#NOT a preordained destiny or fate but specifically a matter of the. choices. you. make.

[mcbitchtits]

more pointedly re: that last wall of tags—

Dial being a control;

control being a choice;

therefore Destiny being a choice

[writingquestionsanswered]

Hi WQA I hope everything’s been good!

I wanted to know- how do I depict a character arc of “reluctant hero/chosen one” without it being… how to explain it? Like the usual Disney type of stuff?

I want my MC to be given a power that they do not want to deal with and are now stuck with- plus leading a bunch of peeps to destroy the big bad guy- but I really have no idea (I mean I have a few story beats in mind but it’s still REALLY fuzzy yknow?) how to show them going from “ew I don’t want to deal with this” to becoming a leader and eventual ruler- how do I depict the arc?

Thank you very much friend!

Non-Cliché Reluctant Hero/Chosen One Arc

There are some specific things that make the Chosen One arc cliché, and honestly, not great a lot of the time. We'll go through some of those things and talk about what can be done instead.

1 - Fate vs Destiny - One of the biggest issues of the Chosen One trope is that all too often, the hero--whether reluctant or not--doesn't have a choice in their role as the Chosen One. They are fated to do the thing that only they can do, so every decision they make is preordained to lead to that outcome. If they're fated to save the world by sacrificing themselves, that's going to happen no matter what. This strips them of any agency they might have in the story. There is the illusion of choice, but all roads lead to their fate. And, honestly, it's not much fun to watch someone rise to greatness when it's the only possible outcome. Solution: Destiny can be changed... it can be shaped by choices. If a character is destined to save the world by sacrificing themselves, that outcome can be avoided. They can find a way to save the world without sacrificing themselves. They could even refuse the call if it somehow set off a chain of events that still led to the world being saved. A Chosen One with agency is much more satisfying to watch than one who is doomed to their fate.

2 - Give Them a Choice or Make Refusal an Option - Prophecies (which can be fate or destiny), bloodlines, or being the only one in possession of a unique gift leaves little to no room for choice. They didn't choose to get involved with a particular cause. And if they'd refused the call, they would have looked terrible. They may have agency later on in that their choices actually matter, but what difference does it make if they're making choices in service of a cause they had no choice but to accept? Solution Option #1: Put them on their path by choice. For example, in The Hunger Games, if Katniss's name had been pulled from the Reaping ball, she wouldn't have had any choice in being a tribute. But because it was her sister's name that was chosen, she made the choice to volunteer to take her place. Since she was the first person in District 12 ever to volunteer as tribute, no one would have expected her to make that sacrifice, and we as the reader wouldn't have even known it was possible. So, while from an emotional and moral perspective, there was really no other choice she could have made (she wasn't going to let that happen to her beloved sister), she still made the choice. She was still the master of her own destiny, and continued to be as the story went on. It can also be argued that volunteering as tribute wasn't even the thing that made Katniss the Chosen One, but rather her behavior and actions during the games that earned her a role as the icon of rebellion. So, "hero-by-deed" is another option to give your character some choice in their role. Solution Option #2: Give them a viable alternative, but one which has an undesirable drawback. For example, let's say your character has a unique magical gift and that's why they're chosen, but whoever delivers the call gives them the option to transfer that ability via magical spell to another person. The drawback is the gift won't be quite as potent in another person, and also they'll lose all their memories associated with ever having or using that gift. Now they have a viable choice. They might lose their unique ability and all associated memories, but they don't have to be in a situation they didn't choose.

3 - Prophecy for the Sake of Prophecy - Too often, prophecy is used as the basis of why the character is the Chosen One, however the prophecy is superficial and serves no other purpose. Solution: If you use a prophecy as the basis of why your character is the Chosen One, make sure the prophecy is fleshed out, relevant to the world and plot, and serves more purpose than being an explanation.

4 - Salvation in the Hands of a Child - Another Chosen One cliché is when the Chosen One--whether a child, young adult, or amateur--is surrounded by people who are better skilled, more knowledgeable, and better qualified to save the day, but still somehow the fate of the universe rests on the Chosen One's shoulders. Solution: Make sure there's a reason why the character, despite lacking in qualifications, is still the best option to save the day. Also, have them receiving lots of help and guidance from the more qualified people around them. Let them struggle as they acquire new skills, and have them really need that help from others. It should be a group effort to some degree. Let other characters be important.

