Unintentional Aesop?

Looking over a trilogy of stories I have written, I discovered an interesting trend that I hadn't even been going for when actually creating it: every time my protagonist gave in to Unstoppable Rage and utterly lost control against an enemy in a fight, he lost. Whether it was a physical or verbal battle, the moment he went from anger to unthinking fury was when the outcome was decided. On the other hand, when he "kept his cool" so to speak, he was able to win. It wan't a 100 percent formula for victory, but it's a noticeable pattern.

I just made a statement about keeping your temper, or you'll screw up.

Has anyone else made little "moral tales" in their work without actually meaning too?

edited 26th Nov '15 9:55:27 AM by Swordofknowledge

My main character is a noble and kind man thanks to his raising. His Arch-Enemy is a brutal and angry woman because her raising.

The main cast has -mostly- issues thanks to his Abusive Parents, or Negligent Parents. Aside The Hero who is a good guy with social issues and self-esteem because his own and personal reasons.

Basically i create a story about how the parents can affect their kids, in both ways.

And then i just decide to going for it.

Took me a while to notice this, but I've realized this trend after a while in what I'm writing.

Exhibit A: The story takes place in Hell, the two sides are people who want to overthrow everything and believe all demons to be evil and demons who want to rule over everything and believe humans to be animals. The main character is a half-blood who ends up working with both sides to stop the villains (who are fanning the flames of rebellion).

Exhibit B: The universe has people who demonize necromancers and want to burn them in bonfires, and people who take necromancy to new levels of Squick. The protagonists are people who accept necromancy as a useful tool, but don't want to start zombie apocalypse with it.

Exhibit C: In the 'verse with noblemen and poor worker's class, there are many factions searching to preserve or change the status quo, but the only truly evil ones are serf-keepers and bomb-throwing anarchists. At contrast, the Reasonable Authority Figures of the tale are from moderate factions.

Seems like whatever I write, I end up making some Aesop about having to balance between two extremes and harmony being the way to go. Not sure if I'm not getting too monothematic.

I initially started out my side story as nothing more than a rant against deep green environmentalism; the kind who advocates the destruction of humanity in a ridiculously smug/chipper tone.

It ended up having the aesop of "environmental precautions should be taken for us to survive, but don't overdo it; Living Is More than Surviving, after all." I'm pretty sure that's an improvement.