# Redemption



## Creed (Dec 26, 2012)

Right, so I'm curious about redemption here. 
A character is either inherently bad/evil or they're something along the lines of a good person who's lost their way and are struggling to remain good in the word. Let's ignore (for now) the whole thing where the villain becomes righteous and good and such. Let's work with a character from the second category. They've done something awful, perhaps. 
But how do you redeem them? For the most part we like those stories where a burden is lifted off of their shoulders and they are forgiven, granted absolution, etc. I think sacrifice is a common theme. But besides that (and including that, too) how to redeem your awful and yet not-too-far-gone character?  And how much is too much? And how do you keep it from being… cheesy? I'm not sure if I'm putting it into words right.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Dec 26, 2012)

I'm struggling with the same concepts.

My first piece of advice is to keep the reactions of all the characters as real as you can.  If each one responds to the situation in a way that rings true to the reader, I think it will work out okay.

The only other thing I'd say is to refrain from going overboard with explaining the emotions and motivations.  A little bit of emotion, if handled correctly, can go a long way.


----------



## Leif Notae (Dec 26, 2012)

Well, the concept is an antagonist/villain is doing what they think is right at the moment and time. There is nothing to say what they are doing WAS right and will be again, or that you can more than ONE right in this situation.

The overall arc would be self realization and understanding of "sin". Growth for the antagonist would shake loose these ideas, much like a corrupted protag would gain twisted ideas until they were a nemesis.

I can understand the whole thing, it is a fine (and tough) line to balance on, but it can work if you give effort to the redemptive human side.


----------



## psychotick (Dec 26, 2012)

Hi,

In my last book I used the theme of redemption for a number of characters. Redemption for everything from minor sins (failing to live up to parents expectations), failings (not being there to save them), character failings (a lord that allowed terrible crimes to be committed because of hatred and bigotry), and terrible acts (soldiers that were demon spelled had committed gross indecencies while ridden). I decided that there were different roads to redemption for all of them, but the best was duty, attempting to make up for their failings by performing good service. But there were other roads. For the demon ridden soldiers who knew what they had done, I gave them a heroic act, fighting the forces of the demon that had ridden them, so that they could die free. And for the rotten monarch I brought him a lesson to learn, and then religion.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## MadMadys (Dec 26, 2012)

Well a lot of what the 'appropriate' redemption is for that character depends on what they did and how aware they were at the time.  There is a difference between a character who is good and in the course of trying to help actually wound up killing people and someone who did it with their wits about them.

Firefighter runs into house, grabs a kid on the bottom floor then busts through a wall to get out only to have that damage the structure of the house causing it to fall and kill 3 other kids on the top floor.  He feels terrible but it wasn't really his fault.  His redemption is more the realization that he did what he could and saved someone.  Not a huge character arc there.

Now take a character who is in that gray area of morality who actively, knowingly blows up an orphanage then feels awful about it later.  As a reader, he's going to have to really go over the top to overcome to moral hole he has dug himself in.  Self sacrifice to save many would be one option or at least the willingness to do so.

The redemption has to fit the bill for the reader to see it as believable and the character worthy of forgiveness.  Sometimes it can hard for a character to achieve redemption which is why in the movie adaptation of _The Shawshank Redemption_ they never say what Morgan Freeman's character, Red, was actually in there for because the audience might not forgive him for it.  As I recall, from the novella, he cut his wife's breaks which killed her but also their neighbor and their kid.  Whoops.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 26, 2012)

I agree with Greg that redemption is a possibility no matter how evil or terrible the character might have once been. The roads are different, and so too are the chances of successfully redeeming the character. The bigger hold you dig for the character morally, and in terms of the sympathy of the reader, the more powerful the redemption will have to be in order for the reader to buy into it.


----------



## Penpilot (Dec 26, 2012)

As said above, there no character that's done something so bad as to be irredeemable. As it turns out I'm about to start a story about the redemption of a villain who's done terrible terrible things and the downfall of a hero.

