#and that's so much more emotionally engaging than the unchanging unchallenged protagonists we're saturated with

[reachexceedinggrasp]

It is really weird, as you say, that these sorts of characters (Beasts, grotesques, Byronic heroes, etc.) are so emotionally, aesthetically, narratively potent and draw on a rich literary history, yet they're such a contentious archetype, rarely done well now. I personally ascribe that to an obvious modern shift in the direction of storytelling cynicism (and I think you elsewhere have too, so don't mind me repeating your points back at you), but do you see a way out of it?

It's obviously an issue which goes beyond them (I mean even the central idea of redemption, or a complicated soul, is contentious), and so I imagine that the way out is effectively only possible if there are much more broader shifts in discourse. I think it's probably true that we might've peaked with cynicism now (absurdism seems to be more an idea that's being embraced - much as I don't like that, either, it's a gestural attempt at least).

But to circle back away from that, it's so funny how... if you're sincere and if you care and if you're trying hard, you can trip and fall into a complicated, Beastly character. And then they get mad about it.

Off anon because I figured I may as well hee hee.

It's definitely a weird moment in mass pop culture, because cynicism is so ingrained as the default that there's sometimes a lack of self-awareness about it from the writers who are responsible for the most mercilessly cynical takes. Of course, writing extruded movie product by marketing committee, as a lot of them are, is unlikely to produce different results, but I believe some of these people genuinely aren't cognizant of the worldviews they're putting across in these stories.

Romanticism has been deeply out of fashion for a long time and idealism is never in fashion, so it's not like cynicism itself is new as the dominant attitude, but it seems like that cynicism has become ever more juvenile and shallow. People steeped in it try to write optimism to play to the crowd (because generally people want a happy ending) and it comes off as the bleakest, most hopeless nihilism.

I think real idealism is challenging and the more complex the story becomes, the more challenging it is, so that you encounter more resistance writing idealistic narratives for adults, because it's so demanding when we see what it really looks like. It stops being crowd pleasing when uncompromising principles come up against the audience's desire for revenge, spectacle, machismo, etc. And because compassion and forgiveness have been relegated to media for children, people are wont to dismiss them as childish. Cynicism is still seen as cool and grown up and 'just being realistic' and fosters a vast wasteland of boring, lazy stories with characters you don't care about.

It is funny how people trip into Sad Murder Boys/Beasts/grotesques, but I think it sort of makes sense for the same reason they're such a rare character type despite being intensely impactful every time they happen, the same reason they're contentious: these are inherently romantic archetypes. So if you're trying to write passionately about this dark figure and you want him to be a complex character, so you give him pathos, and you want him to be powerful or intimidating because you're using him as a threat but still have big flaws so he can be defeated by the hero, and you want him to be charismatic to show why people would trust or follow him, and you want him to be attractive so you can have your incel message about male allure being dangerous... oops, you've accidentally created a romantic figure.

People accidentally writing tragic heroes when trying to write villains have already made something way more compelling than what they imagined, but then when they play up the pathos in attempt to emphasise free choice and create a tension where the audience sees a desire for healing from the character, a potential for change, they have inserted the most dynamic drama known to man. The hope this represents is so potent that it's going to alter the entire landscape of the narrative whether you want it to or not.

The possibility of redemption is a fundamentally idealistic concept and once we have our rogue romantic character breaking through stolid predictable archetypes and rigid storytelling, there's equal parts terror and intrigue on the part of the audience that they might be challenged with it. Redemption equals death is so popular because it defangs the challenge, it strips it of cost and consequence, allowing a veneer of optimism and admirable morality without needing to deal with what makes being ethical hard.

I think what we need more than anything else is more deliberate writing. People who actually want to tell a story and have something they want to say. No one is going to write anything legitimately challenging when they've been commissioned to make Captain Bland 11 and the story barely matters to anyone involved in production. It's uncool to care and there's a lack of respect for the audience, so the most you get is more 3edgy4me death and cynicism because these manchildren are convinced that's somehow still subversive despite paragon heroes who always say the day having been extinct for about fifty years.

You won't get brave choices out of the mainstream until someone with huge money decides they want to make them, because the entertainment industry has consolidated into the most risk-averse and cynical possible version of itself. Either something escapes containment and shows how profitable actually following through on romanticism can still be (you'd think this would have happened by now given how many chances have come up), or the current hierarchy crashes and burns and the field opens up to variety again.