That the person in question was in fact desperate, and hurting, and trying to at least help out other people so they don't end up the same way. It happened, unfortunately, to famous people like Robin Williams. It's probably more common than we realize.
Are you talking about someone close to you? Can we help?
As everyone else said, the person is doing their best to lift everyone else up, while they are doing nothing but sinking. Some that are hurting can only hurt others, because they don't want to be alone, out of spite, etc. But that person decided to help out instead of drag down. Those are the kinds of people that make life worth living.
I would think, that I am proud of that person. Not for ending their life, but for living what they could of it, and using it to give others hope. Every second they were alive was not just time that simply "healed" them, but were little moments of patience that taught them to deal with the pain. However long they lived was time to be treasured, time to keep fighting, time to overcome the pain in the butt that life is most of the time. And thus, time to teach others how to use their time in a similar way.
Hypothetical or not, I truly hope that Harmful Heaven will touch on these topics. It could help out lots of people.
My take on that person is :
A. The person wants to share his feeling about beautiful life to others by writing the story. He/she has more to add to the story however before he/she completed the story, he/she ended his life.
or
B. The person have wishes and dreams about beautiful life which he/she didn't have so the story is written like that but it hurts so much so he/she took his/her own life.
I wanted to add hypocrisy but I think that's included in B.
My comment is just be honest to yourself ;).
What would you think of this hypothetical situation?
Too close to home for many people, to be used as a plot device. People diagnosed as bi-polar or manic depressive could exhibit such behaviour as you described. Praising life in the manic phase and ... not ... in the depressive phase.
I had a game in my recommended games with a thumbnail that depicted a person hanged. Just dangling there. If this pops up again, I might decide to tell the creator off. Horror games are one thing. But this topic is as unfunny as it can get. Games are supposed to be fun. Using this topic in a story, especially in a game, is bound to be problematic. It could easily become a cheap tear jerker or hit too close to be funny.
Also, there is copycat behaviour about this topic, so it should be avoided. An old prominent example was The Sorrows of Young Werther.
You know, I was really thinking about this one but it just occurred to me that, even in spite of the fact I'm bringing up a Christmas film with some minor religious tones I feel like Frank Capra's "It's a Wonderful Life" might actually capture the tone of reminding people that it's better to be alive than dead, let alone not exist at all.
And honestly you could make the argument that there is some existential tone to that film for one reason by the time it reaches the third act where George Bailey actually considers jumping off a bridge to kill himself only to find his guardian angel nearly drowning, goes into save him, and then his angel shows him what his life would be like if the world existed without him and his hometown would turn into a literal shit hole filled with vice, the many people who he changed for the better would be miserable, and the very man that he sought to keep from owning the town would have allowed the ruin to begin with.
I don't think this moment would have been referenced later on in popular culture like say... Rugrats, Simpsons or Tiny Toons. There's a reason why that film had such an impact on everyone at the time and still does to this day since it's such a timeless classic.
As for the situation OP speaks of... suppose that you have a Wonderful Life scenario where even if the character sees this vision and goes through with the act. You have two hypothetical scenarios that could happen after the fact:
1) The antagonist of the Wonderful Life plot gets his way, and the characters who have been impacted by the main character would be forced to move out of the town and yet, still be better people and have a downright bittersweet ending.
Or 2) Because of the protagonist's actions, influences the very people he has saved come together to fight against the antagonist of the Wonderful Life scenario and save the very life that he built up for them and honor the very values that he has upheld.
Personally, if it were me being the writer... I'd probably pick the latter outcome. Even without the religious or holiday tones you still have the positive outcome at the end of all the insanity that would ensue after the character's suicide and ultimately he would leave behind a legacy and the antagonist still loses. I feel like this outcome was also played out in a slightly different way in One Piece as well with Chopper's mentor poisoning himself and willingly ending his own life against a tyrant who ended up controlling the town's doctor's as well, only for Luffy and the Straw Hats be moved by Chopper's back story to fight for him and the impact was not only felt within the arc but the overall story due to Chopper's decision to join with the Straw Hats.
That's my two cents on this scenario and I think as long as this formula is kept in mind, then you could take it in a couple different routes.
The mentor did not willingly end himself. He was terminally ill in his last days, probably with pain to go along. That does not count. Also, he did not actually do the deed, he naivly fell for the trap of the tyrant. Even if he suspected a trap, he was compelled by his principles as a healer.
But he was a short sighted coward. If not for the trap, things would have played out quite badly for Chopper. The mentor did drink the medicine obviously to not hurt Choppers feelings, cowardly avoiding to tell him the truth. But the effect of the plant would have showed up eventually, making Chopper feel very guilty.
One could argue that he sacrificed himself to teach the tyrant a lesson. It did work on one of his minions. But sacrifice is something completely different from the cowards way out.
Even if it is about a legacy. George in It's a Wonderful Life was literally told, he was worth more dead than alive and he was facing arrest. He did not contemplate jumping from the bridge to achieve anything, he was seeking a way out.
But in both cases, the thing with the legacy is not tied to how the characters died or would have died. It is about how they lived. They could have been struck by lightning, or actually not die at all, and nothing would have changed about their legacy.
In other words, people (and their legacy) is not worth more, because said people die. Uhm. Ok. Some famous painters might differ on that - and I have even seen that one used as a plot device in crime stories.
That people do have a legacy is used as a consolation, to comfort the viewer. But in every such scenario, try to take a step back and think about how the story would unfold, if the character would not die. Are the works and the impact of that character any less, just because he lived? The moral of the Wonderful Life story, in my view, is, that he was confronted with his legacy, while still living; making him appreciate life and giving the story it's name.
I would not think as this as something "new"...
You can know the most rational answer and still ignore it due to chemicals in your brain.
It is like trying to forget a person who don't like you anymore... you know that the "most logical answer" is trying to get someone else and forgetting about this person, but knowing it have absolutelly no impact against irrational feelings permeating your brain.
