Psychology for Screenwriters

by William Indick

  SIBLING RIVALRY AT A GLANCE

  ELEMENTS

  DESCRIPTION

  EXAMPLES FROM EAST OF EDEN

  Good Child /

  Bad Child

  Duality

  One sibling is cast as the good child,

  the other is cast as the bad child

  Aron is the good child

  Cal is the bad child

  Parental

  Favoritism

  A parent favors one child over the

  other. Or, one child is Mother’s

  favorite, the other is Father’s favorite

  Aron is Father’s favorite

  Cal sees himself as “taking after”

  his mother

  Romantic

  Rivalry

  Romantic rivalry between the siblings

  over a mutual love interest

  Cal and Aron rival each other for

  Abra’s love

  Need for

  Approval

  Underlying rivalry arising from the

  need for approval from one or more

  of the parents

  Cal’s need for Father’s approval

  results in jealousy and rage

  directed at Aron

  External

  Goal

  There is a rivalry over achieving some

  external goal

  Cal’s need to help his father

  recover from a failed business

  venture

  Moral

  Conflict

  A moral conflict in which the “good

  child/bad child” theme is played out

  Cal’s war profiteering & Aron’s

  moral denouncement of war

  Chapter Fourteen

  LIFE STYLES

  Adler’s theory of the superiority drive owes much to Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900), the philosopher whose incredibly original and provocative ideas inspired and influenced an entire generation of European intellectuals, including Freud, Jung, Erikson, and most of the other great psychoanalytic theorists. Adler used Nietzsche’s concept of the “Will to Power” to describe the primary drive of superiority as a universal goal in human nature. Like Nietzsche, Adler saw the superiority drive as an innate urge toward perfection, which has as its endpoint a hypothetical ideal, rather than an actual attainable goal. “The beautiful thing about man” Nietzsche wrote, “is that he is a bridge… a bridge to the Ubermensch!” From an evolutionary standpoint, individual people cannot attain true perfection. However, evolution provides each individual human being with the drive toward perfection, the goal of superiority that inspires humankind toward greater heights, and makes each living person a “bridge” to the next evolutionary stage of human development.

  UBERMENSCH & UNDERDOG

  While the Ancient Greeks preferred classical heroes of royal or divine birth – men who were born with great powers and predestined glory – the Judeo-Christian tradition championed the true underdog. As Nietzsche pointed out, the Greeks and Romans were the first and second “Reichs” – their mythologies were being composed as their cultures were becoming powerful empires. The Greco-Romans valued nobility, power, and the belief in divine destiny that could drive one culture to conquer and dominate others. The Judeo-Christian tradition was born out of slave societies that valued humility, service to God, and the belief in a reward after death in return for a life of poverty and subjugation. Nietzsche believed that it was natural for a “master race” of conquerors to have a mythology based on the “master morality” – in which the strong and powerful deserve to be victorious. Inversely, it was also natural for a “slave race” to have a mythology based on the “slave morality” – in which the meek shall inherit the earth. Hence, the Greco-Roman hero is an “ubermensch,” a superman, while the Judeo-Christian hero could be called an “untermensch”… an underdog.

  The battle between ubermensch and underdog is symbolic not only of the individual triumph over personal inferiority, but of the historical triumph of the Judeo-Christian ethic over the Master-Race ethic of the ancient Greeks and Romans, as well as the more recent triumph over the Nazi “uber alles.” Films such as Rocky address the mythical conflict between ubermensch and underdog in clearly delineated battle scenes. In Rocky, the quintessential Judeo-Christian underdog must face a technically superior champion who is appropriately named after a Greek god – “Apollo.” WWII films address the ubermensch-underdog conflict by pitting the Judeo-Christian Allies against the Aryan Nazis. The Roman and biblical epics pit the ancient Judaeans and Christians against their imperialist masters – the ancient Egyptians, Romans, and Greeks. In other films, the ubermensch-underdog conflict is an internal struggle experienced by one hero.

  SUPERHEROES

  The superhero character in films represents an odd combination of classical and Judeo/Christian character traits. Superheroes typically display features of both superiority and inferiority complexes. They are the Ubermensch and underdog combined into one hero. The superhero’s personality split, however, is conveniently distributed into his two identities. In his mortal existence, Clark Kent is “mild-mannered,” meek, shy, clumsy, insecure, and ineffectual; but in times of trouble, he transforms into Superman, the “man of steel,” who is superior to every other man on Earth. Similarly, Peter Parker is a small, weak, insignificant young man; but when he turns into Spider-man, he is superior to everyone. Viewers, especially children, easily identify with modern superheroes because they represent the same opposing duality that they feel inside themselves. While we struggle with feelings of inferiority and inadequacy (our inner Clark Kent), our dreams of superiority (our inner Supermen), motivate us to do great things.

