The Zen of Story Structure: Action

All stories have both Action and Decision, however one will take precedence over the other. Traditionally, one might define an Action story as having more Action or more intense Action than a Decision story. This view is overly influenced by how the story is told rather than what it represents. More accurately, either Actions force the need for Decisions or Decisions force the need for Actions in order to advance the plot.

Over the course of the story as a whole, if Actions precipitate the progression of the plot, it is an Action story. The question to ask in regard to any particular story is which comes first to move the story along?–not which is there more of, for even if Action kicks things off, a small Action may be followed by great quantities of deliberation.

In such a story, although Action is the Driver, one would hardly call it an Action story in the traditional sense. Action stories will begin with an Action, be marked at the beginning and end of every Act by an Action, and will end with a climactic Action. In an Action story, the story will eventually slow and dwindle until another Action occurrs.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software

Writing with the Story Driver

The choice of Driver does not have to reflect the nature of the Main Character. In fact, some very interesting dramatic potentials can be created when the Story Driver and the Main Character Approach do not match.

For example, a Main Character who is a Do-er forced to handle a decision-type problem would find itself at a loss for the experience and tools it needs to do the job. Similarly, a deliberating Main Character who is a Be-er would find itself whipped into a turmoil if forced to resolve a problem requiring action. These mixed stories appear everywhere from tragedy to comedy and can add an extra dimension to an otherwise one-sided argument.

Do Actions precipitate Decisions, or do Decisions precipitate Actions? Since a story has both, it is really an issue of which comes first: chicken or egg? In the context of a single story, there is a real answer to this question. As an author, you can decide which it will be.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software

The “Story Driver” Concept

Action or Decision describes how the story is driven forward. The question is: Do Actions precipitate Decisions or vice versa?

Every story revolves around a central issue, but that central issue only becomes a problem when an action or a decision sets events into motion. If an action gets things going, then many decisions may follow in response. If a decision kicks things off, then many actions may follow until that decision has been accommodated.

The Action/Decision relationship will repeat throughout the story. In an Action story, decisions will seem to resolve the problem until another action gets things going again. Decision stories work the same way. Actions will get everything in line until another decision breaks it all up again.

Similarly, at the end of a story there will be an essential need for an action to be taken or a decision to be made. Both will occur, but one of them will be the roadblock that must be removed in order to enable the other.

Whether Actions or Decisions move your story forward, the Story Driver will be seen in the instigating and concluding events, forming bookends around the dramatics.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software

What is Your Story Driver?

Driver: The mechanism by which the plot is moved forward.

Some stories are driven by actions. Others are forced along by decisions. All stories have some degree of both. This question determines which one “triggers” the other, but does not determine the ratio between the two.

If actions that occur in your story determine the types of decisions that need to be made, your story is driven by Action. If decisions or deliberations that happen in your story precipitate the actions that follow, your story is driven by Decision.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software

Stories with Female Mental Sex Main Characters

STORIES that have Mental Sex of Female:

A Doll’s House: Nora effectively assesses what she needs to do to maintain the balance in her marriage.

All About Eve: Margo uses holistic problem solving: When she first becomes suspicious of Eve’s motives, Margo smokes a cigarette and thinks about all that’s been happening; she asks Birdie’s opinion of Eve; her intuition kicks in before Bill’s party, and Margo predicts “a disaster in the air.” After her blowup at the audition, Bill asks her what is wrong:

MARGO: I — I don’t know, Bill. Just a feeling, I don’t know. . .

Bull Durham: Annie deals with everything in a holistic way. She doesn’t see problems and solutions per se, but rather processes and balances. Much of her coaching refers to imbalances between the two halves of the brain, and imbalances in the mind-body connection.

