Confessions of a Hero Whore

[masqthephlsphr]

More often than not when you ask me who my favorite character in a book, film, or television series is, it's the hero. Not that I don't appreciate the grayer characters, the morally ambiguous types--tricksters, shady allies and informants, double-agents, self-serving baddies with sympathetic pasts and motivations

Comments

[ponygirl2000]

I am one of those who goes for the sidekick or the snarky stand off to the side types. Mostly it is because that's what I identify with, but I also have an occasional resentment of authorial authority. I don't like being told who is always right, who I'm supposed to be interested in - the Chosen One trope really bugs me (in Harry Potter it was Neville who I was rooting for the most). Though most of the people on your list were of the self-doubting type which makes them more relatable. It is interesting though who we look to for the entry points to the story.

[masqthephlsphr]

Well, I don't exactly "identify" with the hero. On Highlander, for example, I identified more with Richie. But I was carried along with Duncan's struggle. I understand it. I root for him.

There are some exceptions to my "hero favorite character" rule, and it is generally something unidentifiable that doesn't allow me to get carried up with the main protagonist/hero--Jean Luc Picard on ST: TNG. Didn't dislike him, didn't vibe with him, either. Same with Jack (?) on Lost. Didn't dislike, didn't wish him ill, didn't vibe with him.

It's a vibe thing. Hard to pin down. But I don't identify with the heroes I like. I feel for them and root for them.

And I have Big Time story-kink for Messiah/Chosen One trope.

[ponygirl2000]

My problem with the Chosen One is that it feels like the big authorial hand telling me that I have to feel something that may not have been earned. On BtVS I felt like they deconstructed the trope, and Buffy was shown sacrificing a lot for her special status.

Jack on Lost would be my perfect example of the author(s) trying to force me to root for a hero. Righteous, kept making mistakes that got other people killed, yet rarely got called on it, and it seemed taken for granted that we cared about him. Then there was that tattoo episode. Oy.

The only time I really liked Jack was when he was crazy!bearded!Jack because for once all the other characters were saying he was wrong. I think I like underdog heroes, if other characters are falling into line behind a hero I need to be able to see why in a very big way.

[masqthephlsphr]

Well, I only get caught up in the Chosen One trope if it feels earned. With Harry Potter, for example, I think JK Rowling made it clear Harry was only "Chosen" because Voldemort *decided* the prophecy was about Harry. It could have just as easily been about Neville, but Voldemort decided it was Harry, and went after him.

After that, Harry had to rise to the occasion. In some sense, yes, it would have been lame if after seven books, he failed to do so, but he never had it easy, and from his own perspective, he struggled and very well could have failed. It was not a given for him personally, or for any of the other characters. He had to earn it.

[cactuswatcher]

An interesting topic. It relates to the only show from the most recent two or three years that I watch, namely Arrow. It would be very difficult to watch the show for someone who had a hard time with heros

[masqthephlsphr]

There is a difference, I think between the Hero who was never a bad guy and the Hero who was formerly bad seeking redemption. I like both those tropes. The second of the two often has a Doubter character who is an impediment to the Hero's good deeds because he doubts the Hero's motives and genuine desire to redeem himself.

[masqthephlsphr]

I don't know, it felt to me like the character Merlin poured all his self-identity into being the Hero, or supporting who he perceived to be the Hero unconditionally, as opposed to Emma on OUAT, who pays no attention to her heroic qualities, she just does what she thinks is right in the situation, and doesn't identify herself as heroic.

In between the two is someone like Harry Dresden, who I think perceives himself a hero, but tries not to think about it because that would make him freeze up, but there are times he relishes the role and the sense of superiority that comes with it. Even though he's flawed and he's well aware of those flaws.

[astrogirl2]

You know something? As someone who is generally more likely to be found singing the praises of the ambiguous and the shades-of-gray, the anti-heroes and the complicated villains... I would like to take a moment to join you in saluting the heroes. Hey, where would fiction be without them? And while they certainly can be simplistic -- just like villains can -- they don't have to be. Besides, what I'm mostly a fan of is character complexity, so the more the capacity for complexity in good guys is recognized and used, the happier I am. I may not find myself drawn to them as often, or in quite the same way, even so, but I'm glad they exist, because some of them are just pain fun, and I'm glad there are people out there paying attention to them. :)

[masqthephlsphr]

Sometimes I think it's just me and the kids and the Dudley-DoRightHero-Type fans. It seems everyone prefers the morally ambiguous characters.

[ironed_orchid]

I think with good writing, all the characters, even the ones who try hard to do the right thing, are morally ambiguous at times. For example, Angel needs so badly to be good partly because of all the bad stuff he did as Angelus, but also because of all the times he screwed up as Angel.

[masqthephlsphr]

Yes, making a protagonist both complex, interesting, *and* a basically good person striving to do the right thing is a difficult thing to pull off. "Complex" and "interesting" often imply "flawed", and then you have to weigh the flaws of your character against whatever heroic goals they are trying to achieve.

I suppose what draws me to a hero character is simple faith that, despite their character flaws and the ways they mess up, at the end of the day, they want to do the right thing and try to do it.

[cornerofmadness]

Interesting. I have to admit, there is very little rhyme or reason to whom I identify with.

The one that I do not like would be the scummy protagonist. I don't get into stories where the protagonist is a thief or killing for fun. I don't mind a previous bad person on a redemption arc.

looking at your examples (or at least the ones I watch/read)
Harry Potter series: Harry Potter
Angel the Series: Angel and Connor equally
Star Trek Deep Space Nine: Bashir (but that had more to do with hot doctor than anything)
Harry Dresden: Karrin Murphy and Thomas. Don't get me wrong, I do like Harry but I ended up liking his brother better in some ways

[masqthephlsphr]

Thomas in the Dresden Files is a great character, and I was tickled when they revealed he was Harry's brother, because of my whole Family kink thing. Harry has "discovered" other bio-family since then, but Thomas was the first, and that had real meaning for him. That said, I don't find myself automatically drawn to pretty boys who the narrative seems to view through a lens of their looks and sexual lives. And TDF really does do that, despite Macho!Harry the POV character's avowed heterosexuality, because it's his brother, so it doesn't count

[cornerofmadness]

I can't really argue any of this.

Karrin's character lately has been putting me off in major ways (of course the ending of Cold Days nearly put me off the series). And the inability to see her outside of Harry's pov was something I discussed in the first vs third person pov post I had a month back. That is a disadvantage to first person.

I would love to have another Thomas novella or short story because it's the one time we don't see him thru the lens of his sexuality and impossibly good looks.

And it's very true, to me as well, that Connor is interesting because of his relationship to Angel.

[masqthephlsphr]

I am reading the short stories book right now and I know there's a Karrin POV story in it. I have a feeling, though, it's all about her relationship with Harry, since it takes place chronologically after "Changes" when she thinks he's dead.

[ironed_orchid]

I tend to be all over the map, but for btvs it has always been Buffy for me. I get why some fans dislike her, and why others prefer different scoobies, but I imprinted on her and that meant I hurt when she hurt, etc.

[masqthephlsphr]

I think it is very difficult for a writer to make an interestingly complex heroic protagonist that people will *like* as well as want to root for. I liked Buffy. And I was always on her side through out the series. I didn't always identify with her in a great many things, but I don't think I'm supposed to simply in order to enjoy her story and root for her to win.