5 - Proficiency at Lightning Speed - There are few things that make a reader's eyes roll faster in a Chosen One story than when the previously uninitiated Chosen One answers the call, then very quickly becomes proficient in whatever skills are needed in order for them to fulfill their destiny. Solution: Again, let them struggle as they acquire the necessary skills. It should take a believable amount of time for them to do the thing well, and there should bot lots of failures and setbacks. As much as I hated the Disney+ sequel to Willow, one thing they did right is have their Chosen One really struggle with learning to use and control the magic that was in them all along. It was pretty close to the end of the season before they became adept enough to really make a difference.

Bonus - Here's a lightning round of things to avoid: the over-the-top underdog Chosen One, the "All Powerful" Chosen One, the Chosen One who never has to make tough decisions, the Chosen One who is ordinary for no reason, the Chosen One who is defined by their destiny, the Chosen One who is special for the sake of being special, the Chosen One who has no autonomy and no agency, the Chosen One who only puts others first and never considers their own safety/wants/needs, the Chosen One who doesn't get to have a life beyond their Chosen One role.

Happy writing!

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

I’ve been writing seriously for over 30 years and love to share what I’ve learned. Have a writing question? My inbox is always open!

Learn more about WQA

Visit my Master List of Top Posts

Go to ko-fi.com/wqa to buy me coffee or see my commissions

[tlcartist]

JoJo and the dichotomy of fate vs choice

There's a recurring tension throughout the series surrounding to the conflicting ideas of destiny and free will and how they impact the story. Araki manages to walk the fine line between the two that's just really interesting to me and leaves a lot of room for interpretation on the part of the viewer.

On the one hand, we have characters who seem destined to experience certain loss, trauma, or pain. They're quite literally doomed by the narrative and any actions they make to try and change the course of fate either land them back in the same spot or have no effect. The most obvious examples of this being Oingo/Boingo, Hayato, and FF's fight with Kenzou. These are moments where the story is grabbing you by the shoulders and saying, "See nothing you do really matters!"

Though Araki doesn't just explore this concept in such literal ways throughout the story. We also see it in character arcs over a longer period of time. One could argue that George Joestar was destined to die in the carriage crash along with his wife and child, and that Dario saving their lives was only delaying the inevitable. Or that Jotaro or Bucciarati's deaths were destined to happen in spite of actions (either intentional or not) taken in an attempt to avoid that fate. This could very easily have taken a sharp turn into bleak nihilism. "We all have a role to fill and deviation from that path is forbidden." And yet it doesn't.

Because, you see, more than anything, what Araki really wants the viewer to believe in is the power of coincidence and the lack thereof. Fate may set the stage but at the end of the day what really acts as the catalyst is coincidence, and coincidence isn't always random. It can be influenced and swayed. Josuke and Koichi just happening to walk by the Nijimura house at the specific time they did leading to Koichi getting stand abilities was a matter of chance. Hayato using his intellect to make the decision to call Josuke to make sure he'd arrive in time to hear Kira's confession? That was a deliberate choice.

Time and time again we see characters using their sense of agency when it's most important and taking their destiny into their own hands. Bucciarati choosing to use the loss of his senses to his advantage in his fight with Secco. Josuke's refusal to leave Okuyasu behind leading to Okuyasu later saving his life. Emporio using Weather Report's stand disk to defeat Pucci. The pivotal moments within the story are generally but not always instances where the protagonist regains control of the narrative.

And yet, in spite of everything, all of this still begs the question, what is choice? At what point does free will end and fate begin? Were any of these the purposeful actions of characters or were these also preordained? More importantly, does it matter?

How you choose to view these scenarios is entirely up to you. Are you comforted by the idea that there is a set path to things or do you find it constrictive? Do you find the occurrence of coincidence to be just another facet of a binding fate or are you delighted by happenstance and its unexpected consequences? These are answers only you can find and they have applications that extend far beyond the realm of JoJo and their bizarre adventures.

[thenexusofsouls]

{i am the caretaker of souls} Re-watching Legion... and I just realized something interesting. You know the “instructions,” the angelic script written on Michael’s body?

What did they mean, and how did Michael know they would be passed to Jeep? A bit of a fun rant under the cut, and also Legion spoilers ahead:

It didn’t appear on Jeep’s body until after Michael was killed by Gabriel. Yet before that happened, Michael told Jeep to, “Learn to read the instructions.” How could he read them if he didn’t have them yet? Unless... Michael assumed he was going to die, and knew that after he did, the instructions would be passed to Jeep. This meant that Michael either knew in advance that he was going to die, or was wise enough to anticipate his death at Gabriel’s hands, maybe because he was mortal vs. Gabriel’s full immortal angel self.