The Client: From the first time she appears in the story, Reggie uses female problem solving techniques. Mark says he doesn’t want “some woman lawyer” because his mother’s divorce lawyer was so bad. Reggie asks what “her” name was, and Mark says “it was a man.” Reggie says, “Exactly.” Reggie uses the balance between surpluses and deficiencies to solve a problem. She lets Mark figure out that the deficiency he was ascribing to female lawyers was unfair. U.S. Attorney Foltrigg and his staff believe that they can manipulate Mark into divulging information while they are alone with him, but Reggie has Mark “wired.” The advantage or “surplus” the men feel they have is turned into a disadvantage or “deficiency.” Reggie discovers that Mark has lied to her, creating a deficiency. She tries to balance the inequity by demanding the truth from him. Instead, he runs away, thus creating more of a deficiency. To satisfy the growing inequity, her only recourse is to follow him.

The Glass Menagerie.

I Love Lucy: Lucy evaluates her environment in terms of time, especially when it comes to telling Ricky about their baby in a timely manner.

Lawrence of Arabia: Lawrence sees the larger picture of the Middle East situation, and attempts to unite the territorial tribes and achieve post-war self-determination; he intuitively understands that if they cross the Nefud, Auda’s Howeitat will join them, especially if promised gold; he tries to hold together the quarrelsome tribes in his Arab National Council, and get them to cooperate in keeping Damascus functioning as a city; etc.

The Piano Lesson: Berniece uses female problem solving techniques. She tries to uncover Boy Willie’s motive behind his unexpected visit. She sets conditions upon having Boy Willie and Lymon in her house. She considers her family’s history surrounding the piano and concludes that it cost too much in suffering to give up.

Platoon: Throughout the film, Chris’ ability and attempts to understand the big picture of war illustrate how he views situations from a holistic, female mental sex standpoint. As an example, he is able to home in on who it is that is called to war, and who is excused:

KING: How the fuck you get over here man, you look like you educated…

CHRIS: I volunteered.

KING: You what? Say ‘gain.

CHRIS: Yeah, I dropped out of college and told ’em I wanted infantry, combat, and Nam…

He grins, finding their reactions funny. It’s also the first time we’ve seen Chris crack a smile.

CRAWFORD: You volunteered for this shit, man?

KING: You a crazy fucker, givin’ up college, man.

CHRIS: Didn’t make much sense. Wasn’t learning anything… (hesitate) And why should just the poor kids go to the war – and the college kids get away with it.

King and Crawford share a smile.

KING: What we got here a crusader?

CRAWFORD: Sounds like it. (Stone, P. 24)

Even though he didn’t see Barnes actually shoot Elias, or has any physical proof of the crime, Chris still knows Barnes murdered Elias. Chris’ beliefs are derived from the tense, volatile relationship between Elias and Barnes, and the horrible scene where Elias runs from the jungle only to get killed by the enemy soldiers pursuing him. This sight directly contradicts Sgt. Barnes questionable account of how he earlier found Elias dead in the jungle, prompting the following exchange of dialogue between Chris and other platoon members:

CHRIS: He killed him. I know he did. I saw his eyes when he came back in…

RHAH: (puffing on his bowl) How do you know the dinks didn’t get him. You got no proof man.

CHRIS: Proof’s in his eyes. When you know you know. You were there Rhah – I know what you were thinking. I say we frag the fucker. Tonight. (Stone, p. 85)

Another instance that illustrates how Chris looks at the war from an overall, holistic standpoint is in the last conversation he has with King:

CHRIS: Y’ever get caught in a mistake, King, and you just can’t get out of it?

KING: Way out of anything, man. Just keep your pecker up and your powder dry, things change. How many days you short?

CHRIS: Not just me… it’s the way the whole thing works. People like Elias get wasted and people like Barnes just go on making up rules any way they want and what do we do, we just sit around in the middle and suck on it! We just don’t add up to a rat’s ass.

