#Redemption arcs

[everythingloveandanimated]

Beautifully said @illycanary

Occasionally I see the argument that Zuko taking lightning for Katara was the fulfillment of his redemption arc or the completion of his atonement to Katara, specifically, which not only ignores that Katara already forgave him, but also, Zuko was ready to take a bullet for Katara in The Southern Raiders before she forgave him. Multiple times.

Zuko also took a bullet for Katara when he sat between her and Aang in Ember Island Players.

[emeryleewho]

There's a huge difference between redemption and humanization. I feel like a lot of "redemption arcs" aren't actually redemption at all, they're just attempts to humanize the villain so that they seem multi-faceted, but people read them as "redemption arcs" and think that that is meant to justify all the evil they've done before and negate whatever made them a villain in the first place. I think true "redemption arcs" are actually kind of rare because true redemption would take making the villain acknowledge their crimes, reevaluate their actions, actively choose to do better, and then proceed to make amends and become a better person, and that would this take more time than most stories are allowed to give their characters.

I've also seen people argue that a character has to be poised for redemption from the jump for it to work because once a character does something "too bad", they can't be redeemed. I completely disagree because redemption isn't justification or forgiveness, so no matter how horrible a character's actions, they could choose to become better, but because a lot of people (including writers) think redemption means "erasing the character's flaws and making it so they did nothing wrong ever", a lot of attempted "redemption arcs" just end up erasing a character's entire history or justifying every evil thing they've ever done. And yeah, in these cases, the only way to make a character go from a villain to a perfect cinnamon roll with no flaws *is* to have been planning it from the beginning and make sure they never do anything that can't be explained away later.

TLDR: real redemption arcs require a lot of self-awareness, patience, and growth, which are things that are rarely actually allocated to villains, and that's why real redemption arcs almost never get executed. The reason people think redemption arcs are overdone is because there are so many attempts to either humanize a villain that get misconstrued as redemption or attempts to blatantly erase who a character was in the name of "redemption", which is really just poor character development.

[prokopetz]

I don't disagree that it's often the case that the redeemed bad guy dies at the end because, as a society, we have fucked up ideas about justice and rehabilitation, but sometimes it's clear they got killed off less because the writers thought it was warranted and more because they were staring at the prospect of having to wrap up five separate character arcs in the next ten minutes and decided to start pruning.

[tangents-within-tangents]

Hot take:

Crosshair does not have the Imperial disillusionment and redemption arc of The Bad Batch

Emerie does.

Crosshair has an arc for sure yes but it's not that.

I was thinking about this scene:

and how it got right what this scene kinda didn't:

(It was so close but then bad writing decided to undercut the moment with a joke rip)

And I think it's really interesting that these characters who were more or less raised into the Empire/First Order and chose to leave it are all directly asked why.

But take a look at Crosshair's answers in comparison:

Different context for the asking, yes, but still, compare that to clones like Howzer, Cody, Slip and Cade who left or turned against the Empire because they knew what the Empire is doing is wrong and they weren't just going to blindly follow orders:

Crosshair - Loyalty, Purpose, and Survival

Crosshair didn't choose to join the Empire (though the show isn't very clear or consistent about how much control the inhibitor chips have) but he did, for whatever reason, choose to stay. By the end of S1 we know his chip has been removed and as he definitively says "This is who I am." There were likely still other influences on his decision, but listen to how he talks about the Empire in the S1 finale:

Hunter: Crosshair, I've seen what the Empire is doing. Occupying planets and silencing anyone who stands against them. You know it's not right. Crosshair: You still don’t see the bigger picture, but you will. Hunter: Can't you see they're using you?

Crosshair: We’re not like the regs, we never have been. We’re superior. The Empire can’t protect the galaxy without strength, this is what we were made for. Think of all we could do, together!

Crosshair: You all are meant for more than drifting through the galaxy. It’s time to stop running. Join the Empire, and you will have purpose again.

Hunter: They destroyed an entire city! Crosshair: They did what needed to be done. Kamino, regs, the Republic, that time is over. The Empire will control the entire galaxy, and I am going to be a part of it. Hunter: Don't fool yourself. All you'll ever be to them is a number.

He undeniably knows what the Empire is doing, but he does not care. In fact it sure sounds like he actually supports it and finds self-meaning in it. Hunter spends those episodes trying to convince him it's wrong, he doesn't change his mind. In the end they offer him an out and he doesn't take it.

