The specific order of events within a story is unique. This sequence rises up naturally from the choices an Author makes in regards to character dynamics and the ultimate message they want to communicate to their Audience. Uncovering the proper structure beneath every story is a long and arduous process that, if done correctly, can transform a single piece of narrative fiction into a timeless classic.

Acts exist as a way of focusing dramatic attention on the different ways characters can go about solving their problems. There is more to these general areas of story than simply dividing up a story into Beginning, Middle and End. Writers who wish to create something meaningful can start by giving purpose to the turning of an Act.

Aristotle tells us stories have a Beginning, Middle and End. Syd Field and Blake Snyder tell us the Second Act has a Midpoint effectively dividing it in two. The truth is, all of them are confusing the forests with trees. There are really four movements in every complete story, a reality based on the fact that the mind’s problem-solving process follows the same approach.

As formulaic as they may seem, plot points are intimately tied to the meaning of a complete story. More than simply a way to hit beats that should happen at page 30 or page 90, these events or decisions energize the problems that sit at the heart of a story’s internal structure. Without them, there would be no movement and no meaningful path for the characters to follow in their efforts to resolve the inequities they face.

The idea that the Protagonist is always the centerpiece of a well-told story is a fallacy. While this is most often the case in popular American cinema, there are literally thousands of complete and meaningful stories that can be created wherein the audience has no personal attachment to the one character driving things forward. Limiting oneself to an understanding that is easier to get leaves a writer open to creative suppression.

Misguided faith in cinematic heroes should not dictate story structure. A complete story — one that is meaningful and lasting — requires that its initial author fully comprehend the importance of every component. Relying on a storytelling concept that started out as a gag can only lead to ultimate failure.

Everyone understands that Main Characters have their own personal issues to deal with. It’s why they are so crucial to a story’s meaning. Wouldn’t it be nice, then, to understand exactly what this problem is all about?

When a story feels like it is slowing down or somehow gets lost in the middle of the 2nd act, chances are there is an issue with a weak or undefined Protagonist. Understanding what the Goal of the story is can go a long way towards establishing this essential character and therefore insure that an audience remains riveted to their seats.

Many hold true to the notion that the Protagonist is always the Main Character. This is an old idea that does not accurately describe what is really going on within the structure of complete stories. Understanding the nature of problem solving and the mechanisms through which stories depict this process is key for those wishing to write something off the norm.

Effective story structure requires a screenwriter to establish the mental processes a Main Character employs in the pursuit of his or her own personal problems. Why? Because the order of events that unfold are determined by what “kind” of a mind the central character has.

Every book on screenwriting eventually issues the command that Main Characters must always take action. But is this always the case? Main Characters face their own personal struggles, but it is how they approach those problems that helps to define them. Action is not always the way.

Character arc is often referred to as the transformation a Main Character undergoes throughout the course of a screenplay. This is incorrect. Effective story structure dictates growth, but not necessarily transformation.

Complete stories, the ones we love and cherish, are those that are trying to say something beyond the spectacle. Where the Main Character ends up at the end of a screenplay or novel plays an essential part in providing that meaning.

In this article, the secret to great screenwriting is revealed. For an audience to fall in love with a film’s events, they must first understand that the filmmakers endeavored to provide them with something they could never find in their own lives: meaning.

Archetypal Characters are a wonderful starting point when first starting out in structuring a meaningful screenplay or story. Great authors, however, break free of these standards and create complex characters that more closely resemble the people in our lives.

Moving away from the paradigm of the Hero’s Journey, this article examines the eight basic character archetypes that can be found in many stories. These archetypes are the fast food of screenwriters and writers in general — namely, quick and easy to get, but lacking in any meaningful substance.

An examination of the usefulness and accuracy of Archetypal Characters as proposed by the paradigm of the mono-myth. While on the surface they may seem insightful, ultimately they provide little to no value in the structuring of a complete story.

Screenwriters everywhere often fall into the trap of writing lines like “You and I, we’re both the same” or “I saw myself in his eyes.” This occurs because of the relationship that exists at the heart of every great story. While complete stories requires this dynamic, you don’t have to resort to clichéd dialogue.

Far too often, experts on screenwriting and storytelling fall back on the inaccurate assumption that a Main Character must completely transform themselves. This is only correct for half of the stories ever written.

If you want to write a screenplay or story that appeals to a unique audience demographic, you must pay special close attention to the way that story is structured. Male and female audience members differ on the kinds of stories that appeal to them the most.

Character arc does not mean a character has to change. It simply doesn’t. What it does mean is that a character needs to grow to a point where they are not sure whether to change, or to dig in their heels.

The mental sex of a Main Character is an integral part of the structure of story. Not only does it determine how the Main Character will go about solving problems, but it is also responsible for the order in which events happen in a story.

Dennis Lehane’s novel Mystic River offers a rare insight into the complex dynamics that make up a Main Character’s “arc.” The less straight-forward that growth is, the closer to real life the portrayal will be and the more meaningful it will be for the audience.

Concluding article on the power of meaningful endings in stories. The meaningful ending is the purpose of every great screenplay or novel. It is the essence of what the author is trying to say and the thing audiences remember most long after the curtain has fallen.

When it comes to crafting a screenplay that is both bittersweet and meaningful, many screenwriters turn to the “bitter” half of such stories — the Personal Tragedy. While not as overwhelmingly depressing as the classic Shakespearean Tragedy, this kind of story seeks to create conflicting emotions within the hearts and minds of an unsuspecting audience. Sometimes winning can be ruinous for a character.

Screenwriters looking to write films that are a bit more complex and subtle in their approach, would do well to understand the mechanics behind the “bittersweet” ending. Juxtaposing success or failure in the main storyline with the emotional fulfillment (or lack thereof) of the Main Character leads to more complex, more true-to-life storytelling. When looking at the “sweet” half of bittersweet endings, the message is clear: sometimes losing can be the best thing.

The tragic story, while a downer for any audience, carries with it significant meaning. Authors who wish to write stories that tell of both personal and extra-personal destruction can do so through the use of a tragic story structure. The key is understanding that this destruction comes as a result of failing to resolve the story’s major problems.

Screenplays that strive to be about something more than explosions and attractive personalities must come to a conclusion with one of four meaningful endings. No matter how subtle or obvious the storytelling may be, every single complete story told will either be a Triumph, a Personal Triumph, a Personal Tragedy, or a Tragedy. In this first of a series of articles, Hollywood’s favorite — the Triumph — is examined.

A common complaint of many films is that while they are stunning visually, they somehow lack heart. This unfortunate occurrence happens when a story either minimizes or all-together ignores the relationship storyline that sits at the center of a complete story.

Films can have the same story structure, yet be so different in their storytelling that most normal people would rarely identify them as being the same. Story fanatics are not normal people. The Sixth Sense and Into The Wild — two films that couldn’t be more different in subject matter and genre — have almost the same exact structure, sharing many of the same thematic issues.

The concept of the character arc is often thought to explain the transformation a Main Character goes through over the course of a story. The problem with this definition is the idea of “transformation”. Not every Main Character completely changes, nor do they have to. Growth can occur without losing oneself.

Trust me, there is a difference between the two.

A look at what stories need to work through before they can be resolved.

The keys to serving up that dish best served cold.

Link to free instructional clips.

And the problem with leaving one of them out.

A Story Limit is one of the most important things you can put into your story.

A look at the mechanism that forces a story towards its inevitable climax.

Exploring the Inciting Incident of a story.

A story must explore all four throughlines if it is to be successful.

An explanation of why the Impact Character acts as the catalyst in the Main Character’s growth.

It is not essential for the Main Character to drive the plot forward. What is essential is that we the audience share their emotional experiences. Their surprises become our surprises.

An interesting look at the character primarily responsible for influencing growth in the Main Character.

An exploration of the idea that all Character is fate.

Story goals are meaningless without their corresponding consequences.

Because in their language, nothing is; everything does.

An easy way to understand the throughlines.

Explaining the dissonance between how the main character solves problems and the kinds of problems that exist in the larger overall story.

There are elegant and not-so-elegant ways of introducing this most important relationship.

Some articles from the early days of this site.

Examining the specifics of the plot points within a story can help explain why certain plot progressions feel different than others.

In order for a story to be meaningful to an audience, the plot points must be of the same type.

The ultimate most important element of any story.

Another technique to determine the kinds of events that drive your story forward.

Main Character is a point-of-view and not necessarily always the protagonist.

A wonderful video montage of Impact Characters.

My first attempt at creating a diagram to help explain some of Dramatica’s more complex concepts.

A different way of looking at what is at the heart of the Main Character’s central problem.

And how to incorporate them into your story.

Is it possible that a Main Character could have a significant relationship with another character in a story?

Sometimes it can be difficult determining where the source of conflict is really coming from in a story. One solution can be found in the use of genre.

Clarifying change in characters other than the Main Character.

Quick thoughts on the relation between the resolves of the two principal characters.

Some other pieces that might be missing from your story, and how to fix that.

Why there are Eight Archetypal Characters, and why you should be concerned with them.

Determining the causality between the events in a story.

In a conversation I had with Dramatica theory creator Chris Huntley last November, I asked him, “After 10 years of writing story analysis, what are the top 10 re-occurring problems you see in story today?” He gave me two.

The difference between stories driven by actions, and those driven by decisions.

The character most stories forget to include.

Certain elements of your story occur once per act. Others live throughout all the acts. Dramatica has a term for the latter.

Quick tips on two important concepts.

Well, after a month of being away due to personal issues, it certainly is nice to come back and see all the new wonderful things there are to read about Dramatica.

If you’re analyzing a film, or writing one of your own, and you’re having trouble identifying that first Driver event (which most people refer to as the Inciting Incident), there is something you should consider.

Interesting thought on how the two principal characters relate.

Tips for writing a Steadfast Main Character.

Quick tips on the Main Character’s Approach.

Tips on the Main Character’s Growth.

Some thoughts on the development of the most important relationship in a story.

Differentiating the difference between the Objective Story and the Subjective Story.

An interesting thing happened this week as I began a rewrite on a screenplay.

Story theory works when it is based on things that actually happen in the “real” world.

Defining the difference between a character who “changes” and one who “grows.”

Sometimes Dramatica can be so precise that an author can become confused trying to determine even the simplest of concepts. The concept of the Protagonist is one of them.

A quick thought on why Main Characters in most children’s stories do not change.

Dramatica can seem a bit overwhelming when you first start out. I remember flipping through the dictionary at the back of the theory book and thinking, “This is insane!” But after eight years of working with it, I’ve got the model pretty much memorized (at least down to the Variation level) and have a pretty good understanding of each of the terms.

Clarifying the differences between the Dramatica terms “Enlightenment” and “Wisdom.”

Can you have a Main Character who is not really involved in the Overall Story?

A neat way of clarifying the judgment on your Main Character.

How tension builds in a story.

The nature of act turns in relation to the growth of the Main Character.

Not all Steadfast characters are created equal.

Determining what kind of a Main Character you are writing.

Which one does the Main Character open?

This is a test of the HTML5 system

Connecting the Main Character’s Approach with their Resolve.