KING: Whoever said we did, babe. Make it outta here, it’s all gravy, every day of the rest of your life – gravy…(Stone, p. 95)

Pride and Prejudice: An example of Elizabeth using a female problem solving technique is illustrated when she cannot fathom why Mr. Darcy would interfere with the romance between Mr. Bingley and her sister, Jane. She looks at the issue holistically, reviewing all the possible objections he could have against her sister and her family, as well as taking into account the possibility that Mr. Darcy may wish to have his friend marry Darcy’s younger sister, Georgiana. Elizabeth also determines that the fine points Jane has to offer Mr. Bingley more than make up for any deficiency Mr. Darcy may have perceived. Elizabeth is left to conclude Mr. Darcy’s objections to the match “had been partly governed by this worst kind of pride, and partly by the wish of retaining Mr. Bingley for his sister” (Austen 159).

Rear Window: Jeff tries to hold together his theory of Thorwald as a murderer in the face of opposition from Stella, Lisa, and especially Doyle. He’s more interested in the why and when of the murder, leaving the how to Stella and Doyle to consider, and piecing his ideas together to form the big picture.

Rosemary’s Baby: The female mental sex character resolves problems by comparing surpluses to deficiencies, and then taking steps to create a balance. When Guy first refuses to go to the Castevets for dinner, even though Rosemary makes it clear that she promised Mrs. Castevet, she begins reasoning out loud why they should stay home–creating a surplus of reasons acquiesce to Guy’s wishes. She doesn’t push Guy, but eventually he says, “Let’s go.” When her pregnancy becomes a seeming never-ending agony, and no one will listen to her, she throws a party where her friends can assess her shocking physical and emotional condition and push her to see a new doctor. When she grows weary of Minnie’s meddling, she accepts Minnie’s “herbal” drink, but then pours it down the drain. Thus she is dealing with the immediate surplus, but not yet taking steps to resolve the whole problem. When she discovers the truth about her baby, she is armed with a butcher knife as if she is willing to strike at one of the perpetrators, or even her baby. But she is confronted with a different inequity: the need of her baby. The story ends with Rosemary “becoming” the mother to her child, having seen the real deficiency in the situation, the baby’s lack of a mother.

Searching for Bobby Fischer: As a seven year old child, Josh employs both methods of problem solving, but he tends to favor a more holistic approach. Early in the story, Josh is so reluctant to beat his father at chess, he doesn’t even want to play him. His reluctance demonstrates his desire to hold the relationship together. He doesn’t want to change the status quo–the relationship he has with his dad. He is sensitive to inequities, as demonstrated by his sensitivity to the imbalance between winning and losing, and his sensitivity toward the people around him.

Sula: Nel uses Sula to creates balance within herself and environment.

Washington Square: Catherine is able to evaluate people in a holistic manner, for example:

“To her mind there was nothing of the infinite about Mrs. Penniman; Catherine saw her all at once . . .” (James 10)

The Wild Bunch: When his “family” members squabble amongst themselves, Pike gives them pep talks in an effort to hold the Wild Bunch together:

SYKES: That was a mighty fine talk you gave the boys ’bout stickin’ together. That Gorch was near killin’ me — or me him —

(Green and Peckinpah, p. 33)

With Thornton closing in, and his own men ready for fight or flight, Pike looks at the bigger picture:

LYLE: We kin stay right up here and kick hell out of ’em.

PIKE: No water.

DUTCH: Make a run for the border?

PIKE: They’d be after us every step of the way — I know Thornton. No, I’m tired of being hunted — we go back to Agua Verde and let the general take care of those boys.

LYLE: You’re crazy!… Back with those greasers!

PIKE: He’s so tickled with the guns he’ll be celebrating for a week and happy to do us a favor. Thornton ain’t going after us in there. While they’re busy picking over old Freddy’s pockets, we’ll take the back trail off this mountain and head for town.