Wrecker: You coming with us? Crosshair: None of this changes anything. Hunter: You offered us a chance, Crosshair. This is yours. Crosshair: I made my decision.

The next we see Crosshair in "The Solitary Clone" (S2:E3) he follows orders and shoots the Desix governor, right after Cody heartbreakingly tries to do what's right and find a peaceful solution.

Cody: Tell me something, Crosshair. This new Empire, are we making the galaxy better? Crosshair: We’re soldiers, we do what needs to be done. Cody: You know what makes us different from battle droids? We make our own decisions, our own choices. And we have to live with them too.

After this (glorious!) conversation, Crosshair stays. Maybe this began to seed some doubts, but he actually smiles a few scenes later when Rampart assigns him another mission. It seems like for him it truly is as he said in S1:E1 (chip not enhanced yet but still influencing him enough for his brothers to notice he's acting strange):

Crosshair: Republic, Empire... what's the difference.

Crosshair: Orders are orders.

This unethical mission that finally pushed Cody over the edge does not change Crosshair's mind about the Empire, at least not enough for him to take action.

But what does?

Mayday: And here we are, the survivors. Combat troopers stuck babysitting cargo shipments. Crosshair: Mission’s a mission. Mayday: Yeah, I used to say the same thing.

Mayday: After all the clones have done, all we’ve sacrificed. We’re good soldiers, we followed orders. And for what?

This mission has nothing to do with how the fascist Empire treats the galaxy, it's about how they treat their soldiers. It's about how Mayday loyally fought and served his whole life and Lieutenant Nolan let him die

Lt Nolan: He served his purpose as a soldier of the Empire. Crosshair: You could have saved him! Lt Nolan: Perhaps you didn’t hear me, he is expendable, as are you.

Crosshair thought he could find purpose within the Empire, and Nolan shows him exactly what that will be.

His turning point is accompanied with this powerful visual of the ice vulture, a symbol (and threat) of death, and also set up within the episode a symbol of survival:

Mayday: Vicious creatures, but you have to admire ‘em. They find a way to survive.

This critical moment (that gives me chills, oof this episode is a masterpiece!) comes right after Nolan calls him expendable and directly threatens him:

Lt Nolan: And if you speak to me again with such disrespect I'll see to it you meet a similar fate, clone.

then Crosshair sees the vulture's shadow and turns to Mayday's dead body (ahh visual storytelling my beloved) then makes his decision:

Crosshair turns against the Empire not because he believes Hunter was right about this:

Hunter: I've seen what the Empire is doing ... You know it's not right.

but because he was right about this:

Hunter: All you'll ever be to them is a number.

Redemption (both in fiction and irl in my humble opinion) comes with making amends and reparations (which is why death 'redemptions' bother me so much but that's a rant for another time). Unlike Emerie, Crosshair never explicitly denounces the Empire or his own actions within it. He never says anything to specifically show if and how his views have changed from what he said on Kamino. He makes amends with his family (sending the warning message, helping Omega escape, making up with Hunter) but that's about it. The most we get in terms of acknowledgement is this:

Crosshair: I thought I knew what I was getting into with the Empire. I thought I was being a good soldier. Hunter: Nobody really understood what was happening back then. Crosshair: I’ve... done things. I’ve made mistakes. Hunter: I have regrets too, Crosshair. All we can do is keep trying to be better, and who knows there just might be hope for us yet.

Which is nice and all but it's more about them making up as brothers so it's way too excusing tbh ("no one knew what was happening back then" ummm? "The Empire will control the entire galaxy, and I am going to be a part of it" remember? And even if at first Crosshair was being controlled by the chip, the fact that he chose to stay after it was removed* means he condones and is therefore still accountable for those actions).

There's also a bit of self-destructive guilt:

Crosshair: Omega, don't risk anything for me. I belong in here.

Crosshair: Omega needs you both. So I’m doing this alone, it’s what I deserve. Hunter: Don’t even think about plan 99, Crosshair. Omega needs all of us.

(which thank you Hunter for pushing back on the death redemption bs and oh look is that a wrap up for the purpose thing?)

But there's no action taken on his part to make up for what he's done or to stand against the Empire (aside from the bare minimum of help with Tantiss, only after it became personally relevant, which like yeah he had trauma to deal with but still).

While I do think the implications/follow-up of Crosshair's turn should have been handled better in S3 (like rip Howzer! he deserved an apology, but that's a rant for another time), I don't necessarily** think this arc is a bad writing choice. It's just saying different things than we expect:

Maybe Crosshair's story is not about standing up against an unjust system, like we see with many other characters (who deserved more screen time but that's a rant for another timeeee). Maybe his story is about how even those who are loyal to the Empire, who actually believe in it, still suffer under and within it's rule. Not to garner sympathy, but to show that there is no winning.

