TOOT 3
X: Conflict. Absolutely crucial to drama.
Y: No it's not.
X: Yes it is.
Y: No it's not.
X: Yes, it is. Look. You got your protagonist, right? So what's the point in having a protagonist if you don't have a -- read my lips --
Y: Antagonist.
X: Right. And as soon as you have a protagonist and an antagonist, which is to say a character with a goal and another character who gets in the way of that goal, you got -- well . . ?
Y: You'll have to say it yourself this time.
X: Conflict!
Y: What a surprise.
X: Then you agree. Good. Let's go eat.
Y: No, I don't agree at all. The fact is, if you have strong enough skills with character and language, you can sustain a play indefinitely with those alone. Behaviour. Observation. Poetry. That's enough for one play, wouldn't you say?
X: As in?
Y: 'Happy Days.'
X: You're right. That Fonzie was one lyrical guy.
Y: Not that 'Happy Days.' Beckett's 'Happy Days.' Or for that matter, the play that started everything (at least in the Western tradition) -- 'Prometheus Bound.' Who's the Antagonist in that? The rock he's tied to?
X: Zeus.
Y: But Zeus never shows up. Some antagonist.
(Helpfully passing a URL to X.)
Here, check it out at <http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0010%3Acard%3D88>. Read Prometheus's first speech. Tell me that isn't thrilling enough all by itself to hold our attention. Then note the first thing the Chorus says immediately after. Something like: "Have no fear. We are all your friends." Wooo! Big conflict there.
X: Sarcasm doesn't become you.
Y: Here.
X: Keep your URL to yourself! All right. I'll concede that some plays can get by without conflict. Maybe. At least overt conflict. But those plays are rarities. And rarefied. You might like them. I might like them. (Well, no actually, I mightn't -- they bore the suspenders off me.) But is your Uncle Phil or your Auntie Marge going to sit through 'Happy Days'? I think not.
Y: Leave my Auntie Marge out of this.
X: They'll be out of there at intermission.
Y: 'Happy Days' doesn't have an intermission.
X: And a good thing too. Smart guy, that Sam Beckett. You can have behaviour and observation all you want in a play, and it's lovely -- kind of like watching the scenery through the windows of a tour bus. But it's when the characters start having at each other that the audience sits up and goes, 'Oh Goody.' Tell me this isn't more fun:
'Petruchio: Good morrow, Kate; for that's your name I hear.
Katharina: Well have you heard, but something hard of hearing:
They call me Katharine that do talk of me.
Petruchio: You lie, in faith; for you are call'd plain Kate,
And bonny Kate, and sometimes Kate the curst;
But Kate, the prettiest Kate in Christendom;
Kate of Kate-Hall, my super-dainty Kate,
For dainties all are cates: and therefore, Kate,
Take this of me, Kate of my consolation;
Hearing thy mildness praised in every town,
Thy virtues spoke of, and thy beauty sounded,
Yet not so deeply as to thee belongs,
Myself am moved to woo thee for my wife.
Katharina: Moved! in good time: let him that moved you hither
Remove you hence. I knew you at the first,
You were a moveable.
Petruchio: Why, What's a moveable?
Katharina: A joint-stool.
Petruchio: Thou hast hit it: come, sit on me.
Katharina: Asses are made to bear, and so are you.
Petruchio: Women are made to bear, and so are you.
Katharina: No such jade as you, if me you mean.
Petruchio: Alas! good Kate, I will not burden thee;
For, knowing thee to be but young and light --
Katharina: Too light for such a swain as you to catch,
And yet as heavy as my weight should be.'
(X helpfully passes a URL to Y.)
X: Here. You check it out, at <http://eserver.org/drama/shakespeare/comedies/taming-of-the-shrew.txt>.
Y: I'd rather not. 'Taming of the Shrew'?
X: Very good.
Y: Sexist tripe.
X: Some say. I wasn't remarking on Shakespeare's qualifications as a feminist. I was commenting on his ability to generate a good fight.
Y: Some would also say the two are related. That the whole concept of conflict as the essence of drama is a little too testosterone-charged, thankyou very much. That there must be other ways to successfully tell a story.
X: In fiction, sure. In drama . . . ? I don't know. For now, can we agree that conflict is useful because it forces a character to take action, and that's when we really find out who he or she is? And characters in conflict often act in extreme ways, and that's just plain interesting?
Y: Maybe.
X: I knew you'd see it my way.
Y: I didn't say that.
X: It's what you meant.
Y: No it isn't.
X: Is.
Y: Isn't.
Exercise 3:
You've created a protagonist. Now create an antagonist -- someone who gets in the way of your protagonist's 'want.' Maybe on purpose -- or maybe simply because they have a want of their own that happens to be at cross-purposes with what the protagonist wants. (An antagonist doesn't have to be a villain or a 'bad guy' -- more on that in this week's Handout.) You may want to use either the collage or voice monologue technique to create this new character, or both. You don't, though, need to put them in a scene together -- yet.
POST-IT NOTE:
'I don't know how my plays are going to end. I don't know about the end of the first act before I get to the middle. I'm real unspecific about the second act until I get to the end of the first. You want to leave yourself open for surprises that are going to happen when the characters begin interacting. I don't really have it plotted out, though I have pages and pages of notes of things they could say and things they could do.'
- Beth Henley (Crimes of the Heart, Abundance)
To Handout 3