(Green and Peckinpah, p. 99)

NOTE: The obstacle character, Deke Thornton, also has a female mental sex. He too, tries to hold together his group of misfits, but by using threats. He’s able to grasp the bigger picture of how things work, which allows him to work for Harrigan and to join Sykes at story’s end. He can intuit what Pike is thinking at any given time, as they share the same problem solving techniques.

Witness: When Amish elders object to harboring Book–because if he dies, the policemen will come, investigate, disrupt, cause publicity, etc.,–Rachel looks at the bigger picture. She responds that they must make it so that they never find his body, without going into details of how they would accomplish that.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software

Stories with Male Mental Sex Main Characters

STORIES that have Mental Sex of Male:

A Clockwork Orange: Alex evaluates matters primarily by cause and effect. When Alex wants something, he simply goes out and gets it. If he needs money, he steals it; if he wants to let out aggression, he beats people up; if he wants sex, he rapes; if his droogs do not listen to him, he teaches them a lesson; wanting to leave prison, he sees the Ludovico treatment as the way out, not as the process it places him in.

The Age of Innocence: Newland moves to solve problems by using linear thinking. When he realizes at the opera that May and her family support Ellen, he immediately goes to the box and suggests announcing his and May’s engagement that very evening to add his family’s support as well; when Mrs. Mingott’s dinner invitations are turned down, he goes to the van der Luydens and convinces them to support Ellen; after Newland learns that Ellen is visiting nearby in Portsmouth, he immediately voices a plan to buy a new horse so that he can travel to see Ellen; he then tracks her down and finds her in Boston.

All That Jazz: Joe evaluates problems in terms of cause and effect. For example, when he comes across organs preserved in formaldehyde, he jokes:

Listen . . . I told you guys you should take better care of yourselves. Too much booze . . . too much smoking . . . too much screwing around . . . it’ll get ya every time. (Aurthur and Fosse 120)

Amadeus: Salieri solves his problems using cause and effect techniques. Once he has perceived Mozart as the problem, he methodically begins his years long campaign of destruction. And he is sure that it will result in resolving the problem.

Apt Pupil: Todd has a linear way of thinking, as illustrated when Rubber Ed asks how it all happened, “‘Oh, one thing just followed another,’ Todd said…’That’s really how it happened. One thing just…followed another'” (King, 1982, p. 285).

Barefoot in the Park: Paul solves problems by taking steps, for example, he comes to the realization that his controlling behavior is responsible for his imminent divorce. He decides to lose control by getting “Lousy, stinkin’ drunk!” and taking on Corie’s madcap ideas:

Paul: Hey, Corie….Let’s do that thing you said before….Let’s wake up the police and see if all the rooms come out of the crazy neighbors…I want to be a nut like everyone else in this building.

Being There: Chance uses the male problem solving technique of cause and effect. For example, when faced with threatening gang members, he attempts to turn them off with a television remote control.

Blade Runner: Deckard follows clues leading to the replicants in a linear problem-solving technique, and also uses binary reasoning:

DECKARD: Replicants are like any other machine. They can be a benefit or a hazard. If it’s a benefit, it’s not my problem.

(Fancher and Peoples, p. 12A)

Body Heat: Ned sees each problem as a separate hurdle to jump–each with its own issues, costs, and benefits. As such, Ned is completely blinded to the “bigger picture” of Mattie’s con and consistently falls prey to her manipulations.

Boyz N The Hood: Tre tends to view problems in a linear way, without considering the big picture. In his relationship with Brandi, he wants to take the immediate step of having sex with her, without regard to the consequences that could adversely affect their relationship. For example, Brandi could become pregnant, impeding their college plans and creating a financial struggle to maintain an income necessary to provide for a child. When Tre seeks revenge for the death of his friend, he does not immediately recognize the action will also put himself in danger.

Braveheart: Wallace throws his whole effort into vanquishing the cause of Scotland’s (and his own personal) misery–English rule and Longshanks’ treachery.

