The Concept of The Hero

[Kuroi Hadou]

Originally Posted by Knightrunner

I believe these people can represent the hero population

Spoiler for :):

All I see are a faker hero, a wannabe hero, a fallen hero and a hero's love interest who died at the hands of the faker hero's fallen hero nemesis. An excellent representation if I do say so myself.

[felix]

Originally Posted by Guernsey

Whether it would be the Ancient Greeks or even our own modern intrepretaion, everyone seems to have some idea of what a 'hero' is. Usually, the 'hero' is someone who has achieved fame by preforming a great feat in their lifetimes like Herakles, Achillies or Agammenon. They are worshipped as Gods and even hav cults mnamed after them. While we may not have those kinds of rituals, the Hero worship and the tales of great men of valor still occur today. It usually in manga, comic books, television, books, etc. but the term 'hero' varies from culture to culture. What the Ancient Greeks consider to be a hero is far different from what we today considered to be a hero.

Even now, we have variuos intepretations of what we consider to be a hero. Usually, the hero is noble, strong and powerful figure who defies odds and succeeds int heir goals. We all have our own concept of what a 'hero' is but what do you think of the hero concept?

This is a word with a very clear definition and origin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero
http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hero
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Hero

Any opinion you may have that goes beyond any known definition, and isn’t some metaphorical use (or jargon) is just plain stupid. Let’s take the word “water”, it’s not my place to have an opinion on what it’s meaning is.

Here are some links to help out:

http://www.suite101.com/content/what-is-a-hero-a101471
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2009/0...e-akheans.html

Subjective rambling of some confused people.

The purpose of their monolog seems to be no more then the standard:

“I (think I) have great idea, but can’t figure it out, so let’s have the rest of the word (ie. Internet) figure it out”

Frankly I don’t think any of them really make a point; or even try to.

http://athome.harvard.edu/programs/n...t_of_hero.html

This is a nice way presenting the difference, but still doesn’t really make any point worth talking about. In fact the writer there is pretty objective. He’s not presenting “his opinion of what a hero is”, just facts.

[DonQuigleone]

FF7's heroes aren't particularly good examples. They aren't "larger then life".

Kamina from Gurren Lagann is a decent example. Everything he does is big and brash.

Lelouch and Light aren't particularly good as straight heroes, as while they have the heroes faults, they don't have the required virtues, nor do they have the physical prowess you need as a requisite for being a hero. A hero needs to perform great deeds of strength, and even better if he does it in a smart way.

Odyseus is the classic "smart hero", but even he has more physical strength then every other non-hero. A hero needs to have a bit of both. If he's strong but stupid he's just a thug, and if he's smart but weak, he's more likely to end out in the villain pile.

[Knightrunner]

^^^

I think Final Fantasy Characters represent literally physical strength, courage, and emotions that people can relate too. All Heroes do not have to be muscle or have super natural powers to be classified as a hero.

I'll get more into this later since I have to leave.

[Guernsey]

Then what does thisd make Shinji Ikari or Tsuna from Reborn!? We cannot classify them as heroes because they don't live up to the hero role with the former failing to live up to the mold.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by felix

This is a word with a very clear definition and origin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero
http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hero
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Hero

Any opinion you may have that goes beyond any known definition, and isn’t some metaphorical use (or jargon) is just plain stupid. Let’s take the word “water”, it’s not my place to have an opinion on what it’s meaning is.

Subjective rambling of some confused people.

The purpose of their monolog seems to be no more then the standard:

“I (think I) have great idea, but can’t figure it out, so let’s have the rest of the word (ie. Internet) figure it out”

Frankly I don’t think any of them really make a point; or even try to.

This is a nice way presenting the difference, but still doesn’t really make any point worth talking about. In fact the writer there is pretty objective. He’s not presenting “his opinion of what a hero is”, just facts.

I get the impression that you and I aren't being heard by some of the posters... or its going over their head? I'll just re-point at Joseph Campbell's writings as a primary source for understanding the hero concept in mythology and legend. His books are often used in comparative religion and comparative mythology - particularly when discussing "heroes".

[C.A.]

Originally Posted by Vexx

I get the impression that you and I aren't being heard by some of the posters... or its going over their head? I'll just re-point at Joseph Campbell's writings as a primary source for understanding the hero concept in mythology and legend. His books are often used in comparative religion and comparative mythology - particularly when discussing "heroes".

If I had seen this thread first, I'd have pointed out to Joseph Campbell as well .

After hearing and reading all about him in my narrative telling contextual studies lectures for the past year, my entire impression of story telling has changed. Its worse than reading the entire tvtropes site.

Well, people who haven't heard of him just don't know that they had been subconsciously recognising the same hero and reading the same stories over and over again.

[Ahiru77]

Noble, valiant, has the ability to overcome hardships, just and kind.


Rolemodel of some sort.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Vexx

I get the impression that you and I aren't being heard by some of the posters... or its going over their head? I'll just re-point at Joseph Campbell's writings as a primary source for understanding the hero concept in mythology and legend. His books are often used in comparative religion and comparative mythology - particularly when discussing "heroes".

I think it is the idea of general idea versus personal idea when it comes to the definition of heroes. General idea, as defined by set-texts, usually point to someone at the epitome of ethics, mostly exhibiting courage in the face of danger to self, tenacity towards all odds, but also compassion towards the weak and rivals.

Under personal idea, it is usually someone doing something they can't do, or don't dare to do - a simple definition instead of falling under all the conditions outlined in "Heroes of a Thousand Faces" or as mentioned above. And everyone has a different perspective, thus a different person to look up to, therefore the "personal" part of the idea differ from one to another.

