I've been blogging about writing anything in a more meaningful fashion. I once listened to a presentation at a writer's conference by Chris Heimerdinger about how the big action should somehow be done by the hero's hand. I have since then read a lot of stories in which the protagonist either overcame or participated in the overcoming of the antagonist/larger forces at work and many in which the protagonist didn't. (Spoiler alert) In Jurassic World 2, the heroine leads one monster through the city strategically to make sure another monster takes it out. She took charge of her fate and saved herself. Meanwhile, in the latest movie, the director got all the heroes of the Jurassic Park series and the ones of Jurassic World together for a dramatic climax in which...none of them did anything but stand there while the dinosaurs took each other out. No hero had to do any heroing. I can't imagine a more disappointing way for a series to end. There is a huge difference in the impact of the two kinds of narratives, and I find myself agreeing that the best stories do, indeed, give the hero a big role in the climax.
It's tempting to solve all the hero's problems with deux ex machina, God in the machine. There are a lot of books out there in which some divine power either literally or figuratively saves the day. Most of the best fiction avoids this because it's too easy. Divine powers can help, but if there is no participation by the main character we have followed along the whole book, it's a major let down. The hero can resolve problems through divine aid, but what's the point of watching a hero develop skills if those skills have little to do with the resolution?
I actually read a book recently wherein the heroine didn't have to fight the antagonist on any level. She prayed, and the divine power in the book took care of everything. The author was probably thinking she prayed, right? But the only emotional reaction I had to the climax was disappointment. If Luke Skywalker had stood by, watching a lightning bolt come down and blast away Darth Vader or Emperor Palpatine, the movies may have died a quiet death before they become a phenomenon that has affected generations of audiences. Many have compared the force to priesthood/divine authority, in the first series, and Luke's clothing was reminiscent of a priest in "Return of the Jedi," but he used the power, himself, and/or inspired his father to do so through his actions.
It's almost as bad when some other figure in the book steps in and solves all the problems for the main character, but this is more common. I would have much preferred Disney's "Snow White" had the protagonist actually lifted a finger to take out her evil stepmother and "Sleeping Beauty" had it been the princess to slay the dragon. Of course, one can argue Aurora's prince is a main character, too, which makes the ending somewhat better. It's only with later generations of Disney movies that the protagonist gets to face off with her antagonist, when there's an antagonist to be found. Imagine how exciting it wouldn't have been to follow Harry Potter all the way to the end only to have Dumbledore or Snape stand up to Voldemort in the end.
Does your hero take down your antagonist or at least have a serious hand in it? They may send forth the beast that faces the dragon, resolving their story arc and showing the themselves to be master of both the under and the upper worlds. But one way or another, do yourself and the reader a favor by making sure you, the writer, don't become their worst enemy through dull writing and a hero who can't save the day in the end.