  THE LIFE STYLES

  A central theme in Adler’s later theories was his model for the different “life styles” that people use in their struggles to attain superiority. Inspired by Nietzsche’s theory of the “will to power,” Adler’s theory of conflicting life styles provides a model for both intrapersonal neurotic conflict within film characters (internal conflict), and interpersonal conflict between characters (external conflict). Adler distinguished between four fundamental life styles – all but one of them being “mistaken.”

  1. The “ruling type” – the individual drives toward superiority and domination over others.

  2. The “getting type” – the individual takes from and depends on others rather than providing for others and oneself.

  3. The “avoiding type” – the individual escapes and avoids challenges, responsibilities, and duties.

  4. The “socially useful type” – the individual engages in socially constructive activities.

  The “socially useful type” is the only type that is not “mistaken,” because the superiority drive is directed toward the improvement of oneself and society, rather than selfish pursuits. Notwithstanding the existence of these types, Adler’s theories are not pessimistic or deterministic like Freud’s. Adler was a humanist. His theories espoused the notion of a “creative self,” in which the individual can change and construct his own personality by modifying, or even altering, his life style through the force of his own “will.” Film heroes are also “creative selves.” Through the course of a film, their characters always develop in some way. Often times, characters display personal growth by developing from one of the mistaken types into the socially useful type.

  A MODEL FOR BOTH INTRAPERSONAL AND INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT

  Many films depict these life-style types as interpersonal conflict. In a movie with a classical hero, the hero usually starts out as a fully developed moral individual. In these stories, the hero is the socially useful type, the allies that he recruits are initially the avoiding types before they join the hero and become socially useful, the villain is the ruling type, and the villain’s cronies are the getting type. This formula is standard template for “band of heroes” movies such as Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai, in which a ronin samurai (socially useful type), pulls together a ragtag band o
f warriors (avoiding type), in order to defeat the greedy bandits (getting type), and their evil master (ruling type).

  Other films depict the life styles as intrapersonal conflict. The antihero figure in movies usually starts out as the getting type – an outlaw or gunslinger out for himself. He then epitomizes the avoiding type when a call to adventure is made for him to save the town, and he refuses the call. But he eventually becomes the socially useful type by accepting the call and destroying the evil villain – who is typically the embodiment of the ruling type. The hero in Kurosawa’s Yojimbo is a ronin samurai looking to make a few bucks as a hired sword, (the getting type). At first he avoids helping the poor townspeople (the avoiding type), but eventually he dedicates himself to the cause of saving the town (the socially useful type), which he does by killing the evil mob bosses who are ruling the village, (the ruling types).

  SPARTACUS

  Crassus (Lawrence Olivier), the ruthless patrician in Spartacus, is the embodiment of the ruling type. He treats the slaves and subordinates around him like toys in his own personal game of pleasure. Slaves are not human to Crassus, they are objects whose only purpose is to satisfy his perverse and sadistic appetites for sexual and psychological domination. Batiatus (Peter Ustinov), the avaricious master of the gladiator academy, epitomizes the getting type. He would sell his own mother for a few pieces of gold. When buying and appraising his slaves, Batiatus affects the posture of a patrician. He is head-and-shoulders in class above his slaves and servants, but his position is that of a bourgeois shop owner, who buys valuable stock at wholesale and sells them to the ruling class at resale. Batiatus’s grasping and selfish nature is evident in the scene in which he encounters Crassus and his patrician pals. He immediately disaffects all of his pride and pretense to bow to Crassus and serve his every whim. Batiatus even sells his most precious possession to Crassus, the exquisite Varinia (Jean Simmons), catering to the senator’s sexual desire. Moreover, Batiatus, despite his better judgment, yields to Crassus’ order for a gladiator fight to the death within the academy itself. He cannot refuse Crassus, because his type can always be bought for a pot of gold. Making the gladiators-in-training fight to the death in their own home is the straw that breaks the back of the downtrodden slaves. The fight leads to a mutiny and full-scale slave rebellion, all because of Crassus’ lust for power and Batiatus’ lust for gold.

  In the 1st act, while still a slave in the gladiator academy, Spartacus plays the role of the avoiding type. He knows, all too well, his place in the world, and has even tasted the bitter pill of punishment. In the opening sequence, Spartacus is tethered to a rock to die of sun exposure as penalty for attacking a guard in defense of a fellow slave. He barely escapes this fate when he is bought at discount by Batiatus, who is out on a shopping spree. Spartacus is not about to stick his neck out again for anyone. But Spartacus overcomes his avoiding ways when he is inspired by the courage and martyrdom of a fellow slave, and when he is enraged by the sight of his beloved Varinia being taken away from him by his heartless masters. By inciting and leading the greatest slave rebellion in recorded history, Spartacus depicts the leadership and social interest indicative of the socially useful type. Even in death, Spartacus continues his social usefulness, his legend standing as a beacon and inspiration for slaves everywhere.

