Ghosts & Stases

GHS and STS. I’ve been trying to figure out how to rename “Lie” so it doesn’t sound so goofy and also because it doesn’t sound right to me. (Which is kinda circular in meaning since “goofy” means “it doesn’t sound right, and it sounds silly to me”). The “lie” served the POV and got them to the story’s beginning. It is their normal. Their homeostasis. It’s what’s keeping their life together and from breaking apart. That is the power of STS. We don’t enter stases because we think it’s fun. We do it because it’s our survival mechanism. It’s our reaction to our traumas. Bad thing happened to us, we don’t want it to happen ever again, so we build defense and coping mechanisms. This all contributes to our stasis.

So really, the Lie is STASIS.

As I wrote about last week, ghosts are the traumatic events that define us. Where one of three things on the Maslow Hierarchy can be threatened. Our basic stability (home), our tribe (connection), and our agency (ability to do stuff. Power). And when we experience that trauma, we react in two ways: we self-deprive (SDP) or we overreact (OVR). And those reactions can manifest in any of the four character aspects: Ability (ABL), Roles (ROL), Loyalties (LOY), and Status, or more specifically, how you manage your agency in the system. Do you play the game or ignore it, or fight it? Ranking, hierarchy, system, order… HRC? RNK? POS? Position? PST?

Maybe I don’t need to tag those things. Maybe I just need to tag the six final results of that trauma and reaction pairings. Let’s try that.

Does that work? Just name the ghost like that? But it’s not the ghost, it’s the reaction to it. And it doesn’t even include the ARLX.

Would leaning on one ARLX over another lead to a distinctly different type of ARC to the point that I should create a table? Six trauma reactions times four aspects would equal 24… Stasis-Aspect Pairs.

RTLPSNLWFFAMOUTCLB
ABLRaPaLaFaOaCa
ROLRrPrLrFrOrCr
LOYRlPlLlFlOlCl
PSTRpPpLpFpOpCp

Stasis & Aspect Pairs

Ra

If you’re rootless and wandering the world, I would imagine relying on an ability of some sort is how you make your living. Performance, medical, travelling musician, conmen, fly-by-night operations, mercenary maybe. Staying in one place is foreign to you (why bother, it gets taken away anyway. Or, they’ve hurt you and you’re on the run.). This is someone who has high charisma but keeps everyone at a distance, relying on their ability to impress and make their living. Or they’re just loners. Or adventurers like Theseus, Odysseus, who must be on the road, leaving a wake of destroyed relationships, broken hearts, and abandoned children behind. ARC: They need to find a place they feel safe enough to slow down and think and work through their problems. They need to STOP RUNNING, arc: GET UNSTUCK, or ha ha get arc: GROUNDED. I can see this potentially being a arc: WISE UP too if it’s a restless wanderer who simply left to explore. Like Buddha leaving the confines of his secure, comfortable, rich life. Which leads us to…

Pa

If your home is everything to you, and you’ll defend it to the point of self-destruction, it probably means you’re akin to preppers/survivalists in the modern age. There’s a level of paranoia here. You have excesssive emergency supplies, you have complex security systems, you have dogs, guards, domestic SOPs, guns hidden away. You know the exits and entrances. All this is useful and purposeful in places that are actually dangerous. I’m thinking South Africa or Medieval Castle times. When raiders and robbers did show up at your door. Unfortunately, these prisons also hold their loved ones hostage. And they will rebel, run away, or get hurt by your own security system. ARC: Ultimately, they need to realize they’re not doing it for their family, or loved ones, but this fear or insecurity. So this is realizing an arc: UGLY TRUTH or finally giving in to arc: LET GO. Or they arc: HIT LIMITS and burn out or this paranoia.

