Opinion on the "Chosen One" trope

[Relish in Chaos]

While I agree that it can be used in interesting ways and some of these characters even experience character development (however mild or abrupt it may be) as a result of it, I've always thought the trope of the "Chosen One" (i.e. a character "fated" or "destined" to defeat the antagonist) can lead to lazy storytelling and bland protagonists.

I mean, I love The Matrix, but, ignoring the fact that he's played by Keanu Reeves, Neo remains as the same stoic and unsure hacker throughout the film, up until the final confrontation where he's revived or whatever by Trinity's kiss and goes all "badass Matrihax" on Agent Smith's ass. Then, at the end and in the sequels, he's all of a sudden this confident freedom fighter fully embracing his role. It just seemed so quick, and there's no real reason for Neo to be so much better than the other people in the Matrix other than Morpheus (and the Oracle, correct me if I'm wrong) thinks so. He's not more intelligent, skilled or brave than the others. He just simply is.

A similar thing goes for Harry in Harry Potter. He survived Voldemort's Killing Curse on a mixture of luck and...his mother's love (WTF; I know it's magic, but still?), and seems to have gotten this far due to Dumbledore's favouritism, but Hermione Granger was always much better at magic than him and actually worked for it. I think I heard someone say that the reason Harry was the protagonist and not Hermione was because a male protagonist would get more attention. But now that I think about it, Hermione would make a better protagonist than Harry: it would give more of a reason for Malfoy to hate the main character (Malfoy pretty much hates Harry just because he rejected his offer of friendship and sided with a poor boy and a "Mudblood"), and it would show a new perspective on a protagonist of children's books who was actually somewhat of an "insufferable know-it-all", as Snape put it, who has to learn to show more humility and whatnot. Just a thought.

What do you think?

 

[Tom_green_day]

Uh, a bit of an unimaginative way to make the hero be the hero. He doesn't do it out of hate or love or loyalty or betrayal, he does it 'just 'cause.'
I like it at times like Mass Effect 3 where Shep's the only person who can beat the Reapers. Not though divine intervention or the will of God, just because he/she was the one who's been shooting them all this time so he/she knows how to shoot them good.

 

[FalloutJack]

If we didn't have this trope, we wouldn't have such fun lampshading it.

The best Chosen One has to be Raziel of the Legacy of Kain franchise. Good god, they put him through alot because he's supposedly important, yet destiny's pawn. More than that, he has this quote: "What game is this, where every player on the board claims the same pawn?". EVERYONE is poking him into something.

Honorable mention to Fallout 2 for obvious reasons.

 

[NihilSinLulz]

I honestly can't think of a single story in any medium where the Chosen One hasn't felt lazy to me. However, I do really like the Ticking Time Bomb trope (ie. Glory from Glory: Once and Future Destroyer, Hellboy etc.).

 

[gargantual]

While I agree that it can be used in interesting ways and some of these characters even experience character development (however mild or abrupt it may be) as a result of it, I've always thought the trope of the "Chosen One" (i.e. a character "fated" or "destined" to defeat the antagonist) can lead to lazy storytelling and bland protagonists.

I mean, I love The Matrix, but, ignoring the fact that he's played by Keanu Reeves, Neo remains as the same stoic and unsure hacker throughout the film, up until the final confrontation where he's revived or whatever by Trinity's kiss and goes all "badass Matrihax" on Agent Smith's ass. Then, at the end and in the sequels, he's all of a sudden this confident freedom fighter fully embracing his role. It just seemed so quick, and there's no real reason for Neo to be so much better than the other people in the Matrix other than Morpheus (and the Oracle, correct me if I'm wrong) thinks so. He's not more intelligent, skilled or brave than the others. He just simply is.

A similar thing goes for Harry in Harry Potter. He survived Voldemort's Killing Curse on a mixture of luck and...his mother's love (WTF; I know it's magic, but still?), and seems to have gotten this far due to Dumbledore's favouritism, but Hermione Granger was always much better at magic than him and actually worked for it. I think I heard someone say that the reason Harry was the protagonist and not Hermione was because a male protagonist would get more attention. But now that I think about it, Hermione would make a better protagonist than Harry: it would give more of a reason for Malfoy to hate the main character (Malfoy pretty much hates Harry just because he rejected his offer of friendship and sided with a poor boy and a "Mudblood"), and it would show a new perspective on a protagonist of children's books who was actually somewhat of an "insufferable know-it-all", as Snape put it, who has to learn to show more humility and whatnot. Just a thought.

What do you think?

Reminds me of Stephen King's trip for writers 'Kill your darlings, Kill your darlings.'

My take on that. If a creator really loves a character and decided they're going to win the day. The writer has their work cut out for them, to convince everybody why said character deserves victory, and they gotta bleed for it (metaphorically speaking). We may not like certain characters but can respect anyone that puts in the necessary believable work to vanquish foes.