To me, redemption starts with the acknowledgement by that person of the wrong that they have done and that they feel bad about doing it. This doesn't mean they have to regret doing it. It's just the acknowledgement they did harm and it's not something they relish in. Then, this villain has to be given multiple chances where they are given reasons to act 'evil' or veer from that path. The accumulation of those choices will lead to a true turning point/ redemtive moment where it's either 'evil' or 'no-evil'.


----------



## Anders Ã„mting (Dec 26, 2012)

Creed said:


> Right, so I'm curious about redemption here.
> A character is either inherently bad/evil or they're something along the lines of a good person who's lost their way and are struggling to remain good in the word. Let's ignore (for now) the whole thing where the villain becomes righteous and good and such. Let's work with a character from the second category. They've done something awful, perhaps.
> But how do you redeem them? For the most part we like those stories where a burden is lifted off of their shoulders and they are forgiven, granted absolution, etc. I think sacrifice is a common theme. But besides that (and including that, too) how to redeem your awful and yet not-too-far-gone character?  And how much is too much? And how do you keep it from being… cheesy? I'm not sure if I'm putting it into words right.



Being forgiven isn't the same thing as being redeemed, I think. Forgiveness is an act of mercy on behalf of those you have wronged, whereas seeking redemption is your personal endevour to make amends for the evils you have on your conscience. 

A key trait in a character seeking remeption is _penance._ That is to say, the character needs to genuinely regret what he has done. More than just asking for forgiveness, he feels that he owes a debt that needs to repayed. Such a character may not believe he deserves forgiveness, or perhaps he dare not seek it, beliving his sins to be unforgivable. Even after being forgiven, such a character may continue to feel guilty and seek to make amends, sometimes for the rest of his life. In that sense, redemption is more about forgiving _yourself._

I would like to add that I dislike stories where the redeemer dies in a noble sacrifice, because I think that is a cop out - a way to achieve "cheap" redemption for a character without actually having to deal with complicated questions about guilt and morality or write character arcs and stuff.


----------



## JadedSidhe (Dec 26, 2012)

To me, redemption is usually when someone has done some great wrong and eventually, faces what they've done and then takes actions to become a better person. 

But it doesn't always have to be. For me, a wasted life or gift could be the great wrong and then the person starts caring about something other than him/herself and does good things.  

My favorite redemption type of movie along this last line of thought is called Restoration with Robert Downy Jr. (Probably the first movie of his that I liked) 

A decent summary of Restoration


----------



## wordwalker (Dec 26, 2012)

I'd say the two most important points are:


"I'll never do it again." He accepts he's been wrong, as measured by just plain stopping his evil ways. (It ought to be not just "I can't get away with it anymore" but for moral reasons.)

(In one sense this change might be enough, but it's not very satisfying redemption. So you add


The price. He makes a sacrifice or takes a great risk for someone, maybe the people he's wronged, maybe not. (Or, just making him suffer might be enough for some readers.)

I think those are the only two things you need; the rest is making the one believable and the other large enough.


----------



## Graylorne (Dec 27, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> I agree with Greg that redemption is a possibility no matter how evil or terrible the character might have once been. The roads are different, and so too are the chances of successfully redeeming the character. The bigger hold you dig for the character morally, and in terms of the sympathy of the reader, the more powerful the redemption will have to be in order for the reader to buy into it.



I don't.
Some crimes are so enormous they cannot be redeemed by any new act. What could redeem a dictator or a warlord with the blood of millions on his hands? No human life is long enough to atone for all the suffering.

So keep the sins in proportion. Wilfully murdering a village full of innocents is redeemable. Wilfully murdering hundreds of villages is not.