La

I feel like there is a lot of overlap here with the rootless-ability pair except the lone-wolf-ability pair has the luxury of staying in one place if they want. They can make a home, they can have material wealth, they can be an introverted extraordinaire wunderkind… but they keep EVERYONE at an arm’s length. OK, maybe a few friends, but even those are suspect. House M.D. The lone wolf who’s really good at something are obsessed with their work/craft/profession probably. But specific things that don’t require trust and loyalty, or if it does, they don’t manage it well. And if it does, they always have one foot out the door and their bags are always packed. Commitment issues. This is almost a trope. The hyper-talented X who treats their team like shit, and then eventually realizes how they’ve inadvertently built their found family around them. Don Draper, Carmy Berzatto. The key is to accept that family. arc: FIND FAM, maybe arc: GET UNSTUCK, or arc: LET GO. I mean, at the end of the day, they really just need to go to therapy for their trust or abandonment issues.

Fa

So the opposite of the lone wolf is someone who will do literally anything to keep their family or network under their vise grip. So the abilities here are power dynamics, social manipulation, guilt trips, gaslighting, playing one child against another, playing one parent against another, creating drama triangles (victim, persecutor, savior), having no boundaries, or sending mixed messages. I mean basically creating toxic drama to keep people in your whirlwind like the parents in Arrested Development, Waystar Patriach in Succession, and/or running your family life like A Game of Thrones with all the political backstabbing and intrigue. And the one thing they fear, which is people leaving them, usually happens because I mean, how can it not? People avoid them, can’t deal with them, and set boundaries. These are usually unhinged villains in Austen novels. arc: HIT LIMITS and be unhinged. Or maybe they arc: WISE UP? I guess another way that ability is used to keep the family together is them sacrificing everything and constantly blaming and resenting them too. So possible arc: UGLY TRUTH.

Oa

A little overlap with rootless and lone wolf of course, but these people refuse to be part of the system. The system fucked them over and they’re rebelling against it. They can build homes, they can have friends, but the line is drawn with being part of the group that created their backstory. Can be school, church, government, race, class-warfare… leading up to unions, protest groups, rebellions. What is the arc here though? That they need to see the individuals in the group? Or realize their hatred was misguided? The outside world isn’t evil? arc: NEW FRAME. Or to realize revenge won’t get them anywhere? That they’re fighting something they can’t ever win. And this fight will destroy them if they keep going. arc: GROUNDED. Or maybe it’s simple as accepting they don’t have to keep fighting the system. arc: HIT LIMITS. They can just leave. But most stories like these usually have them ground up in cautionary tales too. What’s the ability though? That they’re really good at sabotage? lol. Or protecting their loved ones away from they system? Over-protective? Or they’re leaders who are great at speaking out and rebelling against the system? If you lean on your ability to be an outsider, you end up with a frame of view that most people don’t have. Maybe they come in from the cold and join the NSA like Will Hunting. Maybe it’s a arc: WISE UP story where they realize not all authority and systems are evil.

Ca

Someone who’s really good at the politics of the game. They know how to play people off each other, manage, delegate, climb the ladder. The trauma is probably because they found themselves in a helpless situation where they had no agency, got crushed by power, and saw that the only way to never let that happen again is to get power. The journey is probably them realizing how destructive the game of getting power becomes until they play the game and win the game at all costs. It’s a cautionary tale, the other side of the coin of the outsider, where they realize the game is not worth playing, as in arc: GROUNDED, but it could also be them realizing the game will never actually reward them arc: HIT LIMITS.

Rr

Ooh. This is interesting. So instead of leaning on your skillset as you wander around without a permanent home… you lean into your identity as a craftsperson, a missionary, an evangelist, a travelling salesperson, whatever you’re good at. And you use this identity to never establish a home. Totally getting Up in the Air (2009) vibes here. Someone whose identity is wrapped around NOT having a home. And I suppose the arc here is they eventually find someone that they do want to settle down with and make a foundational home with? arc: HIT LIMITS? Although, the twist for George Clooney in that movie is he was wrong to want that with the wrong person.

Pr

The king, the patriach, the protector of loved ones. Except they’re doing it in a way that’s suffocating. A lot of overlap with the ability version of this. This one is probably more dangerous though. It’s their identity versus just being good at it. Someone who’s good at security and defense may not necessarily have to build a prison around them. They could be a Jason Bourne character who can do it and is always aware of it. Just hyper-vigelant. But someone who makes it their identity would probably be more dangerous in that they do it to the point where if they’re identity is threatened, they double down. When someone is good at something and they lose it, they feel useless and worthless. When it’s their identity though, it’s an existential crisis. They question their entire life and all their decisions that led them up to that point. So the arc here is how do you threaten that identity to get them to realize they don’t have to be X anymore.

