"Damsel in Distress"

For those that don’t know, “Damsel in Distress” refers to a common trope that most commonly takes the form of the protagonist rescuing the princess from a tower or whatever. This trope is generally extremely boring, and we’ve already seen it in action during Halo 3.

And now, it unfortunately looks like, depending on the quality of the plot and the direction taken, we might see it again.

As we can remember, Spartan Ops concluded with Halsey siding with Jul 'Mdama to achieve common means but differing ends relating to the Janus Key. Escalation’s starting with 13 and beyond will continue to conflict of the Janus Key and will probably escalate it further prior to plopping it onto the next plate:

Halo 5’s story.

Halsey and Jul’s alliance was probably the best thing that came out of Spartan Ops. Sure, Halsey is missing an arm, but the possibilities for a terrific story to be told are almost infinite. Both Halsey and Jul could receive outstanding character development and hell, if things are really pushed forward, we may even see Jul lift his hatred for humans and realize that the actions of ONI don’t speak for all of humanity.

However, what’s equally likely to come out of the “Julsey” alliance is that ultimately, we’d be dealing with a “Damsel in Distress” plot in which, despite the possibilities for a terrific story being told otherwise, a primary conflict in Halo 5 would be saving Halsey from the evil mustache twirling Jul 'Mdama.

Needless say, I’ll be pretty pissed if Halsey and Jul’s alliance is reduced to such a cliched and shallow outcome. Nothing would frustrate me more than the potential of Halsey and Jul’s covenant being wasted on yet another story remiscient of the “Damsel in Distress” trope that seems to afflict stories far and wide.

Surely, I’m not the only one?

Edit:

Just to clarify, in the event that it wasn’t extremely obvious, I am not comparing neither Halsey’s character nor her situation to “Damsel in Distress.” I am merely stating how frustrated I would be if the story turned into a “Damsel in Distress” rather than achieving the potential that it could have had otherwise.

In fact, just to make my point even more obvious, this is what I would do with Halsey and Jul’s outcome if it were my choice.

Initially, as expected of an alliance between members of two opposing factions, there would be a lack of trust between Jul and Halsey. In the event that either of the two decide to dispose of their compatriot, both characters will actively be plotting ways to gain the advantage over the other.

However, as time passes and as plots against the UNSC in the name of the welfare of the galaxy continue to go into fruition, not only will Jul soon realize that not all humans are the nationalist psychopaths that call themselves ONI, but instead of being an organization meant to tie up loose ends following the Human-Covenant war, Jul’s Covenant will be all that stands against a galaxy afflicted by a “one race rules all” mindset that would ultimately cause the mistakes of the Forerunners to be repeated.

So in essence, we’d find out that the Covenant Remnant were the ones intended to hold the Janus Key rather than the nationalist UNSC/ONI.

Um… No, not at all. I thought it was clear that she was doing it willingly, otherwise it wouldn’t be an “alliance”, now would it? How could she be a damsel in distress if she doesn’t need or even want to be rescued?

Would I be pissed? No. I mean, I was with Cortana, but I also hate Cortana. Halsey, I would be fine with it if I thought it was going to happen. I don’t think it will happen. Nothing to base that off other then I just don’t see it.

This post is insulting towards Halsey’s character, and almost a bit sexist. Damsel specifically means “young unmarried woman”, but most usually, the term indirectly implies helplessness. Halsey is not helpless, nor is she a damsel (as she’s not young). She is strong, intelligent, and brave. She is a complex character who is either manipulating Jul into getting the key from him right before having him killed, or is temporarily using his combat expertise to exact revenge on specific members of ONI before attempting to return to her position as a “team human” scientist. Both of these are subjective, true, but it is clear in any case that she is not helpless, nor will the whole of H5 be focused on “saving her” in all likeliness due to the introduction of Locke, the Chief dilemma, etc.

The sexist part comes into play when we consider role reversal. If chief was the one captured, and it was up to Halsey, Locke, and the Arbiter to save him in H5, would that be “another boring example of damsel in distress”? No. You’d probably think it was a great plot twist. Why is that? Again, because “damsel” is subliminally synonymous with the term “helpless female”. Since John isn’t helpless or a female, it would probably interest you.

