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]

İlk olarak (Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Tactical Goose tarafından gönderildi:

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

Well ♥♥♥♥. That throws a large portion of my theory into the garbage. I'll think on that and maybe update this thread later. In which case what role does the player have. The player is clearly not Chara either as Chara takes our soul after a genoice. We are an entirely different human. Are we simply an onlooker? That doesn't makes sense seeing as how Chara is upset with us. If we played no role in this then why? Also why not Frisk's soul?

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

İlk olarak Tactical Goose tarafından gönderildi:

Well ♥♥♥♥. That throws a large portion of my theory into the garbage. I'll think on that and maybe update this thread later. In which case what role does the player have. The player is clearly not Chara either as Chara takes our soul after a genoice. We are an entirely different human. Are we simply an onlooker? That doesn't makes sense seeing as how Chara is upset with us. If we played no role in this then why? Also why not Frisk's soul?

Well look at it this way. The Asriel we meet at the end of pacifist isn't actually Asriel, he's just a flower with Asriel's memories.
Likewise, Chara at the end of genocide isn't the same Chara that lived with the Dreemurr's. The Chara at the end of genocide is a demon created by our actions as the player, a demon that represents the things talked about in the first video I linked.

[SQVeemo]

Chare was never evil. They hated humanity at the start and they wanted to conmit suicide.

[ChadChaddingtonWomanRespecter]

good because she most likely dosn`t mean any harm she just has a lot of power and like most people abuse it with out knowing what would happen like an ape with a gun it would see what the trigger did and not know what would happen it`s curiosity like in one of the songs if you chose genocide it says "curiosty over you?" so most likely she means no harm but has caused alot when she could have been responsible with control of frisk so she just probobloy also could just have been depresssed and kill every one over her family worried about them if i was here and had no power ever and i lost my family i would propobly do it aslo to feel good about myself DO NOT COPY THIS AND POST IT OKAY THIS WAS MY IDEA

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

İlk olarak blrmom tarafından gönderildi:

good because she most likely dosn`t mean any harm she just has a lot of power and like most people abuse it with out knowing what would happen like an ape with a gun it would see what the trigger did and not know what would happen it`s curiosity like in one of the songs if you chose genocide it says "curiosty over you?" so most likely she means no harm but has caused alot when she could have been responsible with control of frisk so she just probobloy also could just have been depresssed and kill every one over her family worried about them if i was here and had no power ever and i lost my family i would propobly do it aslo to feel good about myself DO NOT COPY THIS AND POST IT OKAY THIS WAS MY IDEA

commas and periods, man . . . use them :/

[Cruthaitor]

İlk olarak Tactical Goose tarafından gönderildi:

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 tend to see the PLAYER as a nonentity, as a player/reader isn't typically directly involved in a story. I see Chara as more Chaotic Neutral, as they do what they see fit (narrating from the sidelines, killing the monsters). You also have to factor in that there's more to it than just the story at face value. Chara is the First Human, and not a great person, according to Asriel. I think Frisk and Chara, as symbols, represent the two extremes of humanity. One side is the peaceful, but also fearful (Pacifist and Neutral Run) side of humanity that, like many, lashes out when afraid. And the other is the more psychopathic, still fearful, but power hungry portion of humanity that starts wars, kills, and does "whatever necessary" to achieve a single goal, normally relating to power/prestige. Both characters represent both, but Chara represents just a little bit more of the latter symbol. This is because of their assumed background, and the phrase "Who says you were the one in control?" In standard RPGs, a player absolutely must kill to gain EXP to become stronger, and it is something that cannot be prevented if one wishes to further the plot of said story. This phrase implies that you are, as a player, unable to just go back and simply change the course you started on. You made your decision in the beginning, and now it's too late, it's necessary for you to continue forward with the outcome. Chara, for all intents and purposes, is an embodiment of DETERMINATION. You decided to follow through with the Genocide, and now Chara is going to pull you the rest of the way, whether you really want to or not. But, if you decide to go Geno again just for the sake of it, Chara is disgusted, and that shows how Frisk is now showing the "evil" extreme in humanity. It's kind of like a scale, I guess. Frisk is good, Chara is good. Frisk is bad once, Chara is bad. Frisk is bad twice, Chara is... not good, but not necessarily bad either. Frisk is good after being bad, Chara is bad again. And repeat that pattern, and it's as though Yin and Yang are fighting for stability, figuratively speaking. So while I don't see it in the exact same way, I can agree with what you're saying.

[Joshwooo]

İlk olarak (Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak blrmom tarafından gönderildi:

good because she most likely dosn`t mean any harm she just has a lot of power and like most people abuse it with out knowing what would happen like an ape with a gun it would see what the trigger did and not know what would happen it`s curiosity like in one of the songs if you chose genocide it says "curiosty over you?" so most likely she means no harm but has caused alot when she could have been responsible with control of frisk so she just probobloy also could just have been depresssed and kill every one over her family worried about them if i was here and had no power ever and i lost my family i would propobly do it aslo to feel good about myself DO NOT COPY THIS AND POST IT OKAY THIS WAS MY IDEA

commas and periods, man . . . use them :/

You know I think you hit the nail on the head. I posted this quite a while ago and I've had some time to think. I agree with you now on the idea of the player being just that, the player. I previously thought we were Frisk. I agree with you on all of your points though I'm a bit confused about the scale part. Thanks for the contribution.