Bringing Up Baby: David is not one to see the big picture. He has a tendency to look only at the effects and causes of his circumstances and doesn’t appreciate the process until it is all over. He looks at the effects of Susan’s actions and blames her for all of his problems. He does not understand, nor have patience, for Susan’s decidedly non-linear way of thinking.

Candida: Morell thinks linearly; when his marriage is threatened he considers nothing but the threat itself; if he had put the threat in perspective of his happy marriage, he would realize the danger never existed.

Casablanca: A linear thinker, Rick jumps to the conclusion that Ilsa left him in Paris because she loved Laszlo more. When he decides to help Laszlo and Ilsa, he takes a logical series of actions that ensure they will be able to escape without interference from the police or the Nazis.

Charlotte’s Web: Wilbur evaluates problems in terms of cause and effect; for example, when he escapes his pen, it causes an uproar.

Chinatown: Jake looks for clues to see where they will lead him. Though this helps him locate and identify Evelyn’s daughter/Noah’s granddaughter, he misses the big picture (the intermingled relationships) that a person using female mental sex problem solving techniques might have picked up.

The Crucible: John focuses on what is the specific cause of a problem, without considering all other possibilities.

Proctor: . . . I know the children’s sickness has naught to do with witchcraft.

Hale: Naught to do–?

Proctor: Mr. Parris discovered them sportin’ in the woods. They were startled and took sick.

Hale: Who told you this?

Proctor: Abigail Williams.

Hale: . . . Abigail Williams told you it had naught to do with witchcraft! Why–why did you keep this?

Proctor: I never knew until tonight that the world is gone daft with nonsense. (Miller 68)

El Mariachi: El Mariachi understands his problem of being pursued is caused by a case of mistaken identity.

Four Weddings And A Funeral: Charles tries to solve problems by looking at causes and their effects. Unfortunately for him, there isn’t always a clear cut relationship between the two which makes solving his problems very difficult. For example, when he first discovers that Carrie is engaged to Hamish, he immediately (in his conversation with Matthew) tries to figure out what he’s been doing wrong.

The Fugitive: Dr. Kimble is trying to find out who was responsible for his wife’s murder, and the reasons behind the heinous act, by locating the information that leads back to the killer.

The Godfather: Michael uses a linear, cause and effect manner of looking at problems. He sees the relations of all the families as different links in one hierarchy of power, completely ignoring the holistic effects the families’ methods have on the women and children who are, in his eyes, “not involved.” His keen sense of logic is what allows him to see that he is the perfect candidate to kill the “Turk.” He sees a very binary relationship between people who are “in” the family vs. people who aren’t, warning Fredo never to take sides against the family. He is also able to ultimately convince himself that his “business” has nothing to do with his wife and that because she is “not involved” she should not ask him about it.

The Graduate: Ben tends to solve problems from a very linear, cause and effect perspective, without paying much attention to the big picture.

The Great Gatsby: Nick uses the problem solving technique of cause and effect.

Hamlet: Hamlet tends to use male mental sex problem solving techniques as illustrated in his attempts to gather evidence that “there is something more deeply amiss than his mother’s overhasty marriage to her deceased husband’s brother. . .” (Bevington xx).

Harold and Maude: When Harold sees the effect his supposed death has on his mother, he causes it to happen again and again in a bid to get her attention; to avoid being drafted, he causes his uncle to think he has psychotic tendencies.

Heavenly Creatures: Pauline applies cause and effect reasoning to her encounter with the child psychologist, having him killed by Diello in her imaginary world; with Juliet, she’s worked out the Borovnian “entire royal lineage for the last five centuries”; desperate to go overseas, Pauline takes steps to make in happen–stealing silverware for the fare, applying for a passport, etc.; distressed over the one obstacle standing in her way, Pauline causes an effect–her mother’s death–having carefully worked out the steps of the murder plan.

Klute: Klute uses the linear reasoning techniques of the policeman that he is, tracking down anyone known to have contact with Tom and gathering evidence.

Lolita: Humbert uses the male mental sex problem solving technique of cause and effect. For example, he impresses upon Lolita exactly what will happen to her if she tells anyone the true nature of their relationship:

“. . . A nice grim matron . . . the reformatory, the juvenile detention home . . . By rubbing all this in, I succeeded in terrorizing Lo . . .” (Nabokov 138-9).

Othello: Othello moves to solve his problems by using linear thinking. When Brabantio accuses Othello of using witchcraft to seduce Desdemona, Othello suggests that she be summoned to give evidence of their courtship. When he’s disturbed by the commotion during the celebration, Othello demands the witnesses identify those responsible, weighs the evidence, and metes out a punishment. When Iago accuses Desdemona of adultery, Othello asks for proof. Having been presented with “evidence” Othello accepts it on face value, without considering why Iago is defaming Desdemona, or contemplating the larger issues surrounding the accusation.

The Philadelphia Story: Tracy is a goal setter. She immediately looks at causes and effects, and tries to solve problems in a very linear manner.

Quills: Abbe de Coulmier evaluates events as cause and effect. He sees each problem he has with The Marquis as a new issue, to be handled separate and apart from the last. This problem solving method fails, as The Marquis is able to counter his efforts with his own holistic methods.

Rain Man: Charlie, using linear thinking, attacks his problems straight on. He puts one business fire out at a time; when the EPA officials bug him, he considers paying them off; when his buyers want to back out of the deal, he gives them a discount; when his loan is due, he gets an extension; when his inheritance is given away, he finds out who got it and tries to make a deal. When Dr. Bruner doesn’t give Charlie his half of the inheritance, he keeps Raymond, something they want, until he gets what he wants.

Rebel Without a Cause: Jim tends to use the technique of binary reasoning to problem solve. As an example, he demands yes or no answers from his parents. He also looks at problems in terms of cause and effect. For example, he believes his mother runs the family because his father won’t stand up to her.

Reservoir Dogs: When Mr. White is confronted with a problem, his solution is to pull out his gun and eliminate the cause. He comforts the injured Mr. Orange by telling him not to worry, “it takes days to bleed to death” from gunshots to the stomach.

Revenge of the Nerds: Lewis’s first way of understanding anything is structural and he is able to objectify any problem or idea. He sees getting a house as a set of steps which he tackles one at a time. When he seduces Betty by pretending to be her boyfriend in a mask, he sees it as an act of obtaining her, rather than a process of deceiving her.

Romeo and Juliet: Romeo uses cause and effect problem solving techniques. As an example, in his first scene with Benvolio, he explains Rosaline’s cold heart is the cause of his morose behavior–he does not look beyond this to determine the real reason for his unhappiness–that he has not yet found true love.

The Silence of the Lambs: Clarice methodically follows up each clue provided by Hannibal Lecter and others to gather evidence that eventually leads her to Buffalo Bill.

The Simpsons Christmas Special: Homer uses the male problem solving techniques of cause and effect. As an example, he thinks by taking a part-time job, he will earn enough money to buy gifts. He is quite dismayed later to discover the big picture–gross pay minus many deductions equals minimal net pay.

All Good Things (Star Trek: The Next Generation): Picard chooses to “CAUSE AND EFFECT” by solving the problem of the paradox and saving mankind.

Star Wars: Luke is extremely goal (and results) oriented.

The Sun Also Rises: Jake is goal oriented, as exemplified by his focus on the possibility of winning Brett. He doesn’t see the big picture–that is, he can’t see that his physical impairment will never change and that she will never be able to accept it. He tries to pull it all together by always being available to her and her needs, and by continually pleading with her to stay with him.

Sunset Boulevard: Joe tends to solve problems by using linear thinking: When his car is about to be repossessed, Joe tries to sell a story to a producer, when that effort fails he asks for money from everyone he knows to make the payments; when he feels suffocated by Norma on New Year’s Eve, he leaves to find a happier party; when offered a chance to work on one of his stories that might sell, Joe sneaks out of Norma’s house to develop the idea; when he decides that he’s no good for Betty, he disgusts her into forgetting about him and marrying a better man.

