Storymind Basics 4

Archetypal Characters in Star Wars
Describing archetypes conceptually has its place, but it is much easier to get a feel for them in an actual story. One of the best examples of archetypal characters can be found in the original Star Wars movie, "Episode IV - a New Hope." It should be noted that these arechetypes are NOT maintained in any of the sequals or sequals.
In Star Wars, Luke Skywalker is the Protagonist, for he is the one driven by initiative. Although it might appear at first that Darth Vader is the Antagonist, it is actually the Empire itself, in the form of the Gran Mof Tarkin (and all the Storm Troopers) that seeks to maintain the status quo (its own totalitarian hold on the galaxy).
The reason Darth seems to be the Antagonist is that he is the first of the "bad guys" we see. He enters with his flowing, black robes, and is clearly the leader of the evil minions. But, this is just the opening teaser of the story. Once the main plot gets going, Darth is relegated (in this first movie) to the role of glorified henchman.
Darh, in fact, is the Contagonist - the Temptation of the Dark Side of the Force - and the opposite of Obi Wan Kenobi's representation of Conscience.
Princess Leia is the cold force of Reason, the counterpart of the Emotional Chewbacca.
And finally, where the Droids are the faithful supporters or Sidekicks, the Skeptic is Han Solo (who doesn't believe in the Force, and verbally opposes every plan with which he is presented.
Again, the differences between the Droids' personalities and the bickering between them is part of a minor sub-plot. But, in the main plot, they function together as joint sidekicks.
In practice, very few stories use archetypal characters exclusively. A frequent method is to employ a mix of both archetypal and Complex characters. A good example of this technique can be seen in "The Wizard of Oz."
In the cast of Archetypal characters, Dorothy (like Luke) is the initiating Protagonist. Glinda, the good witch, fills Obi Wan's role as the helpful force of Conscience. Toto is the standard Sidekick, balanced by the Skeptical, doubting, Cowardly Lion.
The remaining principal characters (Scarecrow, Tin Man, Wicked Witch, and the Wizard himself) are close to being archetypes, but actually "swap" some elements among them that make them mmore complex. The remaining archetypes from which they will draw are Reason, Emotion, Antagonist, and Contagonist.
Although the Scarecrow (who always has a plan) might appear at first glance to be the equivalent of Leia's Reason archetype, he differs in that Leia is exceendingly controlled in her physical activities, whereas the Scarecrow is frenetic and uncontrolled (more like Chewbacca).
Similarly, though the Tin Man (who crys and rusts himself) seems to be the Emotion archetype like Chewbacca, externally, he is controlled like Leia.
It is almost as if the Scarecrow is internally like Leia, and externally like Chewbacca, whereas the Tin Man is just the reverse! In fact, we are on the verge of seeing how Archetypes are made up smaller elements of character which can be combined in different ways.
The Reason Archetype (as illustrated by Princess Leia) uses Logic internally, and is Contolled externally. The two elements work hand in hand as members of the same family, each a different spin on the same basic approach to problem solving. The Emotion Archteype (as illustrated by Chewbacca) is driven by Feelings internally, and is Uncontrolled externally.
The Scarecrow takes the internal quality of Logic from the Reason archetype, but matches it with the exterenal trait of Uncontrolled from the Emotion archetype. In the same manner, the Tin Man posseses Emotion's internal quality of Feeling and pairs it with Reason's external Control.
This "swap" makes Scarecrow and Tin Man each half of one archetype and half of another. We note that each character still has one internal and one external characteristic, just like the archetypes, but "flipped." As it turns out, this is not the only way to split an archetype.
The Wicked Witch and the Wizard also swap elements from the Antagonist and Contagonist, but not in the same way. The Antagonist, externally, tries to Prevent the Protagonist from upsetting the status quo. It's internal equivalent is Non-Consideration (simply, don't even think about it!) The Contagonist, internally, represents Temptation and externally is the fly in the ointment or the Hinderer.
In The Wizard of Oz, the Wicked Witch gets both external elements and the Wizard takes both internal ones. So, the Witch tries to Prevent Dorothy (the Protagonist) from fulfilling her quest with the Ruby slippers, and also gums up the works whenever she can, just to make things more difficult and discouraging (i.e., the apple trees and scaring the travellers with fire).