Crosshair has another 'so what changed' convo in S3:E14 with Rampart, in which they draw parallels to each other:

Rampart: You used to believe good soldiers followed orders. Crosshair: Depends on who's giving them. The Empire betrayed us both. Rampart: And you think you can fight them? That's not you. You're like me, loyal to no one but yourself. Crosshair: I've changed.

(note how he says who's giving the orders, not what the orders are)

"Loyal to no one but yourself" describes Rampart much more than Crosshair, since we often saw Crosshair pride himself as a loyal soldier of the Empire whereas we saw Rampart abuse power to be self-serving within the Empire (like when he killed Wilco to save face). But they were both betrayed either way. Vice Admiral Rampart, snively Imperial opportunist through-and-through, shouts "I was following orders!" as he is arrested for the Empire's purposes. (Edit: and where Crosshair rejected the Empire and found new purpose fighting for his family, Rampart was still self-serving in the finale. He still tries to gain power for himself and he gets his comeuppance).

Even Hemlock, the final boss immoral Imperial scientist, who has to be benefiting the most from this system, echoes the expendability idea:

Hemlock: What I am working on is beyond your understanding. Something so vital to the Empire it makes me indispensable.

Then there's CX-2, also set up as a parallel/foil to Crosshair (fight me), who in the end is discarded as no more than a weapon, a tool that served it's purpose, showing us what would have become of Crosshair if he had stayed.

There is no winning in the Empire. Loyalty is not rewarded, it "doesn't go both ways." Everyone has to fight for their value. Even high ranking individuals** who for a time benefit from the injustice, in the end are just pawns to be used up and cast aside at a whim for the Emperor's gain. Even people who are motivated by self-interest alone cannot survive within this system, the only viable option in this galaxy is to fight the Empire and dismantle that system. (unless you conveniently find a magically safe island to hide away on but that's a rAnT fOr AnOtHeR tImE)

Which brings us back to...

Emerie - Cooperation, Compassion, and Choice

(Okay this post has already gotten away from me but I still want to talk about her to show the contrasts.)

Emerie may not have been given a lot of screen time to really flesh out her development, but there is a lot that is pretty clearly implied with her:

Crosshair: They’ll never turn her [Omega] over. Hemlock: They don’t have a choice. She is a clone, and therefore Imperial property. *Camera cuts to an angle more centered on Emerie’s face*

Crosshair: Give me your access card! Emerie: It won’t get you outside!

Emerie: I tried to warn him what would happen if he did not cooperate with the Doctor.

Emerie: Prisoner? Omega, you are no such thing. It will take time to adjust, but you will acclimate. It is far safer in here than out there.

Emerie: You should go back to your room. Crosshair: You mean her cell?

Emerie: Why children? Hemlock: Children are easier to attain and more agreeable to the subjugations. They are unaware of why they are here and what they possess.

Emerie: They're children. Like I was... Was your plan to discard them too? Nala Se: The Empire will keep them in order to control them.

We don't know a lot about Emerie's background, but it's clear that she had a lot less choice than Crosshair and less opportunity or ability to leave. Unlike Crosshair, we never directly hear Emerie's views of the Empire (and she was most likely 'taken under Hemlock's wing' before the Empire even came to power), but lets look at how she talks about the Tantiss:

"Remain calm. Cooperate and you might survive."

"Don't make this worse, Crosshair! There is no escape!"

"All of us serve a purpose here."

"The Doctor will inform me, if it's necessary."

"It's best not to ask questions."

"Escape is not possible, Omega. This is for your own good."

She honestly does the best she can within the system she is also trapped in. She tries to help Crosshair, Omega, and the vault kids in the only way she knows how (warns Crosshair about the hounds and security, tries to protect Omega from Hemlock, tells Scorch his "actions were extreme" with Jax, insists on overseeing Bayrn's retrieval, double checks his m-count (to give him an out), and tries to find out where he came from). When she gives Omega, and later Eva, the doll, I think it shows just how little she really is able to do here (and it's kinda heartbreaking imo).

The framing of this shot especially (after Jax's escape attempt) visually shows how Emerie herself is trapped/imprisoned:

Despite the fact that very little of this is Emerie's fault, she has very little power and she is doing all she can, the narrative does not excuse her role in the Empire:

Nala Se: What will you do, Emerie? Emerie: There is nothing I can do. I don't have that kind of power. Nala Se: Don't you?

