Continuing what Chris and I were talking about two weeks ago, concerning the coil or the circle….
A Change character is the coil, he’s come around to a different place at the end of the story. The Steadfast character’s path is more of a circle, basically coming back to the same place they started. But it’s not 100% accurate. Why? Because all characters grow. They really aren’t the same character they were at the beginning, but they can come to the same conclusion. Their path can go along and they can end up in the same place, but they’re really not the same person. They’ve either grown into their Resolve and they’re really confident, or they’ve grown out of it and are really tempted.
Sometimes a character will take a path, but not really invest much into it. Like Luke in Star Wars (a Change MC) - he wants to leave the farm and join the rebellion but really hasn’t put much effort behind it. In that particular story, it’s more the events that transpire around him that lock him into the story and prevent him from going back.
Contrast this with The Fugitive. Like most Steadfast stories (typically) it’s a really really big deal from the very beginning and the only work required from them is to stick it out. He didn’t kill his wife and there’s no way he’s going back until he proves it to everyone around him. But again this is only for most Steadfast stories, it doesn’t necessarily have to be that way.
In the story of Job, the MC Resolve starts out small. Just like Luke, as the forces of antagonism around him grow larger and larger, Job’s resolve grows stronger and stronger. The difference to note here is that although the growths are similar, their final Resolves are opposite - Luke is a Change Character, Job is a Steadfast Character.
(Note: the story of Job here is used only as an example of a weak to strong Steadfast character. It is not considered a Grand Argument Story in the Dramatica sense)
Now I said that he was a weak to strong Steadfast character and this isn’t entirely accurate either. In the beginning his resolve is really strong, but it doesn’t take that much effort to maintain because of how sure he is of himself. As the conflict grows, his resolve grows even stronger.
Share This
2 responses so far ↓
1 arijjan // Jun 7, 2005 at 12:47 am
Hi James!
Remme me?
Cool blog!
What i am doing now?
Writing directing in the Netherworld
Raising kids.
The coil is an interesting way of looking at the justification process. Harks back to the oldest question in philosophy.. Are all elephants alike? If not how do we know the difference between an elephant and a tiger?
Remember the book I gave you. Bodhis grandfather is obsessed by metamorphoses. Some really cool examples in it
Well what you write down is so crystal clear nothing to ask, northing to add.
Which is sort a lame.
So I am thinking bout a way to add to discussion.
How about contextual examples. Or the process explained trough the four concepts?
The coil represents the past as prologue. Interestingly enough you present the story of Job, cause the Indo Europeans, Greeks, Romans had a circulair concept of time while the Christians, Moslims and all the other guys fighting right now have two things in common: One Deity and a lineair concept of time.
But that’s wandering about. The coil: In the context of the past as prologue, that means that the same inequity is visited over and over again, for instance Michael Corleone has had this inequity with his family since he grew up. And untill NOW he has been able to deal with it by not becoming involved while staying in contact.
When the FATHER DIES (almost)he is exactlt where he was years ago. Should I become involved or stay out?
2 Jim // Jun 7, 2005 at 3:06 pm
No, you should say whatever you want! That’s what the whole comment section of a blog is supposed to be about.
Good to hear from you Arijjan, and yes, I still have that book!
Leave a Comment