thread: 2005-02-03 : Roleplaying Theory Open House
On 2005-05-14, kenjib wrote:
I've been thinking about the theme essay and issues of A vs. B and what happens when the protagonist ends up with A+B. The other post is so old that I thought I might post my thoughts here as a possible new take on the old topic.
There are four possible endings when the protagonist chooses A over B:
1. Neither A nor B: This is tragedy. The protagonist has made the wrong choice and suffers the consequences. There is a clear value judgement.
2. Both A and B: This is comedy. The protagonist made the right choice. He was faced with the very real possibility of losing B because of his choice, but in the end it worked out. The fact that it worked out is a judgement on his actions. It makes the statement that he did the right thing.
3. A but not B: This is the kind of ending which you have already adequately described. I think the key here is that judgement on the protagonist has not yet occurred once the game is over. This is neither tragedy nor comedy because the outcome has no narrative value judgement until it is interpreted through the filter of each person in the audience. You are left pondering the outcome and deciding for yourself whether or not you think the victory of A was worth the loss of B. It is an introspective ending that makes you contemplate various aspects of an issue instead of making a direct statement about that issue.
4. B but not A: Well this is really strange and I don't know what to make of it. You pick one thing and the results turns out the opposite of what you expected. I can't think of any actual examples of this from literature/film though, so I suspect that it just doesn't work. It might work as some kind of nihilist satire...
I think the key here is that causality from a narrative perspective is very different that causality from a simulation perspective. From the narrative perspective, protagonists are not rewarded or punished because it is the logical outcome. Instead, they are punished based on the needs of the narrative - did they choose right or did they choose wrong? In this case it seems completely acceptable to end up with either an A and B or a neither A nor B ending so long as the protagonist was forced to commit to giving up one of them up.
The act of forcing the protagonist to commit to the choice is key to creating narrative theme, not the act of following through with denying him B. How it ends up is a value judgement on his choice. If you end up with A but not B, as you suggest is the best course of action in your essay on theme, then the narrative itself does not have an inherent value judgement. The audience is left to form their own. Is this ambiguity really a superior outcome or just a different kind of outcome equally as interesting as A+B and A nor B?
So, the theme of Master and Commander is not "it's better to fulfill both friendship and duty than to sacrifice friendship for duty." This can not be the theme because Aubrey made the choice to give up pursuit of the ship. He made his choice and was willing to sacrifice his duty for his friend. The real theme of Master and Commander is "Choosing friendship over duty is the right thing to do." That's what Aubrey did, and in the end he came out a hero for it.
What exactly is this judgement phase of a narrative game and how does it work? Is it possible to move this part of the game more consciously into the mechanics in a productive fashion?
