How to Tell a Story With a Central Dramatic Argument

If you read my goals for this quarter, you know this entry is a few days late, but life (and other writing projects) happen. On we go.

Some time back, my favorite writing podcast, The Bestseller Experiment, mentioned writing with a Central Dramatic Argument in mind. The concept comes from writer Craig Mazin (Chernobyl, The Last of Us, et cetera). On Scriptnotes, the podcast he hosts with John August, he dedicates an episode to discussing how the Central Dramatic Argument (referred to as CDA hereafter) works, and how story structure actually stems from CDA.

You can listen to Mazin’s thorough explanation on YouTube, and below are notes from my listen. Let’s get into it.

#

The most basic tl;dr version of writing with a CDA in mind goes like this:

Hero believes something (the opposite of the CDA). An incident occurs that makes Hero question that old belief with a new belief (the CDA). Hero fights to maintain old belief, while more incidents occur that challenge the old belief. An incident occurs that makes Hero mostly give up on old belief, but Hero cannot accept new belief. Hero feels lost. Another incident occurs that will allow Hero to reclaim old belief, but Hero leans into the newer belief through action.

The end.

Now, for a Choose Your Own Adventure moment, if you would like additional notes on Mazin’s talk, read on; if you feel you learned enough and want some music to write to, check out the playlist I put together for my current manuscript.

#

One of the most important quotes Mazin gives is, “Structure is a symptom of a character’s relationship to a Central Dramatic Argument.” Said another way, a story’s structure is dictated by how a character views the CDA, and the structure is only there to enhance that relationship.

So what exactly is the CDA? You could also call it the theme, but it’s not just a broad word like love. It’s an argument that answers the question: What is the story about? The answer to this does not need to be earth-shattering. It can be a universal truth, but it must be an argument. Consider, instead of “love,” a story might be about, “If you love someone, set them free.” This is Mazin’s example, and it is a statement that you can argue for or against; you might also call this a thesis.

Side note: CDA typically comes after your idea, not before. You will likely get excited about an idea, and then need to figure out what it’s about, maybe even writing a full first draft to reach a final realization.

With the CDA in mind, Mazin says the purpose of the story is to take a character from ignorance (believing the opposite of your thesis, aka the antithesis) to embodying the thesis through action.

Here’s a traditional story structure that might form from writing with a CDA:

Act 1

1. You begin with a main character (MC) in their usual world and life. Their life exemplifies the antithesis. They are actively trying to maintain their antithetical belief and not progress their life in a new direction (toward the CDA).

2. An incident related to the CDA/thesis disrupts the MC’s life. This incident essentially destroys the MC’s current, static life in a meaningful way.

3. The MC strives to get their old life back, because the MC has real fears about losing that life—the MC has done a lot in life to avoid experiencing the fears brought on by the CDA. The audience will empathize with the fears.

Act 2

1. The MC reinforces their antithesis by struggling against new and worsening incidents that represent the CDA. The MC is fighting their fears, wants their old life, their “security blanket,” back. The world should seem to oppose the MC.

2. Something related to the CDA happens that causes the MC to doubt the antithesis. Perhaps the MC does something, or sees someone do something, that makes them experience the CDA in a good way.

   1. Remember, your MC is rational. They can see value in other ways of life.

3. Midpoint: the MC questions their old beliefs, even if they do not fully understand the CDA.

4. Dramatic reversal: the MC leans into living the CDA, but then their fear about it comes to fruition (as a writer, Mazin says, you’re lowering the MC’s defenses and then punching them in the face). This should be one of the worst things to happen to the MC, and it should be seen as ironic that just when the MC leaned in, they are punished.

5. Low-point: the MC now doubts antithesis and thesis. They feel trapped and lost.

   1. The MC’s goal to return to their old life is gone, but they fear going toward the new goal. The audience should be able to empathize with feeling lost.

Act 3

1. Defining moment begins: the MC has the chance to face their worst fear, the fear that made them want to stay in their old life. This moment will prove, or disprove, if the MC can embody the CDA.

2. Right before the defining moment happens: the MC has the option to return to their old life. This allows for temptation (if you watched The Last of Us, you can see Joel plainly experience this). If the MC can, they will reject the temptation through an extraordinary action.

3. Defining moment ends: the MC either succeeds or fails, but they hold onto new belief (unless you’re writing a story about failing to change).

4. The ending: to show a meaningful contrast, the final scene should mirror how the MC was introduced, but the MC now lives and acts based on their new belief (again, unless you want to show a failure to change).

And a last note: to create the most tension and empathy, Mazin recommends regularly asking where your MC is on their journey between the antithesis and thesis (CDA), and then doing the meanest thing you can to the MC in that moment, until the MC is left with no belief. That will make the story that much more engaging, and the ending that much more impactful.

Ever used the CDA or plan to? I’d love to hear about it on Twitter or in the comments.