Works like The Odyssey, Lord of the Rings, and Star Wars are similar in that they all center around protagonists who fight against powerful sources of evil. In The Odyssey, Odysseus’ crew struggles against adversaries like the Sirens and Polyphemus the Cyclops. Similarly, Frodo Baggins and his friends risk their lives to destroy the Ring that symbolizes evil in Tolkien’s trilogy. And who can forget the battles of Luke Skywalker and Han Solo against Darth Vader’s threatening Empire in Star Wars?
Yet, whether these protagonists can be called heroes is up for debate. Everyone has his/her own idea of what a hero is supposed to be. In my opinion, a person or character must meet several standards in order to deserve the title “hero”. A hero must know what is right and take action toward that end. A hero must also be driven by unselfish motives. Furthermore, a hero’s actions must benefit his/her community. Someone should only be considered heroic if what he/she does is exceptional and uncommon (for those of you who contend that there are many “everyday heroes,” I clarify that the actions of these “everyday heroes” certainly are outstanding). Finally, a true hero must have an appropriate amount of humility.
Heroic action is any act that fits the qualifications above. Now let us evaluate the protagonists in the aforementioned works. I would not consider Odysseus a hero—while his actions reflect his primary goal of getting his crew back home safely, Odysseus’ pride (hubris) leads to the death of his entire crew. On the other hand, Frodo and friends certainly are heroes. Although there are certain sidetracks on their journey, Frodo’s humble crew was focused on the unselfish objective of destroying the ring and bringing peace to Middle-Earth. The plot of Star Wars is too confusing for me to discuss as a whole (and I admit that I have not seen all the movies), so if anyone would like to help me out here, leave a comment please. The definition of a hero varies from person to person. Someone can contradict me and say that Odysseus is a hero, and after listening to his/her explanation, I may or may not agree with him/her.
Let us talk about a topic that cannot be disagreed upon—the idea of the heroine. Women can certainly be heroes. There is nothing about the female gender that prevents women from being considered heroes under my standards (listed above) or any standards, for that matter. The reason that women are depicted as heroes less frequently than men in literature is this: many cultures diminish the role of women. Ever since Neolithic times, when people first began to live in settled communities, women have been relegated to household duties such as child-rearing while “men assumed the chief positions in public life” (Cannistraro and Reich 11). Still, there are numerous examples of heroine in literature, such as Esther from the Old Testament.
Heroes serve as role models for our day-to-day conduct. While not all of us may have the opportunity to make life-risking decisions or take outstandingly courageous action, there are changes that we can make in our everyday actions to make us more like heroes. One thing we can do is to think about the greater consequences of our actions—is what we are about to do going to benefit people around us or harm them? We should also examine our motives for doing good works—helping others simply for recognition is not heroic. We should also remember to be humble about our achievements. These simple guidelines can help us to grow as individuals as well as support each other in the community.
We need heroes among us precisely because most of us do not put in the effort to behave according to what I wrote in the previous paragraph. We are often too selfish to go out of our comfort zones to help other people. Even when we do act in ways beneficial to our peers, we often mar our charity by bragging. We need the few truly heroic people around us to remind us, through their actions, how we should be living.
I interpret Brecht’s quotation “Unhappy the land that needs heroes” in two ways. My first reaction was that a land that needs heroes must have something wrong in it that needs correcting, and therefore the people of this land are suffering to some degree. Secondly and more significantly, a “hero” in a community may not be a blessing, depending on how one defines hero. I think that a “hero” according to my definition would in most cases benefit a community. However, a “hero” defined in other ways (such as simply someone gifted with great power and courage) can certainly be a nuisance to people around him/her.
I am going to take a wild guess and say that this discussion on the concept of heroes leads into our study of “Gilgamesh”. From a literary point of view, Gilgamesh certainly is the hero of the epic. However, although Gilgamesh and Enkidu display courage when fighting against forces of evil such as Humbaba, Gilgamesh behaves in a way that is harmful to the people of Uruk. One passage from “Gilgamesh” describes him as such:
Gilgamesh sounds the tocsin for his amusement, his arrogance has no bounds by day or night. No son is left with his father, for Gilgamesh takes them all, even the children; yet the king should be a shepherd to his people. His lust leaves no virgin to her lover, neither the warrior’s daughter nor the wife of the noble” (62).
This quotation paints king Gilgamesh as an arrogant tyrant who terrorizes his people just because he has the power to do so. According to this description, Gilgamesh does not fit my definition of a “hero”, and a land dominated by such a “hero” is certainly unhappy.
Works Cited
Cannistraro, Philip V and Reich, John J. The Western Perspective-Volume I Second Edition. Belmont: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, 2004.
The Epic of Gilgamesh (English). London: Penguin Books, 1972
No comments:
Post a Comment