Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27997069-20160317174518/@comment-28721944-20160611192205

GetYourFix wrote: A ton of stuff about Chara being the player or working along side them Chara exists to thwart the player/frisk during genocide, not aid them. They wish to hold them accountable for their actions, and by the end of a genocide route, have aquired enough LOVE to make full use of their ability to desensitise themselves to violence. They prevent a happy ending by being evil at the end of the genocide route because that is the only way frisk/player can be held accountable for their actions. If they let the monsters they love live, they prove that the one who killed and destroyed everyone can get away with it with no consiquences. Flowey also makes reference to Chara trying to get him to stop using that power, and cautions them to not succumb to that very same power at the end of a true pacifist route. It doesn't seem to conflict either. By this point, those without an instruction manuel on how to beat the game have likely reset many times after various nuetral endings, maybe even a near genocide ending. Chara has been left unfulfilled with a happy ending for the monsters, and there have been many resets. When they wake up, Flowey calms them down, telling them theres nothing to worry about. What was Chara worried about?

I wanted to get that off my chest to you, regardless of what you believe or how little it convinces you, because I gave kudos to many of your posts, and I wanted to make sure it was understood that the reason I gave those kudos was not for your general ideas, which I disagree with for the above truncated reasons, but because I agree that Chara is not a metanarrative character.