We’ve seen the “sacrifice secondary characters for the sake of the primary character’s mission” way more often than the “damsel in distress” in Halo. CE had Keyes, 3 had Johnson and M. Keyes, Reach had…an entire friggin team of Spartans, and 4 had Cortana. So I don’t really see your point about how the “damsel in distress” theme is overdone when it was only done in Halo once. In other games? Sure, it’s been done in other games. In fact, it’s probably been done in almost every single Mario game ever released, but Mario isn’t Halo.

If anything, we should be avoiding the “sacrifice” theme, which is present in practically every Halo game, save for ODST. Leave the marine AI for the sick-minded people who enjoy watching their allies die, Halo’s story has had enough of it.

It all depends on how they tell the story and treat the characters. If Halsey is suddenly turned into some incompetent, man-reliant damsel in distress, then yeah, I’d be pissed. However, if her character is handled with the respect and dignity that she deserves, then I see no reason to be mad about a possible “rescue Dr. Halsey” plot. You act as though the potential for good storytelling isn’t possible if 343 goes that direction.

> 2533274808666777;4:
> This post is insulting towards Halsey’s character, and almost a bit sexist. Damsel specifically means “young unmarried woman”, but most usually, the term indirectly implies helplessness. Halsey is not helpless, nor is she a damsel (as she’s not young). She is strong, intelligent, and brave. She is a complex character who is either manipulating Jul into getting the key from him right before having him killed, or is temporarily using his combat expertise to exact revenge on specific members of ONI before attempting to return to her position as a “team human” scientist. Both of these are subjective, true, but it is clear in any case that she is not helpless, nor will the whole of H5 be focused on “saving her” in all likeliness due to the introduction of Locke, the Chief dilemma, etc.
>
> The sexist part comes into play when we consider role reversal. If chief was the one captured, and it was up to Halsey, Locke, and the Arbiter to save him in H5, would that be “another boring example of damsel in distress”? No. You’d probably think it was a great plot twist. Why is that? Again, because “damsel” is subliminally synonymous with the term “helpless female”. Since John isn’t helpless or a female, it would probably interest you.

Clearly you overlooked the entire post.

“Damsel in Distress” is merely just the unversal name of the trope.

It is in NO WAY representative of the story or Halsey’s character nor should ANYTHING of what I said be considered sexist or discriminatory in any way.
Edit:

Since you obviously decided to jump to conclusions rather than reading the entirety of the OP, perhaps I should summarize it.

My arguement, in simplest form, is me expressing how disgusted and dissapointed I would be if Halsey’s alliance with Jul ends up wasting its potential by being reduced to a cliched and shallow “Damsel in Distress” story that ends up being an insult to all of the characters involved.

Given the fact that it’s only in Spartan ops… No.

Great theory this is going to be a complicated game because its going to deal with doctor halseys truce with jul and focus on the story of the arbiter and its going to give story on agent locke and its going to focus on chiefs loss for cortana. Thats a lot to comprehend. Maybe doctor halsey and jul is going to just be in spartan ops and john, cortana, the arbiter, and agent locke will stay in the story, that would equal things out a bit and let ONI and UNSC deal with doctor halsey.

