The Curse of The Chosen One : A Discussion on Destiny

[Bells]

"You are the chosen hero of destiny of the prophecy!"

"Oh cool! That means we already won!"

"No! Your journey is a dangerous one... many perils wait you, ready to strike you down"

"But i'm the hero of the prophecy! The chosen one! It's my Destiny, isn't it?"

"Why... yeah... it is! it is written and foretold, so it is!"

"So... the prophecy says i'm the hero of destiny that will destroy the evil, that means we already won! Cause that's my destiny. That's the prophecy! If i die, that means the prophecy was wrong all along."

"well... it's complicated."

So, yeah... that stuff.

The more i write, the more i'm faced with the need to dodge this stuff, and the more i read, watch, play stuff the more it annoys me, cause it's just so damn common... i would make this thread in the Writing and Art section, but it's a broad enough issue for a Media Discussion. Specially cause there are so many variations of this stuff...

So, does it annoy you guys when that's the story? Cause, quite often that's the story. Of everything. I mean, the Entire Legend of Zelda is nothing BUT this... as it is the Matrix series. And pretty much 80% of all anime...

It is always about that One special dude, that unique individual that is above all else and that will rise to the task when the time is right, cause some ancient bullshit says so... and that is made even worse when it's used to justify "Power Ups". Like the hero awakening his true power when he is beaten down and had clearly no way of justifying his new power... but it's ok, cause it's prophecy fulfillment.

I mean, take for example Rurounin Kenshin. Kenshin is not the most powerful being ever... hell, it is made clear in the story that he was stronger and deadlier when he was a ruthless killer... he is a character that actually nerfed him self down on purpose in order to uphold morals and values he came to believe in, and that makes the character more interesting and easy to relate to! As the story progresses he mets older warriors that are more powerful than him (mostly cause they still have that killer side he set aside) and as the story progresses further, he meets younger warriors that are on his level or even peaking higher... showing him as a character that moves with the times.

On another take in the same medium, take a look at Dragonball and the whole Super Sayan stuff.... there was supposed to be ONE super sayan, that's the Myth, that's the prophecy... but it turns out, the prophecy is wrong and any sayan can become a Super Sayan if they train hard enough. Soon, even kids are becoming Super Sayan, unless you are a girl of course (sorry pan...) ; That later on came to be corrected (maybe, kinda, sorta) with Brolly, who in the movie universe is the actual Legendary Super Sayan, but movies aren't canon...

And then, rounding up the anime medium we have Bleach where a main character literaly says "I'll beat you cause i have to" and he does so, AFTER HE DIES, and then he gets better... cause, y'know... "Fate of the Hero" is just a silent way of being the Chosen one...

I'm sure we have examples on Books and Comics (oh dear lord the comics...) and movies, but this is just a starter. Is it always lazy writing? Is it a quick fix to storytelling?

[Arhra]

You can write badly well with destiny!

[Amake]

I think Mass Effect offers a great example of a chosen one character done well. Also The Invisibles, though I assume no one's read that. Of course the big name shonen animes build entirely on it because the genre is tailored specifically to make 12 year old boys feel like they can punch out everyone in the world.

And if you want to see a story go absolutely nuts with main characters literally bending the fate of the world around them, there's always The Wheel of Time. One of the last parts I read had the hero walk through a town whilst feeling lonely, and soon thereafter everyone in town gets married. . .

But I would be remiss if I didn't give a shout out to my favorite depiction of fate in fiction, which is Insomnia by Stephen King. In this novel fate is dictated by three godlike little faeries who operate on human souls backstage of reality; two of them are benign, reasonable, by-the-book types and the third one is completely insane

[PyrosNine]

I personally prefer stories where the concept of the "chosen one" isn't present, or isn't a character defining thing.

In my definition of a hero, it is a person who selflessly acts for the benefit of people he doesn't directly know. All heros are then defined in their heroism by how far away they are from this principle: The Good Samaritan from biblical parable being a perfect example of a "true' hero, with Superman always being the modern equivalent.

This idea means many things:
1. The hero had a CHOICE in whether or not they did the heroic action, and they chose to act.
2. The hero did not stand to gain or profit (even from personal damages) from the act.
3. The hero isn't just following a familial or authoritative imperative, or doing it for king and country (not doing it because of family, or because they are inherently responsible, or because of some sort of political affiliation.)

