“We need a hero, courageous sacrificing people, setting examples for all of us. Everybody loves a hero, people line up for 'em, cheer for them, scream their names, and years later tell how they stood in the rain for hours just to get a glimpse of the one who told them to hold on a second longer. I believe there’s a hero in all of us, that keeps us honest, gives us strength, makes us noble. And finally gets us to die with pride. Even though sometimes we have to be steady and give up the thing we want most, even our dreams.” (May Parker, Spiderman 2)
This quote resonates so strongly that I had to start things off here. Great words from a fictional aunt.
The popularity of these character and action driven movies in recent years appear to have been heralded by the first Spiderman and X-men movies. Although the comic book movie trend had appeared before these two, Spiderman and X-men set the bar that many have had to climb over since.
Think also, to the 70’s and 80’s when superhero movies were becoming big. Mainly, it was Superman, starred in by the late great Christopher Reeve from 1978 to the not-as-great Superman IV: The Quest for Peace in 1987. In the late 80’s, we found Batman(1989) to be a great adventure with the Caped Crusader played by Michael Keaton….and Val Kilmer (1995)….and George Clooney(1997).
Even before these movies there were TV serials and movies as early as 1950 with Kirk Alyn in Atom Man vs. Superman.
Ever since comic books had begun entertaining readers, we’ve found such a strong interest in the idea of a superhero. Reality itself can’t stop us from empathizing with their struggles, enjoying their triumphs, and loving their individual flaws.
But why? It’s only entertainment, right?
Thanks to an article on the Christian Science Monitor site, I got this interesting quote: "I think [heroes] represent the best of ourselves and the people we'd like to be. Then also, I think there is the wish fulfillment that you can sometimes feel powerless in the world and, if you had these abilities, you could fight back." So says Alfred Gough, half of the writing team that created the successful TV series Smallville which is now in it’s eighth season.
Professor Slotkin of the Wesleyan University in Connecticut theorizes why we love such unrealistic heroes: "Heroes symbolize the possibility of successful action in the world ... whether it's the world of politics or business or whatever.” This comes from a professor of English and American studies.
Wish fulfilling fantasies. Daydreaming the best possible features of ourselves onto a silver or small screen. Triumphant actions in the world. Clearly these are progressive things, and we'd like to be like these shameless spandex wearing champions, with or without powers I may add.
But who says we can't be like them? Sure, the color-clashing outfits might not gel in the real world, and the powers might not be entirely possible (save for maybe millions of dollars of government spending in a specific scientific field....but let's not go there). And maybe--just maybe--some dude could actually tote around all the awesome little gadgets that Batman and Green Arrow are famous for.
Our real life superheroes are a tiny bit different. Since 9/11, Americans think of heroes in terms of those who made it their mission in life to help people. Those people might be policemen, firemen, soldiers, and others of similar job descriptions. However, I don't think we need to limit the description so much. If you help someone--whether it's in your job description or not--you should be a hero. If you go against the mold to do whatever is the most right (without going against ethical values), I think you are a hero. If you truly do something above and beyond, you are a superhero.
This topic will most likely become a series of posts in easy-to-digest snippets. Any comments, ratings, or geekiness is very much appreciated
My Super Sources:
Stuck on Superheroes
I can't help but hate these superhero icons on televisions and the now new trend that heros are just average joes and single parents.
it just seems so typical and average to label something that is the vogue a hero. it actually depletes the significance of the defintion of superhero. a superhero is something impossible to reach. if we take the impossible out of superhero then we have something average that doesn't make us unsatisfied enough to push an individual to the limit and towards a different outlet.
so what we are current doing is just satisfying our american value of laziness.
so go out a be a hero; not a policeman or a single parent because you screwed up in college or fell in love with the wrong person.
you have no right to be labeled a hero just becuase you are.
"you have no right to be labeled a hero just because you are."
You lost me here, but I think I know what you were getting at.
I'm not trying to say that "Ok, everyone just think of yourself as a hero and be done with it. Ok. Back to the TV for a four hour drool session." I'm saying those you go "above and beyond" there average role in life and go out of their way to help someone (which doesn't directly benefit themselves) can be a hero. An example might be helping someone study for a very hard test, even if this doesn't help you with your own homework. That might not be "super", but I bet for a little while there you were their hero. At least in a small sense.