[C.A.]

An archetype is recognised subconsciously, especially the hero archetype, you don't choose to recognise the hero, you already know who's the hero.

Even though in classical narratives, its always heroes who perform extraordinary acts of courage and sacrifice, it is not what makes them the hero. Aristotle states that the tragic hero is simply the link between the audience and the plot. The plot is most important and the hero is to allow the audience to relate to the tragedy of the plot.

In other words, a hero is simply a character to relate to in a story and every character archetype can be a hero.

A modern 'tragic hero' would be Shinji of Evangelion, we do not need to discuss whether he's an anti-hero or not, we simply recognise him as the hero of the story. The story is told in his perspective and we relate to it through him. If the exact same story were to be told in the perspective of another character, be it Asuka, Rei or even Gendou, they will all be respective heroes of the story.

Who is the Hero in Suzumiya Haruhi? My opinion is that all of them are heroes, not just Kyon and/or Haruhi, but probably the entire SOS-dan.

[Highman]

A hero is no braver than an ordinary man, but he is brave five minutes longer.

-Ralph Waldo Emerson


Hero must come from the heart and soul learn about himself ever more

Ye judges by his character but never his heart and will

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by C.A.

An archetype is recognised subconsciously, especially the hero archetype, you don't choose to recognise the hero, you already know who's the hero.

Merit given. Usually stories revolve around the protagonist, and the protagonist is the hero, unless it is a narrative from a secondary perspective.

We COULD take the style of storytelling from Dragon Age 2 as an example from that, where the narrator is not the hero, but a companion to the hero. Though sometimes in stories, there are ambiguous example as to who is the hero, like Tales of Graces. Is Asbel the hero of the tale, or is Sophie the heroine since the story revolves alot around her past? Or is she simply putting Asbel in the hero's seat by narrating the ending?

Even though in classical narratives, its always heroes who perform extraordinary acts of courage and sacrifice, it is not what makes them the hero. Aristotle states that the tragic hero is simply the link between the audience and the plot. The plot is most important and the hero is to allow the audience to relate to the tragedy of the plot.

In other words, a hero is simply a character to relate to in a story and every character archetype can be a hero.

A modern 'tragic hero' would be Shinji of Evangelion, we do not need to discuss whether he's an anti-hero or not, we simply recognise him as the hero of the story. The story is told in his perspective and we relate to it through him. If the exact same story were to be told in the perspective of another character, be it Asuka, Rei or even Gendou, they will all be respective heroes of the story.

Who is the Hero in Suzumiya Haruhi? My opinion is that all of them are heroes, not just Kyon and/or Haruhi, but probably the entire SOS-dan.

I would think that it is the reader who chooses who he/she wants to be the hero, while the author simply offers the false choice through storytelling. There are certain occurrences, particularly in one of the Chinese wuxia novels that point out to that.

For example, in the novel Demigods and Semidevils (天龙八部), four choices for heroes are offered, namely Qiao Feng, Duan Yu, Xuzhu and the tragic hero You Tianzhi. Each pursued his/her own adventure, but ultimately has his own ending. The first and the last ended in death, while the other two lived the "happily ever after" ending. This is the most interesting out of all of Jin Yong's works, as it not only presents a multiple heroes for the reader to relate to, but also invokes favouritism for each of the main characters. Unlike the SOS-dan, they are not a group because their storylines are not clumped together - each took his own path, own adventure, and in the case of Qiao Feng and You Tianzhi, their own demise.

Unfortunately, that work was often overshadowed by the Condor Heroes trilogy.

Though there is another wuxia tale that could be vied as a "band of heroes" instead of "a set of singular heroes", and that would be the Seven Swords duology by Liang Yusheng. The swordsmen, however, each has their own background, but band together to fight the "Barbarian tribes" (as in Han terminology). That would be, in my opinion, a collated hero team instead of individual heroes in their own path. However, if the novels are read separately, I would say that the first one is about singular heroes having different destinies like Demigods and Semidevils, but the second novel brings them back together as a hero team.

Another confusing work would be Legendary Siblings (绝代双骄) by Gu Long. The batons are passed halfway through the story from the sworn-brothers to Jiang Feng's twins. As the novel implied, the twins are supposed to be the heroes according to the author, but like Demigods and Semidevils, their paths are split in the middle as they are separated, each having their own adventure before reuniting in the end. The definition of "sole hero" simply thinned itself out through the entire story, so defining it from the point of "monomyth" is just.....pointless.

[erneiz_hyde]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

Great leader yes, benevolent leader yes, but a Great and Benevolent leader is a myth.

I disagree with this statement, though I accept that it depends on each person's subjective values what one considers "benevolent" and "great".

Gandhi of India, Cyrus of Persia, Saladin of Kurd, etc, etc, are all ones I consider both great and benevolent leaders. Maybe you just have different standards to call one as "benevolent" and/or "great".



Back on topic, I think heroes are recognized through their deeds, not their characters. And another essential element to what makes a hero is imo, recognition of others. His heroic actions must be recognized by enough number people to consider him a hero. Borrowing Fate/Stay Night's term, a hero becomes more powerful the more he/she was widely recognized. Because the need of other's recognition, what can be categorized as hero, both by text book or personal definitions, is actually very subjective.

Edit: I'm adding that I also accept the existence of "Unsung Heroes". They are the more subtle of heroes that didn't get too many recognition despite their heroic deeds. These unsung heroes imo are actually more down to earth and closer to us. Doctors and teachers are one few that I consider unsung heroes.

[GundamFan0083]

One particular character comes to my mind when I think of a fictional Hero of recent years.