----------



## Creed (Dec 27, 2012)

Oh, I don't intend on redeeming the man who started a great genocide. I'll certainly explain that he's not crazy (well, you can't be completely sane and do it), but he has reasons. For the lesser of two evils, there is no price too high. 
I'm interested specifically in what wordwalker had to say in regard of "The Price". I have a character who seeks revenge- and it consumes him. He walks the edges of the world hunting this man. Lots of story passes… and then when he gets the chance to finally kill this vile, villainous nemesis he won't do it. That's slightly irrelevant. But for a conclusion I've discussed it with two people and I'm torn between what to do here. He's failed at the one thing he set out to do. Thinks himself a coward, a fool, a weakling. He's spent decades hunting this man and is- in his own mind- less human and more animal than he was before. What next? Wordwalker said it is enough to see the character suffer- whether redemption comes from atonement or not is subjective. In this case, I think the character feels it is his DUTY to suffer. So, should I kill him; throw him off a cliff and grant him absolution for his trials? Or should I make him wander the wilds in self-loathing, afraid of becoming a part of civilisation again, haunted by his regrets and his failures? I'm afraid it might not be so much a question of redemption as of mercy.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 27, 2012)

Graylorne said:


> I don't.
> Some crimes are so enormous they cannot be redeemed by any new act. What could redeem a dictator or a warlord with the blood of millions on his hands? No human life is long enough to atone for all the suffering.
> 
> So keep the sins in proportion. Wilfully murdering a village full of innocents is redeemable. Wilfully murdering hundreds of villages is not.



I don't agree, and I don't think the majority of readers will agree (I could be wrong, but I base that on the idea that the majority of the population self-identifies as Christian, and under Christian theology a person committing any of these crimes can still be 'saved' in the end.


----------



## Graylorne (Dec 27, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> I don't agree, and I don't think the majority of readers will agree (I could be wrong, but I base that on the idea that the majority of the population self-identifies as Christian, and under Christian theology a person committing any of these crimes can still be 'saved' in the end.



I'm an atheist, but that's beside the point. I wasn't talking about redemption in the Christian sense, I'm talking of fantasy books. Let's not confuse the two. 
But I'm not planning to start a thelogical discussion, that's just as dangerous as a political one.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Dec 27, 2012)

Graylorne said:


> I'm an atheist, but that's beside the point. I wasn't talking about redemption in the Christian sense, I'm talking of fantasy books. Let's not confuse the two.
> But I'm not planning to start a thelogical discussion, that's just as dangerous as a political one.



I would think that who can be shown to find redemption in a book depends entirely on the skill of the author, not on the severity of the crime.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 27, 2012)

Graylorne said:


> I'm an atheist, but that's beside the point. I wasn't talking about redemption in the Christian sense, I'm talking of fantasy books. Let's not confuse the two.
> But I'm not planning to start a thelogical discussion, that's just as dangerous as a political one.



I'm not religious either, but I think a recognition that most of the population is can be helpful in terms of determining what a reader will accept. Even not being religious, I agree with the idea that redemption can come to anyone.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 27, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> I would think that who can be shown to find redemption in a book depends entirely on the skill of the author, not on the severity of the crime.



Yes, I think that is true, primarily. There will also be variation among readers as to whether they accept the redemption.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Dec 27, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> I would think that who can be shown to find redemption in a book depends entirely on the skill of the author, not on the severity of the crime.



I agree with this. Let's not forget that we're talking about fantasy writing. In reality I would tend to agree that some crimes are unforgivable. However, in fantasy terms would someone who slaughters millions of innocents on a planetary scale be able to find redemption by saving a galaxy or two later by sacrificing himself? Probably. At least if the author's story is good and supports this redemption.


----------



## Graylorne (Dec 27, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> Yes, I think that is true, primarily. There will also be variation among readers as to whether they accept the redemption.



There is that, of course.




T.Allen.Smith said:


> I agree with this. Let's not forget that we're talking about fantasy writing. In reality I would tend to agree that some comes are unforgivable. However, in fantasy terms would someone who slaughters millions of innocents on a planetary scale be able to find redemption by saving a galaxy or two later by sacrificing himself? Probably. At least if the author's story is good and supports this redemption.



In this case, if the plus factor is sufficiently larger than the the min factor, and his own sacrifice is included, I agree.