The latter makes more sense than the former, since this couldn’t have been anything preordained by god if he had already supposedly lost faith in mankind and wanted to exterminate them all... right? That is until you begin to wonder how Michael knew the instructions would be passed to anyone after he died, let alone already knowing specifically that they would go to Jeep. This knowledge seems to imply that Michael was told or shown in advance what was going to happen.

And beyond that, what do these instructions even say? If they were given to Jeep because he was a “protector,” then they must pertain to protecting Charlie and her baby. But... if god was pissed off at humans and wanted nothing more to do with them to the point where he was willing to kill them all, why did Michael have instructions written on his body that detailed how to protect Charlie, a human, and her baby, a savior of mankind who was never meant to be born? This becomes even more confusing when you consider that Michael said to Jeep upon defeating Gabriel, “You are the true protector, you always have been.” The true protector. For him to be the truest one of anything, there had to be more than one. It implies that Michael was a “protector” before Jeep. And indeed, if Michael had the instructions to begin with, then it would seem that he was the first protector. Why would he have been designated as a protector if his order directly from god, the order he was given that he “didn’t believe in,” had been to kill Charlie’s baby to doom mankind?

To cloud matters more, let’s consider what angelic script even is. It’s a language comprised of symbols often referred to a either angelic or celestial. The names of all the archangels are written in this language, usually designated by symbols arranged into a sigil. Depending upon the lore involved, these sigils may be embossed or carved into their armor, tattooed or branded onto their skin, or applied as a magical glyph to their skin, often on the side of their necks. But in some lore, angelic script written on the bodies of angels is said to be the orders of god. As the angel carries out these orders, the script disappears from their skin, making room for new orders. So if we subscribe to this type of lore for Michael, the “instructions” written on his body would likely be direct orders from god. This makes no sense if they were instructions on how to be a protector of Charlie and her baby if god was hell-bent, no pun intended, on destroying the human race. Unless you consider god’s potential mindset regarding not only the fate he’d chosen for mankind but also Michael’s defection.

“Do you want to be the son who gives his father what he asks for, or what he needs?” Michael asked Gabriel just before he defected. “How dare you presume to know his heart?” Gabriel challenged, to which Michael replied, “Because he made this one,” laying his hand over his heart, “and it tells me he shouldn’t lose faith now.” Michael seemed to have an intimate understanding of god, which isn’t surprising being that he was the first angel created and is thousands of years old. Michael seemed to know that, although god was discouraged enough to decide that mankind should be destroyed, there was a part of him that wished that wasn’t true. He lost faith, however, and so as much as he might wish humans were redeemable, he just didn’t believe that anymore. But Michael understood that god wished he could believe in the redemption of mankind. What god asked for was the extermination of mankind. What he wanted... was for them to prove that they were still worthy of the gifts he’d given them and that they were still worth having faith in. While Gabriel was content to follow orders regardless of what they were, Michael was willing to defect and risk severe punishment and even death, “you’ll anger him for the last time” as Gabriel said, to give god that hope back and to prove to him that faith in mankind was warranted.

Since Michael seemed to know in advance that he would die and bequeath these instructions to Jeep, that has all the airs of a prophecy itself. Did god change Michael’s orders after he defected in the hopes that he would actually be successful in carrying them out? Well, they wouldn’t have been orders anymore, now they were simply “instructions.” A how-to on this final stand god knew Michael was planning. Maybe god in his benevolence towards such an ancient and previously loyal and devoted archangel, and instead of punishing Michael outright, decided to give him the purpose he wanted... to protect Charlie until she had her child and then protect them both. Kindof like when your kid leaves home at eighteen and you don’t agree with all their life choices but you still wish them well and want to see them succeed? Perhaps god wasn’t pleased by the defection and yet some part of him was rooting for Michael to succeed. His “instructions,” as a way to help him succeed, seem proof of that.

And if the instructions were placed on Michael’s body because he was a protector, then he must have been reading them, right? So what did they say? Maybe they told him where on Earth to locate Charlie? Maybe they told him what the other angels were going to do and how to fight them? The signs to look for in a possessed human? The exact date that Charlie would go into labor, and that’s how he knew she would have the baby about a month early? These are all things he would need to know to be a good protector. Maybe... Michael’s instructions told him that he would die while protecting Charlie and her baby, and that’s how he knew in advance. And that may have been either a deterrent or a challenge from god, too, like... okay, you want to defy me? You’ll die in the process. Not that god was going to kill him himself, but just to make the point to Michael that this would not end well for him. It could have been a way of testing just how serious Michael was about the defection and how much he loved humans. Were they worth his life? Maybe god even used that as a measure of mankind’s worth, that the Archangel Michael was willing to die for them. 

