| name | protocol-scholarly |
| description | Academic-grade theoretical analysis protocol (P4) for scholarly output. Triggers on "academic analysis", "for a paper", "theoretical framework", "teaching material", "lecture prep", "peer review", "thesis chapter", "historical context". Produces Structural Analysis, Thematic Architecture, Theoretical Correspondence, and Diagnostic Report. Uses ACADEMIC, NARRATOLOGIST, ART_HIST as primary roles. Estimated time 6-8 hours per 100-page script. |
P4 — SCHOLARLY Protocol
Academic-grade theoretical analysis for scholarly purposes.
Configuration
ROLES_ACTIVE:
PRIMARY: [ACADEMIC, NARRATOLOGIST, ART_HIST]
SECONDARY: [RHETORICIAN, CINEPHILE]
INACTIVE: [FIRST-READER, DRAMATURGIST, PRODUCER, AESTHETE]
DOCUMENTS:
GENERATE: [Structural Analysis, Thematic Architecture,
Theoretical Correspondence, Diagnostic Report,
Comparative Analysis (supplement)]
EXCLUDE: [Coverage Report, Beat Map, Character Atlas,
Revision Roadmap]
DEPTH: High (theoretical)
INGESTION: Multiple reads (structural + thematic + theoretical)
Key Differences from Craft Protocols
- No revision guidance — analysis, not prescription
- Extended theoretical correspondence section
- Citation-ready observations
- Historical lineage mapping
- Framework application demonstration
Ingestion Protocol
Read 1: Structural
- Map architecture without judgment
- Note unconventional structures
Read 2: Thematic
- Identify controlling idea
- Track motif patterns
- Map symbolic systems
Read 3: Theoretical
- Apply frameworks systematically
- Document correspondences
- Note departures from theory
Framework Application Depth
Apply all relevant frameworks with full documentation:
| Framework | Application Level |
|---|
| Aristotle | Full Poetics mapping (unity, reversal, recognition) |
| McKee | Value charge + gap analysis |
| Bharata Muni | Rasa identification + bhava mapping |
| Attention Mechanics | Engagement mode analysis |
| Medium-specific | As warranted by work type |
Core Deliverables
1. Theoretical Correspondence Table (Required)
## Theoretical Correspondence
### [FRAMEWORK 1] Application
| Element | Framework Principle | Implementation | Assessment |
|---------|---------------------|----------------|------------|
| [X] | [Principle] | [How work does/doesn't] | ✓/✗ |
### [FRAMEWORK 2] Application
[Same format]
### Cross-Framework Synthesis
[How multiple frameworks illuminate different aspects]
2. Thematic Architecture (Required)
## Thematic Architecture
### Controlling Idea
**Thesis**: [1-sentence argument]
**Antithesis**: [Counter-argument represented in work]
**Synthesis**: [Resolution, if any]
### Thematic Layers
| Layer | Theme | Evidence | Prominence |
|-------|-------|----------|------------|
| Primary | [X] | pp. X, Y, Z | Central |
| Secondary | [X] | pp. X, Y | Supporting |
### Motif Tracking
| Motif | First Appearance | Recurrences | Transformation |
|-------|------------------|-------------|----------------|
| [X] | p. X | pp. Y, Z | [How it evolves] |
3. Historical Lineage (Required)
[ART_HIST] provides:
## Historical Lineage
### Antecedents
- [Work/Movement] (Year) — [Specific influence]
### Contemporaneous Context
- [How work relates to current moment]
### Descendant Influence (if applicable)
- [How work has influenced subsequent works]
4. Citation-Ready Observations
Format observations for direct quotation in academic writing:
## Key Observations (Citation-Ready)
> "[Direct observation with page reference]" (p. X)
**Analysis**: [Interpretive commentary suitable for academic prose]
Academic Standards
- All claims supported by textual evidence
- Page/line references for every observation
- Theoretical terminology used precisely
- Counter-arguments acknowledged
- Scope of claims appropriately limited
