TV Discussion The “redemption” problem

In recent years I’ve been getting really sick of the amount of redemptions, not to mention that some of them just feel totally unearned and unbelievable given the amount of awful stuff the characters have done, but at times it feels like they don’t want the audience to remember that.

It often feels like it’s a cop out on the writers part because they can’t handle darker stories and unhappy endings.

I feel like the majority of villains are handled poorly these days as they either get redeemed or have to be a one dimensional type of evil. The writers don’t seem to understand that you can develop villains and keep their motives grounded - at times making them somewhat sympathetic, it doesn’t mean they need to be redeemed and switch to the side of the heroes, sometimes things are best left grey.

How does everyone else feel about the amount of redemptions?

 

That's not Star Wars is about though. It's not meant to be broody and dark. It's supposed to be a fun adventure, family friendly with exceptions here and there. Hope and redemption are big central themes. Not that people who do bad things don't get what's coming - even in the end of Tales of the Empire,

Spoiler

Barriss gets stabbed in the torso. That's not fun. I give Barriss' redemption some leeway because of the short format of the storytelling. It has to be quick otherwise they'd never get to the end of things.

 

I expected Barriss to be redeemed, but it shouldn’t have happened on Tales. Going from terrorist unibomber wannabe to redeemed healer in 30 minutes doesn’t make for a compelling redemption.

Don’t even get me started on Lyn being redeemed.

I actually think the bad batch did a really great job on this. With both Rampart and Cid not being redeemed, but you could feel sympathy for both characters. Crosshair gets one of the better redemptions in Star Wars.

but the TOTE episodes show how to not handle a redemption. You don’t redeem characters in something that’s only 30 minutes. Barriss needed longer to cook and Lyn needed even Linger than Barriss. It took Crosshair three seasons to be redeemed. That is hours of content.

so it’s not the amount of redemptions it’s more just how they are handled. An anthology show like TOTE isn’t the place to do it.

 

I just posted about this somewhere. To me the "problem," if it is one, is one that Yoda paints the dark side as something that you can't escape from ("Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny,"). If it's happened a bunch of times already by then, Yoda's words, and Vader's redemption, carry less meaning.

Redemption of non-Force-users (e.g., Crosshair) is a-OK by me. Theoretically, redemption of Force-users after Vader would also be a-OK by me, if it's done well (i.e., not Kylo).

 

For every villain redeemed, however, there are more villains who don't. And redemption doesn't come without a price.

Morgan Elsbeth was never redeemed. She only became worse and worse as the years dragged on. Trilla was somewhat redeemed, but ended up being killed by Vader before it actually meant anything. Reva was redeemed, but it's clear that she has no idea what to do with her life and was gravely wounded by Vader. Crosshair was redeemed, but only after suffering through the worst of the Empire and losing his hand in the process. And he doesn't believe himself to be worthy of redemption after what he did under the Empire. Rampart never bothered to redeem himself despite being subjected to Imperial imprisonment.

And that's really what Yoda's words meant. Just because the villain is redeemed doesn't mean that the past has been forgiven. It still haunts them and follows them, begging them to take their own life because they did not deserve redemption. Even when the redeemed have obtained peace like Barriss, the shadows of their past still haunts them.

And for Yoda, Obi-Wan, and even Vader himself, redemption seemed impossible for someone who committed so many atrocities. Vader hates himself for what he has done, but he couldn't just leave the Dark Side because he felt he has gone too far to simply stop and turn good. He rationalize it as Anakin being dead for good and he has to be evil in order to even live.

 

Can't agree more, this trope is just so tiresome at this point.

IMO, the bigger problem with the lack of grey is that antagonists belong to some factions, and factions themselves are very rarely grey. So, if a character with positive qualities works for an evil faction it means that this character is either
deluded or did not have much of a choice when joined (that can be applied to the majority of the Inquisitorius), both variants can work, but ultimately this motivations are the weaker ones. (In that regard I like Barriss' storyline in TOTE

Spoiler

since she seemingly quicky realised that the Empire's methods are not for her and just leaved.