There are still good stories made where the ending is already decided. But rather than 'What happened?' (cuz we've been exposed a lot of stories and tropes by now) the real question we should be seeking is 'Ok...How the HELL did he/she do it?'

 

[Hero of Lime]

I don't really mind the trope personally, it's a bit lazy, but I think it works well in the realm of video games. In a game, you can still fail, even with unlimited continues and re-spawning, the chosen one still can fail unlike a book or movie. It puts the "chosen one" burden on the player, so we may be destined to succeed, but we will make mistakes and even die on the way there. In a game, "chosen one" means nothing, we can just as easily fall into a pit and die rather than saving the world, and I kinda like that.

 

[Zhukov]

Don't like it.

Reeeeaaally don't like it.

Why? Ehhh... bit difficult to explain. I guess it kind of undermines the tension. I mean, Character X is the Chosen One Destined to Do Y, and then proceeds to do Y. Where's the interest in that, y'know?

It could be subverted or overturned of course, and I'm sure many stories have done that, or attempted it. Like having a Chosen One who then turns around and say, "Oh no I'm fucking not, Imma do Z instead!" That could be interesting, although I'd still prefer the trope to just not be there at all.

 

[RJ 17]

Like some others before me have mentioned, for me it depends on how it's implemented. If a story starts out with "Random Jackass stumbles upon some strange set of coincidences and some old guy with a gray beard proclaims "You are the Chosen One of the Prophecy!" and said jackass proceeds to fulfill said prophecy." then I don't really like it. You're no longer experiencing a story, you're just experiencing the prophecy within the story...why? Because it's bound to happen. The Chosen One's going to win, someway somehow.

That said, I do tend to like the "wrong interpretation" angle for The Chosen One. That is when everyone in the story is certain that one character is the Chosen One and it actually turns out that they're not. An obvious - if horrendously executed - example of this would be Anakin from Star Wars.

Like what if in Harry Potter, it turns out that Ron was the one who was destined to defeat Voldy? And since the OP brought it up, what a bunch of BS that is that Harry survives because of this mother's love. I guess all the countless others that the big bad wizard slaughtered just weren't loved enough by their family and friends.

 

[Little Woodsman]

Like so many tropes it can be well used, or ill used. I primarily think of BtVS, where early on

Spoiler: Just in case there are some here who haven't seen Buffy yet...

Buffy is chosen to receive the power, but in a very early story-line it is also revealed that she is destined to die when she confronts the Master vampire. Buffy (a High School student) is forced to grapple with questions of mortality, responsibility, destiny... forced to question what might happen to her friends if she runs away from the confrontation, etc..
Of course it worked out OK in that instance, but thankfully the creative team kept poking at the whole question of her being "The Chosen One", introducing other Slayers, emphasizing the role her friends played etc until finally in the final season they establish why & how the system of the Slayers was established, and question whether the establishment of such a system was actually a good choice.

But yes, I didn't care for The Matrix and the use of the trope in that abomination of a Green Lantern movie was just awful.
And I'll get myself in real trouble if I start talking about Harry Potter....

 

[Thaluikhain]

Yeah, it's lazy and generally nonsensical. Why was Harry the chosen one? Why couldn't someone else beat Voldemort?

Secondly, and going off a bit, it's ideological lazy. The idea that you need just one good person to fight the bad guy, and everything works out right...that's a stupid idea, but one lots of people seem to believe in, especially during elections.

Look at Obama's first term. You had people who voted for him, believing him to be less bad than the alternative, and then there were people who voted for him, believing that if this one guy got into power, he'd totally fix the US. Which, of course, is laughable, to fix all, or even a large amount, of a society's problems, you have to make large social changes.

For some reason, people don't tend to like this in their fiction. Going back to Harry Potter again, they defeat Voldemort, but then there's no mention of how they are going to make Slytherin not evil, how to integrate the wizards with the Muggles, how to end hostility with other magic creatures...all the things which allowed Voldemort to come to power in the first place. Without that, there'll be another one of him in 50 years.

 

[Zontar]

I don't like it mainly because it's used poorly much more often then not.

A perfect example is Sword Art Online, where the protagonist was 'the chosen one' for a videogame everyone was trapped in. Even if you ignore how crazy that is in terms of lazy writing, the only way they are even shown to be the hero is because he was incredibly overpowered compared to everyone else, despite the fact that he almost only soloed quests (which any MMO player will tell you is the slow way to gain xp).

If it's used well then so be it, but it is almost painful to watch it be used improperly.

