[ SECRET POST #4333 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4333 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 15 secrets from Secret Submission Post #620.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

01. https://i.imgur.com/1vzMJl2.png

[(Anonymous)]

If you mean a skilled writer could redeem any/all characters and make them sympathetic to you, sure. Cool. Subjective and all that

If you mean redeeming any/all characters so that mass public opinion changes is just a matter of skill, I find that doubtful. Subjective and all that

[(Anonymous)]

I'm really not sure that I agree. And even if it's true, i think there are a lot of characters where the amount of things they would have to do and undergo to be redeemed is just staggeringly large. Remember, a character having moral complexity or shades of grey is not the same as being redeemed.

[(Anonymous)]

So, how can someone redeem fantasy Hitler?

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not sure that's the right question to ask. Because you could probably come up with some answer - part of the basic idea of fantasy as a genre is that you can build these elaborate, hypothetical, magical scenarios. The considerations and limitations of the real world don't apply to invented hypothetical scenarios.

The real question for me is, should you do that. What's the point of going to all that work and inventing those scenarios. Where does that get you. Why would you do that, especially as it couldn't possibly have any real effect on our actual thoughts on Hitler, who would remain just as evil. A writer could in principle try to come up with something, but they shouldn't, and to the extent that they do, they're not good writers. Even though, yes, it's fiction, there's still a purpose, a point, to writing fiction and making the choices you make in doing that.

And the same is true for fictional characters to the extent that they're representations of real world evil or meant to evoke it or meant t be morally serious or what have you. Obviously, writing a reedemed Voldemort isn't a political action with real world relevance the way that redeeming Hitler could easily be. But it would still detract from the moral seriousness and villainous nature of Voldemort and the series as a whole. It would change the series in a pretty fundamental way.

[ayebydan]

I'm going to break this to you softly.

Hitler is real.

Fictional characters are not.

Comparing them is ridiculous.

[(Anonymous)]

Blizzard managed twice already.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree. Anyone can be redeemed. That's the whole point of redemption. It might not be easy, depending on the character, but it wouldn't be impossible.

[(Anonymous)]

Are you referring specifically to fictional characters when saying 'anyone can be redeemed' or

[(Anonymous)]

I agree. I also think that not every character needs to be redeemed, and not every story has to include redemption. The picture used in this secret is an excellent example of a story that doesn't need the villain(s) to be redeemed, and a character whose redemption wouldn't especially serve the story.

[sparklywalls]

I want to agree with you but it's difficult to commit myself 100%. I think with some characters it's extremely hard, borderline impossible, but could be done if you put A LOT of effort into it. In fanfic you may also have to play around with canon and kick things off earlier but I know some fans don't like this as it will essentially erase later canon events/characters. You'll also always get the folk whose tastes are that a villain is a villain is a villain and they won't buy the new take. That's fine. Everyone's tastes are different.

At the same time I remember things like a huge amount of people manage to fuck up when you've got a villain who is already on the really sympathetic side of sympathetic. Not to mention I've rarely seen a fic that tries to redeem someone who is presented as purely monstrous like, for example...the Joker, that hasn't been OOC cringe most if not all of the way. Not just for him but for Batman as well.

[(Anonymous)]

I think it depends on how the character was originally written. Voldemort, to use your example, is so one-dimensional that there's just not much there to work with.

[(Anonymous)]

Disagree.

But I don't think "people who can't be redeemed" is a matter of "how bad was the thing they did." There are some people who, when their warped worldview is challenged or undermined, will only double down. There are people who are so attached to their anger, or whose ego/identity depend on their awful values, who will refuse to consider alternatives.

There are a few - very few - characters whom I would look at and say.....no, *could* be redeemed, if they chose to try. But if you write them choosing to try, that in itself is an OOC/AU decision, and it's just not that character anymore.

There are characters, specifically, where the entire point of their arcs is that they have opportunities for redemption, and turn them aside. I think you could write a really interesting story about someone very similar who made a different crucial choice, but at that point, it's about a fundamentally different character.

In real life, you don't have that kind of outside perspective. You can't ever know all of someone's life and they don't have an "Arc". People can have strong defense mechanisms that erode over time, and I would never say for sure that a real person couldn't be redeemed.

eg, Eugene de Kock, basically the top death squad guy for apartheid south africa, has had really interesting interactions with the truth and reconciliation commission, and has tried to counsel young white supremacists in prison with him away from racist beliefs. (Source: A Human Being Died That Night, by Pumla Gobodo-Madikizela, the TRC psychologist who interviewed him over several months.)

But in fiction...I think a skilled enough writer can redeem a character who has done anything, but equally a skilled enough writer can create a character who can't be redeemed, because they can create a character who won't be redeemed.

[(Anonymous)]

excellently put, anon, and I agree.

if part of what defines a character's personality is that they fundamentally can't or won't turn aside from their path and the only way to give them a redemption plotline is to actually write them OOC so that they do make those choices, then it's not a case of skilled writing (or lack thereof in the character's original sense). in that sense it's the author wilfully bending characterisation in order to force the plot.

[kittydesade]

... yep this about sums it up *thumbs up*

[nightscale]

I agree a little bit, as in it is possible that someone could redeem wizard!Hitler(to use the example in this secret), but I also think there are some characters that would take so much effort and work to redeem that it would be almost impossible to pull off in a way that would be even remotely satisfying.

I think there's also the added question of whether or not the character deserves to be redeemed, which is a bit of a loaded point of discussion.

[ayebydan]

agreed

[(Anonymous)]

Well, yeah I agree, but the writers have to intend for some kind of redemption in the first place. If they decide to change things out of nowhere it tends to be in and of itself bad writing.

I thought of someone who can’t be redeemed

[feotakahari]

Kazuo Kiriyama from Battle Royale.

Re: I thought of someone who can’t be redeemed

[el_regrs]

To be fair, the kid was jolly well fucked in utero and was never going to be normal (though I'm only going by the book).

[mudousetsuna]

I agree, and I don't think you have to go OOC/AU to do it. By technicality, anything other than canon is AU, and you could argue it's also OOC because it's not what the characters canonly did. So I don't buy this argument. Now, sure, they are degrees of LESS LIKELY to do certain things, including changing their minds, but that's where skill comes in. To find and craft the correct circumstances is the kind of skill I believe it takes. Maybe it's not everyone's cup of tea to read that particular outcome, but if you can make it believable, then that is skill.

Personally, I love redemption stories. Love love love them, it's so interesting to explore what makes a character tick, and what it takes to change some part of their core view on life. This includes also turning heroes into villains. It's so much fun!

[(Anonymous)]

I am smiling SO MUCH RIGHT NOW because of this comment. Cosigning forever; I could talk about my favorite parts of it but that's pretty much the whole thing.

Your choice of picture...

[(Anonymous)]

Thinking about redeeming Voldemort made me think of a fanfic that I would rec any day. It's not a redemption fic, no, but it gives a disturbingly plausible starting point for the character, instead of "he was born evil, nothing to be done" -- and in under 400 words. For anyone who wants to read it: https://www.fanfiction.net/s/7415768/1/

[(Anonymous)]

Possible, but I think for some characters it would take god tier writing skills so realistically it likely won’t work.

[chamonix]

I agree.