----------



## Feo Takahari (Dec 27, 2012)

To me, all redemption requires is inner change--becoming the sort of person who won't do the things you did before. Atonement and sacrifice are things that may flow naturally from that change, but that depends on exactly what you changed to and from.

Incidentally, I'm a big fan of _Superior_, a manga about the gradual redemption of a genocidal mass murderer. I think it's a little too soft in parts--change shouldn't be _quite_ this easy--but overall, it does pretty well at documenting a journey from villain to hero.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 27, 2012)

Feo Takahari said:


> To me, all redemption requires is inner change--becoming the sort of person who won't do the things you did before. Atonement and sacrifice are things that may flow naturally from that change, but that depends on exactly what you changed to and from.
> 
> Incidentally, I'm a big fan of _Superior_, a manga about the gradual redemption of a genocidal mass murderer. I think it's a little too soft in parts--change shouldn't be _quite_ this easy--but overall, it does pretty well at documenting a journey from villain to hero.



Yes, I could see that working. I think, as you said, the main problem would be being subject to a charge that it's too easy. For a genocidal murderer you'd have to have a very convincing and, in my view, long transition process.


----------



## Chilari (Dec 27, 2012)

I'm sick of the cheap redemption you occasionally get in (generally) stories aimed at younger audiences. Someone's done this horrible thing (generally off screen) that doesn't quite amount to murder but when you think about it it's pretty bad. Then this guy turns on his former master, helps the good guys, and suddenly he's a good guy too. Oh, there'll be one character who doesn't trust him - for a while, but then he proves he's good now and it's all fine and dandy.

And I am sick of the redemption through death thing. Guy does something bad, gets kicked out of the Good Guy Club House, dies protecting them later. Or bad guy tries to do good, good guys don't accept him, he dies trying to prove himself.

It cheats the reader of conflict, tries to make them feel sorry for this apparently redeemed character so when they die it tugs on the heartstrings. No. Just no, seriously.

I want to see a character truly face what they have done wrong. Face it and understand it, see the harm it has done to people, live the harm it has done to people even. Even if they work with the good guys, I want them not to be forgiven the bad because they did some good. If the good guys are determined to do things right, then that means trials and that means the bad guy who switched sides to help them (even if the good he's done is taken into account in this trial, if the good guys want it all above board, the trial should exist even if he's acquitted because his help was invaluable in bringing down the Big Bad, unless he's previously negotiated to avoid all that). I want characters ending up in prison and paying for their crimes properly, or whatever appropriate punishment there is within the culture.

Why? Because it's what's right. And because it can create further conflict. Character realises he's going to trial, he runs away before everything goes down and his absence throws the big plan off. Or he doesn't and gets arrested afterward, and feels betrayed by the hero, swearing revenge. Or he goes to trial and gets off because of all his help, but this creates major conflict between him and some guy whose cousin twice removed died as a result of his actions, throwing off some big plan later on because they don't play nice together.


----------



## Anders Ã„mting (Dec 27, 2012)

Graylorne said:


> I don't.
> Some crimes are so enormous they cannot be redeemed by any new act. What could redeem a dictator or a warlord with the blood of millions on his hands? No human life is long enough to atone for all the suffering.
> 
> So keep the sins in proportion. Wilfully murdering a village full of innocents is redeemable. Wilfully murdering hundreds of villages is not.



So, what? You wouldn't forgive a mass murderer no matter what he did to make up for it, no matter how much he regretted it, and no matter how honestly good and benevolent he ended up being afterwards?

Well, you know what? That's fine. You don't have to.

