A writer recently asked:
Archive for the ‘Archetypes’ Category
Archetypes and the Crucial Element
July 14th, 2011Four Archetypes
March 25th, 2011Excerpt from an upcoming book on story structure:
So far I have spoken of characters as representing or embodying fragments of the overall Story Mind, but that is misleading; characters are much more orderly than that. The term “fragments” provides an easy visualization that each character is a part of a larger whole and that perhaps they are different shapes and sizes. This is all true. But the shapes are regular and the sizes are in specific increments.
In this section we are going to introduce the largest of the characters, called Archetypes, and then in succeeding sections we’ll break them down into progressively smaller components until we arrive at the elemental building blocks of characters called, not surprisingly, Elements.
It is these Elements which form the bottom layer of the Dramatica Table of Story Elements and, in fact, provide the Table its name. It is at this level in which the chemistry of characters is born. Some elements combine to form complex aspects of the human psyche they represent. Others are like oil and water. A character may even exist as a single element, simple and pure, yet still advance a small part of the story’s argument.
But that is for later. For now, let us start at the top.
In the Periodic Table in chemistry, elements are arranged in families in which all of its member elements share certain attributes. While they each have individual differences, a family resemblance between, say, Fluorine and Chlorine is as hard to miss as that in some human family lines.
In a like manner, the elements at the character level of the Dramatica Table are also organized into families of similar traits called Archetypes. Each archetypal family contains exactly eight elements and, collectively, they form an entire facet of the Story Mind and, by extension, of our own minds.
The names of some of these archetypes are familiar: Protagonist and Antagonist, for example. But that creates a problem. The term archetype has been used by so many others, from Jung to Campbell, that it carries a great deal of baggage. The words Protagonist and Antagonist carry even more. So for Dramatica to come along and try to redefine those terms is to be fighting a lot of inertia and preconceptions.
Still, the traditional archetypes are looking at the same character functions as Dramatica, just through the obscurity of storytelling. So Dramatica is not so much redefining the archetypes as it is clarifying them. With that caveat in mind, let us proceed.
Each archetype exists to portray one of the major facets of our minds in a story. In a sense, each presents a different kind of argument, just as we work out a problem in our own thinking from several directions. Perhaps the two archetypes that most easily illustrate this point are Reason and Emotion.
The Reason archetype represents our intellect and the Emotion archetype, our passion. Certainly Reason and Emotion are two of the largest contributing factors in any decision we make in life. So it stands to reason (and feels about right) that they must be present in any story for its argument to be complete.
Turning now to the best known archetypes, Protagonist and Antagonist, we find that they are heavily masked by the storytelling concepts of Hero and Villain. While a Protagonist can be a Hero, that role is just one set of clothes it might wear. In fact, your Protagonist might as easily be a Villain. (And, in a like manner, an Antagonist might be Villain or Hero, for as we shall later see, both Hero and Villain are not archetypes but Stereotypes, which are over-used combinations of structural and storytelling elements working together.)
When you pare the Protagonist and Antagonist down to their structural bare bones, Protagonist represents our initiative and Antagonist, our reticence. In simpler terms, the Protagonist stands in for that part of ourselves that gets us up out of our chairs to get things done; to accomplish something. The Antagonist, in contrast, is the avatar of our desire to maintain the status quo, or more colloquially, to let sleeping dogs lie.
This fits in well with our common understanding of a Protagonist as the character leading the effort to achieve the goal and the Antagonist as the one who will do anything to stop him. (Note that while it stands for reticence, the Antagonist is not lazy or inactive, but rather exemplifies that counter-force within our own minds that acts in opposition to change: i.e. “If it works, don’t fix it.”)
We’ve just covered a lot of new ground, so let’s pause for a moment to take stock: We have learned that any entity in a story that exhibits a personality is a player. And any player that advances the story’s argument is also a character. Characters are made of elements, which are the smallest and purest fragments of the Story Mind.
Groups of elements share certain family traits. When a whole family of elements is represented by a single character, it is called an Archetype. Each archetype represents one of the major families of thought that go on in our own minds as we seek to resolve life’s problems. So far, we’ve identified four archetypes: Protagonist (which represents our initiative), Antagonist (our reticence), Reason (our intellect), and Emotion (our passion).
