|
|
Joined: 6/28/2011
Posts: 188
|
I'm very interested in the theme of heroism, to the extent that every novel I've written (including the two embarrassing ones from high school) revolves around characters who are either heroic from the start, or who learn to take up a mantle of heroism. Because I write fantasy, I don't think that's all that unusual.
However, I recently reread Jack McDevitt's A Talent For War, which does an interesting job of turning the theme of heroism on its head in a number of ways. The protagonist-narrator is a fellow of mixed principles, though generally a good guy. The plot carries him on an archaeological quest through the lives of several centuries-dead war heroes, most of whom are revealed to have feet of clay in one way or another. And (spoilers) the most heroic scene in the book involves a shuttle bus full of ordinary people and the main antagonist of the book risking their lives to rescue the narrator's assistant, who has crashed her air-skimmer in the sea. The narrator plays a crucial and dangerous role in the rescue, but ultimately he is not the hero of the moment.
So: How important is heroism to your development of characters? Do you prefer to write about flawed human beings who perhaps learn life lessons through the course of the story, but never assume any heroic role? Or do you find yourself drawn irresistibly to characters full of boldness, principle, and willingness to sacrifice for others?
|
|
Joined: 8/13/2011
Posts: 272
|
I'm fond of the development of heroes, as it's a very common, always interesting aspect of SF&F. The honest truth is that all good stories involving 'heroes' are about the stuff that doesn't get into the history books. Simply the concept at looking at the world through their eyes forces the writer to get into the human behind the legend as writing about a perfect being gets dull, fast.
That said, a really great look at heroism is the Ciaphas Cain novels by Sandy Mitchell. The titular hero's a legendary hero, famed for his ability to sniff out and defeat the worst enemies. His memoirs (which the book is based of) reveal a very different man, one who is so terrified of battle that he's been trying to avoid it his entire life. Unfortunately, every time he tries to escape, he almost inevitably ends up in the middle of things. What's great about the series is that neither the author, or the memori's 'editor' really know whether Ciaphas is a coward or just completely unware of his own redeeming features.
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2011
Posts: 188
|
Sounds like a great story! I'll have to take a look at it.
Good point about perfect heroes getting tiresome. When I was a kid, I read all the Edgar Rice Burroughs Mars books and was disappointed that most of them didn't feature John Carter (hero of the first three books) as the principal character. Motivated by the release of the movie, I reread them all this year, and found that John Carter is about my least favorite of all Burroughs Martian heroes. Don't get me wrong, I love the character. But he's so unfailingly superhuman that it's simply more interesting to read about people who don't have his Earthly strength or his completely reflexive moral code.
|
|
Joined: 7/25/2012
Posts: 25
|
Heroes inspire me. Protagonists in literary fiction make me think, and I like thinking. But to write epic fantasy, I need epic inspiration. So my protagonists are heroes, and if I can squeeze some thought-provoking character development in there, all the better.
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2011
Posts: 188
|
I prefer writing that inspires also, which I think is why I'm so obsessed with heroes. A lot of dramatic fiction (and film) is about people wrestling with personal crises or figuring out that they need to pull their heads out of their rear ends in some complicated way. While that can be very interesting, I usually don't find it inspiring.
And when it comes to writing, I need a sense of inspiration even more than when reading.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
A discussion about heroes. I must get in on this.
I like writing heroes too, but I find that a good hero who rushes into danger to "save the world" usually has to be a bit naive, just plain stupid, fool hardy, or all of the above. When you look at the things that a typical "hero" does, it would make any rational person shake their head. I like to look at heroism and the hero as separate.
Heroism is an act. You don't have to have a character who is a hero commit and act of heroism. Heroism can be performed by Joe Schmoe, the antagonist, or coffee patron number one. A hero is a character who's entire existence is for acts of heroism, or someone who is idolized for their act of heroism like a firefighter or soldier.
I prefer a protagonist who performs acts of heroism because they have to than one that deliberately goes seeking glory. I write fantasy, so this is a tad difficult to get around. Fantasy is so filled with heroes that I am ashamed to admit I'm very selective when I read it. I'm a fan of a good antihero, the former antagonist, the fucked up person who only ends up helping the protagonist because he gets to hit things, but not everyone is a fan of a good asshole. I know that. So, when I write I try to make a variety of reluctant heroes.
First I have my MC Melody. She has a bit of a vigilante complex, but she has no problem killing people. This could be because she watched her village destroyed and mother killed, and was repeatedly abused by someone she knew. Just don't call her a victim. All she wanted to be when she grew up was a soldier like her daddy, not a princess.
Then there is her friend Adamar, who is haled as a war hero, but don't tell him that. He's still struggling with symptoms of PTSD, and the philosophical idea of "What is murder?" The poor kid is only 18 and wishes that all he had to worry about is how to get a girl to like him. Instead he has to save a country.
Tao, the foul mouthed, chain smoking Exorcist. She's hanging out with the two above because she actually believes in something for once.
Those are the first three. I use the whole "group journey" scenario since I'm writing an epic fantasy and like having complicated character relationships. I try to make their relationships influence how they behave as heroes. I'm about to write an important scene where a character has to rescue Melody when he says, and believes, that he doesn't give a damn about her. (I admit that it's more about him than her.)
I've got more on heroes, but I'll save that for later.
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2011
Posts: 188
|
I think I see what you're getting at, but that approach has to walk a very fine line for me to accept it as a reader. I have fundamentally little attraction to characters who are defined by being damaged or angry or selfish. I can meet enough of those people in real life. On the other hand, when presented with a character who possesses those traits but refuses to be defined by them, I can really get on board.
In The Last Tragedy, I start off with the least appealing of my three protagonists, a self-absorbed daydreamer who relates well to books but not to people. But instead of letting his obsession with literature confine him, he has set out on a quest that marks him as brave and determined and admirable in at least a few ways, even if he's a bit of a fool and an annoyance.
Because he's more flawed, he has more room to grow than the other two protagonists, and he eventually demonstrates the hero's journey more fully than they do, since they're more heroic from the start.
But the trilogy that follows that book is jam-packed with right-from-the-start heroes, including a narrator who is borderline super-heroic. And the point is not to indulge in a lot of power fantasies, but to demonstrate that heroism is indeed a choice, and that it's a choice anyone can make. One of the two best compliments I've ever received as a writer was when one of my readers said that the ending of that trilogy made her want to be a better person.
Which is exactly the effect I as a writer want to have on my reader -- because I don't have a magic sword or a starship to make the world a better place ... just this keyboard.
|
|
|
|