The Protagonist and the Main Character do NOT have to be the same character. While they very often are, splitting them apart can help give a story more dramatic depth.
This was one of the first concepts that stood out for me when I was first diving in to Dramatica. Up until then, every single storytelling guru I had come in contact with, from Syd Field to Robert McKee, had told me that these two characters were one in the same.
Imagine my surprise when I read this:
A Main Character is the player through whom the audience experiences the story first hand.
A Protagonist is the prime mover of the plot.
A Hero is a combination of both Main Character and Protagonist.
What? How can that be? I always thought heroes were mythic larger-than-life characters like Superman or Luke Skywalker. How could this computer program have the audacity to change terms around on me like this?
Again, Dramatica takes commonly used storytelling terms and makes them more complicated - and more accurate. Chapter 3 goes on to say:
In other words, a hero is a blended character who does two jobs: move the plot forward and serve as a surrogate for the audience. When we consider all the characters other than a Protagonist who might serve as the audience’s position in a story, suddenly the concept of a hero becomes severely limited. It is not wrong, just limited.
Limited. That really struck a chord in me. I always felt that those other story paradigms had a narrow view of how to tell a story. Their approach to structuring a story certainly worked, but it always felt a little too formulaic.
Suddenly, after reading the above quotes, all sorts of new dramatic potentials were open to me. I had a tool to write something different. It was freeing. And it simply made sense.
Examples of this New Paradigm
The value of separating the Main Character and Protagonist into two different characters can be seen in the motion picture, To Kill a Mockingbird. Here, the character, Atticus, (played by Gregory Peck) is clearly the Protagonist, yet the story is told through the experiences of Scout, his young daughter.
Of course. In that story, you get two very different perspectives on the impact of racism. You get the very obvious, very objective view of it with Atticus fighting it out in the classic courtroom scene. But you also get to feel it very personally from the perspective of Scout and her predisposition towards the scary Boo Radley. To Kill A Mockingbird was a fantastic movie (and an even better novel). Now I had the tools to write something just like it (well, maybe a little talent would help too!).
How about other examples?
Let’s take a look at the greatest movie of all time: The Shawshank Redemption. Story gurus in the past have always assigned Tim Robbins’ character Andy Dufresne to the role of Main Character/Protagonist. After all, he’s the guy we are rooting for - the one who has been unjustly imprisoned - and consequently, the one we really want to see escape at the end.
But do you really feel as if you’re experiencing the story through Andy? Do we get to known him intimately and develop a strong empathy with him?
Not really. We witness Andy’s actions from a distance. Remember the scene of him sitting there soaking in the sun on the rooftop? If he was the Main Character we would’ve seen and felt what it was like to have overcome an “accidental” drop off the roof - we would’ve identified with him emotionally. Instead, we watch that smile on his face and wonder what he’s thinking. We watch and feel the impact of his actions on us.
He certainly is the Protagonist. He’ll do whatever it takes to get out of that hellhole (even crawl through miles of…well, you know!). But remember:
Dramatica identifies two different kinds of characters: those who represent an audience point of view, and those who fulfill a dramatic function.
Andy is in the story to pursue and escape. The warden is there to prevent him from succeeding. These are dramatic functions of the overall story - not points of view.
By now, it should be apparent who the Main Character in Shawshank is. In fact, it might’ve already been obvious to you. You just didn’t know why.
when it comes to Main Character, we’re not interested in the big picture story
Morgan Freeman’s Red is our emotional, personal connection to the story. He’s not driving the story - we could care less whether or not he succeeds in escaping or overcoming the warden. Instead, his dramatica function is that of a sidekick or helper. However, when it comes to the Main Character, we’re not interested in the big picture story - we’re after the more intimate one.
Note how in the very first scene with Red we don’t even see his face! Instead, it is us (the camera) taking his place and walking through that door into the parole boardroom for “evaluation.” A better visual representation of experiencing the storyline from within would be hard to find.
Andy also has another role in the story - that of Red’s Impact Character - but I’ll go into that more later when I take a swing at the analysis for this great film. For now, it is enough to realize that the Protagonist of your story does not have to be the Main Character.
Splitting the roles of Protagonist and Main Character into different characters can widen the breadth of your dramatic argument. By separating them, you can analyze all the different perspectives of your central idea - you can watch it play out objectively, and you can experience firsthand, from within the story.
