Seriously, can we please stop with the "noble heroes are boring" crap? I would really, really like for this to happen. When did "hero" and "noble" become dirty words? What happened to boasting about our Big Damn Heroes? When did we start thinking "good" = "perfect"?
Where the hell did we get the idea that heroes can't be flawed or make mistakes or be real human beings? I mean, when Benton Fraser no longer counts as "noble hero", I have to fear for the state of our society.
As though "flawed protagonist" is the best compliment we can give our favourite characters. As if the sacrifices they make can't possibly be counted as "noble" and "heroic", or they'll step over that imaginary line in the sand into "boring" and "stick up their ass".
I'm not saying that every single character in media fandom deserves the title of "noble hero". But come on, you can't tell me that none of them do! You can't tell me that Jed Bartlet and Buffy Summers and Duncan MacLeod and Alanna the Lioness and Sam Carter and Harry Potter don't deserve to be called heroes--and not as an insult. Because I won't believe you.
ETA: I should add that my personal definition of "good guy" and "hero" is not quite the same as my definition of "hero" in the... hmm. Classical sense. The latter implies a much larger stage. Jed Bartlet isn't simply a good man: he's the President of the United States. Buffy Summers isn't just a good woman: she's the Slayer. Their stories are epic.
David Sinclair of Numb3rs is both a "good guy" and a "hero" character, in that he's good and kind and moral and heroic. But his influence and impact on society as merely one FBI agent among many is much more limited than, say, Martin Luther King Jr.
I prefer
comments on Dreamwidth |
comment(s)