'The Chosen One' paradox
In many books novels or other forms of fictional writing, the reader is introduced to a so called 'chosen one'. This character or being is of higher power or in general, of different nature than other characters.
To be more precise - my question is about the making or formation of said 'chosen one'.
In my experience, being the 'chosen one' is often related to a certain event in which the 'chosen one' overcame a certain enemy or challenge in which most other characters would have perished/not succeeded.
In this specific event, I see a paradox: Did the character overcome the enemy/succeed in the challenge because he is the chosen one - or did he become the chosen one by overcoming the enemy/succeeding in his task.
How can I approach this paradox in a fictional story that has a 'chosen one' as the main character?
This is the beauty of the Oracle scene in the Matrix and the Beauty of Breaking the Vase (Upon entering the Oracle's kit …
5y ago
Very fun question. Is it a paradox that "the Chosen One" is the only one that can defeat the great evil they face, or ar …
6y ago
It's not really a paradox, the chosen one is seen as the chosen one because they succeed where others cannot, but they c …
6y ago
In my opinion, the chosen one is made that way, whether they know it or not. IRL, the kings of old were warriors, born w …
6y ago
It's not a paradox - it's a choice You, as the author and creator of your specific fictional world, have the choice to …
6y ago
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/38331. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
5 answers
This is the beauty of the Oracle scene in the Matrix and the Beauty of Breaking the Vase (Upon entering the Oracle's kitchen, the Oracle tells Neo not to worry about the vase. Neo looks around for the Vase, and ends up knocking it to the ground, shattering it. As Neo appologizes, she sums up your noodle baker... er, paradox: If she had said nothing, would Neo have broken the Vase) which sets up the entire debate Chosen one paradox brilliantly. She tells Neo he's not the One, but maybe in another life... and unfortunately, Morpheous is so convinced Neo is the One, that either he or Neo will die because that conviction.
It puts Neo in a bind and as they try to Exit, Morpheous is captured preventing Neo's capture. This sets up the conflict... pull the plug on Morpheous and kill him, or attempt to save him and die. Now, we all know how the film ends, but again the oracle predicts everything. Neo saves Morpheous and gets caught by Agent Smith and is fatally shot (either Morpheous will die or Neo will die for Morpheous' belief in Neo being the one. Neo dies.). But then moments later resurects and fights Agent Smith as "The One" and easily beats him, as predicted by the Oracle (You're not the One, not yet, maybe in another life. Neo dies, resurects into a second life, and becomes the One).
The entire climax of the film centers around The Chosen One Paradox. Was Neo always the one, or was Neo the one because he chose to act in such a way that the One would? What bakes your noodle, is if the Oracle had said nothing, would he still be the One?
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/45124. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
It's not really a paradox, the chosen one is seen as the chosen one because they succeed where others cannot, but they can only succeed because they are already the chosen one to begin with. To put it another way that character was always the chosen one but no-one can see it until they complete an impossible task that marks them out.
Think about Unbreakable the protagonist already knows what he is, what he's capable of, but he turned his back on that knowledge and its implications a long time ago. He's only recognised for the superhuman being he is after he survives the unsurvivable.
There are a number of different approaches one can take to the chosen one character archetype:
the knowing reluctant hero; they know what they could be but they don't want it, this character will hold back from situations they see as potentially exposing their true nature. They will also run from the responsibilities that come with their final revelation if they can.
the unknowing reluctant hero; this is a humble character who doesn't want anything to do with personal power of any kind. They don't know what they will become but when asked to take up their hero's mantle they will try to refuse it, they may take up power but never out of self-interest.
the completely ignorant hero; they have no idea what's going on, usually they're only involved at all because they're being played by someone else. They may fall into any of the other categories once they become aware of the position they have been placed in.
the knowing and eager hero; knowing what they are they embrace their role, they go to their destined fate with their heads up, eyes open, and a smile on their lips.
the unknowing but eager hero; they don't know what they're going to become but they grab any opportunity to prove themselves or gain power. Characters who fall into this category but aren't actually the chosen one will often fail, and/or die, spectacularly.
the necessary man; this is not a traditional hero, they have been called to a great task/destiny, but they're neither eager nor reluctant to complete it, simply accepting, resigned to the trials ahead. They'll do what they feel needs to be done, but they maintain a certain detachment from the task and the other people around them.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/38333. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Very fun question. Is it a paradox that "the Chosen One" is the only one that can defeat the great evil they face, or are they "the Chosen One" because they are the only one that can face it? I don't know that I would call it a paradox as the two perspectives are either predictive or attributed.
One hopes because of minimal evidence that the hero is "the Chosen One" either because of a prophecy or because they have the courage to try at something that everyone else has already failed. Your audience trusts you that they are in fact "the Chosen One" because why would you tell them they could be only to have them reach the climax and fail? (coincidentally, that does happen, and makes for some excellent comedy - Take "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" for example where Zaphod Beeblebrox is attempting to find the answer to life and everything only to get the answer 42 and have no clue what to do with the answer.)
The other acts as more substantial proof that in fact the hero could be "the Chosen One" because they have overcome something that everyone else has failed at. A great example of this might be Achilles in Greek Mythology at the battle of Troy. He had already proven himself, but in the end still fails. In either circumstance however being "the Chosen One" or fate can be its own paradox in that it attributes power to accomplish something before it is done and is only proven true or false after the thing has been accomplished. Whether this is attributed to the person before or after however is just hyperbole toward the character that for readers adds an extra element of strength and power to the hero and provides an added significances to their ability to overcome.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/38341. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
In my opinion, the chosen one is made that way, whether they know it or not. IRL, the kings of old were warriors, born with a talent for fighting that was recognized, cultured and taught, if they were "chosen" it was by fate.
I prefer to think they were not chosen at all, but the recipient of blind luck that was then, usually, augmented by hard work and training, because their inherent talent was recognized by some mentor early on, while they were still able to be shaped.
That, IMO, is how it works in real life. Sports stars are not really special because of the amount of work they put in, for every one of them a thousand other kids start out working just as hard, and a hundred of them would be willing to work harder to achieve their dream. They just don't have the genetic gifts required to reach the top, no matter how great their desire.
It isn't just sports, but academics, and singing, and acting, and songwriting and music, and mathematics and engineering and games like chess. The prodigies that become world champions are kicking butt at the age of five; they have natural talents that were not taught, or were self-taught.
I prefer the same dynamic in my fiction. I write about a character because she was born with something world class special; and I want to see how she found that out, early or late, and where that leads her in life.
0 comment threads
It's not a paradox - it's a choice
You, as the author and creator of your specific fictional world, have the choice to define which of these statements is true. There is no inherent reason to assume one or the other is true and that the other one is false. In fact, it's often used as an important plot device for the characters themselves to explore whether they are just a pawn doing what some higher power wants from them or they have a "choice" and can influence the world around them.
There is not even a reason to tell your reader what you decided. Simply explore this very paradox in-universe and see what your characters make of it. And if it ever blocks you from writing just choose one and go with it for the moment - if it doesn't feel right later you know that you need to change it and that the other one is the right one for you, your story and your specific world.
0 comment threads