Lr

Feel like there’s a LOT of overlap here with La. But similar to what I wrote about in Rr, this is about identity. I guess the difference between Rr and Lr is that Lr, again, can stay in one place and be a lone wolf. They don’t have to move around. And in fact, because they stay in one place, they become that curmudgeonly, but ultimately super insightful (although cutting) person you go to when you need the truth. The arc here is them being an asshole about it and maybe eventually hurting someone they love with their “blunt truth”. Maybe they learn grace or empathy and stop hurting feelings, or learn how to wield their weapon better.

Fr

Interesting thought. Fa is good at power dynamics. Fr may not be. I think that’s the difference between ability and role. Just because you identify as X doesn’t mean you’re good at X. This makes for interesting stories when the patriach or matriach dies and the next up in succession has to step up to the role. Everyone is looking to them to lead and they’re just so new to it. There’s a really good growth story here. The opposite of this is someone who’s holding on to power and can’t let go because it’s their entire identity. Almost tropey, but the mom who can’t let go. The CEO who can’t let go. The boss who’s intimidated or threatened by someone younger and coming for their position. The arc is to die (and perpetuate that life moves on), or they get disillusioned and pay the costs (King Lear), or they actually learn to let go and pass the torch. SIDE NOTE: maybe it’s not a pair so much as GHOST>STASIS>ARC.

Or

Every fucking teenager. Amirite? Fight the system. Stick it to the man. etc. etc. Except we all grow up and then get fed into the capitalist system. Punks. Misfits. Weirdos. I think the challenge is that these people, and I’ve been one myself, is that you hold on to your identity as an outsider so much that you don’t really like or love why you’re doing it anymore. The identity of being an outsider is more important than the actual cause.

Cr

Oof. This one is interesting. Climbing the ladder is their role. What does that even mean? I’m thinking Littlefinger. Like wielding and manipulating power is all he does. But does he define his identity by that over, say, his ability at it? He may. His whole identity is wrapped into how the game is unfair, since you’re born into nobility. That’s something you can’t control, but climbing the ladder by manipulating nobility? That’s something you can do. Like is position (or Cp) even something he cares about? I mean, yes, it’s the reward, but I don’t think he chases Cp purely for the power so much as being able to do it and being defined by it. I also wonder if Don Draper falls into this part of the matrix too. I know I put him under La, because ultimately he is a lone wolf who relies on his ability… actually, yeah, Draper is definitely more of a La than a Cr. Draper is constantly running from his past. Littlefinger is embracing the game. So who else? Warren Buffet, Jeff Bezos, other billionaires? They play the game purely for the game’s sake. They could’ve stopped at $10 or even $100M. Why keep building? They don’t need the money (or power) beyond $100M. What’s the arc then? The lazy one is for them to realize how pointless the game is at the end of their life (e.g. Rosebud), but that’s super tropey. Another is for the author to threaten and take away their game. So now they’re poor and humbled (e.g. Scrooge maybe? But Scrooge had a beloved at one point). Or maybe they use their power for good? I think this one is really interesting because they’re not playing the game to get at something else. It’s not just they’re good at it, or they’re doing it as a distraction to escape a trauma… they actually genuinely love the game. So maybe changing the rules of the game, a regime change, a revolution, a destructive force that destablizes how they built their wealth is the fun an author can have. So now the story is… what is my identity when my game is gone? That’s interesting. QUESTION: Does this person have to be climbing? What if they just blindly follow and/or are loyal to the system and they define themselves as such inside the system? What if the rules and infrastructure has given so much to them and they have no reason to question it? It doesn’t have to be someone who’s climbing right?

