Skip to content → Skip to footer →

Irrational plot-hole climaxes are okay

▯ 1PAGE 410 words • last modified 16 days ago
☑️ terms Terms of Service
By reading, you agree to the site's Terms of Service — TL;DR: doubt and fact-check everything I've written!
  • ola:: satisfying story outcomes need not be rational
  • eg: Cars Climax
    • [?] Lightning stopped right at the finish line, before pushing the King to 2nd
    • He could have crossed the finish line first, get first place, then double back
      • the mechanisms of the racing world perfectly allowed him to do so
      • with no negative external-world consequences
        • to himself, or to others
    • [*] BUT there are internal-character consequences.
      • it shows he will not vouch for a system that disregards the worth of people
      • it reflects how he desires to re-do Doc’s history, honouring him
        • if he had crossed the line, then “the multiple-time legend would suffer a painful end to his career” and Lightning would be that “rookie who overshadowed” him
      • this action shows how Lightning had changed after Radiator Springs
    • [*] and in fact, there are external consequences!
      • who gets the first-place fame and reporter attention?
        • Chic, the selfish winner, is hated
        • King gets the cheer of the crowd, reporters’ attention, avoiding Doc’s tragic history
        • we see Lightning slip away from all the glory that he once chased
      • this is the reality that Lightning establishes for the racing world
    • we ask… what is the Piston Cup? What is a person worth?
  • eg: Aladdin climax
    • [?] Aladdin could have given Jasmine the lamp and have her wish the Genie free instead?!1!
    • Aladdin promised Genie
    • Aladdin used to operate on loopholes and tricks and lies
    • Aladdin used to believe he needed to be a prince in order to have worth
    • Aladdin used to care about himself before others

I think it’s all boiled down to simply this:

[!important] These plot-hole-less climax alternatives allow the protagonist to achieve their ==Truth-fuelled Need== AND their ==Lie-fuelled Want==. That’s the wrong message.

It gets tricky when the Want itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Winning first place at the championship is great. Being a prince is great. But the issue is that these good things are Lie-fuelled. They are Lies they should no longer believe that they need these Wants (e.g. to have worth).

In a climactic [rejection of the Lie-fuelled Want], they also climactically [reject the Lie], and thus they [champion the Truth].

Now, there are stories where the heroes also do get their Want, on top of their Need. But it’s in best taste when through some coincidence or external force. And they don’t view the Want in light of the Lie anymore. ‘Cause, getting the Want… it’s just not the point.

↗ External Resources