Because, again, forgiveness is an _act of mercy_. It's not a fair trade or a mathematical equation. Forgiveness isn't something you have to deserve, or buy back in equivalent exchange for your sins. Nor is it something one is required to give to others if certain conditions are met. It is a gift you freely bestow on others _even if you have every right to refuse._


----------



## Graylorne (Dec 27, 2012)

Anders Ã„mting said:


> So, what? You wouldn't forgive a mass murderer no matter what he did to make up for it, no matter how much he regretted it, and no matter how honestly good and benevolent he ended up being afterwards?
> 
> Well, you know what? That's fine. You don't have to.
> 
> Because, again, forgiveness is an _act of mercy_. It's not a fair trade or a mathematical equation. Forgiveness isn't something you have to deserve, or buy back in equivalent exchange for your sins. Nor is it something one is required to give to others if certain conditions are met. It is a gift you freely bestow on others _even if you have every right to refuse._



Of course. What I in my original post reacted against, was the thought of an universal right to redemption. It can be a gift, but never a right.


----------



## Feo Takahari (Dec 28, 2012)

Graylorne said:


> Of course. What I in my original post reacted against, was the thought of an universal right to redemption. It can be a gift, but never a right.



Are forgiveness and redemption really connected? That is to say, can someone still be redeemed even if no one ever forgives them for what they've done? (I know someone can be forgiven who hasn't truly been redeemed.) Personally, I wouldn't classify redemption as a gift or a right, but a capability.

(I realize I'm a bit skew from most people on this stuff--I'm operating on very unusual premises. They're complicated and arguably off-topic, though, so if anyone's curious, I'll leave them to PMs.)


----------



## wordwalker (Dec 28, 2012)

Feo Takahari said:


> Are forgiveness and redemption really connected? That is to say, can someone still be redeemed even if no one ever forgives them for what they've done? (I know someone can be forgiven who hasn't truly been redeemed.)



Good point. I see two answers:


Unresolvable, it's a classic form of "whose opinion matters?" and will always have disagreements
They're redeemed if the reader forgives them


----------



## brokethepoint (Dec 28, 2012)

When you look at redemption you need to look at several things, conversion, atonement and forgiveness.

Conversion - then understanding what you did was wrong and making the decision to not do it any more

atonement - making amends or reparations for the wrongs

forgiveness - the act of those you have wronged ceasing to hold resentment or blame


Once you put these in a non religious context, based on the wrongs, you need to be able to explain in a convincing and believable way how atonement can be made.  If forgiveness is desired then you must explain why they would forgive the person.


If someone wipes out an entire village where my family lived and there is no religion involved, how could someone make atonement to me and why would I even consider forgiving them.  These are the things you must resolve, because atonement isn't just doing good will counter the bad that I did, atonement is to those that were wronged.

I am not saying that redemption can't be done without religion, I believe it just makes it more difficult.  With or without religion it still has many factors involved, motive, mental state, personality, and the magnitude of the wrong to just name a few.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Dec 28, 2012)

> If someone wipes out an entire village where my family lived and there is no religion involved, how could someone make atonement to me and why would I even consider forgiving them.



Not saying that religion isn't a better path to go, but the concept that forgiveness helps the victim is a popular one and provides a credible reason for allowing atonement.


----------



## brokethepoint (Dec 28, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> Not saying that religion isn't a better path to go, but the concept that forgiveness helps the victim is a popular one and provides a credible reason for allowing atonement.



I agree, which is why I said there are many other factors involved.  I also know that I hear, "I will never forgive them/him/her."   way too often.

I just hate books where you go why did the MC do this or, that was just not what they would have done.  If you are going to do something like this show my why, make me believe, show the struggle and turmoil involved.  I want to understand why and believe it.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Dec 28, 2012)

> I just hate books where you go why did the MC do this or, that was just not what they would have done.



I understand the need for explanation, but I'd rather there not be overexplanation.

People react in a large range of ways.  Take a hundred people and independently expose them to the same stimulus.  I'm not sure you'd get 100 different reactions, but the set would be widely varied.


----------



## Rullenzar (Dec 28, 2012)

There are many ways to redemption but my favorite of them is Sacrifice. You have so many different ways to take this. Death is the most popular because it has the biggest reaction. However, things such as donating organs to save someones life or sacrificing your way of thinking to make someone happy can be just as powerful.


----------