Rl

A travelling family perhaps, a rock band, a nomadic tribe, a team of salespeople, business-types, travelling consultants. Most likely a work family, but also a wandering family? You hang your loyalties on people you travel with. A group of adventurers. Why do they hang out together? They’re all running away from something. It’s a team of people who find their home in each other, and they’ve all ran away from some other home. A crew on a spaceship. A band of mercenaries. A gang of thieves and conmen. A pirate ship. They’ve known safehouses and camps and squatting and the hospitality of patrons and hotels, but never a home. Except their ship. Take that away and they’re constantly rescuing and saving each other. They’ve made each other thier home. The arc here is them sticking to each other through thick or thin? So constantly testing their loyalty to each other because they literally have no home to go to?

Pl

If it’s a castle, then it’s the entire hierarchy. The privy chamber, the king’s guard, the court of nobles, the cooks, the scully maids, the cup bearers, the entire extended family of the office. They’re trapped together if it’s besieged. The best thing you can do to this character, this king, is to have them taken away from the castle. To figure things out on their own without all their resources and network and people they rule. Or threaten the heck out of it. How does the king here react? Which loyalties would they sacrifice? Are they loyal to the “body” of their castle? Are they a good leader or a corrupt one? The latter might jsut need a comeuppence. Or have traitors in the midst.

Ll

Secret families, multiple lovers in every state or country, estranged children everywhere, or just long-distance relationships. Are they loyal to these scattered relationships? Or would they be willing to sacrifice them on a whim? Maybe they get stuck with one of them during a disaster or some sort of situation and now they have to confront how their short-term impact is more destructive as a lone wolf? Maybe the estranged and second families discover each other? Half-siblings? How does this threaten the lone wolf though? Seems like someone that just keeps running from one thing to another. Or maybe it’s someone who starts a family and can never feel attached to them, constantly has one foot out the door, constantly thinking about going out ot get a pack of cigarettes. But compelled somehow to stay and it’s something they deal with inside.

Fl

Too easy? Famiglia-Loyalty. That’s all they demand and want and then they get abandoned. They’re loyal to their family but in a toxic and destructive way. What does it mean if their loyalty is the number priority and not their idenity or ability to keep it? Maybe the identity one doesn’t actually care about the people so much as the reputation they have to keep, the reputation of the bloodline, the family’s heritage and values. Maybe the Fl actually cares about and is loyal to their tribe, and maybe they have no boundaries in a way that’s more vulnerable and has more potential for destruction. These are people who don’t see themselves as “mother” or “father” or “daughter” or “son” or whatever so much as they truly believe they’re doing what they’re supposed to do to “protect” their loved ones. It’s not a “standard” set by society so much as their own. Their arc might be realizing they’re toxic. I think the Fr are more like the Eat, Love, Pray kind who having lived life trying to conform to the identity, the Fl are codependents who need to find themselves and learn to alone.

Ol

Sidekicks in the rebellion? Leaders who take care of their band of misfits? Followers of a cause? Their loyalties aren’t to the mission and why they’re fighting the power so much as they’re loyal to someone in that organization. They might even carry the cause after their loyalty dies. Getting betrayed or kicked out or pushed to the side is probably their worst nightmare. Maybe their arc is to figure out why they’re actually fighting the system and realizing it’s not their cause and they step away and rejoin the system. Or they recognize their love for who they’re loyal to and carry their torch. But the character journey here is to make sure they’re doing what they’re doing because they actually want to and not because of their love for someone.

Cl

Which friends and family do you nepotically bring along with you as you climb up the ladder of success, wealth, and power? Who are the hanger-ons, the yes-folk, the strings? Who is actually good for you to have around as a counterweight to your weaknesses and blindspots? So many delicious dramatic questions here. Maybe developing – what’s the word I’m looking for – not keeness, not insight, not wisdom… but sagacity or shrewedness? But the ability to read your own people and know who’s good for you or not. That’s the arc. Getting burnt by trusting the wrong people. Not listening to the people who are actually good for you. Having people close to you hurt because you trusted the wrong person. Stuff like that.

Rp

Do they value not having a position or status by being rootless? That they don’t have a place in society? Or maybe being a leader of their small band is enough? Or a reputation as a travelling type? What status benefits do you get for that? I suppose a touring musician gets all the fame, attention, and admiration they would want. And what happens when that wanes and their fame doesn’t carry them like it used to? Is finding or going back home the story here? The adventure costs too much as they age?