  THE ROBE

  The biblical epic The Robe (1953) depicts a character who progresses through all four of Adler’s life styles. Tribune Marcellus Gallio (Richard Burton) is a Roman patrician, a member of the elite ruling class that owns slaves and dominates other nations as the self-proclaimed “Masters of the World.” Gallio starts out as a prototype for the classical Greco-Roman hero, but in this extremely religious film, Gallio must overcome his superiority complex in order to become a Judeo-Christian hero. In the first act, Gallio is the epitome of the ruling type. His own superiority complex leads him into a bidding contest over a slave in which he butts heads with Caligula, the heir apparent to the throne of the Roman empire. As punishment, Gallio is given an officer’s commission in the Roman army and sent off to an obscure post in the uncivilized realm of Judea.

  Gallio’s journey of personal transformation begins after he crucifies Jesus. Gallio’s guilt at having destroyed such a pure and divine being is physically retained in Jesus’ robe. The guilt is initially a curse that drives Gallio mad. He tries to evade the curse by leaving Judea and returning to Rome. Gallio’s evasiveness at this stage of his journey embodies the life style of the avoiding type. Gallio’s madness, however, follows him to Rome. The imperial soothsayer diagnoses Gallio with a curse bewitched upon him by Jesus, the “sorcerer” whom he executed. Emperor Tiberius gives Gallio an imperial commission to return to Judea in order to find and destroy Jesus’ robe. While doing so, Gallio must also uncover the leaders of the new seditious Christian movement, so that they may all be executed. The imperial commission transforms Gallio once again into the getting type. Rather than ruling others or avoiding responsibility, Gallio’s life style is now completely focused on getting something in order to satisfy a personal need at the expense of others. While he is now just a servant of the ruling class, a messenger boy carrying out the emperor’s orders, Gallio is out for himself. His only purpose in life is to get.

  Gallio returns to Judea and finds the robe, but the holy cloth and the guilt it embodies transforms Gallio once again, turning him into a socially useful type. The symbolic relationship between guilt and the robe signifies the essential difference between the Roman and Christian moralities. The Roman ethic is based on pride and the idealization of dominance, nobility, and strength. The Judeo-Christian ethic is based on guilt and the consequent idealization of social responsibility and humility, especially in relation to the lowest rung of society… the poor, the crippled, the enslaved, and the oppressed. In Nietzschean terms, pride is the psychological force behind the “master morality,” and guilt is the psychological force behind the “slave morality.” After converting to Christianity, Gallio renounces his old proud ways and embraces the humility of Christian guilt.

  In the 3rd act, Gallio displays his newfound social usefulness. He fights against his old Roman allies in order to rescue his former slave (Victor Mature), a fellow Christian. In a final dramatic display of his life-style reversal, Gallio selflessly sacrifices his own life in order to save the slave that he bought in the beginning of the film in an act of pride, hubris, and superiority. Gallio’s martyrdom is doubly significant, because he – a Roman patrician – sacrifices his life for the life of a lowly slave. Gallio’s self-sacrifice is also a literal emulation of the Christian ideal performed by Jesus himself. By willingly sacrificing himself for the poorest member of society, Gallio displays his complete identification with Jesus as a mentor, and his ultimate devotion to the Christian ideal.

  CHAPTER FOURTEEN SUMMARY POINTS

  Drawn from Nietzschean philosophy, Adler’s theory of conflicting life styles provides a model for both internal and external conflict. The theory delineates four different personality types based on life style – the way people express their drive toward superiority.

  The Ruling Type strives to feel dominant and superior over others.

  The Getting Type takes from others or depends on them to satisfy his needs.

  The Avoiding Type runs away from his duties and avoids obligations or responsibilities.

  And the Socially Useful Type engages in selfless, socially useful activities.

  Some films depict these life style types as interpersonal conflict. For example, the hero is the socially useful type, his reluctant sidekick or allies are the avoiding type, the villain is the ruling type, and the villain’s cronies are the getting type.

  Other films depict the life styles as intrapersonal conflict. For example, the antihero figure usually starts out as the getting type. He epitomizes the avoiding type when a call to adventure is made and he refuses the call. But he eventually becomes the socially useful type by accepting the call and destroying the evil villain �
� who is typically the embodiment of the ruling type.

  CHAPTER FOURTEEN EXERCISES

  1. Using your knowledge of film, identify five movie characters who epitomize the life style of the getting type.

  2. Identify five movie characters who epitomize the life style of the avoiding type.

  3. Identify five movie characters who epitomize the life style of the ruling type.

  4. Identify five movie characters who epitomize the life style of the socially useful type.

  5. Find and analyze a film in which there is interpersonal conflict between the four different character types delineated in this chapter.

  6. Find and analyze a film in which there is intrapersonal conflict – inner conflict within a character that drives him to develop from one type of life style into another. See if you can find a film in which the protagonist develops through all four of the life style types delineated in this chapter.

  ADDRESSING ADLER’S LIFE STYLES IN YOUR SCRIPT

  1. Would you define the hero in your script as a Greco-Roman hero (an Ubermensch) or as a Judeo-Christian hero (an underdog)? Why, or why not?

  2. Does your hero develop into someone who is more socially useful? If not, do you think that this sort of character development may add something to your script?