If the hero is saving people who are related or acquainted to him, he's doing it as a result of his natural inclination: these are things he values, he's also responsible to them as a result of this relationship. Even if only a monster lets their daughter/mother/friend die, the would be hero's choices are weighted towards family and away from selflessness. After all , a person can spend his entire life in service to his family and rescuing them from harm and trouble, and still be a villain to the rest of the world. This is typified in Westerns, where the moral gray is emphasized on what a man will do to protect him and his, and what this means for people that aren't.

If they're doing it for king and country, or out of responsibility, it's not heroism: it's their job. If it's something that the person is getting ultimately paid for, or something that they spend their day to day doing under the guidelines of a profession, it's not pure heroism. This is to deal with the concept of "war heroes" and the sort who are likely to say "just doing my job, m'am." A war hero is a vague, gray concept in the grand scheme of things. It's not that a soldier or a hired man cannot be a hero, but there is a distinction between a 'war hero' or "heroic civil servant" versus the ideal hero, and it's not just the paycheck.

(Modern DC and Marvel superhero stories sometimes seem to be more about a bunch of super powered soldiers waging campaigns against other super powered soldiers, with entire issues far removed from any actual heroics!)

#1 was most important though, as choice is always important. It's thought that sin and responsibility directly exist because we as human beings, and our characters, possess free will, and the capacity to rationally choose. Choices matter more than the actions that they lead to, and the events and experiences that lead up to the choice. Choices are often simple, binary, do or do not. 50/50, flip of the coin. What makes a hero a hero above all is that anyone could have done what the hero did. ANYONE.

This does not mean that anyone could have succeeded, for are we to say that men who died selflessly for the good of others are not heroes? But rather that the hero is not unique, not the only skilled participant, and not the only mover and shaker on the board. It just so happened that the hero happens to be at the right place at the right time, but it's often that we forget that they happened to also be there with at least a couple dozen other people. In comic books this gets ridiculous, with entire communities of superheroes living in an increasingly small world, as they stop to look at all the people who live around folks like Peter Parker and Bruce Banner and realize how many opportunities to do good they all have at their disposal.

The point is, that while the hero made his choice to help/save/act, everyone else around him at the time chose not to, and that is what makes him a hero, and worthy of our respect. Even if he failed, he's still better than the people who are equally as capable, if not better, who did not.

So we get back the thread's original topic, and that of the "Chosen" hero. You can see where the problem comes in: The issue of choice. The hero made no choice: He is designated the hero. It was stuck to his forehead when he was born, some old soothsayer foresaw everything, all is according to the god's plans, the Genius Chessmaster planned every step he ever made for the good of us all.

He therefore, isn't a hero, at least within the confines of his destiny. The phrase "overglorified errand boy" comes to mind. It's sometimes best to just imagine a "prophecy" as a kind of highly expensive magic that surrounds a person and twists odds to reach an ultimate outcome-presumably even if they kicked a billion puppies on the way there, ala Anakin Skywalker.

There will be the author saving throw whenever the existential implications of destiny having total control of a person's life come up, some wise old man will say "Oh, but destiny picked you because you were the only one who would have made that choice", or "your experiences and tribulations were all just guidelines to lead you up to the real choice, and you can totally still back out but you shouldn't.", but it's still full of crock and shit.

The chosen hero is not a hero if his job could have been done by a well programmed robot.

Get sword. ;
Seek MacGuffin.;
Meet Party;
Find MacGuffin;
Lose MacGuffin to Villain.;
Defeat Villain with highly unlikely coincidental circumstances.;
Go to 0;

One would imagine that the reason why a story set after the events of a previous book has a different main character is that the instant the character no longer had "destiny" on his side, he was completely lost on what to do and died at the first misfortune outside destiny's tender care.

Hell, one could write an entire story about an almost post-apocalpytic fantasy world about what happened to all the heroes and magical kingdoms whose gods have all died out in a Götterdämmerung, when Kings aren't given divine mandate and guidance by all powerful overseers, and heroes are no longer given "coincidental" shoves into the right place and the right time, and see what kind of bloody mess the world becomes without people who are capable of being the hero without some sort of divine intervention.

In terms of writing, the "chosen" hero is an easy way to cover up plot holes or tie together loose ends, generally to create a false connection between unconnected parts that rose up during the writing. A lot of stuff happened, some of it was completely random and thought up at the last minute, but man, if we say that it was all part of a greater plan and give even a half hearted reason for why it was important in the grand scheme of things, it just adds a great deal of "depth" or at least a more compiled ending.

