Original Post Date: November 23, 2012 - Robert McKee teaches the nuances involved in creating an empathetic protagonist, with reference to THE SOPRANOS.
We recognize Tony Soprano's humanity BECAUSE we show him living in parallel worlds. One of those worlds is just like our own --- a standard middle class or upper middle class life in which he plays by normal rules of morality, and expects his kids to do the same. The other world is a parallel and mutually-exclusive world that operates on another standard of morality. That other world has its own rules for integrity, justice, morality, and ethics --- its own logic. And Tony and the other mobsters have to compartmentalize --- they have to simultaneously operate in these two parallel worlds, and never integrate the two. Any real possibility of integration is a grave threat. For example, when Meadow begins holding Tony, in his middle class world, to that middle class moral standard in the mobster world. This is intolerable because one of the worlds is threatening to impinge on the other, and allowing that to happen means psychological destruction and breakdown. So we have empathy because half his life is just like ours.
Bob, any videos in making it believable that two characters are justified in falling in love? That they have shared enough to be genuinely attracted? I'm guessing there is a relationship between this and creating empathy.
Do you think most men don't want to empathize with women and therefore, they choose to not back women protagonist movies... unless they're action-packed?
This is utter nonsense. Look around at how much diversity is pushed in modern storytelling. Diversity of gender, race, sexual orientation, is celebrated, encouraged, and the norm in the modern era. There are female protagonists in indie films, horror films (very often, in fact), romantic films, action films, thrillers, sci-fi, comedy. I mean, where are you even getting this idea that female protagonists are not often backed? Are you totally unaware of the "Bridesmaids trend" where female liberation (and foibles) are celebrated as a kind of escapism and are put in so many Melissa McCarthy movies and Amy Schumer movies? Are you unaware of the "Ghostbusters reboot trend" where many movies are just reimagined with female leads in place of male leads, often done arbitrarily? The "action female lead" is certainly an ubiquitious trope, and an underwhelming one at that. But don't pretend that it's the only place we see female leads. You must be projecting some sort of specific grievance onto the larger picture and it's not syncing up with the measurable results of reality. As to the other commenter who suggests males are easier to write because the writers are of the same sex, it could be, but I doubt it. It seems more tied to the nature of the sexes. Characters are written to pursue things with an amplified version of ordinary human ambition, we call it "motivation," and it's hardly as magical in real life as it is in storytelling. But where we do see it in real life, it seems more pronounced in certain males more often (although it can obviously manifest in men or women broadly). Being obsessed with a career comes to mind. Many studies have been performed that demonstrate that men more often care about careers, working, making money, than do women. Again, this is generally speaking. The point being, a stereotype is formed in the collective consciousness, and we more readily perceive men, in a very shallow manner of speaking, as having lots of "agency." This more closely resembles "motivation" in story. So while both male and female writers do write beautiful male and female characters, all the time, I think all of the above explains with societal context why we more typically see male characters being written, not just by men, but disproportionately by women as well.
Umm…I am not sure what to make of this, though. 🤔 Empathy is not what I thought it is, and that was quite a shocking revelation. People empathise with the Hero (be them victim) whilst they rejoice seeing the blood and guts of the Adversary, and are utterly indifferent to ‘collateral damage’. But not even the Hero suffering is enough to elicit empathy, actually…Think of Christ whom people happily kill every Sunday, rejoicing at his torture and murder, rejoicing at the prospect of the genocide of the ‘end of times’, utterly indifferent to the genocide of the Jewish babies (and the genocide of the Egyptian first borns) as well as Judas who was doomed by god from the beginning. I don’t think humans are able to empathise, really, if by empathy you mean other things than projection. I profoundly dislike people. I somewhat pity them, but I profoundly dislike and distrust them.