Emerie: I- I was doing my job. Echo: Yeah, I’ve heard that before. You’re a clone. How can you be part of this?

These fighting-the-Bystander-Effect conversations parallel these exchanges:

Hunter: We made a choice, and so did you. Crosshair: Soldiers follow orders. Hunter: Blind allegiance makes you a pawn.

Crosshair: We’re soldiers, we do what needs to be done. Cody: You know what makes us different from battle droids? We make our own decisions, our own choices. And we have to live with them too.

which did not change Crosshair's mind. And honestly, all respect to Echo's disappointed mom glare™ but I think it's clear Emerie had already made her decision, she just needed help to actually be able to do anything about it. When she stopped Echo, with her voice wavering on the verge of tears (ahhh v good voice acting), she clearly had no intention of turning him in. She's on her own in the Empire's most secure facility with very little resources, if she had tried anything on her own she most likely would have failed and been killed

Omega: Emerie, you don't have to do this. Emerie: (sigh) I’m sorry, but I do.

but as soon as she is enabled by an ally, she immediately turns around to help: giving information and getting Echo through security, helping the kids escape, and giving Omega the tablet that allows them to free the other clone prisoners.

Where Crosshair's turn is accompanied by the symbolic imagery of the ice vulture, Emerie's is the removal of her (literally rose-tinted!) glasses:

Symbolizing how she has shed her previous views/indoctrination that altered her perception of the Empire and blinded her to it's wrongs. It's disillusionment.

Emerie's story shows us that even those who are raised and indoctrinated into this system can, should, and will escape (with needed help). Even those who did not choose to be apart of the Empire and are not making the decisions still have the responsibility and ability to act on what they know is right.

Emerie, whose name means 'Home strength' 'Brave' and 'Powerful', and "reflects the importance of leadership and authority in the workplace".***

While Emerie is only in one more scene after her turn, so the wrap up is a bit rushed, she still very simply does what Crosshair does not:

Emerie: Because I was wrong about this place. And I'm trying to do the right thing.

Echo: I’m sure Senator Chuchi would find what you have to say very helpful for our cause. Emerie: I have a lot to make up for. I’d like to help out however I can.

She admits wrong, takes accountability, commits to making amends, and leaves with Echo to go take on the Empire (which hopefully we will get to actually see more of some day).

So, in short, she's showing us how redemption is done right!

---

Notes:

*Whether this writing choice was good/logical/in-character or not is another discussion entirely, but I'm going off of what we were given, what the show is presenting in the canon text and (reasonably inferred/intentional) subtext. Crosshair is pretty multifaceted and I could only touch on so much here. There's a lot of ways to interpret his character/choices, but I tried to avoid the realm of speculation or fanon explanations (even if they sometimes make more sense lol).

**History and political theory are not my area of expertise at all, so I have NO idea how well this aligns with real-world fascism stuff and therefore what implications this storytelling choice could have. I think the message of like 'if you think you could survive or gain power by doing what the Empire/fascist system wants you are wrong' could be good (like how everyone is actually harmed by the patriarchy type of a thing), but I hesitate bc maybe there are those who would benefit, since it's a hierarchal system, right? If anyone more knowledgeable than me has incite to share, by all means

Either way, I do think it works in-story and in-universe though. It's just in the execution. The main problem (even from a strictly theme/character arc stand point) is the lacking follow-up/consequences for Crosshair in S3. Like you gave your character accountability by removing the chip and I think that's great setup for an arc but you gotta follow through with that and actually hold him accountable!

***I'm always curious when clones have 'normal' names, like why did they chose the name Emerie of all things? So I looked it up. Idk how reliable sources are for name meanings so take it with a grain of salt but it's still fun. Fits pretty well, and clones names have definitely had significant meanings in the past (like how Rex and Jesse both mean 'king') so I'm pretty sure it was intentional.

Anyway, thanks for coming to my tedtalk

[sticks-and-souls]

I love that star wars tells us time and time and time again that the only thing a person needs in order to make amends is the desire to. And if you want it enough to work for it, then there’s a place for you to bring good back into the world.

Emerie and Rampart in TBB finale both had opportunities to switch sides the only difference between them is that Emerie wanted it and Rampart didn’t. And the narrative treated them accordingly. And rather than treating Emerie like the evils she did were the only thing that would ever define her, Echo said “fine, if you want to help, then help” and those kids got out of there because of her.

