This post is a continuation of my last post (The Butterfly Effect Pt 1), where I discussed the importance of the antagonists point of view. I posed the consideration that the protagonist’s Point of View (POV) can be nearly powerless without that of the antagonist. I gave an example from my current (main) work in progress (WIP) while trying not to drop any spoilers. This was far from easy, and I want to make certain I can give other examples. Yes, there might be spoilers involved, however, it is my hope that, since the show has been around for a while and was quite popular while it was running, many of my readers will have seen it and spoilers will not matter. I will still give fair warning.
Spoiler alert (I am going to be talking about final plot points in the final season of Sherlock, which affect the understanding of the entire series. If you have not yet taken the leap to watch the series and think you might do so at some time, skip the next paragraph.)
As we see in the Sherlock TV series, even if the audience doesn’t see the antagonist/s or know what they are doing: we see the effects. In the last season, we see that Eurus was really the antagonist all along, orchestrating things from behind the scenes and that many episodes in the previous seasons were actually a result of the things she had plotted and planned. Many of the adventures Sherlock experienced would never have taken place had it not been for Eurus working invisibly in the background. Therefore, what would have happened had the writers not known what their main antagonist was planning? Odds are there would have been major plot holes, to a point where the story would not have been enjoyable. Yes, this means that they needed to know the ending before they began the step of outlining in earnest.
This concept is one that also took place in the TV series Vienna Blood (no spoilers). We, as the viewers, were not always given insight to the main antagonist’s identity or what their underlying goals were, but the writers had to know because, as the two protagonists attempted to solve the case, their actions would be determined by what the antagonist/criminal had already done and continued to do. B could not have happened without A.
So, consider what your antagonist’s goals are (in the case of circumstances there aren’t so much goals as there are consequences) and how they would achieve that goal, because there will always be a ripple effect which will direct the actions of the other characters. The action or circumstances will always cause other circumstances and actions. I’m sure we all remember the basic story of the butterfly effect; how if one goes back in time and steps on a butterfly it could cause them to never be born in the future because life is made up of many small events chained together with big events in between (which were often a result of the many small events).
In other words, take time to sort out the minutia. What are the things going on around your protagonist? Was there a rock slide that blocked the passage through the mountains so they have to go by way of the sea which is wrought with its own unique dangers? What are those unique dangers which the protagonist will have to take into account? Was the rock slide caused by the antagonist or is your antagonist a little more subtle? Without knowing those, you cannot truly know how your protagonist will act. Just like your characters, the crisis does not exist all on its own: in a vacuum. There are other things that will navigate your protagonist. Even if it was by a fraction of an inch, your protagonist’s course was changed and over time that fraction leads them to an entirely different outcome unless something else redirects them.
An obvious example of circumstances that were caused by the villain creating a whole new set of challenges for the other characters would be in The Fellowship of the Ring (movie). The scene of which I speak is where the Fellowship attempts to go over the mountains, but Saruman calls down extreme winter weather upon them so that they cannot get through without risking their lives due to hypothermia or being knocked from the mountains to be shattered by the long drop. Neither of these seem desirable, so Frodo decides that they will go through the mines of Moria. The fact that Gandalf does not see fit to tell Frodo of the dangers involved with a trip through Moria, thus making it impossible for the main protagonist to make an informed decision, is another matter but could be grouped under circumstances. This all illustrates my two main points; 1. that the antagonist has great power to influence the protagonists decisions and 2. the writer needs to know about the various circumstances surrounding a protagonist or that protagonist might make a decision out of character. Would Frodo have made the same decision if he had known about the swarms of goblins and orks, and more, if he had known about the Balrog?
So, as you go along with your major scenes, crises, plot points, and character decisions, if you get stuck, take some time to step back from your protagonist. Give a little more love to your antagonist or antagonists whether they be human, event, idea, or other, as well as the other little considerations that make of the world around your protagonist at that moment. These will guide you so that, hopefully, you can get past that road block, and you can begin again to enjoy the wonder.
If you enjoyed this post, please, share this site with others, and like this page. If you want to receive further posts directly to your email before they are posted on my site, subscribe. Feel free to leave a comment or make use of the Contact page.