![Clave Especial x Fuerza Regida - No Pasa Nada [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3u2jaju71IQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Empathy is essential if you want the audience to care about your characters. Great information :)
We recognize Tony Soprano's humanity BECAUSE we show him living in parallel worlds. One of those worlds is just like our own --- a standard middle class or upper middle class life in which he plays by normal rules of morality, and expects his kids to do the same. The other world is a parallel and mutually-exclusive world that operates on another standard of morality. That other world has its own rules for integrity, justice, morality, and ethics --- its own logic. And Tony and the other mobsters have to compartmentalize --- they have to simultaneously operate in these two parallel worlds, and never integrate the two. Any real possibility of integration is a grave threat. For example, when Meadow begins holding Tony, in his middle class world, to that middle class moral standard in the mobster world. This is intolerable because one of the worlds is threatening to impinge on the other, and allowing that to happen means psychological destruction and breakdown. So we have empathy because half his life is just like ours.
Bob, any videos in making it believable that two characters are justified in falling in love? That they have shared enough to be genuinely attracted? I'm guessing there is a relationship between this and creating empathy.
Do you think most men don't want to empathize with women and therefore, they choose to not back women protagonist movies... unless they're action-packed?
Lisa Scott i think that maybe most writers are males, if that's the case, then male are just easier for them to write.
When I said "back" female protagonists, I meant the decision-makers, not the writers.
Lol that's a _very_ shallow perspective you have there.
That's an interesting question. This needs aocial research.
This is utter nonsense. Look around at how much diversity is pushed in modern storytelling. Diversity of gender, race, sexual orientation, is celebrated, encouraged, and the norm in the modern era. There are female protagonists in indie films, horror films (very often, in fact), romantic films, action films, thrillers, sci-fi, comedy. I mean, where are you even getting this idea that female protagonists are not often backed? Are you totally unaware of the "Bridesmaids trend" where female liberation (and foibles) are celebrated as a kind of escapism and are put in so many Melissa McCarthy movies and Amy Schumer movies? Are you unaware of the "Ghostbusters reboot trend" where many movies are just reimagined with female leads in place of male leads, often done arbitrarily? The "action female lead" is certainly an ubiquitious trope, and an underwhelming one at that. But don't pretend that it's the only place we see female leads. You must be projecting some sort of specific grievance onto the larger picture and it's not syncing up with the measurable results of reality.
As to the other commenter who suggests males are easier to write because the writers are of the same sex, it could be, but I doubt it. It seems more tied to the nature of the sexes. Characters are written to pursue things with an amplified version of ordinary human ambition, we call it "motivation," and it's hardly as magical in real life as it is in storytelling. But where we do see it in real life, it seems more pronounced in certain males more often (although it can obviously manifest in men or women broadly). Being obsessed with a career comes to mind. Many studies have been performed that demonstrate that men more often care about careers, working, making money, than do women. Again, this is generally speaking. The point being, a stereotype is formed in the collective consciousness, and we more readily perceive men, in a very shallow manner of speaking, as having lots of "agency." This more closely resembles "motivation" in story.
So while both male and female writers do write beautiful male and female characters, all the time, I think all of the above explains with societal context why we more typically see male characters being written, not just by men, but disproportionately by women as well.
Umm…I am not sure what to make of this, though. 🤔
Empathy is not what I thought it is, and that was quite a shocking revelation. People empathise with the Hero (be them victim) whilst they rejoice seeing the blood and guts of the Adversary, and are utterly indifferent to ‘collateral damage’. But not even the Hero suffering is enough to elicit empathy, actually…Think of Christ whom people happily kill every Sunday, rejoicing at his torture and murder, rejoicing at the prospect of the genocide of the ‘end of times’, utterly indifferent to the genocide of the Jewish babies (and the genocide of the Egyptian first borns) as well as Judas who was doomed by god from the beginning. I don’t think humans are able to empathise, really, if by empathy you mean other things than projection. I profoundly dislike people. I somewhat pity them, but I profoundly dislike and distrust them.