> 2533274876631466;7:
> > 2533274808666777;4:
> > This post is insulting towards Halsey’s character, and almost a bit sexist. Damsel specifically means “young unmarried woman”, but most usually, the term indirectly implies helplessness. Halsey is not helpless, nor is she a damsel (as she’s not young). She is strong, intelligent, and brave. She is a complex character who is either manipulating Jul into getting the key from him right before having him killed, or is temporarily using his combat expertise to exact revenge on specific members of ONI before attempting to return to her position as a “team human” scientist. Both of these are subjective, true, but it is clear in any case that she is not helpless, nor will the whole of H5 be focused on “saving her” in all likeliness due to the introduction of Locke, the Chief dilemma, etc.
> >
> > The sexist part comes into play when we consider role reversal. If chief was the one captured, and it was up to Halsey, Locke, and the Arbiter to save him in H5, would that be “another boring example of damsel in distress”? No. You’d probably think it was a great plot twist. Why is that? Again, because “damsel” is subliminally synonymous with the term “helpless female”. Since John isn’t helpless or a female, it would probably interest you.
>
>
>
> Clearly you overlooked the entire post.
>
> “Damsel in Distress” is merely just the unversal name of the trope.
>
> It is in NO WAY representative of the story or Halsey’s character nor should ANYTHING of what I said be considered sexist or discriminatory in any way.
> Edit:
>
> Since you obviously decided to jump to conclusions rather than reading the entirety of the OP, perhaps I should summarize it.
>
> My arguement, in simplest form, is me expressing how disgusted and dissapointed I would be if Halsey’s alliance with Jul ends up wasting its potential by being reduced to a cliched and shallow “Damsel in Distress” story that ends up being an insult to all of the characters involved.

I read the entire OP before posting and I knew exactly what you were saying. My first response of insulting Halsey’s character was most relevant, with the sexist part being a potential subliminal slip on your behalf. Forget the sexist part. I don’t think H5 will focus primarily on Halsey nor do I think 343 will paint Halsey as a defenseless casualty in need of rescuing.

> My first response of insulting Halsey’s character was most relevant, with the sexist part being a potential subliminal slip on your behalf.

Assuming that I’m not misinterpreting you, I still don’t see why you think that I insulted Halsey’s character at any point. I didn’t. Period.

Additionally, I don’t necessarily think nor expect that 343 will botch Halsey and Jul’s alliance. However, following the joke of a story that was The Next 72 Hours, I think that we all have a right to pessimism especially when the writer responsible for TN72H happens to be the lead writer for Halo 5.

But then again, that same writer was also responsible for Halsey and Jul’s alliance to begin with. This is quite the paradox.

I believe I understand your concern.

I hope they don’t mess it up. They can do a lot with it, with a lot, but they can mess up too.

> 2533274961508741;5:
> We’ve seen the “sacrifice secondary characters for the sake of the primary character’s mission” way more often than the “damsel in distress” in Halo. CE had Keyes, 3 had Johnson and M. Keyes, Reach had…an entire friggin team of Spartans, and 4 had Cortana. So I don’t really see your point about how the “damsel in distress” theme is overdone when it was only done in Halo once. In other games? Sure, it’s been done in other games. In fact, it’s probably been done in almost every single Mario game ever released, but Mario isn’t Halo.
>
> If anything, we should be avoiding the “sacrifice” theme, which is present in practically every Halo game, save for ODST. Leave the marine AI for the sick-minded people who enjoy watching their allies die, Halo’s story has had enough of it.

It’s a necessary trope in an ongoing war story (or just about any story involving a lot of conflict) in order to maintain any level of suspense or sense of a threatening enemy. Having a name giving you plot shielding is far worse.

Its also not sexist or racist, unless only specific groups are always sacrificing themselves.

> 2533274876631466;11:
> > My first response of insulting Halsey’s character was most relevant, with the sexist part being a potential subliminal slip on your behalf.
>
>
> Assuming that I’m not misinterpreting you, I still don’t see why you think that I insulted Halsey’s character at any point. I didn’t. Period.
>
> Additionally, I don’t necessarily think nor expect that 343 will botch Halsey and Jul’s alliance. However, following the joke of a story that was The Next 72 Hours, I think that we all have a right to pessimism especially when the writer responsible for TN72H happens to be the lead writer for Halo 5.
>
> But then again, that same writer was also responsible for Halsey and Jul’s alliance to begin with. This is quite the paradox.

I suppose I made an error. What should have been said was “If 343 portrays Halsey as a seemingly helpless, weak individual in need of saving throughout Halo 5, that would be an insult to the character that she’s been established as thus far in the series”. Nothing against you personally, but I was moreso trying to say that my doubts lie within 343 making such a gross misrepresentation of the character, and making that a central theme in H5 would be even more difficult to comprehend. My personal opinion is that this will unfold into a complex, manipulative turn of events that displays Halsey’s intelligence.