Copyright Melanie Anne Phillips
Choosing Your Protagonist & Antagonist
November 1st, 2010The Contagonist
April 14th, 2010The following excerpt is taken from
The Dramatica Class Transcripts
William S1 : Could you touch on Contagonist?…
Dramatica : Sure, William! First of all, Dramatica sees 8 archetypal characters. But, Dramatica also sees Millions of non-archetypal characters. It all depends upon how the character elements are combined. The elements fall into “families”, by their natures. Some are Motivations, Some are Methodologies, Some are the character’s Purposes. Others are their Means of Evaluation. There is an internal and external trait, in each of these four categories, and there are sixty four elements all together (by the time we divide Universe, etc., down four levels.
That means that there is one special arrangement in which, eight character each get eight traits, internal and external from each category. And when all eight traits are from the same “family” it forms an archetypal character. These archetypes even form quads! Two quads of four! But they are easiest to see by their dynamic pairs. Protagonist / Antagonist, Reason / Emotion, Sidekick / Skeptic And Guardian / Contagonist. Darth Vader is a Contagonist.
These characters are defined by the elements they contain. Guardian has Conscience, and Help. Contagonist has the dynamically opposed elements of Temptation, and Hinder. Reason has Control, and Logic. Emotion has Uncontrolled and feeling. As you can see, each of these archetypes, has the same elements as more complex characters, just in a consistent or more simplified arrangement.
William S1 : What is the difference between the dramatic purpose of Antagonist and Contagonist?
Dramatica : Now, the contagonist is not the antagonist. The Antagonist is made up of Avoid (or prevent) and Re-consider. This is dynamic to the Protagonist who is Pursue, and Consider. In other words, the antagonist is out there to stop the Protagonist, the contagonist is just trying to push them off the path, Look at conscience and temptation fighting it out. That is the job of Obi Wan and Darth.
William S1 : Can the Contagonist be thought of as the Antagonist’s ally?
Dramatica : Actually, William, it is only a story telling convention, that often the Contagonist is the Antagonist’s ally. But they might also be attached to the Protagonist as well. You see, when we are looking at objective characters, we are not seeing them by their relationship to the Protagonist, but by their function. The contagonist Tempts and Hinders. They will do it to everyone everywhere, not just to the Protagonist. This is often confusing, because most people think the Protagonist has to be the Main Character.
Dan Steele : if viewed from goal standpoint – is antags goal to stop protag, while contag’s goal is to achieve his own objective?
Dramatica : Yes, Dan, in reference to the goal, Protagonist functions as Pursue, and the antagonist functions as Avoid. So, you can see that when we have a Main Character, who is also performing the function of preventing the giant corporation from building a shopping mall in the ecological park, they are a Main Character and an Antagonist! They are trying to stop someone’s goal. The effort to pursue is there first, THEN this character responds.
Archetypes in The Wizard of Oz
March 30th, 2010From Dramatica Unplugged
Uses of Archetypal Characters
March 30th, 2010From Dramatica Unplugged
Guardian & Contagonist Archetypes
March 30th, 2010From Dramatica Unplugged
Sidekick & Skeptic Archetypes
March 30th, 2010From Dramatica Unplugged
How to Create Archetypal Characters
March 17th, 2010Just because characters are Archetypal does not mean they cannot be fresh and interesting. Archetypal Characters have just as many diverse characteristics as Complex Characters. The only difference is how these characteristics are divided among your story’s characters. When an equal number are given to each character and when all the elements making up each character are from a single “family” of elements, Archetypal Characters are created. In this sense, an Archetypal Character set is like an alignment of the planets: each individual orbit is complex, but we choose to observe them when they are all lined up in a clear and simple pattern.
Nonetheless, we must still explore all aspects of each character to make the Story Mind’s argument fully. However, since there is such consistency to the way the elements are distributed, the audience will anticipate the content of each character, allowing an author the luxury of using shortcuts to describe them. In fact, once a character is outlined enough to establish its Archetypal tendency, an author can leave out the rest of the information since the audience will fill it in anyway. In a sense, a character is guilty of being Archetypal until proven otherwise.
A Sample Story Using Archetypes
When an author wishes to concentrate primarily on action or entertainment, it is often best to take advantage of the Archetypal arrangement to fully make the story’s argument with a minimum of exposition. The characters still need to be interesting in order to involve an audience in their story. To illustrate how even Archetypal characters can be intriguing, let’s create story using only Archetypes and dress them up in some attractive storytelling.