) While stronger motivation means that character's level of ruthlessness meets the organization's standards. Dedra is probably the best recent example, since she is one of the most efficient new Imperial antagonists and in her initial appearances the focus was on her positive qualities - intelligence, resourcefulness and boldness. But then Dedra quickly went into "sadistic Gestapo officer" mode, and with her as the most active antagonist the conflict between Luthen's cell and ISB is not "grey vs grey", but clearly "grey vs black".

 

Redemption can easily be overdone, and often is, but nevertheless, most fiction writers think that representing change is necessary. If people can't change, it suggests they lack free will, and interestingly, studies show that belief in free will actually results in people developing habits that result in more agency (e.g., critical thinking skills).

So such narratives actually do play an important role in society, beyond merely being satisfying if done well.

However, it's also important to show why people don't change, so we do need a good balance of stories.

 

I think that's something The Bad Batch did really well. Despite being given the chance to change, Rampart ultimately chose to still be loyal to the Empire that had already discarded him. Cid was given the chance to change as well, but ultimately she chose to be selfish and sell out the Bad Batch to the Empire. And even in Tales of the Empire, we got the story of Morgan Esbeth, who ultimately became no better than Grievous.

 

His line even makes less sense as he literally knew Quinlan Vos was redeemed. lol. And Ventress was Qausi redeemed as well. And Yoda knew of both of these cases.

edit: as to the case of redemption = death I think Star Wars is moving away from it. Crosshair didn’t die. And Barriss isn’t either.

 

Genuinely interested for off-forum reasons: Sources?

On topic, I don't mind redemption at all - it shows a better side of people.

What I do mind, however, is the strange oddity of storytellers not having their characters face up to those characters who they previously destroyed/harmed, etc. It's too nicely "contained".

There is little actual justice or restorative justice. I'm not sure SW writers are deft enough to do this.

I'm not sure SW overall can do this. However, I did not expect the maturity of Andor to have been part of SW, so maybe SW can grow some more in this regard too..

 

"Recent Research on Free Will: Conceptualizations, Beliefs, and Processes"
Roy F. Baumeister, Andrew E. Monroe

 

See I was always bothered with how Bo-Katan became a 'good' guy because it always felt like it was more like what Filoni and co wanted to do with her rather then an actual story around it.

Death Watch were terriorists and yet Bo-Katan somehow gets a free pass to lead Mandolare.

 

She doesn’t do anything to be redeemed that’s my problem with Bo-Katan

 

Thank you!

 

Palps will never be redeemed if he returns from the dead again, Thrawn should never be redeemed because he's more than a mere villain. Dooku or Snoke weren't redeemed, neither was Hux, he just switched sides. The point of Ben Solo's redemption was always to mirror Anakin's. Boba isn't redeemed, it's just he has his own code of ethics and once his employer is dead he needs to find alternative employment. He does almost go through an epiphany whilst living with the Tuskens but the way he gains vengeance for their slaughter is in no way the act of someone redeemed.

 

I hate how this is now approached as a serious possibility and not a joke

On topic, I don't think that everyone even uses the word "redemption" in the same manner anymore. And to be fair, it can mean a variety of things in different contexts. It also depends how much of a spiritual component someone gives to that word.

Was Darth Vader really redeemed in the eyes of everyone? Most certainly not. Throwing the Emperor into a nuclear reactor after almost two decades of evil and horror doesn't atone for his sins and evil actions. Was it enough to allow him to become a Force Ghost? Apparently yes. But that doesn't mean that everyone in the galaxy should (and would) now think of Vader as a cool dude who saved the Galaxy from the Emperor. It was literally the least he could do just before he died.

Do I want to see characters like Barriss Offee, Bo Katan, Quinlan Vos, and many more realize that they are on the wrong side of history and start acting in a way where they make the galaxy a better place as opposed to a worse place? 100%. Even Asajj Ventress shows some signs of repentance. And that's the key word for me. Repentance is always great in Star Wars, as the message of the franchise has always been about hope and improvement. Should all the characters that show repentance be "redeemed"? Probably not. But again, that's still subjective. There is no such thing as an objective way to assess whether someone has been redeemed or not, but I think we can usually all agree on whether it was earned or not. Or most people anyway.

 

Are there any villain characters that went from dark to light and not die 5-10 minutes later?

 

Crosshair and Kallus. That’s it though

 

Isn't that a SW staple? Redeemed characters immediately getting killed