Pp

Invest the castle, lay siege to it, overrun it and what power does the king have? If their power lays in them having all this security and the author destroys it all and takes it away, now the paranoid ruler starts wondering who betrayed them. They become a dangerous caged animal. Maybe they accept the power they’ve accumulated is a house of cards. Getting Sandman vibes from Preludes and Nocturnes, when he gets home. And maybe the arc is finding out that you don’t need this power and/or it can be rebuilt. Thor finding New Asgard. And even passing the torch. Delegate more. Recognizing you can’t do it all alone.

Lp

The hotshot parchuting in consultant, getting helicoptered in to make a few edits, wired a year’s worth of laborer’s wage to do a few hours of work… no longer is asked to do these things. The power of the lone wolf is they are outsiders. They’re the crazy rich uncle. The one who can walk away without loyalties. They’re transactional. Han Solo does a job, gets paid, and leaves.

SIDE NOTE: The Ghost drove them to lean on this Lie so much it becomes a crutch, so the author’s job is to take it away and make them question their ability, identity, loyalties, or power source. So to make this functional/useful, the DSR moment is when you threaten their ASPECT related to their WOUND.

The arc of the has-been lone wolf is they need to find family again. That they can’t rely on their star status anymore. That they reconnect with their children too late. That they “settle” for a domestic life, but are perpetually tempted and called to “one last job”. They’re not people you can trust because they will always chase their high again and neglect/abandon you.

Fp

Lots of overlap with Fr. But there might be more moral/ethics to the person who identifies as the head of the family, or whatever position they hold than someone who only wants this for the power. The Lone Wolf’s power is in their ability to command people through charm, performance, and whatever, but not requiring deep ties to them. The Famiglia position however, requries a clear power structure to be in place and for them to be able to be integrated into it and for them to pull levers inside the family dynamic. So you threaten that by removing parts, sabotaging it, spread gossip, create opportunitiies to undermine authority, sow distrust.

The arc here is their position is threatened and they either let go, soften up, or destroy the family in the process of holding on to their power.

Op

If you spend your entire life as the opposing power and you finally win and get it, what happens? Most stories in this vein tend to stop short of the end of the revolution. America is an ongoing “Great Experiment”. Decolonialization is another. Stories in the Star Wars universe that takes place after they win the war has been “meh”. I mean, the news item a couple years ago when the Taliban were annoyed they had desk jobs was kinda funny.

The power is in the resistance. The organizing, the clandestine meetings, the secret codes, the questionable funding sources, rooting out the traitors, making horrible unethical decisions for hte cause, having a common enemy. But take that away. Either they lose diastrously, or in the rare instance they win… now the maintenance of the new power structure comes in. This is a story of change management. LOL.

Or, let’s say it’s someone who refused to be part of the system, say Shrek. And you’re sucked into the Empire’s games anyway. Now you lose your power to be outside, off the grid. Maybe the story is about getting sucked back into a game you no longer want to play and thought you left. This is a story about the machine chewing you up even if you think you’re not part of it.

Cp

This seems obvious. Climbers do it mostly for the power. We’ve discussed those who are good at the game, those who wrap their entire identity around it, and those who are loyal to their colleagues and associates in the game… but i would presume most people are willing to play the game for its rewards: power, wealth, status, position, titles. We’re all working because we have a mortgage to pay off here right? Or for Americans, it’s to get health insurance in what would otherwise be prohibitively expensive. To lose power in the game is to basically become worthless to the eyes of those inside the system. So one can imagine the arc is finding things that are more meaningful I would hope? A more simpler life? Why did this character chase power so hard in the first place? Because it was threatened in their Ghost. So now their Stasis is to be the best at the game, to keep their head down and play the game. Gain, or retain the power they can. Be productive. Be useful. Be valuable to the system. Until they’re no longer it.

Final Thoughts

If the theory that Craig Mazin teaches is correct, that arcs are braided into the PROG, then what I have here is a dictionary of character ARCs that I can weave into the plot. I need to let what I’ve been typing here for a week stew a bit. Come back to it. Pull out the DREAM arcs.