One of the most familiar attempts to describe the nature of the thematic argument relies on an idea called the premise. A premise usually takes this form: Some activity or character trait leads to a particular result or conclusion. An example of this would be Greed leads to Self-Destruction. A premise can be useful in describing what a thematic argument is about in a nutshell, but provides little information about how that argument will advance.

For the example above, there are many ways in which greed might lead to self-destruction. In addition, each of the four throughlines has its own view of the thematic nature of the problem, so each one needs its own thematic argument. The traditional premise looks at a story's Theme from one point of view only. If greed leads to self-destruction, is this a problem for everyone, just for the Main Character, just the Impact Character, or does it perhaps describe the nature and outcome of the relationship between Main and Impact? We simply don't have enough information to decide that. As a result, the traditional premise is fine for summing up a story, but does little to help an author create a thematic argument.

Dramatica's view of a thematic argument begins with the thematic conflict. Each of the throughlines has its own thematic conflict that we have already described to some degree during our discussion of Issue.

The Issue itself forms one side of the thematic conflict and the Counterpoint forms the other. As suggested earlier, you won't find Greed in Dramatica's thematic structure, but you will find Self-Interest. The Counterpoint for Self Interest is the Variation dynamically opposed to it in the chart, which is Morality. Thus, the premise of a thematic argument dealing with Greed might begin with the conflict, Self-Interest vs. Morality.

The advantage of the thematic conflict is that it spells out both sides of the thematic argument. Both Issue and counterpoint must be played against each other over the course of the story if the author is to make a case that one is better than the other.

The component of a traditional premise that describes growth is in the phrase "leads to." Sometimes this may also be "prevents," "creates," "hinders" or any other word that shows the relationship of the topic (such as Greed) to the conclusion (such as self-destruction). Again, this describes what an audience comes to understand at the end of a story, but does not give a clue about how to develop that understanding while creating a story.

Because it begins with a conflict rather than a topic, Dramatica's version of a thematic argument supports an author creating as many scenes or events as he may choose in which the Issue is weighed against the Counterpoint. Each time the Issue or Counterpoint is illustrated does not have to be shown in terms of all good vs. all bad. The illustration can be shades of gray. Using our example from above, in a series of scenes Self-Interest might be moderately positive, largely negative, slightly negative, then largely positive. At the end of the story the audience can sum up or average out all the instances in which they have seen it.

Similarly, the counterpoint of Morality in its own scenes might be largely positive, moderately positive, largely negative and largely negative again. At the end of the story the audience will sum up the counterpoint and decide whether Morality by itself is positive or negative.

The audience does not consciously work out these averages. Rather, it is simply affected by the constant layering of value judgments created by the author's bias. In fact, audience members are constantly balancing the Issue against the counterpoint in their hearts until the story is over and they feel more toward one or the other.

The advantage of this approach is that an author does not have to be heavy-handed by saying only negative things about one side of the thematic conflict and only positive things about the other. An audience will be much more open to a balanced emotional argument where decisions are seldom black and white.

Finally, as reflected in traditional premise, an audience will want to see the results of adhering to one value standard over another. In our example of Greed, it led to Self-destruction. This is a generic conclusion. It could mean either a failure in one's goals or a personal loss of the heart.

Dramatica sees goals and yearnings as two different things: One born of reason and one born of emotion. How completely we achieve our goals controls our degree of satisfaction. How well we accommodate our yearnings controls our degree of fulfillment. So, one thing we need to know at the end of thematic argument is whether our goals ended in success or failure, and whether things feel good or bad.

The degree of success or failure, good or bad, is determined in storytelling. The thematic story points of Success, Failure, Good, and Bad simply suggest on which side of the fence the conclusion settled. As a result, there are two different parts to the conclusion of a Dramatica thematic argument -- the Outcome (Success or Failure) and the Judgment (Good or Bad).

From these considerations we can see that four broad conclusions to a thematic argument are possible:

 

1.The Success/Good conclusion = Happy Ending

2.The Failure/Bad conclusion = Tragedy

3.The Success/Bad conclusion = Personal Tragedy

4.The Failure/Good conclusion = Personal Triumph

A Failure/Good story, for example, does not mean the Failure is Good but that despite a lack of satisfaction, the feel of the story is fulfilling. Such is the case in the motion picture Rain Man in which Charlie (Tom Cruise) fails to get the inheritance, yet overcomes his hatred of his father. This is a Personal Triumph. Rocky is another example of a Failure/Good story.

Similarly, Success/Bad stories are like Remains of the Day in which Mr. Stevens (Anthony Hopkins) successfully preserves the household through wars and owners, yet in the end finds himself empty and alone. This is a Personal Tragedy. The Silence of the Lambs is also an example of a Success/Bad story.

Another Success/Bad story is "Romeo and Juliet" by William Shakespeare. It is Success because the families cease their feud after the death of their favored children. It is Bad because Romeo (the Main Character) dies unhappily.