Sunday, September 16, 2007

Why Heroism?

Some of the greatest books and films in human history center around the concept of the hero. From the ancient Greek epics to modern fantasy and science fiction movies, the hero- usually a man, often endowed with some sort of special power or ability- has gone on a journey, searched for something lost, or wielded his sword/bow/light saber/nunchuks/fearsome intellect against an entity seen as "evil." When they succeed in their quests, they are revered by their fellow characters, and hailed by their readers or viewers as brave, noble, selfless, etc, etc. Whether these characters are, in fact, heroes, depends on the individual's idea of a hero.

Clearly, someone whose heroes are famous athletes is not going to be inspired by a Rubik's Cube champion, and someone who looks up to great scientists is not going to care about the exploits of a military leader. A 2001 poll asked Americans what they thought the characteristics of a hero were. "Not giving up" topped the list, followed by such things as "doing what's right," "changing society for the better," and "not expecting personal recognition." If we assume that there are as many definitions of what makes a hero as there are people, then we can conclude that there is no great, universal figure whom we all admire and whose actions we strive to emulate. People like Rosa Parks and New York City's firefighters are held up to us as heroes, but this is because they conform to the politically correct "hero" standard. Rosa Parks didn't wake up one morning and think to herself, "Today's the day I stand up for the rights of my race, and do the deed that will cause little schoolchildren, forty years from now, to say that I am the bravest person in the world." She was probably just tired, pissed off, and sick of being told to move from her seat. She didn't consciously decide to be a hero, but a split-second decision caused her to go down in history as a great leader of the civil rights movement. "Acceptable" heroes such as Parks are the ones who don't give up, change society for the better, and don't expect personal recognition.

However, this image of the selfless everyday person doesn't explain the world's fascination with supernatural heroes, or the ones who do their deeds not out of a desire to "better their communities" but out of hate or a desire for revenge. These heroes are almost exclusively found in fiction, the supernatural ones for obvious reasons, and the vengeful ones because anger and hate are not socially acceptable emotions. We're happy to watch an angry person kill an evil guy in a movie, but if an angry person killed an evil guy in real life he'd be considered a murderer, not a hero.

It is perhaps for these same reasons that many people believe that there are far fewer female heroes (heroines) than there are male heroes. There are just as many heroines in literature and film as there are heroes. However, what makes a heroine admirable to her audience (mainly women) is not usually her intelligence or their skill in combat, traits traditionally applied to male heroes. It is, instead, based on her physical appearances and her ability to help others and keep them- and herself- happy. If by the end of the book or movie she has obtained the affections of a suitable male, so much the better. Heroines such as these are emulated by women worldwide, and judged to be "acceptable" to men.

Heroines that defy this acceptable standard are few and far between. Those who do are seen as unfeminine, and therefore undesirable members of society. While a young girl may admire a warrior princess in a book or film, she cannot emulate the actions of her idol for fear of being judged violent or masculine by society. Women in literature and film who are given the same special abilities as their male counterparts are expected to use them for the good of the community, not for personal gain. A woman who puts her own goals before the cares of those around her is considered selfish. This attitude is seen in everyday life all the time- witness society's views of a woman who chooses to pursue a career, especially a traditionally male one, instead of tending to a family. While these women are occasionally lauded for their courage, they are more often discouraged and considered villains rather than heroes.

In modern society, heroes give the average person someone to admire and to copy. That well-known heroes inspire us to do benefit our societies is a good thing. But other heroes- less socially acceptable ones- often lead their followers down paths that are detrimental to society. Personally, I believe the world would be better off without heroes. For every great figure of the past that is held up as a hero, there is someone in the present who is looking to that figure for guidance instead of looking to himself. If a country is in need of a hero, it means that that country can no longer rely on itself- its leaders and its people- for hope, innovation, strength, or whatever is needed. Someone who needs a hero to inspire him to be brave or selfless has lost his natural ability to be so, and therefore has lost the ability to look out for himself.

No comments: