Thread by @Spaztique

A Story (Structure) Reboot: A thread summarizing Narratology for #storytelling and #writing.

Part 3: Building Characters, Casts, and Events

We’re now approaching all the standard stuff most fiction writers get taught, only now, it’ll be through the lens of narratology.

For designing characters, we have the old standby Characterization (the surface) vs. Deep Character (the real personality).
Appearance and surface behavior can vary wildly, but it should stay consistent, they should be motivated to behave that way, and be (somewhat) realistic.

For Deep Character, there are two dimensions: Personality and Values.
For Personality, there are dozens of models to choose from: OCEAN, Enneagram, Myers-Briggs, Archetypes, and they can be mixed.
Thanks to focalization, you only need to modify a few traits to make a character.

Each key (i.e. focalized) trait should be either low or high, and at healthy or unhealthy levels.
For example, take Assertiveness.
Healthy/Low: A humble person.
Healthy/High: A confident person.
Unhealthy/Low: Submissive and weak.
Unhealthy/High: A controlling, rude blowhard.

For values, let’s use Spencer Stuart’s Integrated Model: Stability vs. Flexibility, and Independence vs. Interdependence.
This creates four categories of desires: Uniqueness and Self-Enhancement, Safety and Conservation, Expansion and Adventure, and Bonding and Connection.

Of course, this isn’t the limit on values: you also got Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (widely used by Western writing schools), Murray’s System of Needs (used in French/Japanese writing), and Schwartz’s Wheel of Values (from which the Stuart Spender model is based).

So, you got all the basic tools for making individual characters, but how you do make casts?
If you’re familiar with Robert McKee, you may know of his favorite tool for figuring out conflict: The Semiotic Square!
Only this time, we’re using it to build a cast of characters!

The Semiotic Square has four corners of opposing values, and thanks to Post-Structuralism, you got plenty of options as to what you can put in each corner.
Top Left: The Base Value. X.
Bottom Right: Contradictory. Not X.
Top Right: Contrary. Y.
Bottom Left: Implied. Not Y.

So, let’s pretend we’re building a cast of characters with a base value of hard work. What’s it’s opposite, i.e. NOT Hard Work? Working smarter? Sure, let’s go with that. The contrary: Laziness? So, what’s Not Hard Work, Not Working Smarter, and Not Laziness? Passivity?

From this, we got four separate character personality types… but seems a little flat, right? Let’s add another dimension!
Serious, Goofy, Serious-But-Goofy, Goofy-But-Serious!
This is getting good. One more?
Pragmatic, Moral, Flexible, Apathetic!
Now they’re getting complex!

Let’s try building a cast:
1. Lazy + Goofy + Moral
2. Hard Work + Serious + Flexible
3. Passivity + Goofy + Pragmatic
4. Work Smarter + Goofy-But-Serious + Flexible
5. Hard Work + Serious-But-Goofy + Moral
6. Passivity + Serious + Apathetic
That’s 64 possible characters!

And let’s not forget: there’s wiggle room for character development, for characters to show deeper personality traits, for changes in character dynamics, and then some!
Each similar trait adds fuel for a relationship, while each opposite trait gives room for eventful scenarios.

And it doesn’t just work for personalties or themes, either: it can also work for appearances.
-Casual, Fancy, Trendy, Eclectic
-Masculine, Feminine, Androgynous, Gender-Fluid
-Straight lines, Curvy Lines, Geometric Shapes, Chaotic Patterns
There’s no limit to combinations!

But now comes the question: what if you have a personality, but no appearance? Or an appearance with no personality?
Either use their personality to determine what that kind of person would wear and look like, or determine what the appearance says about their personality.

Now that you got a setting and characters to inhabit it, it’s time to build events, and there are two approaches:
1. The Classic Approach: Build only the essential (i.e. focalized) events.
2. The Modern Approach: Build as many events as you can, select for focalization later.

“But I can’t build *that many* events! I can barely even build *one*!” Don’t sweat it: we’re about to get into what exactly an event is, and knowing this, not only will building scenes be easier and faster, but you won’t have to worry if they’re useless.

Simply put, an event is when a state change occurs.
…
…
That’s it.
That’s all there is to it.
That disappointment you’re feeling after anticipating a bigger answer? Or that chuckle after expecting something serious? That’s a state change.
… Fine, let’s go deeper…

Storyworlds are filled with three types of events: Happenings, Satellites, and Kernels.
Happenings are “non-events”: nothing changes, not even an anecdotal insight. It’s when a character travels from one place to another, or has a normal day at school or work: it can be skipped.

What separates a Happening from the other Event Types is the lack of “tellability.”
-Does something, from beginning to end, actually happen? (Not a dream or imagining, though reactions to dreams and imaginings do count.)
-Is it unpredictable?
-Do the consequences last?
And so on.

Kernels and Satellites, on the other hand, show a world in a constant flux of change.
Kernels are events that dramatically shift the states of the storyworld.
Satellites are events that show the characters reacting to adapting to the shifts of the Kernel. (Hence the term.)

Look at any sitcom, and you’ll see how Kernels and Satellites are used together.
First, we have a normal setting, and then, something wild happens to disrupt the status quo. That’s a Kernel Event.
And the hilarity that ensues as they struggle to adjust? Those are Satellites.

If you’ve heard the phrase, “Stories are just ‘ands,’ ‘buts,’ and ‘therefores’,” then Satellites are your “Ands,” and your Kernels are your “Buts.”
Wanna know why some writers suggest killing off characters when stuck in a plot? Because character deaths are Kernels.

The Kernel-Satellite approach also explains many major mainstream plot structures.
What’s Syd Field’s Paradigm? Plots Points (Kernels) and Pinch Points (Satellites).
Hero’s Journey? A series of Kernels, divided by Satellites.
Save The Cat’s Beats? A pattern of Kernels/Satellites.

Even in my own writing, I never understood why I enjoyed writing some scenes more than others.
But now I know: those were the ones that wildly shifted the dynamics!
I only thought, “Nice: this scene gives me new story options.”
That was a Kernel opening room for new Satellites!

Next time, we’ll look at the shapes of individual events, and how they can be shaped for maximum tellability.
But from this thread alone, you should have a fresh new look at typical story writing theories, from character creation to scene dynamics.
I hope this helps you all!