Creating a Protagonist
We want to write a simple story using Archetypal Characters. We can create a PROTAGONIST called Jane. Jane wants to… what?… rob a bank?…kill the monster?… stop the terrorists?… resolve her differences with her mother? It really doesn’t matter; her goal can be whatever interests us as authors. So we’ll pick “stop the terrorists” because it interests us. All right, our Protagonist — Jane — wants to stop the terrorists.
Creating an Antagonist
Dramatica says we need an ANTAGONIST. Antagonist by definition is the person who tries to prevent achievement of the goal. So, who might be diametrically against the completion of the task Jane wants to accomplish? The Religious Leader whose dogma is the source of inspiration that spawns the acts of terror?… The multinational business cartel that stands to make billions if the terrorists succeed in their scheme?… Her former lover who leads the elite band of criminals? We like THAT one! Okay, we have our Protagonist (Jane) who wants to stop the terrorists who are led by her former lover (Johann).
Creating a Skeptic
Two simple Characters down, six to go. Dramatica now tells us we need a SKEPTIC. Who might oppose the effort and disbelieve in the ultimate success of good Jane? A rival special agent who doesn’t want to be left in the dust by her glowing success?… Her current love interest on the force who feels Jane is in over her head?… Her father, the Senator, who wants his daughter to follow him into politics? Good enough for us. So we have Jane who wants to stop the terrorists, pitted against her former lover Johann who heads the criminal band, and opposed by her father, the Senator.
Creating a Sidekick
To balance the Skeptic, we’re going to need a SIDEKICK. We could bring back her current lover but this time have him knowing how much ridding the world of scum-sucking pigs appeals to Jane so he remains steadfastly behind her. Or we might employ her Supervisor and mentor on the force who knows the depth of Jane’s talent, wants to inspire other young idealists to take action against threats to democracy, or prove his theories and vindicate his name in the undercover world… We’ll use the Supervisor. So here’s Jane who wants to stop the terrorists, pitted against her former lover Johann, the head of the band who wants to stop her, opposed by her father, the Senator, and supported by her Supervisor.
Creating a Contagonist
Let’s bring in a CONTAGONIST: the Seasoned Cop who says, “You have to play by the rules” and thwarts Jane’s efforts to forge a better modus operandi?… Or, the Ex-Con with a heart of gold who studies the classics and counsels her to base her approach on proven scenarios?… Or, her friend Sheila, a computer whiz who has a bogus response plan based on averaging every scenario every attempted? Computer whiz it is. So Jane wants to stop the terrorists, is pitted against the head of the band (her former lover Johann) who wants to stop her, opposed by her father, the Senator, supported by her Supervisor, and tempted by her friend Sheila, the computer whiz.
Creating a Guardian
Keeping in mind the concept of Dynamic Pairs, we are going to want to balance the Computer Whiz with a GUARDIAN. The Master of the Oriental martial arts who urges her to “go with the flow” (“Use The Force, Jane!”)?… The Ex-Con again who urges, “Get back to basics”?… or perhaps the Seasoned Cop who paves the way through the undercover jungle?…. We like the Seasoned Cop. Note how we could have used him as Contagonist, but elected to use him as Guardian instead. It’s totally up to us as authors which characteristics go into which players. Jane wants to stop the terrorists, is pitted against the head of the band (her former lover Johann) who wants to stop her, is opposed by her father, the Senator, supported by her Supervisor, tempted by her friend Sheila the computer whiz, and protected by the Seasoned Cop.
Creating Reason and Emotion Characters
Since we really like some of our earlier concepts for Characters, let’s use the Ex-Con as REASON, stressing the need to use classic scenarios. We’ll balance her with the Master of the Oriental martial arts, who maintains Jane’s need to break with the Western approach by letting loose and following her feelings.
Well, that seems to cover all eight Archetypal Characters: Protagonist, Antagonist, Skeptic, Sidekick, Contagonist, Guardian, Reason and Emotion. Finally, we have Jane who wants to stop the terrorists and is pitted against the head of the band (her former lover Johann) who wants to stop her, is opposed by her Father, the Senator, is supported by her Supervisor, tempted by her friend Sheila the computer whiz, protected by the Seasoned Cop, urged by the Ex-Con to copy the classics, and counseled by the Master of Oriental martial arts to let loose and follow her feelings.
From the Dramatica Theory Book
Protagonist & Antagonist Archetypes
March 2nd, 2010From Dramatica Unplugged
