If you were to graph them, they'd look something like this:

-------------|(catalyst)--------------------------------|?(end of act one)      ----------------------------|(precipitator)------------|(climax)-----

That little interrogative at the end of act one pretty much sums up its job: to raise the question "what will happen now?" Typically it'll be an event or incident involving your central character (either directly or indirectly), so that the question often becomes more specific: "what will she do?" or "how will he get out of this?" or "what's going to happen to her now?" It places the focus back on your central character at a key juncture, and, not incidentally, gives the audience a good reason to come back for act two.

If you're writing a one-act play, you won't -- by definition -- be arranging it around an intermission break. But you can still make use of the concept of an important incident happening around the halfway mark, involving your central character -- either something he does or something that happens to him. Its purpose is to raise the dramatic stakes, perhaps by presenting him with a new problem to solve, or by causing him to formulate a new goal -- one that will keep him going through the latter half of the play. For example, let's say that up to the halfway mark your hero's goal has been to make the next-door-neighbor fall in love with him, and he's succeeded. But halfway through, her husband is revealed to be a mafia don. Now his goal becomes to make the next-door-neighbor fall out of love with him, while also concealing their affair.

That's just one example, and a kind of goofy one at that. Obviously, this plot event occurring at the midway mark can take many forms. The advantage is that it divides your play up into two smaller, more compact units of action -- bite-sized chunks -- which can help when the whole thing seems just too intimidatingly long to get through.

CLIMACTIC CONDITIONS

The "precipitator" (no, it wasn't a movie starring Arnold Schwarzenegger) and the climax go hand-in-hand. Let's talk about the climax first, since it's probably the more familiar idea to you, and the more important of the two. The climax is an event or incident which resolves your central character's journey for better or worse -- they either get what they want, or they don't. Once that happens, your story is pretty much over, and you're probably best off drawing the play to a close expeditiously.

The precipitator, on the other hand, is an event or incident occurring somewhere late in the play that leads in a direct way to the climax. For example, our hero from the above example learns that the mafia don is planning to murder his wife, and decides to give her refuge in his home. His decision is the precipitator, which leads to a confrontation with the mafia don, in which . . . something happens. He declares his love for the woman, and the mafia don gives him a million bucks for taking her off his hands. Or he shoots our hero. Or the FBI arrive in the nick of time and arrest the mafia don. Any of those could be the climax. Again, it may take any of a number of forms, but, whatever form it takes, it will resolve your central character's journey in a clear way.

Your play may or may not have a precipitator. It will almost certainly have a climax.

I GOTTA BE ME

These four points will typically involve, or have impact upon, your central character. They identify the play's through-line -- its central core, around which everything else is wound. Think of them as the dots in a connect-the-dots-game; hook 'em up, and you've got a play.

Should dramatic writing be reduced to a connect-the-dots game? Well, I do think sometimes playwriting is simpler than we realize. But, while I like having some sense in advance of what these key plot points are going to be, you may prefer to work more intuitively. That's fine; just put these concepts to one side, and know that they're there to take another look at, and maybe apply, if you lose your way and aren't certain what to do next.

Or, you may decide: I WILL WRITE PLAYS ANY WAY BUT THAT WAY. Which is good too; these traditional notions of dramaturgy -- traditional because they have worked so many times -- can also be something to define yourself against, at least occasionally. For more on moving beyond them, let me refer you (shamelessly) to my entry in the "Postings" area at the E-script website, at

http://singlelane.com/escript/postings.htm#fm

To Handout 10