Taxi Driver: When Travis decides to act on the idea of “True Force” that’s been building up in his brain, he gets “organezized” and breaks the job down into steps: he buys an arsenal of guns; he does physical exercise; he practices at the shooting range; he clips articles on Palantine; he practices drawing his weapons; he cuts his hair into a Mohawk; etc.

To Kill a Mockingbird: Scout considers each problem she comes up against as a separate issue, not realizing the connections that make up a bigger picture.

Tootsie: Michael tends to solve his problems using linear thinking: He needs money to produce Jeff’s play and tells his agent he’ll do anything to get it, even appear in commercials. When he’s told he’s unemployable as a actor, he poses as an actress to get an audition for “Southwest General.” After he lands the job, Michael devises a step-by-step morning routine to transform himself into Dorothy, and creates an allergy story to avoid the studio makeup person. When informed that his soap opera character is a wimp, Michael solves the problem by improvising Dorothy’s lines on the spot–without consulting the show’s producer or writers.

Toy Story: Woody is almost entirely focused on the effects he wants to achieve and how to directly cause them; “balance,” “surplus,” and “deficiency” rarely enter his considerations. His very linear approach is most dramatically demonstrated when he thinks, “Hmm, if I cause Buzz to disappear behind the desk, Andy will have to pick me to go to Pizza Planet, and I’ll win his favor back.” He then attempts a very simple cause-and-effect operation to use RC Car to push Buzz off the desk, but fails to see the relationships among the objects on the desk that will make his plan go awry. He also fails to consider how his actions will tip the delicate balance of public opinion against him. Later, however, when he pulls the mutant toys together and lays out a very linear, step-by-step strategy to save Buzz from Sid, his Male approach is very effective.

Unforgiven: Munny uses cause and effect, linear reasoning. Having trouble with animals, he figures that:

MUNNY: Now this here horse is gettin’ even on me… hold on gal… for the sins of my youth… before I met… your dear-departed mother… I was weak an’ givin’ to mistreatin’ horses an’ such. An’ this here horse… an’ that ole pig, too, I guess… is my comeuppance for my cruelty…

(Peoples, p. 21)

When he can’t hit a coffee can with the pistol, he switches to a shotgun; told that Little Bill caused Ned’s death, Munny eliminates him.

The Verdict: Frank tries to determine the cause of Ms. Kay’s condition by examining the effects.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?: George formulates a plan to end one particular game (the fantasy of their son) and takes steps to bring it to fruition.

When Harry Met Sally: Harry does not need to be fulfilled mentally when seeking a solution to a problem. He needs only to be satisfied.

X-Files: Beyond the Sea: Scully approaches problems using linear thinking: She decides that since her father never told her he was proud of her being in the FBI, he must not have been; follows clues to an abandoned warehouse and finds evidence; decides that with only three days left to save the teenagers, they must deal with Boggs to get information; reasons that because Mulder was shot, Boggs must have orchestrated the attack.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software

Examples of Female Mental Sex Main Characters

Female as the Mental Sex — The Main Character favors a holistic approach to problem-solving. For example, female mental sex characters try to hold it all together while male mental sex tries to pull it all together; a mother whose family is breaking up does everything she can to make family life look more attractive to her kids; female mental sex looks for motivations while male mental sex looks for purposes; a detective sees that the kinds of stores being hit in a seemingly random string of robberies betray the motives of the criminal behind them and allows the police to narrow down the list of suspects; etc.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software

Examples of Male Mental Sex Characters

Male as the Mental Sex — The Main Character favors an analytical approach to problem-solving. For example, male mental sex looks at purposes while female mental sex sex looks at motivations; a detective sees that the pattern of stolen tools adds up to the culprit attempting next to rob the downtown bank; male mental sex tries to pull it all together while female mental sex tries to hold it all together; a father whose family is breaking up grounds his kids and gives them curfews until they come to their senses; etc.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software

Writing with Female Mental Sex

A Female Main Character’s psychology is based on assessing balance. The female Main Character resolves inequities by comparing surpluses to deficiencies.

