#redemptive arc

In the very best version of “third time’s the charm,” we are finally welcoming Christopher Rice to Fated Mates! A man of many talents, he writes fabulous contemporary romances as C. Travis Rice, and suspense, crime and supernatural thrillers as Christopher Rice. Today we’re talking Redemption Romance in honor of his most recent romance release, Sapphire Spring.

In this episode, we talk about how redemption romances and bully romances work, how tricky they are to write, and why so many of us are so drawn to redemption arcs — particularly when they involve sticking it to our childhood enemies. We had the best time with Christopher, who filled our TBRs…so get ready, because he’s definitely going to fill yours, too.

(Yes. They finally meet in this one!)

For example, I consider Akio, and his actions, much, much worst than a majority of the rest of the cast. So, in that sense, even for me, there are actions & characters (people) who are by definition unreddemable, simply because there are certain things (actions, deeds, attitudes) I do Not Like.

I think the divergence or difference for me (e.g. what makes it worst), is the attitude of the character who’s done the bad things. I was going to use my writing as an example, but I’m having trouble putting that into words without addeumn clarification and/or thoughts.

One Piece might be a better example. The Celestial Dragons and Noblity come closest to the attitude I consider worse: entrenched superior thinking that dehumanizes others without caring or conscience. What I don’t like about this is its disregard for other living beings. It’s blinder superiority, in a way. Bleh.

But as I was writing this, I got to thinking that Blackbeard was worst. Prominently because he does that thing where he uses situations (and murders people) to promote his own ambitions. He doesn’t care about betraying or lying as long as he gets to the goal he has in mind. And he knows he’s doing it and doesn’t show remorse or care and that upsets me more.

(There’s also the whole bit with Impel Down and how the main cast are, technically, criminals, and how heroes vs pirates, and different kinds of pirates at that, exist in the narrative, within world and to an outsider reader/watcher.)

Basically, what I’m confronted with is, are the things I do Not Like—lying, using others/situations, manipulation, dehumanizing others, superior elitism, knowingly perpetuating such things—a sign of my own hierarchical morality? Or are there just bad things from a universal perspective?

More to the point: Do I ascribe to a definition of redemption? I’m not sure. Other than there are things I consider Bad and that the definition of redemption being linked to proof expiating wrongness (deeds, attitude, action) still feels...like it could be used as gatekeeping.

Namely, I think I’d prefer the term “compassionate learning” or “compassionate growth” for when toxic characters (or people) or those who have harmed or caused distress, et. al start moving out of that toxic mindset or ideology. Like, a character can’t change what they’ve done, but they can recognize the harm they’ve done, why or where it came from, and learn to live better with themselves and others, in a way that is less harmful all around.

But the strict definition of redemption has too much of a taste of hierarchical goodness, where a character has to...mmm...exhibit the appropriate amount of remorse for past actions or the right about of forgiveness or good behavior to be let into the tiers of good chacarters. Like, I think a character should be shown to be trying to change, making progress too, but that doesn’t feel like the same thing as being adequately redeemed.

I’m reminded of a post I saw about why Zuko’s redemption arc worked where others didn’t, which boiled down to: he was never portrayed as being as bad as the real bad characters. (I’m paraphrasing and may be misremembering.) but what stands out to me now, is that it places Zuko subtly in the “good” catergory. His arc works because he’s already got some inherent goodness. Which makes sense, I suppose, since the more inclination you have to try to be genuinely good, the better chances are you will try to be less toxic. But being good is not the same thing as being less toxic; the former can have a moral sentiment behind it, while the other seems less so to me.