But it also cheapens all the heroic actions up to that point, by removing the 'weight' of the heroes own actions. A hero who lifts up himself by his bootstraps saying "WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM?" and lifting his drill to the heavens would be insulted if some old guy came up and said "Hey, don't get too proud sonny, this was all ordained by prophecy!"

Nowadays, however, there is less focus on "chosen one" unless it's there to be subverted, and more on "special one". For instance, in Naruto, the main character is not in anyway particularly destined: people see him as the modern incarnation of the will of his village, destined to fight against the descendent of the Uchiha, but in terms of fate and destiny nothing is really expected of him. The clash is less destiny and more something that's naturally inevitable: he will have to confront his friend.

In Avatar, the Aang and Korra are "destined" to restore balance between the elements, but as it turns out that it's less destiny and more a job of the universe: it may be the destiny for someone to become the Avatar, but each avatar is more or less free to use their powers to create "balance" whatever way they saw to make fit, and nothing in his journey was ever guaranteed success.

"Fate of the hero" isn't destiny, it's just that unless the hero wins, the story's over. Ichigo winning and it all being Aizen's plan is just pure unadulterated asspull as the story limps to a conclusion.

The first story I remember demonstrating the problem the subject of the "destined hero", though I can't remember the name, was a book about a guy who is tricked into picking up a magic sword, and learns that it is his destiny to protect a small castle town from invaders- whether he wants to or not. Instead of playing it like a heroic fantasy, it treated it almost like cosmic horror: he can't leave even if he walks in a straight line out of the village, when he wields he sword he becomes possessed by it to lead the defense of the castle, and whenever he expresses frustration and comments on his desire to leave, the asshole villagers (presented in writing as being knowing and understanding the nature of his predicament in the same way OneTruePairers would coyly respond when the preferred male love interest expresses no interest in the female heroine) simply go "Oh yeah, like that's going to happen. Good luck with that, lol." at the fact that the hero is literally stuck protecting this place until he dies.

The previous hero was depicted as an old man walking on the outskirts of the village, who was only able to die because the hero took the sword from him by accident.

The end of the book has the castle saved and the hero ditching the sword to leave, but with the tavernmaster going "He can try, but he'll be back. They always come back." Sounding less like a knowing sage and more like a creepy villain, which may not have been the writers intention, but maybe it was.

Wish I could remember the name of the book, all I can remember was that when he had the sword he had a specific name and spoke in terms of "We", and that the hero was able to talk to cats, one of which was more sympathetic to his plight. That, and whenever he wasn't possessed by the sword, it described him as holding it like a shovel.

[Bells]

Pyros, you just explained beautifully why the Dragonborn in Skyrim is not a Hero, and why it feels rewarding to me to roleplay a really morally grey character that comes to great, beyond mortals, levels of power.

...and subsequently why the game pisses me off royally when it blocks me from the freedom of how i want to act.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Originally Posted by Bells

Pyros, you just explained beautifully why the Dragonborn in Skyrim is not a Hero, and why it feels rewarding to me to roleplay a really morally grey character that comes to great, beyond mortals, levels of power.

...and subsequently why the game pisses me off royally when it blocks me from the freedom of how i want to act.

My first Dragonborn was a self centred elf who made pacts with Deadric princes, became the most powerful mage in the world in the quest for power, and began playing multiple factions off against each other in order to buy time for her to aquire the throne and rule the world.

My second was a self centred thief who cared only about money and pulling off the most audacious heists in the world, including stealing an Elder Scroll before the plot would normally allow oneself to do so, effectively stealing the hope of defeating Alduin in the future from the real Dragonborn who I now like to think is still wandering somewhere around Skyrim unable to fulfil his destiny.

My third was a self centred Lara Croft expy who ran away from home in the search for adventure and lost treasures. All the lost treasures. Yeah, Skyrim doesn't do heroic destiny well.

Of course, you could always go with the Buffyverse version of the chosen one; There is a chosen one, but if she dies, they just call another to take her place every time.

[Amake]

That's a very good post, Pyros. My definition of a hero usually starts and stops at "someone who risks their life for someone else", but I think I'll have to reevaluate that.

And I had an idea why so much more or less heroic fiction removes the choice from the protagonist which, as you say, should be a vital part of an given character's depth. I think comes from a writer failing either to understand or to convey heroism objectively. (Depending on how charitable you want to be.)