In contrast, the fearsome Wizard presents the force of Non-Consideration (put it out of your mind), and also represents Temptation. The Wizard as Tempation? This is most clearly illustrated when tells Dorothy the only way to get her back to Kansas is if he takes her there himself in his balloon. Clearly, if Dorothy returned by balloon, she would never learn the lesson that "There's no place like home" and that she had the power all along.
As we shall see, Archetypal characters are made up of more that just two elements, internal and external. The point of the moment is that Archetypal characters and Complex Characters share the same elements, just in different combinations.
For now, let's consider a complete breakdown of the internal and external elements of the eight archetypes:
Archetype Internal External
Protagonist Consider Pursue
Antagonist Non_Consideration Prevent
Reason Logic Controlled
Emotion Feeling Uncontrolled
Guardian Conscience Help
Contagonist Temptation Hinder
Sidekick Faith Support
Skeptic Disbelief Oppose
From this table it is easy to see why these characters are Archetypal. The internal and external elements of each archetype are equivalent, and between opposing archetypes are most nearly opposite. So, Archetypal Characters are consistent inside and out, and are equally in opposition to their chief opponant in both realms.
Returning to Star Wars, we can see the elements at work in each of the eight Archetypes:
Name Archetype Internal External
Luke Skywalker Protagonist Consider Pursue
Empire Antagonist Non-Consideration Prevent
Princess Leia Reason Logic Controlled
Chewbacca Emotion Feeling Uncontrolled
Obi Wan Guardian Conscience Help
Darth Vader Contagonist Temptation Hinder
Droids Sidekick Faith Support
Han Solo Skeptic Disbelief Oppose
Beginning with Luke, he has taken it upon himself to Consider
Let's get practical for a moment and build some characters using archetypes. Although the names and description of most of these archetypes are no doubt familiar to you, an exact definition of their functions in story structure may not be. In fact, if you ask any group of authors to define each of these characters by their role in a story, you are likely to get such a range of different descriptions that some are actually contradictory. In other words, most everyone has a "feel" for these archetypes, but few have an exact understanding of them.
Moreover, even if two authors agree on a definition, they often use a different name for that archetype. For example, the terms "Protagonist," "Main Character," "Central Character," and "Hero," are often used interchangeably, sometimes even by the same author, when in fact, each is a completely different dramatic attribute.
The Main Character represents the audience position in the story, from where they experience the pathos first hand. In our own minds, the Main Character represents our sense of self - essentially, where we are coming from. Every Story Mind must also have a sense of self, otherwise, the audience only comes to the story from the outside looking in, as if it were something outside themselves, and therefore they never empathize with any of the characters in the story.
The Main Character provides the audience a place to stand on the inside. And, just as with our own minds, where we are coming from may change with the situation and/or with with issue in question. So, we may spend varying amounts of time looking through the eyes of any number of characters in our story.
Still, there is always one character that feels like the "Main" character. What is it that makes this character feel speical? As we shall soon see with our archetypes, each of the elements of character represents a different kind of concern - a different area of consideration in a complete map of the mind. One of these issues is the "message issue" of the story, the human quality around which the story's moral revolves. The character who contains that element represents that issue. So when we look through that character's eyes, we are standing at ground zero of the story's argument. It is this outlook which is being questioned in the story, the one that the author is trying to prove is better (or worse) than all the other approaches to the problem. Simply, that is why the Main Character feels so important, even if we actually spend more time looking through the eyes of other characters.
The character through whose perspective is give the most time or attention in the story is the Central Character. Notice I wrote "time or attentian" rather than just "time." The impact of a character is not due solely to screen time in a movie or number of pages in a novel. It is also dependent upon how strongly that character is drawn. It is the combination of the amount of exposure to a character and the intensity with which the author describes the character that deteremine its overall impact on the audience.
This concept is well-known in psychology, and they even have a name for it: Temporal and Spatial Summation. Simply put, it means that your response to the world is partly built on a life-time of experience and partly on those fleeting but intense moments that will live forever in your memory. (In fact, even the neurons of the brain respond to the collective energy of repeated exposure to the same information over and over again and to the sudden exposure to very intense momentary information.)