I am in agreement with the OP. Story potential has been pissed away by 343i repeatedly, and its always usually the same writer. I hope that Halsey isn’t yanked away, the moment that her and Jul begin to open up more to each other. Though i do want to see the UNSC struggle to get the other half of the Janus Key, and fail. I also want to see a point where Halsey has an opportunity to relieve herself from Jul’s grasp, but chooses to remain. That would be an interesting development for her character.

> 2533274808666777;14:
> > 2533274876631466;11:
> > > My first response of insulting Halsey’s character was most relevant, with the sexist part being a potential subliminal slip on your behalf.
> >
> >
> >
> > Assuming that I’m not misinterpreting you, I still don’t see why you think that I insulted Halsey’s character at any point. I didn’t. Period.
> >
> > Additionally, I don’t necessarily think nor expect that 343 will botch Halsey and Jul’s alliance. However, following the joke of a story that was The Next 72 Hours, I think that we all have a right to pessimism especially when the writer responsible for TN72H happens to be the lead writer for Halo 5.
> >
> > But then again, that same writer was also responsible for Halsey and Jul’s alliance to begin with. This is quite the paradox.
>
>
> I suppose I made an error. What should have been said was “If 343 portrays Halsey as a seemingly helpless, weak individual in need of saving throughout Halo 5, that would be an insult to the character that she’s been established as thus far in the series”. Nothing against you personally, but I was moreso trying to say that my doubts lie within 343 making such a gross misrepresentation of the character, and making that a central theme in H5 would be even more difficult to comprehend. My personal opinion is that this will unfold into a complex, manipulative turn of events that displays Halsey’s intelligence.

They approved of Kilo-5 comparing her to -Yoink!- and providing no counter-arguments and their lead writer outright called her a monster with another writer saying people only saw her as a monster or misguided. I fear such misrepresentation of her character is highly possible.

> 2533274812652989;16:
> They approved of Kilo-5 comparing her to -Yoink!- and providing no counter-arguments and their lead writer outright called her a monster with another writer saying people only saw her as a monster or misguided. I fear such misrepresentation of her character is highly possible.

-Yoink!-? Lol what the hell? I was just reading over Fall of Reach (the original edition) a few weeks ago and she was portrayed as a kind, loving, and self-doubtful person, despite her keen understanding of her own intelligence level. Seemed like a “hard on the outside but soft on the inside” type character, with very maternal personality traits extending into her relationship with the Spartan-II’s. I got the vibe that throughout H4, they were painting her into a sort of morally-grey and ambitious character, but it would be hard to swallow 343 turning her into a morally-grey, ambitious, -Yoink!--esque, selfless damsel. They’d be taking her in too many directions at that point. But what do I know? Obviously canon gets modified and disgraced all the time in this series, so who knows?

> 2533274808666777;17:
> > 2533274812652989;16:
> > They approved of Kilo-5 comparing her to -Yoink!- and providing no counter-arguments and their lead writer outright called her a monster with another writer saying people only saw her as a monster or misguided. I fear such misrepresentation of her character is highly possible.
>
>
> -Yoink!-? Lol what the hell? I was just reading over Fall of Reach (the original edition) a few weeks ago and she was portrayed as a kind, loving, and self-doubtful person, despite her keen understanding of her own intelligence level. Seemed like a “hard on the outside but soft on the inside” type character, with very maternal personality traits extending into her relationship with the Spartan-II’s. I got the vibe that throughout H4, they were painting her into a sort of morally-grey and ambitious character, but it would be hard to swallow 343 turning her into a morally-grey, ambitious, -Yoink!--esque, selfless damsel. They’d be taking her in too many directions at that point. But what do I know? Obviously canon gets modified and disgraced all the time in this series, so who knows?

That’s what happens when you get the author famous for comparing the Jedi to the Nazis to write your Halo novels. And evidently, they approved of that. Spartan Ops admittedly did paint her morally-grey, but I don’t see what is stopping them from reversing on that position since the same guy who wrote her as morally-grey also said she is a monster.

I think that you should put a spoilers head up about SO story.

Sure, I can see where you’re coming from, but what makes you think they’re going to do that?