 

[Asita]

Usually not a fan. I don't like seeing that so-and-so is the only one who can beat Evil-Mc.Villain just because fate said so. I have found, however, that it works out quite well when used as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why is John Connor the man destined to save humanity? Because he knows how to live off the grid, how to survive and has experience fighting machines. Why is this the case? Because Skynet tried to kill his mother before he was conceived and - being now forewarned - she taught him those exact skills. By trying to kill their greatest enemy they ensured his existence. Why are the Chosen in Guild Wars Prophecies destined to bring about the end of the Mursaat? Because the Mursaat's own actions made that seem like the best solution. Why will SeeD kill Ultimecia? Because in her attempts to avert this fate she tries to bring about the end of the universe, forcing their hand. The villain providing the hero with motive for the prophecy is a well trodden path, but it works If a prophecy is made it makes sense for people's reactions to it to be the driving force behind it. Or to use the old proverb itself "A man often meets his destiny on the very road he took to avoid it." Or alternatively, there's the Andor Vex route...


Though on the whole, I typically prefer eschewing the prophecy route altogether (or at the very least making it a case where "A broken clock is still right twice a day" for the oracle who made it). The story's already penned and written, the ending's already a foregone conclusion. No need to rub that in the audience's face, and if you do feel the need you can at least make the prophecy suitably opaque or unexpected enough to be interesting instead of the boringly direct "Oh, this is the one who will overthrow the evil king!" we are so often 'treated' to.

 

[Chaos Isaac]

It works sometimes. Depends on the media, writing, and reason behind it.

 

[skywolfblue]

I can't think of any real good instances of the "Chosen One" trope played straight that I really loved. Maybe Legend of Zelda? Link is pretty nice despite being "the chosen one".

That said, I do tend to like the "wrong interpretation" angle for The Chosen One. That is when everyone in the story is certain that one character is the Chosen One and it actually turns out that they're not. An obvious - if horrendously executed - example of this would be Anakin from Star Wars.

I'll second this, subversion of the Chosen One trope can result in some really awesome stories. I can think of two absolutely awesome series that do that well, but I realized that merely by mentioning their name I'd be majorly spoiling them. Like, give-the-whole-plot-away kinda spoilers that would ruin all the fun.

Spoiler: But if you insist...

Spoiler: No really, don't click

Spoiler: Ok, fine

The Dune series, where the "Chosen Hero" from the first book screws over the course of all humanity, and it takes the "villain" from book 4 to set things right and save humanity.

And the Mistborn trilogy. One of my favorite fantasy stories.

 

[Slitzkin]

Steins; Gate spoilers:

Spoiler

I like how it's subverted in Steins; Gate. I really enjoy how Okabe is pushed to being the saviour of humanity with his 'unique' ability but as the series progresses he slowly realises that he isn't in all that unique and that everyone has the potential to 'Read Steiner' like he does, maybe to a lesser extent but they can still do it in the right circumstances. The only difference between him and everyone else is that he has the means to use time travel on a constant basis and his 'Reading Steiner' is 100% consistent. Who knows if other people can do it?

 

[DementedSheep]

I don't partially like it. I think it's generally just a lazy way to have everything centre on a character, have them receive some power or inproable skills and have people following them when they wouldn't otherwise have that treatment. I don't like predetermination (unless it's played with in and interesting way and is a major point not just there) or ?one special person is needed to fix everything and no one else could possibly do it? themes. It also tends to go along with the save the world from ultimate evil plots which I?m not a huge fan of either. I don?t hate them, they work well enough as framing. It just doesn't make the story good.

 

[Asita]

That said, I do tend to like the "wrong interpretation" angle for The Chosen One. That is when everyone in the story is certain that one character is the Chosen One and it actually turns out that they're not. An obvious - if horrendously executed - example of this would be Anakin from Star Wars.

Sadly enough, it's actually a subversion of the "wrong interpretation" angle. While fans like to interpret the prophecy the prequels cited as "balancing the dark with the light"[footnote]An interpretation, I maintain, that better fits with the original feel of the setting's eastern influence than the messianic approach they invoked with the prophecy[/footnote], Lucas has gone on record saying that the Dark Side itself was the imbalance and that Anakin ultimately fulfills the prophecy in the climax of Return of the Jedi by destroying the [Banite] Sith Order.

 

[Kyrian007]

It might be overused, but that's hardly surprising. For the most part if you AREN'T the chosen one in a video game, most players are wondering why THAT guy isn't the player-character. It's not the writers fault, it's the players and their egos and expectations. If by and large PLAYERS didn't expect to be the most important and influential characters in a game, it would not be an "overused" trope.

 

[Mr.Squishy]

Much like everyone else in this thread, I dislike it.
Actually, I guess it's not just dislike.
It is the one trope I can not stand whatsoever, and hate both from a writer's perspective and an audience perspective; because it feels lazy and like the writer just wants to let their bland pet character prance about invincibly.
That said, I can somewhat overlook it if the protagonist is interesting or compelling, but they are, in 99% of cases, bland as all fuck.
I feel like I could elaborate better, but this one trope just triggers some sort of snarling rage in me.