Talk:Chara/@comment-27635996-20160118211341

I have a little hypothesis about what Chara is and why red human souls ''don't seem to persist after death. ''The humans were trying to artificially recreate beings with the magical properties of monsters and these two fallen children are some of the results. They're modified pseudo-humans. In this line of thinking, Chara was an earlier version of Frisk. Here's how I came to this conclusion: Chara can't be human because they ask for Frisk's soul at the end of a genocide run. If they were human, they shouldn't be able to absorb another human soul. There's also the issue of Frisk's soul shattering after death when human souls are supposed to persist. Frisk shatters like a boss monster. That's why I think these two aren't quite human. Plus, while it's evident that gender does exist in the human world (mew mew kissy cutie features a she) the fallen children are ambiguous, which could be explained if they were born of science. Chara's hatred could stem from being treated as though they deserved to die or were unworthy of equal treatment. If they happened to be a failed experiment or just "sub-human," this treatment would be likely. So at first they believe their abusers, but after the Dreemurrs share love and treat Chara kindly, Chara becomes convinced of their self worth and resents the past abuse.

Chara being an earlier version of Frisk could also be supported by their more humanlike appearance. Chara is flesh toned, while Frisk is a highly artificial yellow hue. It's not too much of a stretch to say that, if the human scientists started off with human children as their raw material, the subsequent versions might change to be less human and more like the intended result. What do you all think? Maybe this ventures too far into headcanon territory. I support the idea of Chara being a sociopath, too.

And the children's striped shirts reminded me of concentration camps. And Chara's intelligence would seem to support the idea that they didn't have a normal childhood.