Because if you listen to any given real world hero trying to relate their experiences, you'll almost always notice they do not believe they had any choice. A highly moral individual may never realize that it may have been possible for them to not make whatever sacrifice that made them a hero. So a good writer may want to symbolically show their protagonist's strong moral character by making the right choice explicit in the story world, and the wrong choice physically impossible; or a poor writer might themselves never realize the choice exists, either because the hero's mindset is foreign to them or because they're working through their own heroic experiences and lacking objectivity. And maybe this turned into standard Hollywood convention over time and the reasoning behind it's been forgotten even as it propagated from the movies to other mediums including the real world to some degree as Hollywood conventions are won't to do, or something I don't really know.

But anyway I think for a hero it's almost as important as having the choice to do right to do right without really considering the alternative as a possibility. The greater their hesitation, the more human the hero becomes, which is great because it makes them more relateable, but also diminishes their heroism. Bad if you want to write as epically heroic a story as possible.

[PyrosNine]

Granted, my definition is mostly placing a 0,0 on a scale of being a hero, with a hero's level of heroism defined by their day to day heroic actions (fights local crime, donates blood, heals the sick) +/- their big "heroic moments." (saves the world, creates peace, banishes Big Bad)

As for chosen ones, be aware that this only refers to them as not being true heroes in the context of their destiny, and they may in fact still be heroes, it's just that their heroism is proven by all the things they did or didn't do that wasn't directly tied to their destiny. In the case of Elder Scroll's and Fable's Hero, a point is made that regardless of whether or not the character was heroic was not, they still followed the prophecy of the Elder Scroll/Theresa, and that was all that was the only thing they didn't have a choice in, but they did have a choice in what they did in the in between: your hero was a hero if you played him as such, because of your choices which had nothing to do with any of the greater elements going on in the story.

A Dragonborn hero is the one who does the good sidequests which have nothing to do with stopping the big bad dragon, and keeps doing these things long after this heroic requirement is settled. Elder Scrolls games are great because they always make a point of explaining that once the main job is done, you are off the leash of destiny, and don't have to follow the path of the Nevarine or some divine servant- and all the DLC is just more things you have an option of doing.

Though one theory about Elder Scrolls is that there are in fact multiple heroes at any given time, explicitly stated in Morrowind, and that while of course yours is the one who succeeded at the given task, centuries later all your exploits and the possible exploits of other created player heroes get merged together into a single person- while there was a Champion who escaped from the Imperial Prison to battle Jagar Tharn, there were also a bunch of others in the area who did all these quests, but since their names were not recorded and the Champion wast not well known, everyone presumes that the hero who helped them was the "Champion" and in the following years Historians are confused about who exactly this "Champion" was, what they looked like, their gender, or even their name, but the evidence of the deeds done are irrefutable. The same for the Nevarine, and implied to have caused the "Warp in the West". Another way of explaining it is that one Hero of Kvatch became the new leader of the Knights of the Nine, while another wound up the new Sheogorath.

Also, for the rule mongerers out there, though the hero may gain something from their efforts (friends, fame, fortune, XP) they didn't intentionally seek it- some heroes in RPGS and the like express a degree of shock at some point during their adventures when all the experience gained from doing the moral equivalent of helping an old lady across the street has made them practically demi gods. And sometimes the act of seeking power/money/xp is in itself a self sacrificial action, as the hero pursues it so that others do not have to, and so that he can use it for others. A hero who eats a mystic fruit that could potentially kill him in order to grow stronger in order to defeat a superior opponent is a good, straight example.

[Bells]

There is also the issue of the "After Destiny". That one always alluded me. Always wondered what happens to Link after he saves the world... i mean, any given Zelda game takes place in a pair of weeks at most!

I think that would apply to most final fantasies too... i wonder what a warrior does in the following years of his life after he has acquired the power to summon meteors and firestorms or has the most powerful weapon in the world, has seen horrors from beyond and risked his life for the many... and then a couple of years pass and some drunken asshole talks shit to him in the local Tavern for no good reason...

...that's probably how villains are born, it's their destiny!

GAH! I BORKED THE SYSTEM! OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[Tev]

Originally Posted by Bells

I think that would apply to most final fantasies too... i wonder what a warrior does in the following years of his life after he has acquired the power to summon meteors and firestorms or has the most powerful weapon in the world, has seen horrors from beyond and risked his life for the many... and then a couple of years pass and some drunken asshole talks shit to him in the local Tavern for no good reason...

Become pop music sensations?