Thinking About the Hero

"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
–Lord Byron, “Ozymandias”

The concept of hero is well-steeped in tradition. Since the time of Gilgamesh almost five-thousand years ago, the ideal “hero,” materialized in the epic poetry of the old, remained nearly unchanged. These epic heroes all shared some traits; they were all in some way “special” (i.e. possessing superhuman abilities), they all were nearly impeccable morally, and they were all mired in some nearly-impossible lofty enterprise. This basic modus has produced the archetypical heroes such as Gilgamesh, Odysseus, Aeneas, and even Eastern heroes such as Rama. However, even though these heroes are hailed today as landmarks in cultural and artistic development and still widely read today, to many their significance is no more than a collection of quaint little relics from a distant (and exotic, thanks to the Hollywood effect of cultural corruption) past.

As one who was born and raised in a Communist country, and one who had to endure countless hours of media praise for numberless Comrade Ogilvies, to me the very idea of hero is distorted—one is a hero because one performed “amazing” feats, and after the feats were accomplished, morality, character, dignity also comes automatically, much like the epic heroes of age’s lore. Thus, the idea of “hero” is, in my opinion, by and large corrupted in the average mind. When the word “hero” comes to mind, words like “lofty,” “distant,” “feat” and “impossible” quickly pop up as well. The concept of hero is isolated in a sort of idealistic cryostasis, inaccessible and unrelated. Heroism becomes distant epics, and the little bits of kindness and good that is close to home is then relegated to a position of inferiority, becoming a supine sidelight unworthy of praise or notice.

Yet, few question the point of these so-called heroes. Aside from the fact that they performed amazing feats that normal human beings would scurry away from (for good reason!), what is their influence on the average Joes like me? I, for one, will probably not bother with making my own feats of heroism, and the feats of heroism of others will probably not be on my mind when I go about my daily life, or when I have to make decisions that might affect myself and others. In other words, though I may admire the feats of heroism by the heroes, I would not become a hero myself, and really I could not care less about what the hero did for the hero’s feats has no influence on my modus operandi. The existence of the heroes, in other words, makes no difference in society. "Unhappy the land that needs heroes." So said Brecht. Heroes, if they represent nothing, then why would “the land” need them? For nothing more than a empty spiritual satisfaction? If a land need empty heroic epics to satisfy its empty spiritual life, then how could happiness exist in a land? Thus, throw aside heroism, and focus on the little details that actually affects our lives. Then we can all be “heroes” this way, and this time, heroism will matter to us.