Share This
9 responses so far ↓
1 Andrew Dickson // Mar 5, 2007 at 11:59 am
Love the blog. Keep up the good work!
This is one of the topics that really got me interested in Dramatica in the first place.
One thing that I think relates to this topic, but has never been fully explained, is how the Crucial Element helps to define the MC’s point of view in the objective story.
My suspicion has been that if I have “Help” as my crucial element, then the story will be told from the Guardian’s perspective (or a complex character that includes the Guardian element). This also tells me that my IC will have the role of contagonist (hinder) in the objective story. But I’ve never seen this explicitly stated anywhere.
What do you think?
2 J. Hull // Mar 5, 2007 at 3:39 pm
I think you’re exactly right if you’re talking about Archetypal Characters and their relation to the crucial element. If you have a Crucial Element of “Help” and you’re using those kinds of characters, then yes your Main Character would be a Guardian.
But I’m not sure I would try and use that in telling the Overall Story - in other words, telling it from the Guardian’s perspective.
It’s my understanding that the Guardian, Contagonist, and other Objective Story Characters are just that - objective characters. Any attempt at assigning some kind of perspective to them confuses their role in the story. It clashes two perspectives - the objective and the personal in such a way that I think might be detrimental to your story.
Does that make sense?
Oh, and thanks for the kind words - I’ve been trying to hit this every day and so far, it’s been a blast.
3 Andrew Dickson // Mar 6, 2007 at 10:53 am
Thanks for the response. I’m still trying to work out how the character elements work and how they are expressed through both the objective and subjective characters in a story. I’m also struggling to understand how characters move between throughlines.
I guess what I’m thinking is that if we separate the MC from the protagonist then don’t we have to assign the MC to one of the other archetypes?
If we tell Star Wars from Obi-Wan’s point-of-view, don’t we get a very different story? And isn’t it because we’re focusing on the Guardian rather than the Protagonist?
Thanks again!
4 J. Hull // Mar 6, 2007 at 11:25 am
The short answer is yes - if you tell Star Wars from Obi-Wan’s point-of-view you would get a different story. But, the overall story would be exactly the same - the plans would be stolen, Luke’s family would be killed, Alderaan would be destroyed, and so on and so on.
I would try your hardest not to think of what Archetypal Character your Main Character is. Yes, he will have to be one of them (if you’re writing a story with those kinds of characters) but it will have no impact on his personal throughline.
The Main Character Throughline exists outside of the Objective Story. A cool trick is to think how or what problems your Main Character would take into another story. Those things that are essentially him, that are most personal, would still be there even if you changed the larger story.
If R2 and C-3PO had never shown up, Luke would still be this whiny farmboy who always felt like he had to test out how good he was. Without the whole Rebellion thing, he would’ve particpated in a podrace or tested his farming skills against his neighboring farmers.
5 Chris Huntley // Mar 7, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Andrew, you’re correct about the crucial element (e.g. Help) tying the MC to an archetype other than the protagonist.
I think the trick is to get your head away from Dramatica Archetypes and into complex characters. Archetypes are too simple for most stories–especially those told to adults. Building an Objective Character using the MC Crucial element is the way to create an OS character that ties the MC to the OS. Put them in the same player and you have someone that does the doubled-duty of satisfying the necessary story functions in the OS and providing the personal perspectives of the MC.
From the audience’s perspective, they may not be able to readily identify the difference (which is good because you don’t want the story mechanics to be too obvious). From an author’s perspective, knowing the differences between the OS charcter functions and the MC personal perspectives gives you insight into how to develop and use your character in the story.
6 JPh Brunet // Mar 29, 2007 at 8:45 pm
“Building an Objective Character using the MC Crucial element is the way to create an OS character that ties the MC to the OS”
Can someone illustrate this with examples ?
7 J. Hull // Mar 30, 2007 at 12:31 am
Certainly.
Because of the breadth of such an answer, look for a complete writeup in a post towards the early part of next week.
Thanks for giving me something to write about!
8 J. Hull // Apr 26, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Finally found some time to write a post about the Crucial Element of Screenwriting.
Hope it helps!
9 The Cult of Dramatica // May 9, 2007 at 3:30 pm
[...] covers Protagonist and the Inciting Incident as well, but it defines them with more precision. A Protagonist is not always the Main Character and the Inciting Incident needs to be defined as either an action or a decision. Without the [...]
Leave a Comment