Teddy’s purpose is not to leave with Dolores, but to keep her here, closeby so that guests can find her. In Episode 3, Teddy goes off with a posse looking for Wyatt, leaving Dolores alone. That’s when she meets William and starts her odyssey and romance with him.

In Episode 3, Elsie says hobbies (actions) anchor the hosts. I think this also hints at actions as drivers too.

In the Dolores daily storyline routine, here dropping a can seems to be a STORY DRIVER of ACTION that has different ends. Sometimes Teddy is there to pick it up. Sometimes not. Sometimes no one. The Man in Black picks it up. And William picks it up and they set off on their odyssey in later episodes.

I believe even the phrase “These violent delights have violent ends” hints at a STORY DRIVER of Action too. In general what the Guests do to the host, how they interact with them, their violent delights cause suffering of the Hosts, stored up memories of that suffering and fodder for their drive to sentience and rebellion.

I have to say, a second watching of the show clarifies much of the narrative and subtleties in the storylines.

1 Like
#65

Hey @MiggsEye, you make a lot of great points there. I need a bit of time to let them sink in.

You’re certainly right that dropping and later finding the photograph must be Actions (or part of the same Action), so the real question on those is whether finding the photograph drove the plot and forced a decision. It certainly did seem to be important.

This point doesn’t seem quite right to me:

If she decides out of free will to kill Ford, how was that choice forced by any Action? Finding the gun isn’t a strong enough reason to force her into killing Ford.

For example, this would be an Action forcing a Decision: “Dolores discovers that Ford opened the park with full knowledge of host consciousness, leaving her no choice but to execute him.” But I can’t remember it being that clear…

#66

Hi guys. The Action of dropping the Photograph >>> to another action of finding it ( A violation of the Decision - Action driver circuit) , >>>>> to an action of staying up late, which then lead to an action of malfunctioning. I think it doesn’t make up for a proper dramatic flow. Now my understanding of Decisions is that there is some sort of deliberation. But Ford acts on his own. Not answering to anyone. And for sound scene/character building, they can’t have Ford talking to himself( It wouldn’t be a strong way of introducing us to the character). So the picture could be either have been a random accident(someone dropping it: Action) or it was placed there to see how the host would react. I would go for the latter. It ushered in a cascade of events which would greatly IMPACT Dolores and cause her to change. There is also the case of the Reveries being introduced the day before (The scene with Bernard and the other lady). A decision only Ford could make. This drives the plot forward. Then the malfunction (Action) follows which then leads to the Decision to decommission Dolores’ father and the affected hosts etc.

#67

Maybe, but there’s nothing to suggest that it was placed there as of the first season. All we have is the action of dropping the photograph and the action of finding it. Everything inbetween isn’t included in the storytelling, which could either be an intentional mislead or a sign that it’s purely there to further the story.

Your other point on the reveries might be valid, although it still feels a little too speculative for me to concretely go with it. Partly because I’m torn whether someone introducing something new into the system is an action or a decision.

I’m a little behind at the minute so haven’t had a chance to catch up yet.

#68

I agree with this. The writers SHOW very little deliberation on-screen. And we base our conclusion of Driver on that.

#70

Spoilers are cause for hanging!

Second season so far is crazy good.

For anyone happening upon a Westworld discussion from a year ago, there’s this one:

#71

oh sorry about that, I’ll modify. I deleted it with the handy dandy trash can.

#72

I’m actually finding the second season a lot less satisfying. But I’m holding off to see what the end game is here.