I really think of heroes as doing the really hard things, like saving someone's life during a disaster when they could be worrying about saving their own skin. That could be defined as a superhero, no?
~ *~
This is a signature, an automated thingy that pops up when I comment, not a demand to see my blog!
Mind Control is Easier Than You Think
so go out a be a hero; not a policeman or a single parent because you screwed up in college or fell in love with the wrong person.
Considering police officers put their life on the line on a regular basis, I would consider them a hero. It's kind of annoying when I see people talk about how people should just "let the police handle it" (often when discussing the 2nd Amendment), yet people still make remarks about how police officers aren't heroes. If you're depending on the police force to defend you, then you obviously believe they are something you're not.
I also don't agree that being a single parent isn't heroic, either. The mother could have had an abortion, or put the child up for adoption, but instead, she chooses to raise her child herself, even if it means sacrificing (or at least putting off) her own dreams to do so. Deciding to go to/finish college while working and raising said child is also not something that is easily done. A third of people, in general, who enroll in college (which is about a third of the people that graduate high school) drop out, and that's just average undergrad attrition rates. Add the responsibilities of working at least one full time job and the full time job of raising a child and you have someone who's doing what the majority of the population can't do.
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge
I do not consider police officers heros because they are paid to do what they are suppose to do.
it they didn't go out and try to save people's lives then they wouldn't be doing their job.
the same goes with single parents. they are not paid, but they are expected to raise their child.
there is nothing superhuman about doing what is expected of you.
the same goes with single parents. they are not paid, but they are expected to raise their child.
Not really. They could have just as easily put the child up for adoption and had no further contact with the child.
On the same token, it could also be argued that a superhero is expected to use their abilities to help people. Or that regular person is expected to help the child that fell through the ice.
it they didn't go out and try to save people's lives then they wouldn't be doing their job.
If they weren't a cop and they did what they did, they'd be charged with being a vigilante (which is looked down upon, at best). Yes, they do get paid to do it, but they made the decision to go through the training, take the classes, get the certifications, and go into a field knowing full well that it could get them killed. They chose to dedicate their lives to protecting civilians, even if it means sacrificing their own lives.
And here's a question for you: do you consider the soldiers who help free a nation from an oppressive ruler to be heroes?
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge
I know the question wasn't exactly directed at me, but I'd like to try to answer it.
And here's a question for you: do you consider the soldiers who help free a nation from an oppressive ruler to be heroes?
There's very specific wording here that makes it easy to say, "Yep, they're heroes", because you said these soldiers are freeing a nation from an oppressive ruler. However if you'd just said soldiers in general, we'd quickly run into problems. A soldier could be either side, and if we look at things in a very black-and-white perspective, a soldier is a unit on either the good or bad side. Plus, those who we look at as "terrorists" are probably heroes to someone because they represent a fighting spirit, going against those capitalistic, greedy foreigners.
Since I have a conflicting view of war, it's sometimes hard for me to imagine soldiers as heroes. If you've seen some of the startling footage from Farenheit 9/11 you'd know why I might some sort soldiers don't deserve hero status.
~ *~
This is a signature, an automated thingy that pops up when I comment, not a demand to see my blog!
Mind Control is Easier Than You Think
No, I do not consider soldiers that liberate an oppressive state as heros.
this is simply because there is monetrary value in their endeavors.
second, they were ordered to free the oppressive state.
they didn't willingly choose to liberate a country from its tyrant.
if were to label soldiers as heros then in an essence I feel that the label would extract the true definition of a hero, for a hero would never openly receive the title of a hero. ( in my romantic view)
if a soldier volunteered for the purpose to free the oppressive state without pay, then perhaps he or she could be labeled as a hero.
It seems to me that you have a pretty unattainable view of what a "hero" should be.
That's kind of a depressing outlook, in my opinion.
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge
Being a hero, I think, requires some consciousness. It is being aware of those around you. That's what superheroes do, they look around and know who's in trouble and needs help. Living with tunnel vision, pretending you are the only person who matters, which many miserable people do, is not heroic.
Anyone who guides children, whether it is their own or someone else's is a hero.
I like this blog!
"Consistency is not a human trait" - Maude, from Harold and Maude