If I have to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.
Today I'm gonna write about dissonances, decisions and resolutions. I learned something about those in a seminary at my university and found the learnings very useful for story-matters. Let's start.
Dissonance, Decision and Resolution
To me, a story doesn't necessarily have to have a conflict, although many a story surely has one. I believe that instead of "conflict" one should rather say "dissonance", because questions, unresolved matters, inconsistencies, any tension, a spontaneous thought.. all these might lead to choices and resolutions too. But even the spontaneous thought needs to be motivated by a perceived difference, there has to be some reason why a character wants to act in the world. This may be "I want the world to be a better place" but it may also be "I want to do a walk, but I ain't doin' one".
 |
| Geralt famously once proclaimed that not deciding is no decision. Source |
This idea of dissonance, decision and resolution of course requires an actor, a character in many cases, who is able to perceive differences, make (be it unconscious) decisions and act such that things are set in motion that lead eventually to a resolution of the dissonance.
This, of course, is no template for every case. I'm thinking of all the never resolved cliffhangers and stories with an open end here. Random thought: In general, deliberate diversions from an often occuring category-defining pattern seem to often belong to the same category, if the diversion is not to big. Anyway, the pattern itself is useful for describing many stories, so I'll continue.
Notice that the actor doesn't have to be human: Animals and AIs are two obvious examples, but in fiction we can make literally anything an actor. Speaking teapots, walking toys and trees.. Even emojis have become actors in a film. Notice also, that while the main character is the obvious choice for where to place dissonance/decision/resolution, one might also give such arcs to minor characters, groups, communities and even whole societies or universes. In case of giving a collective arc to multiple actors, we have some kind of collective storytelling exemplified on single characters. So no limits there.
Besides introducing me to this way of thinking about stories, the mentioned seminary also gave me some questions to ask about a story using such a structure:
Dissonance:
- Who is a "stakeholder" to this dissonance?
- Are there interests standing against each other? Which?
- What is at stake?
- Which value is this about?
Decision:
- Who makes the decision?
- What options are there?
- What gives rise to noticing the need for/doing the decision?
Resolution (or Consequences):
- Did someone loose/win something? What?
- Which interests were asserted?
- Which new dissonance evolved?
- How did a value change?
These questions are meant to help making a story better. I'll test this on my Witcher 2 quest.
Further Reading / Inspiration
- Wikipedia: Cognitive Dissonance Link
A "Witcher" Quest - Part 7: Dissonance, Decision, Resolution
There are several instances where this pattern can be observed in my quest. The most obvious ones can be seen in the decisions made by Geralt, especially those which the player controls:
- accompany Alene (or not)
- intervene when Alene's father is about to hit her
- help Alene with her plan (or not)
- blame woodworker, bear or no one
- how to calm down townspeople
But the NPCs in this quest are meant to have a story on their own too, and thus I've given them some dissonances, decisions and resolutions aswell:
- Alene decides to lie to Geralt about where her parents live
- Aisker (Alene's father) decides to teach Alene a lesson
- Aisker decides to ask Geralt for help
- ...
There are also some things happening in the background, which are never explicitely revealed or happening before/after Geralt's visit in the valley:
- Alvin decides to move away from the village
- Aisker decides to discontinue the woodworking tradition and turn himself to the lake
- Many in the village unconsciously decide to follow him
- Alene decides to flee the valley
Let's take a closer look at one of the most important threads: Alene's (attempted) flight from the valley.
The dissonance starts in her childhood: Even though not consciously, she is aware of the conflict between her father and her uncle, who visits her at times. The same holds for the loss of tradition happening in the village. She is drawn to her family's roots: Earth, tree and forest flora and fauna. She doesn't understand why her parents try to hinder these thoughts. Worse, they can't give her a good explanation, not to mention a honest one. Growing up, she questions her parents more actively, and the lack of a real answer hurts ever more. In his heart, her father realizes he can't control her thoughts, on the outside, he is not able to live with that. In fear of exposal of true reasons he goes to great lengths and, finding no other way, even hits his daughter. For a long time, Alene doesn't have the energy to get herself out of this situation, but the need is ever more urgent. This all is the dissonance. Let's answer the questions from above.
- Who is a "stakeholder" to this dissonance?
Alene, Aisker and his wife, Alvin - Are there interests standing against each other? Which?
Aisker (stern, lake, anti-forest, anti-Alvin, protect Alene from Alvin)
vs. Alvin (soft, forest, tradition, protect Alene from unhealthy family/village dynamic)
vs. Alene (individuality, freedom, right on a healthy life)
vs. Geralt (not getting involved) - What is at stake?
a family's integrity, a daughter's wellbeing - Which value is this about?
patriarchy, family, progress
At some point then, she is independent enough to dare making the decision to leave her father, her family, the village, the valley. Even though her wounds and insecurities stay, there's now an inner drive, a newly born stubborness that sustains her. This is the decision.
- Who makes the decision?
Alene - What options are there?
stay in this dynamic, change it from within, break out - What gives rise to noticing the need for/doing the decision?
the increasing pain
She then thought of a plan. The plan is simple and not that well-engineered, since she has no practice in such things. She imagines, that she may simply pack her stuff and go of with Alvin. But she didn't consider many pragmatic things like - Alvin might not be too eager to just vanish with her. Or dangers lurking on the way to Alvin's hut. Or that more than some proviant might be needed when going on such a journey. This is why Geralt witnesses two times her plans' failure.
The next part heavily depends on Geralt, Alvin and their actions and decisions. Alene on her own - even though she surely would try again anyway - isn't able to archieve what she aims for. She needs others to help her, she needs a catalysator to get on her own feet. Geralt can provide a first part of that by deciding to help getting the lord's permission. Alvin is the more important person in the long run: Without him she wouldn't survive outside of the valley, and he will be the one preparing her to truly stand on her own feet.
On the other hand Alvin is not able to get the lord's permission on his own and without an elder companion Alene won't make it to him anyway. So Geralts help is indeed crucial. This shows in the bad ending for Alene's quest: If Geralt denies his help, she will die while trying to reach Alvin.
This all is the resolution.
If Alene flees the valley:
- Did someone loose/win something? What?
The family lose a daughter, the daughter a family - Which interests were asserted?
Alene's: individuality, freedom, right on a healthy life
Alvin's: soft, forest, tradition, protect Alene from unhealthy family/village dynamic - Which new dissonance evolved?
how do Alene/Alvin survive out there
how will Aisker/Family cope with his loss
was Geralt's choice right? - How did a value change?
patriarchy, family did not win
If Alene dies:
- Did someone loose/win something? What?
Everyone lose - Which interests were asserted?
Geralt's not-getting-involved - Which new dissonance evolved?
Family: how to cope with loss
Geralt: how to cope with decision's consequences - How did a value change?
patriarchy, family, geralt's morale codex did not win
-------------
When looking at this analysis one might spot that there is a "happy" branch for this thread: If Alene leaves the valley. According to the "grey choices" pattern employed in many Witcher games, one might need to rebalance that imbalance with complementary consequences in the second quest branch which is intertwined with this one. I pose this as a challenge to my future self.
Ideas for Feedback
- Might a fourth step "Action" be sensible? Such that it goes: Dissonance, Decision, Action, Resolution?
- Do you agree with my final conclusion regarding my Witcher quest?
Conclusion
I believe the terms I talked about certainly are of use for designing a narrative and for writing respective design decisions down. However one should probably do analysis' like I did only for major threads.
Hope you have a great time!
No comments:
Post a Comment