Just as the functioning of the brain's neurology is represented fractally in the mind's psychology, so too is it represented in the characters (and in fact in all the dramatics) of the Story Mind.
So, the terms "Main Character" and "Central Character" do not mean the same thing at all. Still, the player in a story that stands on the crucial issue is often given the most "play" by an author, and is therefore the Central Character as well as being Main. I just doesn't necessarily have to be that way. One character could be the "message character" and another the one who is most intense.
It should also be noted that you might present all of your characters in an equally intense manner. Who then is Central? As it happens, the term "Central" is not really about a single character, but is the measurement of how impactful on the audience each character is compared to the others. It is not a wasted question to ask of each character in a first draft you have written, "How Central is he (or she)?" The answer can give you a good idea how your audience's attention and empathy will be distributed.
Just being Central does not mean you are Main, and vice versa. In the human mind, and therefore in the Story Mind as well, we sometimes adopt a point of view looking at things from that perspective. We also look internally at our own attributes without necessarily adopting that outlook . The most important character whose point of view we share (the one possessing the trait at the heart of the message) is Main. The most important character whome we observe (the one most strongly drawn by the author) is Central.
When you have a Main Character who is also the Central Character, you have the beginnings of the traditional "Hero," who we will continue to explore in a moment. But first, what of the Protagonist? The Protagonist is the character who drives the plot forward. Note that while the Main Character is dealing with the judgmental aspects of the story's message regarding a particular issue or quality of human nature, the Protagonist is dealing with the practical issues of trying to achieve the story's Goal.
As with Main and Central, the Protagonist represents an aspect of the mind: our initiative. Within each of us is a drive to shake up the status quo, to make things different (for good/benefit or for bad/detriment). It doesn't matter if that drive is benevolently or malevolently applied. It is just the drive itself that the Protagonist represents.
You'll note that in the list of eight archetypes above, they are arranged in pairs, each associated with its most antithetical match. Reason is most directly offset to Emotion, and so on. And, as expected, Protagonist is set against Antagonist.
The Antagonist represents that force within ourselves that seeks hold things back or prevent them from happening WHETHER GOOD OR BAD. Note that in a structural sense, neither Protagonist nor Antagonist (nor the other six archetypes) are absolutely associated with any moral imperative, with right or wrong, kind or mean, positive or negative intent. Protagonist and Antagonist represent only our drive to make something happen and our drive to keep things as they are.
This concept is likely quite different than what you have encountered before, but it is absolutely essential to separating the function of a character in a story's structure from the moral judgement of the author.
When a character is made to appear to be moralistically correct or righteous, it is the author's opinion of the character's action, and is not directly dependent on whether the character is trying to instigate something or to block something.
Where then do the notions of right and wrong bear on the nature of characters? This occurs when we try to fashion a Hero. The stereotypical Hero is the Main Character who is also the Central Character, the Protagonist, AND is on the side of Good. His counterpart, the Villian, is the Influence Character (more about this concept later), who is also a Central Character (the second most impactful), the Antagonist, and is on the side of Evil.
Those other characters who are on the side of "right" are the "Good Guys" and those on the side of "wrong" are the "Bad Guys." And, of course, Good Guys can fall from grace and Bad Guys can be redeemed.
By separately defining Main Character, Central Character, and Protagonist, we have now opened up a whole world of possiblities for creating far less stereotypical characters that the standard Hero and Villian.
For example, suppose we have a character who is Main, Central, and Protagonist, but Bad to the bone. This character will stand at ground zero of the story's moral issue, because he is Main. He will also be the most strongly drawn and memorable character because he is Central. He will be the character who drives the plot forward as Protagonist. But, because he is Bad (moralistically) he will be an "Anti-Hero."
Or, a character might be Main, Central, and Good, but be an Antagonist. A well-known example of this is James Bond. It is the "Villian" of the story that has the agenda, instigates things, and tries to achieve a goal. Bond's function is to stop the Bad Guy, so, by definition, Bond is an Antagonist.
It is hard to disassociate the labels of Good and Bad from Protagonist and Antagonist, but doing so allows one to break out of formula ruts and to investigate a wealth of sound, new character types.
Returning to our list of eight archetypes,
In summary, if you have only been creating Heros and Villians, youve been severly limiting your storytelling opportunities.