I need a hero...

[Robinne Weiss]

Of course, you could ask Bonnie Tyler ...

 

[georginaK]

Antiheroes are most interesting to me. I think someone else said that perhaps there’s no such thing as heroes any more. When popular culture reveres such perverse role models, what are we left with? To me, the best heroes are flawed. They have to be so that us regular mortals can relate on some level—they must inspire us to be better, but also have humility and humanity. These days, a hero is a person who stands up for what they believe is right, regardless of the consequences.

 

[Nikky Lee]

Great discussion! And so many interesting points.

So if a hero acts selflessly, does that mean the definition of villainy is selfishness? That's an interesting proposition given the current, apparant, cult of the individual.

Do we want stories that challenge individualism? Is that where modern heroes are to be found?

What do you reckon?

I'm seeing a lot of stories that are challenging the system/status quo at the moment (in fiction and real life). They're brave enough (or perhaps compelled enough, e.g. they're sick and tired of being beaten down) to stick their head above the parapet and call out society as behaving unjustly.

Of course, there are the heros who quietly work against the system—e.g. the men and women who smuggled Jews out of Nazi occupied regions. But I'm seeing more of the outspoken ones of late, particularly in literature. I think this outspoken nature, the revolutionary hero, in storytelling is a relatively modern thing. Or perhaps simply on trend?

Someone also said earlier than a hero is in the eye of the beholder. I totally agree with this. To use Game of Thrones as a well-known example: the heros here a totally depends on point of view. One people's hero is someone else's villian, e.g. Jaime Lannister.

 

[CageSage]

There are also a lot more stories of 'ordinary' people doing more to stop the crooks/baddies/evil. We all have the capacity to be a hero, but will we? The ones who won't, or who chose to be selfish for whatever reason, make good antags.

 

[Steve C]

This is a huge subject. Some people are instinctively violent and might respond to terrorist violence by confronting it thus becoming a hero. Amongst the cowardly watchers may be a man who is currently busy exposing paedophilia amongst his colleagues despite it likely costing him his livelihood and lifelong friendships. Courage comes in many guises. Perhaps premeditated heroism is more valid than the instinctive sort.

 

[Leonora]

But of course, a hero is different to a protagonist. I'm rather sick of recent YA where the main character is beautiful, sassy and heroic. My own protagonists are never heroes. To be honest, I'm not much interested in portraying them, or reading about them, and I don't think novels need to have them. Discuss!

 

[Paul Whybrow]

Isn't a hero a construction made by the media? Those who act bravely don't think heroically. A good example of a hero by chance is Swampy. He was a protestor against the widening of the A30 in 1996. To interfere with the work, the environmentalists tunnelled beneath the route of the proposed extension. They were evicted and he just happened to be the last one out—so, he was painted into the role of being the most militant. He was scruffily photogenic, so newspapers and television latched onto him as a hippy-dippy counterculture hero.

Swampy (environmentalist) - Wikipedia

 

[Paul Whybrow]

Of interest: Rise of the 'bleakquel': your favourite heroes are back – and more miserable than ever

 

[Robinne Weiss]

But of course, a hero is different to a protagonist. I'm rather sick of recent YA where the main character is beautiful, sassy and heroic.

THIS! How many actual people are beautiful, sassy and heroic? And how many TEENAGERS are? An even smaller percentage. I find those characters difficult to take seriously. I read a thing a while back written by a teenager about those 'perfect' YA characters, basically saying, "Look, I've just learnt how to fry an egg, and that's a big accomplishment. How come all teenage characters are so good at everything? They're not at all like me and I can't relate."

 

[Leonora]

THIS! How many actual people are beautiful, sassy and heroic? And how many TEENAGERS are? An even smaller percentage. I find those characters difficult to take seriously. I read a thing a while back written by a teenager about those 'perfect' YA characters, basically saying, "Look, I've just learnt how to fry an egg, and that's a big accomplishment. How come all teenage characters are so good at everything? They're not at all like me and I can't relate."

Back in the day, the protagonists of kids books tended to be speccy wimps. I liked them.

 

[Katie-Ellen]

Def: "a person who is admired for their courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities."

To defend one's own is not remotely heroic, but some do not even defend their children. Some won't even say boo to authority, a doctor, say, or a teacher, in order to obtain proper care or justice for their children when the children can't. Others neglect their children or actively abuse them. The biological imperative to invest in one's own genetic legacy misfires all the time, but if it is not heroic to defend one's own, and I concur it is a parent's first duty, and therefore is not, then is it villainous to fail to? It is, isn't it, if the failure is wilful. Because that would be cruelty to the small and weak. Ignoble. But the corollary does not apply.

Hector died defending his own, his wife, baby son, family, and people of his city state. He is accounted a great tragic hero. And like King Arthur one might alternatively say, a loser. Because he went out knowing he could not win against Achilles. But it was his duty. And it may even have had an element of selfishness. He told his wife Andromache he wanted to go underground rather than see her taken away into slavery. He was killed by Achilles, Troy fell, their baby was killed, chucked off the city walls, and off she went, taken off into slavery.

A hero could be anyone at all, and they have as much importance in our collective psyche, and in the world of today as they ever did. The comments here alone tell us the concept of the hero is alive and meaningful as ever.

When it comes to story making, I won't bother reading any work of fiction where there is no character big enough or deep enough to engage me.
A hero who is not complex or in some way fragile is not a believable human being.

A hero is not expected to be any kind of saint and never was, but then again, there are some perfectly ghastly saints.

Also in the hero mix is another hot potato of a word. Martyr. As with Martin Luther King.

 

[Steve C]

I think a reader needs to understand the fear our hero is combatting to identify with him. The fear could be anything. Fear of getting the sack, losing a boyfriend, getting killed. The hero fights his fear and does the right thing. He is prepared to sacrifice himself in some way for the good of another/others. Sometimes he succeeds sometimes he doesn't but he is willing to try whereas others are not. I think overcoming fear is essential so in terms of writing we need to first show the fear.

 

[Cadiz]

Have you seen killer whales playing with seals? Chimps toying with a fallen enemy?

Perhaps, but I am not sure that they are doing it intentionally to inflict pain.They play, that is probably the best explanation for what animals do.

 

[Hannah F]

Was it 1913? Rosa Parks was considered a hero because she defied segregation law and sat on a seat in a bus. The man on London Bridge: I don't know what bad things he's done, but at that moment his actions saved lives so, in my mind, he was a hero in that moment. A car slipped into the sea off a Northern Irish harbour. People stared, horrified. A footballer stripped to his underwear, swam to the car, took the baby, struggled and failed to pull a second child through the window. He made the effort, risked his own safety. He was a hero.
I think heroism is distinct from what kind of life a person leads, whether they are individualistic or conformist, what their beliefs are. If they do one thing, at risk to themselves, for the good of another or others - be that human or animal or even an ancient tree - then, for that snippet of time, they are a hero. In the same vein, an animal can be a hero or whatever other life form you choose to write about.
My caveat would be: if they do for the good of another but, in doing so, cause great harm to many (e.g. terrorists/suicide bombers fighting for their cause no matter how honourable that cause may be) then they are not heroes.

 

[Hannah F]

Animal discussion. Chimpanzees and dolphins do understand pain and do have empathy for others. That has been frequently observed. Killer whales are less researched but what is known about them suggests their emotional intelligence is as good as dolphins. They are playing, yes, but they are not ignorant of the other's suffering. Their empathy, however, may be inhibited by adrenaline, a surge in endorphin release and group-think. A similar set of inhibitors may be affecting human individuals in gangs who are inflicting cruelty (I should, perhaps, mention: I have a masters in animal behaviour - taught it for 20 years.)
If one individual risked their life/inclusion in society to stop this cruelty, I would consider them a hero.

 

[Cadiz]

Was it 1913? Rosa Parks was considered a hero because she defied segregation law and sat on a seat in a bus. The man on London Bridge: I don't know what bad things he's done, but at that moment his actions saved lives so, in my mind, he was a hero in that moment. A car slipped into the sea off a Northern Irish harbour. People stared, horrified. A footballer stripped to his underwear, swam to the car, took the baby, struggled and failed to pull a second child through the window. He made the effort, risked his own safety. He was a hero.
I think heroism is distinct from what kind of life a person leads, whether they are individualistic or conformist, what their beliefs are. If they do one thing, at risk to themselves, for the good of another or others - be that human or animal or even an ancient tree - then, for that snippet of time, they are a hero. In the same vein, an animal can be a hero or whatever other life form you choose to write about.
My caveat would be: if they do for the good of another but, in doing so, cause great harm to many (e.g. terrorists/suicide bombers fighting for their cause no matter how honourable that cause may be) then they are not heroes.

I agree. They may have tough decisions such as, 'should I save this person or that person,' but their action should never intentionally cause harm.