Michael assumed they would be transferred to Jeep because Jeep was an incredibly good and moral human being, as Michael noted when he told him, “You, Jeep. You are the reason I still have faith.” Jeep was an example of a genuinely good, selfless individual undaunted by the odds stacked against him. Between that and how close he was to Charlie, he was a natural choice for a protector of her and her baby. But maybe when the instructions were transferred to Jeep, they no longer spoke of Michael’s destiny, but Jeep’s instead. Maybe they say different things now, such as how to find the “prophets” Michael mentioned, places they would need to go, and perhaps even Jeep’s, Charlie’s, or her baby’s fate.

I’ve seen Legion countless times and this was the first time any of this even occurred to me, and I just thought it was incredibly interesting. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?

[a-sagittarius-expression]

FMP - ARTIST RESEARCH: STEPHEN A. DIAMOND (PH.D.) - 'EVIL DEEDS'

"Do you believe in fate? Destiny? If fate does exist, how much responsibility must we accept for our lives? Are we responsible for everything that occurs to us--even choosing our own birth, as some suggest--or do we bear little or no responsibility for a cosmically, theologically or genetically preordained destiny?

One of the most confusing and difficult issues psychotherapy patients struggle with is personal responsibility. In existential depth psychology especially, responsibility is a focal point, along with other "ultimate concerns" such as freedom, meaning, limitation, suffering, death, and the daimonic. For the patient, the existential question is: What am I responsible for? How much responsibility must I take? One of the most common mistakes patients make regarding responsibility is either taking too little or too much responsibility for that which has happened in life.

When we habitually repudiate or slough off responsibility for negative thoughts, feelings, and behavior patterns and the effects of that behavior on others, we perceive ourselves as passive victims of powers beyond our control, for which we take no personal responsibility. Accepting responsibility for those problems for which we are accountable is prerequisite to changing one's life. It is a matter of personal power: If we deny our power to engender destructive consequences, refusing responsibility for having, often unconsciously, done so, where will the power to creatively transform one's life and relationships come from? We are, for instance, clearly not responsible for our genes, nor the myriad physical and mental predispositions to which they render us vulnerable. Genetics are part of fate. But we are responsible for how we deal with our inherited biological and genetic makeup, and for doing what we can to cultivate our strengths and manage our vulnerabilities rather than exacerbating them through self-destructive lifestyles.

On the other hand, some individuals tend to take excessive responsibility for people, events, and circumstances that are beyond their control. For example, psychotic patients may feel irrationally responsible for causing a deadly earthquake or plane crash. Others frequently feel responsible for the destructive behaviors or evil deeds of their parents, blaming themselves for having been unloved, neglected, betrayed, abused or abandoned during childhood. Some may take on too much responsibility for the feelings and actions of spouses, lovers, children, friends--a kind of codependency. In such situations, effective psychotherapy involves reducing hyper-responsibility, assisting the patient in sorting out that for which he or she is and is not responsible.

The philosophical questions of fate, destiny and responsibility are central to psychotherapy. But different approaches to the understanding and treatment of mental disorders today diverge radically as to how much responsibility patients must take for themselves. (See my previous post.) Responsibility is intrinsically related to freedom: Some "New Age" therapies preach complete responsibility for and freedom from fate as an attainable human potentiality. Cognitive therapies disregard the fateful influences of the daimonic, the shadow, the unconscious. Others grossly overemphasize biochemistry or behavior, tending to negate the patient's responsibility so insidiously that their freedom too is further undermined. The fact is that there are certain things in life we are responsible for, and many that we are not. The secret is to discover the delicate balance between fate and responsibility without relinquishing our relative freedom to become who we wish, or denying that which fatefully determines what we are.

Is fate different from destiny? For me, yes. Fate refers to the existential givens of life, those aspects of existence that are immutable, inexorable and inevitable, and over which we can exert little or no control. From an existential perspective, we are "thrown" into life without any choice or responsibility in the matter. We are born into a world at a biologically predetermined time, in a particular place, to specific parents, of a certain gender, and with innate strengths, talents, traits, temperament, limitations and vulnerabilities. All this is our fate, the cards we are dealt in life. How can we hold ourselves responsible for fate?"

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/evil-deeds/200807/essential-secrets-psychotherapy-fate-destiny-and-responsibility%3famp