Tell me about heroism and antiheroism

Remove all ads!

Specifically with respect to heroes and antiheroes in literature, movies, even RPGs you've encountered. Certainly both types are going to prevalent here or there, but I'm not looking for an encyclopedia entry -- rather, I"m looking for what you think defines heroism/antiheroism in media you've encountered. Please, enlighten me.

 

A hero is defined internally. There is an old saying,

All men have fear. The brave ones lay it down and go forward.

The process of becoming a hero requires that the individual be aware of the consequences and still proceed. The Medal of Honor is the extreme, it requires:

The deed performed must have been one of personal bravery or self-sacrifice so conspicuous as to clearly distinguish the individual above his or her comrades and must have involved risk of life.

An interesting caveat during the selection process for the medal is 'failure to perform the deed would not bring discredit upon the individual even if judged by a person of remarkable courage.'

Something important to the hero must be at risk -- it does not need to be life or death (although that does make it more dramatic). That something must also be considered significant to the audience.

The hero also has a choice. A person who is trapped in a pit with a tiger and kills the tiger is a survivor -- a person who jumps in the pit to save another from the tiger is a hero.

I think, above all, the hero must be selfless -- or at the very least put others first at some point.

The antihero must be missing some or all of these traits -- awareness, risk, choice, selflessness. Just as pushing through fear is necessary for a hero -- the lack of fear, or more accurately the lack of something to fear, is a trait of the antihero.

 

I agree with most of what T2B wrote. However, I would actually put selflessness as the most defining distinction between hero and antihero, and not the aspect of fear. Typically, the antihero's deeds are done out of especially selfish reasons, such as revenge, or because a particular injusitice was visited upon him at some previous time. Comic book antiheros show just this theme. I would say the most famous of these would probably be Batman, although the Punisher is probably more in line with a true example of the antihero.

 

I'd disagree with the definition of an antihero. I'd say an antihero is a protaganist who is not a hero. The main character of sth who does not live up to the standards of heroism. Forex, Blackadder is an antihero, Artemis Entreri is an antihero. Artemis Fowl is an antihero.

 

Or antihero could perform seemingly heroic deeds while surviving. Also, some people lack preservation instinct, which isn't always heroic. Or they take great risks for profit. Not normally heroic, if at all.

 

Roland Deschain (Dark Tower series) is another good example of an anti-hero. He ultimately had a "good" goal in mind....but the problem with Roland is that he would do anything, even betray his closest allies, to achieve that "good" goal. He was an anti-hero because he was ruthless.

 

I was thinking Mel Gibson's Character in the movie Payback. He took out his enemies for his own reasons, not from some motivation for greater good. The fact that they were the greater evil was irrelevent to him.

I guess they do good things for their own reasons, not because they care about anyone else...

 

If you have not already, take a look at two texts: _Beowulf_ and John Gardner's _Grendel_. Beowulf is the "heroic ideal" in action and Grendel is the heroic ideal turned on its head. They are both short reads (both can be read in a weekend). _Grendel_ will challenge everthing you thought about the heroic ideal and then some. A lot of it is achieved through the power and skill of Gardner's writing, which is superb in this particular text. That is part of Gardner's larger point in Grendel, which is that the power of the heroic ideal is in its telling more than in its reality. It also helps to explain some of the paradox in the heroic ideal, which has been widely commented on in the original _Beowulf_ text by literary scholars.

[ May 16, 2006, 05:56: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

An anti-hero isn't a villain, but more of a person who does not share the same traits as the hero of the story.

Oh, and I also found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-hero

 

Film noir contains many anti-heroes. I just saw Road to Perdition and Tom Hanks plays an anti-hero. He's basically an enforcer for his boss, so he kills people, extorts, bribes, blackmails and so forth yet he loves and protects his family and holds honor and duty to his 'family' above all. Yet when he's betrayed he's prepared to go against his 'family' to avenge his family.

Anti-heroes are often people who do heroic things yet only out of desparation.

 

Bahir's link is excellent. I'd say that the example it gives of different types of antihereos is pretty much as comprehensive as you could hope for. The vigilante type of antihero is probably the most commonly depicted in modern film and books. The more I think about it, defining differences between a hero and an antihero really cannot be done in a simple sentence or two, because it's not as easy as saying there is one particular characteristic that all heros share, and that all antiheros lack. About the best you can do is say that heros strive for the ideal while doing the greater good, while antiheros also seek the greater good but fall short of the heroic ideal in one or more areas. Because of this, heros tend to look upon most people with benevolence, and are looked upon by others quite favorably. Quite to the contrary the antihero is both viewed and views others with antipathy.

 

All heroes are anti-heroic for what is defined as heroic is defined by the situation and contemporaries, and the customs of certain times.

What may have been considered heroic in ancient Greece, such as the deeds of Herakles, or in the bible, like Samson for instance, can be and is in other times considered anti-heroic at best and even monstrous at worst in other times.

Other trait of heroes is that they are always on the winning side, even if the cost of the victory is the life of the hero. If you slay a slew of your enemies and your side wins, you're a hero, but if your side loses, you're a ruthless villain.

The rhetoric of heroism is used wanting people to do your bidding and even quoestionable deeds. Ideals are shaped to make tools for certain goals and thus very few heroes become rulers. It's Arthur who sits on the throne, but the knights of the round table are considered heroes, especially Lancelot. Rulers are described to be powerful, but the heroics they do are done before they sit on their thrones.

Self-sacrifice is one of the most powerful traits of heroism and this does befit kings and queens. The most lacking trait of an anti-hero is exactly self-sacrifice.

 

Anti-Heros can actually be the story's villian or at least blur that role with another character. Victor Frankenstein plays the role of both the anti-hero and often the villian as well.

Usually in a story where conflict of the story is man vs. self or man vs. god (like MacBeth) it is possible for the anti-hero to fall into the role of a villian as well as the main character.

 

Interesting that you should have put that up, Chandos. Grendel is almost certainly one of my favorite novels, although I didn't have either text in mind when making the original post.

 

I think the Punisher is the quintessential anti-hero.
He fights crime, but not only does he use methods as morally bankrupt as theirs to achieve his goals, he may not even be murdering criminals to protect the "innocent", but rather just enjoys killing, and justifies the mass murder of wrongdoers with the murder of his own family by the mob.

 

hero,,,
a thing that strugle for what he/she beliefe,,,
anti hero,,,
the oposite of hero,, thougth,,