[queenoftheferns]

conversations about caitlyn rn are giving me flashbacks to the she-ra fandom iykyk

[copalcetic]

Every time I think about it, I’m struck by the parallel beats in Kallus’s and Crosshair’s redemption arcs.

Spent a season chasing the heroes.

Forced to work together with the heroes after being abandoned by the Empire, then refused to leave with the heroes even though that meant being stuck on a deserted rock with no way off and no Imperial rescue incoming.

Risked everything to get a message out to the heroes once captured after defecting, only to have that message ironically be what doomed the heroes.

Retired to an isolated, idyllic planet for a happily ever after.

Yeah, yeah, I know. It’s Star Wars. It’s like poetry. It rhymes.

But my favorite part is despite all of that, if they ever met, they’d probably hate each other.

Kallus: After all that, you just . . . left? You didn’t stay to join the fight? Crosshair: Nope. Kallus: Your guilt for your past actions didn’t make you feel compelled to spend years giving your all for the cause? Crosshair: Nope. Kallus: You weren’t driven by a need for absolution? Crosshair: I shot Hemlock. It was very absolving.

[midgardianqueenreturns]

The annoying thing about “ugh why can’t we have more irredeemable and unsympathetic villains, all villains get redeemed or are sympathetic these days” discourse is…most stories that have redeemed or sympathetic villains also have at least one irredeemable villain with 0 sympathetic qualities. Name a redeemed villain and I can often also name another villain from the same story as them who doesn’t get redeemed. For every Darth Vader there’s a Palpatine. You say “not all villains can be Zukos some of them should be Ozais” but miss who the obvious Ozais already are in favor of calling for the Zukos to also be Ozais.

[spop-romanticizes-abuse]

a redemption arc is not a sacrifice.

a redemption arc is not some grand act of selflessness.

a redemption arc is not meaningless pain and suffering.

a redemption arc is simply facing the consequences of your actions, fixing your mistakes and doing better, regardless of whether you will be forgiven or accepted. that's it.

[rj-anderson]

"I was brought up to hate you but I've now realized that my upbringing kind of sucked, please involve me in all your wacky do-gooder shenanigans" is definitely one of the best redemption arcs

[sketching-shark]

Been a couple of years, but I still think fondly of Grace Monroe from Infinity Train for achieving that very rare redemption arc narrative of "the people you hurt are allowed to sever all ties, and you can still become a better, happier person."

[bonefall]

Bones I don't have anyone else to turn to, and you're INCREDIBLY informed on the subject. How do you write characters who the audience WANTS to be redeemed? Especially without being able to reliably pull a 'What you are in the dark' trope like how Breezepaw eases up when away from his dad.

Any tips for how to write a good redemption/'recovery', especially one where the character has to unlearn ideas they grew up on?

Advice from me is almost always going to be double, triple, QUADRUPLE underlining; CHARACTERS ARE NOT PEOPLE THEY ARE TOOLS.

Think about WHAT YOU'RE SAYING with this story. What are you trying to accomplish, besides simply having a fun villain join the main cast?

For Breezepelt, I want to dive into him finally recognizing his own flaws. I want him to realize he does have problems he needs to work on, but that he's LOVED, and his life has value! That it's never too late to do the right thing, and that happiness is within reach. A very character-driven arc.

For another character, a redemption arc could be a really good opportunity to unpack how the "bad guys" are recruited and indoctrinated. Zuko from Avatar is the best example of that, but you can also look at Peridot from Steven Universe. It's our introduction to how Homeworld Gems talk about planet colonization. Her story up to mouthing off at Yellow Diamond is essentially unpacking and rejecting the Homeworld mindset.

There's a billion ways and reasons to do a redemption arc! Show how an environment can change a person! Talk about how power acted on them! Explore what happens to an empire's underling when they start having doubts about their cause!

Think about what it can do FOR your story, and what juicy ideas you can show during it.

And... a BAD redemption arc, imo, is one that grinds your story to a halt by removing a main driver of conflict (the POINT of an antagonist), and is done for a character who has absolutely no reason to want to change.

What are your antagonist's motivations? WHY do they act the way they do? What would it take for them to willingly give up what they currently have, for something else? If they were forced out of their position and suddenly offered it all back, what would it take for them to accept the deal?

And, most importantly, do you still have a goddamn plot if this character has a turnaround? Or maybe is the story ending with this redemption! What does the redemption say for your characters and themes?

