Whose Story Is It? Finding Your Main Character Through Perspective & Point Of View

Who is the main character in a story, and who (or what) is their opposition? It may seem like a simple question with an intuitive answer. But it is still a question worth exploring. How can the writer be sure they have identified the right characters for their main character and opposition?

In my previous article, Mastering Conflict in Screenwriting, we defined narrative conflict, at its most basic, as one character wanting something and another character (or force) that doesn’t want them to have it. Here we will build on that idea by asking who wants the thing, and who, or what doesn’t want them to have it. At the story level, in the central conflict, these are recognized as the main character and their opposition. 

Surely, we have all heard that a hero is only as great as their villain. It may be clear to the writer who is their protagonist or hero. However, they may be less obvious to the audience, especially when the antagonist or villain have stronger motivations. And what if the main character and opposition are apparent allies? Or who is the main character in a buddy flick? Or what if the opposition is more… interesting? Suddenly, identifying the main character may not be so simple.

The exciting part of this often-overlooked exploration is that it may lead the writer to reassess whether an opposition character might indeed make for a stronger main character. It may be that telling a familiar story from a different point of view (POV) will simply be more interesting to the writer and the audience.

Perspective vs POV

The easiest way to determine the main character and opposition may be through perspective and POV. While often used interchangeably, perspective and POV are two distinct, but related ideas. Understanding them as separate concepts will allow the writer to clarify their story for themself and their audience.

 - Perspective is how the character feels about the world in which they live
POV limits the context in which the audience experiences the story

The central conflict has two competing perspectives, the main character and their opposition. The POV belongs predominantly to the main character. To build empathy and maximize narrative conflict in a story, the author may have different characters assume the POV, if only temporarily. A change of POV away from the main character will create dramatic irony and perhaps provide necessary context. It can also clarify meaningful stakes for the main character. 

However, POV is not a rule in determining the main character. For instance, the POV may be limited by a narrator, who may or may not be one of the characters in the story. Here are some challenging examples:

POV In A Buddy Flick

Pitting two mismatched characters against each other can be a wellspring of conflict. The buddy flick has two equal characters who are forced together to solve a problem. One is definitely not the sidekick to the other. They have vastly different perspectives and essentially fight for the primary POV. They may have a shared story level goal but will have distinct reasons they are forced to act towards it. They may also have very different consequences. The two must learn to work together, or simply endure each other. The contrast of competing perspectives in a buddy flick is as important as achieving their shared goal. It’s the journey, not the destination. 

POV In A Rom-Com

The climax answers an implied question, “Will they live happily ever after?”  The same is true for the romantic drama. One of the two characters will typically engage with the other elements of the story more than the other. However, their potential partner is not their opposition. Often the main character’s unrecognized flaw stands in their own way. 

POV Within An Ensemble Cast

The ensemble drama is a battle of perspectives between an emergent POV character and one or more of the other characters. In the action, war, and horror ensembles, the death of other characters will restrict the POV and serve as a reminder of stakes for the main character. The ensemble comedy might not have an emergent POV character. Instead, like a TV sitcom, it may have various characters, each reacting to the situation in their unique way. 

Why the Opposition Isn’t the Main Character?

Determining whether a character is a main character or opposition is more than a question of screen time. It will also be determined by how the character interacts with the other elements of a story.

Before we compare how the main character interacts with the other elements, let’s clarify that the terms main character and the opposition are neutral. That is to say that they do not represent good and evil. They represent only how the character interacts with the other elements. 

For instance, the main character will have a more established status quo. They will be featured in the triggering events and inciting epiphany. Compared to other characters, the main character will have the most meaningful goals, stakes, and negative consequences. By contrast, the opposition will not necessarily have meaningful triggers, goals, and stakes. Or if they do, then these elements will be underdeveloped when compared to the main character.

Context and Setting

In any story, for the central conflict to be clear, it will be necessary to establish the opposing perspectives. The main character will be given more context for their perspective, the stronger justification. This will typically engender more audience empathy. The opposition is given just enough context to allow the audience to understand why they are opposing the main character. The opposition does not require much justification, if any.  The setting will favor the opposition, it’s often their home turf. However, the setting will be understood predominantly from the main character’s POV.

Triggering Events

Also known as inciting events or inciting incidents, the triggering events interrupt the status quo for the main character. The protagonist realizes their circumstances have changed; the hero becomes aware of the villain’s goal. These triggers typically come with immediate consequences for not acting. The trigger initiates the central conflict. The story will not often show triggers for the opposition character, or if they do, they are portrayed late in the story as excuses for their wicked behavior. Or as The Incredibles called it, monologuing. This may engender some cognitive empathy, but rarely ever emotional empathy.

Meaningful Goals

When faced with strong triggering events, the main character is forced to act towards a meaningful goal that will solve their story-level problem. This is easy to see in the protagonist/antagonist dynamic. Facing a stronger antagonist, the protagonist’s goal must be clearly defined, difficult to achieve, and deeply meaningful. The context supports the protagonist’s goals, and the negative consequences for failure are personal. It’s not the same for the hero/villain dynamic. The hero reacts to the villain’s actions. The villain’s nefarious goal typically drives the narrative forward, similar to the protagonist. However, the villain does not engage with the other elements in the same way as a protagonist. Their goal is greedy, or at the least, not justifiable. The negative consequences for the villain aren’t a fate worse than death. And mostly, villains don’t have the primary POV. 

Meaningful Stakes & Consequences

Stakes are a simple either/ or proposition. Either the main character will succeed and achieve their goal, or they will fail and face severe negative consequences. Story level consequences come in the climax when the main character runs out of time or options. This should be defined in the goal. They must not fail. At least that is what the character has to believe because the negative consequences are so personal, they are a fate worse than their own death. They must stay alive to prevent the consequences! The opposition may have their own consequences, but they are not so concerned with them. They may not even think of the climax as the decisive battle. They feel they can regroup and try again.

The Main Character’s Flaw

There is a promise inherent in narrative conflict that despite the apparent strength of the opposition and the apparent weakness of the main character, there is a chance for the main character to succeed. This is a canary in the coal mine. Rarely is the opposition presented as weak. The opposition is always presented as stronger than the main character. The reason is simple: If the main character could easily achieve their goal, then there would be little tension in the story. The flaw ensures the character has something that they must overcome internally. It is a kind of personal redemption story that makes the audience root for the main character even more. Defining the character through the elements, the audience develops empathy for a character who is specifically flawed in a way that makes it more difficult for them to succeed. The opposition can be flawed, obviously, but it may be in a way that helps them in some way, or at least makes it harder for the main character to succeed. 

Final Words – An Exploration of Alternative POVs

Does another character interact with the elements more than the apparent main character? If so, they may be the main character. Would it be more interesting, for the audience or the writer, to tell the story from the POV of another character? How would that affect the other story elements, such as goals, triggers, and consequences? What context would be needed to understand the conflict from another character’s perspective?

For a more in-depth look at how the elements of story work together, check out my book Mastering the Logline, How to Excite Hollywood in a Single Sentence.