The insatiability of Dick Grayson
Why that man will never choose depth over endless possibility.
I think I've fingered one immutable character trait of Grayson. He's insatiable. Sometimes some people get stuck in these places where nothing seems like enough, like nothing is ever good enough, there are never enough contingency plans, or that they're afraid to commit to one choice. Because why close doors unecessarily? If you can be anything, how do you choose one thing? Sound like any New Jersey-based vigilante families we know? Or like any acrobats with "itchy feet" and trust issues?
Specifically let's look at Dick Grayson and allostatic load / contained mobilization. This is when the body is systemically activated like anxiety, but with less panic and more of a constant, persistent readiness / preparedness. It is not caused by 'something bad will happen', it's caused by 'something irreversible will happen'. This activates vigilance, scanning, constantly mentally preparing, and/or doubt. Because irreversibility removes escape routes. So the nervous system stays just activated enough to keep as many doors open as possible. By force, if necessary (that's full dysregulation).
This level of stress leaves a person just functional enough that the worry or insatiability becomes normal, familiar, or actually pretty productive. A person with this constant need for an undefinable something else or something better, is pretty responsible,all things considered, calm under pressure, perceptive and is usually highly praised. These people are "thoughtful", "driven", or "self-aware". They despise personal deception. So the body learns this state keeps them safe and competent. They have just enough regulation to stay upright, but never to settle.
In place of breaking down there is chronic restlessness, spikes of 'do not want', cycles of doubt followed by periods of respite, and absolute certainty of the truth of your feelings. The cost of all this is difficulty settling, difficulty choosing, difficulty feeling "enough", and difficulty tolerating stillness and permanence. Sounding more familiar now?
This emotional state (because it is a state, not a character failing) lasts for decades because it doesn't immediately end relationships, destroy functioning, or look dramatic. It looks thoughtful, so there's no reason to shut it off. In fact, calm might feel wrong. However, it does eventually end relationships and become mismanagable in truly spectacular fashion.
One last point is that people like this are the way they are because "I'm safest when I can handle things myself", "depending too much creates risk", or even constantly needing to think "If I plan ahead, I won't be caught off guard". Like how depending on your billonaire dad for funding robs you of true independence or saying "I fly solo", when you've literally led every team imaginable. That belief doesn't require betrayal, neglect, or dramatic trauma (though he has it). It can come from inconsistent support, being the responsible one, watching others be unreliable, learning that help came with strings, or simply being very perceptive early on. Any ideas who that unreliable, inconsistent / strings attached support might be, Bruce?
If you're writing Dick, are you making sure that he's just functional enough? Is he always just a little bit hungry? Because I think that is as immutable as his endearing hope. Hell, it may even be the cause of all that often praised hope. With hope there is opportunity and you're not going to turn down opportunity, are you? Because what if you need it???
The best part is, if you write Grayson like this, you know exactly how to write Bruce - just 20 years down the line and more than twice the certainty in the righteousness of his beliefs.