[destinygoldenstar]

Redemption Arcs Should NOT Look Like THIS:

Redemption is not a switch. A character should not automatically swap sides and become a better person from simply doing a couple of good deeds. Depending on the character, their history, and their personality, etc., it doesn't work like that. It's a lot harder to do these good deeds in the first place. And if it IS that easy, then why would they even need redemption in the first place?

Try Making A Redemption Arc Look Like THIS Instead:

Not only is this more realistic, but it also makes the moment they are redeemed that much more satisfying. Yes, the journey of that arc is much more painful as they take one step forward and a couple steps back, but in the end, through effort, the morals stick. People can't just swap sides and call it a day. There's a lot in their psyche that makes them need 'redemption' in the first place. Regression is something that does happen. Challenges are something that do happen. But in the end, it makes the redemption feel like a very satisfying journey of growth.

[prokopetz]

Level 1: character gets a redemption arc for something that's not really that bad because the writers are cowards and don't want to risk making them truly unsympathetic.

Level 2: character gets a redemption arc and the text just straight up refuses to specify what they actually did, but trust us, it was really bad. (AKA Schrödinger's war crime)

Level 3: character gets a redemption arc for something the writers clearly think is really bad, but it's... kind of not? (Bonus points if it's a weird gender role thing.)

Level 4: character gets a redemption arc for something that genuinely warrants it, but the writers seem to have very strange ideas about why it was bad.

[picturejasper20]

Thinking about Dagur’s redemption arc in Httyd Race to the Edge series and how it is done so differently to other arcs from other shows: -Dagur does not require help from the protagonist to start to change in comparison to others of his type. They usually require exposure or some influence from the "nice guys" to change, but this is not the case with him. -He doesn’t exactly have a tragic backstory nor he was controlled/abused since he was younger (unless you count how he was betrayed by the dragon hunters in Season 2) -Meaning that he doesn’t come off as ¨sympathetic¨ unlike other characters you know that they will eventually get redemmed on the long run. -When he appears again after Season 2 finale, the focus is on how he is trying to change and how has he changed. - At least in the Enemy of My Enemy episode, he doesn't ask Hippup to trust him or to give him a new chance, in fact, when Hippup asks him why he should believe him, Dagur tells him that he shouldn't since he "doesn't deserve it" due to his previous actions. -He decided to change for the better because he thought it would be the best for him, regardless of whether Hippup or any of the other dragon riders helped him or not. -There isn’t a moment he asks Hiccup any favor in exchange for saving him in ¨Enemy of my Enemy¨. He, however, does ask for his help to find Heather in a later episode. -Even after the team believes that he is lying about how they are about to fall into a trap and put him behind bars in "Family on the Edge", he still tries to help them and almost loses his life when trying to stop the trap. -While i have some issues regarding how some things seems to get retconned, Dagur tries compensating the pain that he caused to Heather by offering her a place to stay in Berserker Island and teaching about her Berserker culture.

[bethanydelleman]

Redemption arcs are great, you love to see one done well. We eat up Mr. Darcy overcoming his pride and Elizabeth learning the truth about her prejudices. But the one thing that rarely comes up narratively is backsliding.

In fact, if someone writes a fan fiction follow-up to Pride & Prejudice with Darcy falling back into his old ways, people get angry. "Where did his character growth go?" they cry. It feels like when Han Solo was back at square one in The Last Jedi, that can't happen, can it?

Except it can! My husband says that when I visit home, I act younger and somehow my 'character development' of the last 20-ish years means very little. And then we have the most common serious cases: addiction and leaving domestic abusers. You can in fact hit "rock bottom" more than once, you can return to a toxic person and then escape multiple times. You can leave one bad relationship and fall into another. I think part of the reason this is so hard to accept is that we are taught that once you mount the top of that redemption arc, it's over, you'll never slide back down. But humans can and do, again and again and again.

I have had trouble with this mysterious concept of "tact" since I was a child. I have grown (I think), but every so often I just say the stupidest, most tactless thing to someone. If I was a book character, someone would scream at the page and ask where my character development went. It's there, I've been working on it, but I still make mistakes. I get tired, I misjudge, I get too comfortable and tell a stupid joke around the wrong people. At this point I've just accepted that it will always be a struggle for me, I will never complete my arc, I have to just keep trying.

So... the point is have a little mercy. We aren't characters in an epic novel, hopefully we learn, hopefully we grow, but we also stumble and backslide and screw up. And we are prone to make the same mistakes over and over again. You just have to decide to keep loving people, flawed as they are.