Othello

The works of Shakespeare have always run the emotional gamitt on heroes and villians. Hamlet embodied the tragic hero on a vengence quest, King Lear the flawed but learned leader and even Juliet represented passion and love. In Othello the hero is very noble in presence but can also be viewed as sympathetic because his actions are not entrirely of his own fault but have been cohersed by another. For a character to posses both virtue and empathy is an important part of a flawed hero type, but if they can be manipulated by a villian into evil deeds, how sympathetic can they be? Yes Othello's past suffering and endeavors makes him virtuous and helps win Desmedona's heart, but perhaps Othello is more flawed than most heroes if he can be lured into blind jealousy by the villian Iago. This flaw makes Othello more human and thus more relatable, especially to today's audience, but it also makes him less of a true hero because the hero must not be seduced so easily, which is why heroes are looked up to and praised. The snake in the grass Iago has all the qualities of an opposing manipulator like The Joker from Batman or The Emperor from Star Wars, and his overall success makes Othello less of a true hero and more of a tragic good guy. The overall reason Shakespeare allows such flawed characters to be called heroes is to make them relatable and sympathetic, but I view Othello as the lesser of all heroes previously discussed and would say he fell too easily.

The Cave / Matrix

People have always lived thier lives based on thier perception of reality. In both the Allegory of the Cave and The Matrix there are two realities, but which is the more real? For heroes like Neo of the Matrix or Simba from the Lion King, what is real is not of thier choice but rather thier chosen destiny (or thier Dharma). For the Villian however, reality is what makes them happy or content so morally speaking, who is more genuine, the hero or villian? In the Matrix the character Siefer argues that the artificial world of the matrix can be more real than reality, and he chooses to betray everyone to embrace that reality. If "ignorance is bliss", than what is the truth according to the teachers Morpheus and Socrates? Suffering? I believe that the value in truth and knowledge is always subjective and is always filtered through a force of some kind. The bad truth is that Neo and the enlightened prisoner from the cave now know thier reality is not what they thought, but the good truth is that now they have the chance to spread enlightenment or "Moksa" (Neo experienced this when he stopped the barrage of bullits after returning to life in the film). This supports what Plato argued that people must open thier minds to the world beyond what they know to have true wisdom and what Morpheus tried to teach Neo in the Matrix about what is real and what is not. Given that free will can always inhibit enlightenment (the people plugged into the matrix that will fight to defend the artificial world, or the still trapped prisoners in the cave), reality and fantasy are not black and white concepts for the hero or villian. Rather it is the idea that there is something beyond our control or understanding, and that reality is always relative to each person.

Dao De Jing

The practices and teachings of many eastern religions are exotic and foriegn to most western traditions. In Zhungzi's writings, he argues that words are meaningless but are also the way, a core value in the Dao De Jing. Somewhat obscure to read the first time, eventually the idea of the "enlightened hero" makes more sense through the Tao lense. Fighters fight, and leaders lead because that is who they are, not just what they do and the aknowledgment of "the way" is a core trait of a hero. This trait is like the methods of Odysseus at the start of the Odyssey, even though he has a change of heart towards the end, and explains more one dimensional heroes like Beowulf and Buliwyf. This circular flow of actions is contary to other heroes like Gilgamesh because they have a moment of "Moksa" or enlightenment that changes thier point of view. "By defending others, you save yourself", goes the mantra of Kambei in the film "Seven Samurai" (Kurosawa, 1954), which is one way of altruism taken up by the ancient Japanese heroes, the Samurai. The spiritual teachings of the Dao De Jing help us understand the flow of events in all hero tales, but not define it.

The 13th Warrior

            The idea of the "Hero's Code" is one that has been a part of most great heroes of ancient legend and lore. In the film "The 13th Warrior" a group of northmen, accompanied by an Arab scribe named Ahmed, wage war against a group of beast people for control of their land. One of the greatest of the north warriors is Buliwyf, a strong but silent stoic through the journey. Paralleling the Scandinavian hero Beowulf, this warrior is fearless, self-reliant and indifferent to danger, but one contrast is their belief in a higher code or honor system. Like all great Norse warriors, Buliwyf believes in Valhalla, the Viking afterlife, and his duty to earn his way into paradise through battle and glory against all enemies. Beowulf also believes in honor and glory but lacks the social faith system that Buliwyf shows at the film's end in prayer before stepping onto the battle field an inch from death and ready to die fighting. "Lo, I see my father and I see the way.." is the chant of Buliwyf and his men as they fight the beast hoard down. Other ancient cultures like the Spartans believed in a glorious death for the state, as did the Greeks and Trojans in the Odyssey, personified by characters like Aeneas and Odysseus, who believed in "Ananke" or fate and social duty. The idea of immortality is held by Buliwyf, but rejected by the Greek hero Achilles in the Iliad, which is another distinction that the characters in the film hold above others. I believe that the need to prove oneself to a greater cause is paramount to a code of conduct and the hero Buliwyf is a good demonstration of this sacrifice.

Beowulf

            The Scandinavinan epic of "Beowulf" is one of the first written accounts of old world heroism and adventure we still study today. Although the story is written in a time long forgotten, the elements of what make the character Beowulf are relevant to any modern reader. He is strong, courageous, self-reliant and most importantly, flawed. Beowulf is cursed with the heroe's pride which has led others of similar origin (Heracles in old Greek and Samson of the Christian bible) to thier decline or ultimate fall. In regaurds to the original story, Beowulf is tasked with killing the beast Grendel and his mother, which he does like any good strong man would, with his bare hands. Considering this, why would modern media make a computer animated version of the tale where Beowulf not only does not kill Grendel's mother, but sleeps with her for the promise of power and fame later in life? I believe changes to an old story like this are nessesary to be able to present dated ideas to a new audience, so long as the idea of the hero remains essentially the same. New Beowulf does not kill the temptress out of lust and youthful hunger for power, which a much deeper and more relatable traite for the modern movie goer than a one-dimensional cave man killing beasts left and right. In addition to not killing Grendel's mother, the movie makes several other small changes, such as burying the hero at sea instead of in a tumulus, and the dragon being Beowulf's son, which add to the idea of the aging hero and the sins of the father, making it a better movie. The values of what makes a hero today are always changing and evolving with the ages, but considering how much we do not know about the original story of Beowulf (such as the name of the original author), truth is relative to the teller of every passing tale in history.

The Odyssey

            Many of the old world epics of Greece and Rome dwell on grand subjects like conquest and warfare as in Homer's "Illiad", or duty to one's nation as a Roman, personified by Aeneas in Virgil's "The Aenied." In Homer's other epic poem, "The Odyssey", the protagonist Odysseus embarks on a ten year journey accross the ancient world to defy nature, rationaility and even the Gods to get home to his wife and child. This sounds like a modern romance novel on the outset, but Odysseus's quest, like many other Greek mythological figures, is trecherous and lacks regaurd for those around him. I believe that Odysseus's success does not make him a hero, but more of a heroic opportunist. The qualities of self-sacrifice and altrusim are lost on Odysseus as his men fall like flies along the way to get back home. Some drown in the ocean strom brought on by the God Poseidon and the Furries, others are eaten alive by the cyclops monster, and all the while Odysseus keeps moving forward, relativly unscarred himself. I can compare a warrior like Achillies to an opportunist like Odysseus in the same field because each posess heroic qualities but are not  actual heroes. This absolutist idea of herosim is what sets Greek and Roman Mythology apart from other world epics like Gilgamesh or Ramayana.http://www.litwithmccall.pbworks.com/