The manner employed in resolving the inequity will involve creating a surplus where a surplus is desired, creating a deficiency where a deficiency is desired, creating a surplus so a deficiency is felt elsewhere, creating a deficiency so a surplus will be felt elsewhere. Through the application of one’s own force, hills and valleys can be created and filled either to directly address the inequity or to create a change in the flow of energies that will ultimately come together in a new hill or disperse creating a new valley. These are the four primary inequity-resolving techniques of an female mental sex character.

It is important to note that these techniques are applied both to others and to oneself. Either way, manipulating surplus and deficiency describes the approach. When selecting female or male, typically, the choice is as simple as deciding if you want to tell a story about a woman or a man. But there is another consideration that is being employed with growing frequency in modern stories: putting the psyche of one sex into the skin of another.

This does not refer only to the “sex change” comedies, but to many action stories with male mental sex female Main Characters (e.g. Aliens) and many decision stories with female mental sex male Main Characters (e.g. Prince of Tides and The Hunt for Red October). When an author writes a part for a woman, it would intuitively use the female psyche for that character. Yet, by simply changing the name of the character from Mary to Joe and shifting the appropriate gender terms, the character would ostensibly become a man. But that man would not seem like a man. Even if all the specific feminine dialog were changed, even if all the culturally dictated manifestations were altered, the underlying psyche of the character would have the female, female bias, rather than the male, male bias.

Sometimes stereotypes are propagated by what an audience expects to see, which filters the message and dilutes the truth. By placing the female psyche in a male character, preconceptions no longer prevent the message from being heard. A word of caution — this technique can make a Main Character seem “odd” in some hard to define way to your audience. So although the message may fare better, empathy between your audience and your Main Character may not.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software

Writing with Male Mental Sex

The male Main Character solves problems by examining what cause or group of causes is responsible for an effect or group of effects. The effort made to solve the problem will focus on affecting a cause, causing an effect, affecting an effect or causing a cause.

This describes four different approaches. Affecting a cause is manipulating an existing force to change its eventual impact. Causing an effect means applying a new force that will create an impact. Affecting an effect is altering an effect after it has happened. Causing a cause is applying a new force that will make some other force come into play to ultimately create an impact. These are the four primary problem solving techniques of the male minded character.

It is important to note that these techniques can be applied to either external or internal problems. Either way, manipulating cause and effect is the modus operandi. When selecting female or male, typically, the choice is as simple as deciding if you want to tell a story about a man or a woman. But there is another consideration that is being employed with growing frequency in modern stories: putting the psyche of one sex into the skin of another. This does not refer only to the “sex change” comedies, but to many action stories with male mental sex, female Main Characters (e.g. Aliens) and many decision stories with female mental sex, male Main Characters (Prince of Tides).

When an author writes a part for a man, it would intuitively use the male psyche for that character. Yet, by simply changing the name of the character from Joe to Mary and shifting the appropriate gender terms, the character would ostensibly become a woman. But that woman would not seem like a woman. Even if all the specific masculine dialog were changed, even if all the culturally dictated manifestations were altered, the underlying psyche of the character would have the male bias, rather than the female bias.

Sometimes stereotypes are propagated by what an audience expects to see, which filters the message and dilutes the truth. By placing the male psyche in a female character, preconceptions no longer prevent the message from being heard. A word of caution — this technique can make a Main Character seem “odd” in some hard to define way to your audience. So although the message may fare better, empathy between your audience and your Main Character may not.

Excerpted from
Dramatica Story Development Software