The single figure always refers to another, whether that other is absent or present. The figures desire, actions are defined by this other.

 This does not necessarily root painting in narrative, although it does imply a causal link between the central character and other facets.

Such a link can be establish on the grounds of a justification which exists outside of the linear nature of literay time. The panic, the state, the impact can be a permanent condition brought on by the other. It need no be the direct effect resulting from a previous cause. The two are symbiotic rather than intrinsically linked in a historic hierachy.

The protagonist, I am suggesting, need not precede the victim. There states can both exist in the eternal now, the moment of flux, which the painting deals with.

On another note, we need no depict the protagonist. We only need focus on the ‘victim.’ The protagonists prescence or existence can be suggested by an unseen ofstage prescence. Hints of exists or doorways can potentially imply this.