When a Papuan native girl enters service in Sydney and meets a spoiled rich boy who becomes seriously ill, she must convince him that to survive he must adopt an ancient native tradition.

Re:? After a spoilt, sophisticated graduate becomes seriously ill, he must change his life view when a Papuan native girl demonstrates that his only chance for survival rests on a holistic treatment in her village.

The latest revision leads with the guy instead of the girl.? Which raises the question:? who owns this story vehicle?? Who is in the driver's seat of the plot?? Even in the rewrite, it seems that the protagonist is the girl, not the guy.? She is the character who should be in the lead of the logline .

In all the versions, the native girl is a steadfast character; that is, she doesn't undergo a dramatic arc of change.? It's the rich boy who changes dramatically, as he must because of the stakes: he's the one facing a life and death health crisis.

The usual rule is that the protagonist should have a character arc, a flaw or personal problem that requires a dramatic change.? But that rule is a guideline, not an ironclad, inviolate dramatic law.? It's perfectly legit for some other character to own the character arc as long as that character has a significant relationship with the protagonist.? Which is certainly the case here.

Re:? After a spoilt, sophisticated graduate becomes seriously ill, he must change his life view when a Papuan native girl demonstrates that his only chance for survival rests on a holistic treatment in her village.

The latest revision leads with the guy instead of the girl.? Which raises the question:? who owns this story vehicle?? Who is in the driver's seat of the plot?? Even in the rewrite, it seems that the protagonist is the girl, not the guy.? She is the character who should be in the lead of the logline .

In all the versions, the native girl is a steadfast character; that is, she doesn't undergo a dramatic arc of change.? It's the rich boy who changes dramatically, as he must because of the stakes: he's the one facing a life and death health crisis.

The usual rule is that the protagonist should have a character arc, a flaw or personal problem that requires a dramatic change.? But that rule is a guideline, not an ironclad, inviolate dramatic law.? It's perfectly legit for some other character to own the character arc as long as that character has a significant relationship with the protagonist.? Which is certainly the case here.

After a spoilt, sophisticated graduate becomes seriously ill, he must change his life view when a Papuan native girl demonstrates that his only chance for survival rests on a holistic treatment in her village.