Chara: Evil, good, or in between?

[Joshwooo]

Disclaimer: So here is a huge topic in the community right now. A lot of people are up in arms about this so I'll start off by saying I am not telling you your theory is wrong. You are totaly able to think what you want. I'm just throwing things at the wall to get some feedback and start a discussion. That being said, here we go!

So the first and only time we encounter Chara (I will be refering to Chara as a "her". It's a habbit) she gives a very evil vibe. "The demon that comes when you call it's name". That on top of Asriel telling us she wasn't a very good person establishes an immediate impression of an evil character. Also the presention of the character is very sinster. However let's take a look back to pre-death Chara.

I think a good place to start is establishing what we already know aboout Chara. Which is almost nothing. (This is partially based on the theory that Chara is the narrator)

Chara:
-Hates humanity
-First human
-Leading trait is Determination
-Has no real reason to hate mosters
-And finally has no soul (currently)
(I'm open to additons and corrections here)

So now we know the basics. Now lets review the first major plot point Chara plays a part in. Her own death. We can gather from the tapes in the True Lab that Chara's plan was to poison herself with Buttercups so that Asriel could then absorb her soul, cross the barrier, and acquire six additional human souls to then break the barrier. Note that the means of getting said souls was indeed (or can be assumed to be) by killing humans. This is my first point. Ultimately the plan between BOTH Asriel and Chara was to kill humans. Asriel tells us later that is was his choice not to kill the humans and so he was the one who caused his own death because he couldn't bring himself to hurt anyone. Somthing that Chara had no problem with. We can roughly trace this timeline to the two getting the souls and freeing mosters but likely causing a second great war in the proccess. So Asriel made the *right* choice. This does not make him totaly in the right though. (Back to actuall timeline) Asriel then is wounded by the humans and dies in the garden. Enter Flowey.

King Asgore decides that humans should be killed and their souls used to break the barrier. Then monsters would wage war against humans and take the surface as their own. Causing the exact same result as Chara and Asriel's previous plan. This goes on for a while until Frisk falls down. (I will also refer to "her" as such) Frisk also possesses Determination as a dominant trait. Chara possessing Determination as well is awakened when Frisk falls on to her grave. This is where Chara enters as a narrator. I think that the idea that the genocide route is a timeline where Chara possesses Frisk is not valid as Undertale is a game about choice. Passing off the choice as big as what route you chose to an outside force does not make sense lorewise in a game tagged as "Choices Matter" on Steam. Also it was the player all the way. Was it not you who struck down every monster in the underground? Do you claim that your computer played itself? A big hole in this argument is that when looking at oneself ingame during a genocide route the text reads, "It's me, [player name]". However I think that it might simply be Chara identifiying with you lust for power. As a child who was likely abused and ingnored simply because she was a weak and insignificant child it would seem reasonable that someone of a similar age might seek the same thing. Or maybe beacuse the text only shows when the player looks at oneself (specifically in a mirror) it might be Chara identifying as a mirror of you. You share a goal. Power (even if used for different reasons) And was that not the original reason Chara gave her own life? To give power to Asriel who could in turn use that to free others? Chara and Frisk also share Determination. (I could use some help with this particular part)

Here is another point I will adress. Some think that Chara never cared for the monsters in the first place. Stating that she "Laughed it off" when Asgore became sick. This does sound bad but we see laughter as a response to hurt or shock many times throughout Undertale. I think Chara's plan further disproves this theory. Look at what she chose. If she simply wanted to go to the surface and kill humans it would have been simple. Asriel is a boss monster. She could have killed him and absorbed his soul. Then she could have just left. But she put herself through a painful death and then planned to get more souls to free the other mosters. If she didn't want to deal with that step she wouldn't have to. It could been totaly bypassed.

Then comes the apperance at the end of the genocide route. Obviously unfeeling, devoid of compassion, and inhuman. But at this point she doesn't have a soul. She can't feel. Asriel experinced the same thing. He couldn't love, and he too commited a similar crime only to be stopped by the player and then? Forgiven? Why is it so hard to do the same for his sister? Maybe because we never see her the way she was. The mosters in New Home seem to have compassion for her. Asriel cared about her. They were siblings.

I think that Chara is a misguided child. She saw the player, one so similar to herself, and took guidance from their actions. She saw what you did on a pacifict route. Sparing lives and being kind and took note. However on a genoiced seeing you completely without caring somthing resonated with her hurt, soulless mind. She figured you had a reason for killing. Whatever it was she had no concern. But upon finding out that you had none. That you were simply killing because she became disgusted. Calling you out on your "perverted sentimentality". I don't think post-death Chara's actions could ever be considered good. Not even justifiable. But perhaps, just maybe, understandable. After death we can't really judge Chara as a person. But before she died, when she still had a sould I think that there was a person that held malintent, if unfairly, for humans but no real "evil" deeper than that. I think that maybe Chara is an extention of yourself. Taking after the player in the extreme during the genocide route, and while yes, she did some awful things I think we should try and look at her from a different perspective. Not controlled by the player but maybe taking after some of their Chara-cteristic.

Thanks for sticking around! Please leave your thoughts below as I am always open to discussion!

[Joshwooo]

Sorry for any typos or unconnected threads. I did this all in one sitting with little to no editing.

[Lord Egg]

Originally posted by Chara:

Disclaimer: So here is a huge topic in the community right now. A lot of people are up in arms about this so I'll start off by saying I am not telling you your theory is wrong. You are totaly able to think what you want. I'm just throwing things at the wall to get some feedback and start a discussion. That being said, here we go!

So the first and only time we encounter Chara (I will be refering to Chara as a "her". It's a habbit) she gives a very evil vibe. "The demon that comes when you call it's name". That on top of Asriel telling us she wasn't a very good person establishes an immediate impression of an evil character. Also the presention of the character is very sinster. However let's take a look back to pre-death Chara.

I think a good place to start is establishing what we already know aboout Chara. Which is almost nothing. (This is partially based on the theory that Chara is the narrator)

Chara:
-Hates humanity
-First human
-Leading trait is Determination
-Has no real reason to hate mosters
-And finally has no soul (currently)
(I'm open to additons and corrections here)

So now we know the basics. Now lets review the first major plot point Chara plays a part in. Her own death. We can gather from the tapes in the True Lab that Chara's plan was to poison herself with Buttercups so that Asriel could then absorb her soul, cross the barrier, and acquire six additional human souls to then break the barrier. Note that the means of getting said souls was indeed (or can be assumed to be) by killing humans. This is my first point. Ultimately the plan between BOTH Asriel and Chara was to kill humans. Asriel tells us later that is was his choice not to kill the humans and so he was the one who caused his own death because he couldn't bring himself to hurt anyone. Somthing that Chara had no problem with. We can roughly trace this timeline to the two getting the souls and freeing mosters but likely causing a second great war in the proccess. So Asriel made the *right* choice. This does not make him totaly in the right though. (Back to actuall timeline) Asriel then is wounded by the humans and dies in the garden. Enter Flowey.

King Asgore decides that humans should be killed and their souls used to break the barrier. Then monsters would wage war against humans and take the surface as their own. Causing the exact same result as Chara and Asriel's previous plan. This goes on for a while until Frisk falls down. (I will also refer to "her" as such) Frisk also possesses Determination as a dominant trait. Chara possessing Determination as well is awakened when Frisk falls on to her grave. This is where Chara enters as a narrator. I think that the idea that the genocide route is a timeline where Chara possesses Frisk is not valid as Undertale is a game about choice. Passing off the choice as big as what route you chose to an outside force does not make sense lorewise in a game tagged as "Choices Matter" on Steam. Also it was the player all the way. Was it not you who struck down every monster in the underground? Do you claim that your computer played itself? A big hole in this argument is that when looking at oneself ingame during a genocide route the text reads, "It's me, [player name]". However I think that it might simply be Chara identifiying with you lust for power. As a child who was likely abused and ingnored simply because she was a weak and insignificant child it would seem reasonable that someone of a similar age might seek the same thing. Or maybe beacuse the text only shows when the player looks at oneself (specifically in a mirror) it might be Chara identifying as a mirror of you. You share a goal. Power (even if used for different reasons) And was that not the original reason Chara gave her own life? To give power to Asriel who could in turn use that to free others? Chara and Frisk also share Determination. (I could use some help with this particular part)

Here is another point I will adress. Some think that Chara never cared for the monsters in the first place. Stating that she "Laughed it off" when Asgore became sick. This does sound bad but we see laughter as a response to hurt or shock many times throughout Undertale. I think Chara's plan further disproves this theory. Look at what she chose. If she simply wanted to go to the surface and kill humans it would have been simple. Asriel is a boss monster. She could have killed him and absorbed his soul. Then she could have just left. But she put herself through a painful death and then planned to get more souls to free the other mosters. If she didn't want to deal with that step she wouldn't have to. It could been totaly bypassed.

Then comes the apperance at the end of the genocide route. Obviously unfeeling, devoid of compassion, and inhuman. But at this point she doesn't have a soul. She can't feel. Asriel experinced the same thing. He couldn't love, and he too commited a similar crime only to be stopped by the player and then? Forgiven? Why is it so hard to do the same for his sister? Maybe because we never see her the way she was. The mosters in New Home seem to have compassion for her. Asriel cared about her. They were siblings.

I think that Chara is a misguided child. She saw the player, one so similar to herself, and took guidance from their actions. She saw what you did on a pacifict route. Sparing lives and being kind and took note. However on a genoiced seeing you completely without caring somthing resonated with her hurt, soulless mind. She figured you had a reason for killing. Whatever it was she had no concern. But upon finding out that you had none. That you were simply killing because she became disgusted. Calling you out on your "perverted sentimentality". I don't think post-death Chara's actions could ever be considered good. Not even justifiable. But perhaps, just maybe, understandable. After death we can't really judge Chara as a person. But before she died, when she still had a sould I think that there was a person that held malintent, if unfairly, for humans but no real "evil" deeper than that. I think that maybe Chara is an extention of yourself. Taking after the player in the extreme during the genocide route, and while yes, she did some awful things I think we should try and look at her from a different perspective. Not controlled by the player but maybe taking after some of their Chara-cteristic.

Thanks for sticking around! Please leave your thoughts below as I am always open to discussion!

I honestly see it like purple guy from fnaf, I never saw chara as the bad guy

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

Enjoy. Warning strong language so if that's something you don't like . . . myeh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTaSWCbUJeM

[MusicalTiger87]

Well in personal opinion, I don't think it really was a case of them being truly bad or truly good. No human is truly good or bad. I think Chara may have had just a bad experience with humanity (for whatever reason) and caused them to hate humans. Monsters could have been a great paradise for them (usually refer to Chara as them as to not break anyone's headcanons for them.) or used them as a way to vent the anger.

The whole point of the game I think is to fill in the blanks where Toby Fox hasn't. After all, the player is in charge of what happens to monsters and the outcome of Frisk. Maybe their hatred of humans and over all anger corrupted them to that point in the genocide run? Maybe they were just a really scared kid who found solace but wanted revenge? Who knows. That's why it's fun to talk about.

[Joshwooo]

Huh. Interesting point. That makes a lot of sense when it comes to Chara delivering the line about being LV or EXP and such. My theory is more of a theory about the Chara pre-death. It is more of an anylazation of how Chara came to be the way she is and is a way to more deeply undertand her as a chararcter. I don't think my theory and this one are mutually exclusive. Thanks for the imput! (this is in reply to the comment by Edgey Dreemurr)

[Joshwooo]

Originally posted by MusicalTiger87:

Well in personal opinion, I don't think it really was a case of them being truly bad or truly good. No human is truly good or bad. I think Chara may have had just a bad experience with humanity (for whatever reason) and caused them to hate humans. Monsters could have been a great paradise for them (usually refer to Chara as them as to not break anyone's headcanons for them.) or used them as a way to vent the anger.

The whole point of the game I think is to fill in the blanks where Toby Fox hasn't. After all, the player is in charge of what happens to monsters and the outcome of Frisk. Maybe their hatred of humans and over all anger corrupted them to that point in the genocide run? Maybe they were just a really scared kid who found solace but wanted revenge? Who knows. That's why it's fun to talk about.

I agree totaly. I think that Chara is an awesome character simply beacuse she breaks the mold. She doesn't cleanly fit in to either category and that makes it fun to pick apart. She is more "real" in that manor.

[Honey]

Originally posted by Tactical Goose:

Originally posted by MusicalTiger87:

Well in personal opinion, I don't think it really was a case of them being truly bad or truly good. No human is truly good or bad. I think Chara may have had just a bad experience with humanity (for whatever reason) and caused them to hate humans. Monsters could have been a great paradise for them (usually refer to Chara as them as to not break anyone's headcanons for them.) or used them as a way to vent the anger.

The whole point of the game I think is to fill in the blanks where Toby Fox hasn't. After all, the player is in charge of what happens to monsters and the outcome of Frisk. Maybe their hatred of humans and over all anger corrupted them to that point in the genocide run? Maybe they were just a really scared kid who found solace but wanted revenge? Who knows. That's why it's fun to talk about.

I agree totaly. I think that Chara is an awesome character simply beacuse she breaks the mold. She doesn't cleanly fit in to either category and that makes it fun to pick apart. She is more "real" in that manor.

Same, she's my favorite Chara-cter

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

Originally posted by Tactical Goose:

Huh. Interesting point. That makes a lot of sense when it comes to Chara delivering the line about being LV or EXP and such. My theory is more of a theory about the Chara pre-death. It is more of an anylazation of how Chara came to be the way she is and is a way to more deeply undertand her as a chararcter. I don't think my theory and this one are mutually exclusive. Thanks for the imput! (this is in reply to the comment by Edgey Dreemurr)

Was Chara evil before they died?
No, I don't think so. Chara and the player (whom I believe are meant to be symbiotically one and the same) are just meant to represent the way we played video games in the past, and we usually don't see ourselves as being evil in most games, right?
Chara, the character in Undertale, only becomes evil as a byproduct of our actions when we take on their role. Chara can become good as well if we never True Reset after Pacifist.

In a similar fashion Frisk respresents the morality and character-based conventions that Undertale teaches you. So at the end of Pacifist, it's not that you the player aka Chara just go away. . . you decide to take upon the name Frisk, the human you've been controlling this whole time to reach your goal. By doing this, you as Chara are making the statement that you are rejecting the old videogame conventions in favor of Undertale's in order to let the characters, including Frisk, live on even after the game ends.

But if you do reset, you are taking a step back to your old roots.

[Joshwooo]

Originally posted by (Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr:

Originally posted by Tactical Goose:

Huh. Interesting point. That makes a lot of sense when it comes to Chara delivering the line about being LV or EXP and such. My theory is more of a theory about the Chara pre-death. It is more of an anylazation of how Chara came to be the way she is and is a way to more deeply undertand her as a chararcter. I don't think my theory and this one are mutually exclusive. Thanks for the imput! (this is in reply to the comment by Edgey Dreemurr)

Was Chara evil before they died?
No, I don't think so. Chara and the player (whom I believe are meant to be symbiotically one and the same) are just meant to represent the way we played video games in the past, and we usually don't see ourselves as being evil in most games, right?
Chara, the character in Undertale, only becomes evil as a byproduct of our actions when we take on their role. Chara can become good as well if we never True Reset after Pacifist.

In a similar fashion Frisk respresents the morality and character-based conventions that Undertale teaches you. So at the end of Pacifist, it's not that you the player aka Chara just go away. . . you decide to take upon the name Frisk, the human you've been controlling this whole time to reach your goal. By doing this, you as Chara are making the statement that you are rejecting the old videogame conventions in favor of Undertale's in order to let the characters, including Frisk, live on even after the game ends.

But if you do reset, you are taking a step back to your old roots.

I agree with what you said about morality and conventional videogame logic however I don't think Chara has any had in Frisk's actions.

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

Originally posted by Tactical Goose:

I agree with what you said about morality and conventional videogame logic however I don't think Chara has any had in Frisk's actions.

So you think that the player is Frisk?

[Joshwooo]

Originally posted by (Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr:

Originally posted by Tactical Goose:

I agree with what you said about morality and conventional videogame logic however I don't think Chara has any had in Frisk's actions.

So you think that the player is Frisk?

Yes. The player is in control throughout the entire game. When I refer to the player and Frisk I mean the same person. We are Frisk and I our actions are not effected by Chara's. Do you belive that the player and Frisk are seperate from eachother?

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

Originally posted by Tactical Goose:

Originally posted by (Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr:

So you think that the player is Frisk?

Yes. The player is in control throughout the entire game. When I refer to the player and Frisk I mean the same person. We are Frisk and I our actions are not effected by Chara's. Do you belive that the player and Frisk are seperate from eachother?

The problem is we know the player can't be Frisk because of what Flowey says when you reopen the game after completing Pacifist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BptqPXUMnZI

[The Caretaker]

i think all the theories are right. including the ones that say chara is the bad guy. it all depends on how you look at what their meaning is in the story and the metaphor (the metaphor being that chara is a symbol for the average RPG player, in other words, you.)

[The Caretaker]

also does anyone think its possible to read characters and story in undertale WITHOUT breaking passed the fourth wall? ya'know like without the "frisk is the player" or "chara is the player" pretty much without connecting the game world with the outside world. that seems to be the only thing people ever focus on without just trying to look at what undertale is as a story rather than a metaphor or a "how evil are you" test.

[Luke50056]

(let me just get it out there that chara is actually my favourite character and no im not making that pun even though i love puns and jokes)
i actually used to think chara was evil but after watching a youtube video called ''Who is the true fillain of undertale?'' I then changed my perspective about chara, but my theory...
Chara is not evil and yeah in the genocide run they say ''I am the demon that comes when people call its name'' and ''the feeling when those stats increase... thats me'' I think they only say that because I think they to had the power to reset way before frisk came and they may of had killed a monster but regretted it so reset, but still knowing what that felt like they decided that they would be ATK, DEF, LV, EXPand Gold and even though in the genocide route you erase the world, chara still remembers this simply because... they have determination also. Incredible determination that they can erase an entire timeline not resetting it but getting rid of it for good, yet they still are good and this is because of seceral reasons: though they lauphed when asgore was in pain by eating the buttercups inside the pie they were just lauyphing away the pain, even though they say they are a demon they're not chara is just a regular kid who hated humanity and everyone on the surface called them a demon supposedly that they thought they were actually a demon, but the final piece... is... jerry. ok just kidding everyone hates jerry, so the actual final piece is......... that they take the soul of a genocider, yes it is killing someone but if they didnt want that genocider to destroy all timelines then they would have to do it. Proving that they are good wether they killed someone or not they killed a genocider and genocide is one of the baddest things anyone can do... and it was not us who did the genocide... it was Frisk we are just watching frisk as they continue there journey creating new timelines and being a 'pacifist child' but no, they got bored, reset and did genocide.