/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4676601]

Do you think the idea of a hero and their plucky band of misfits saving the world is a poor narrative? I think the whole "lone hero saves the world" thing is pretty poisonous for society.

[Anonymous No.4676621]

Its just a product of our societes individualism, It has existed for ages and It's not going to disappear soon.

[Anonymous No.4676631]

>>4676621
Yes, it's something we're naturally going to dream about, but that doesn't mean it's a healthy behavior. We've managed to suppress the urge to constantly fight each other for food and the ability to mate (at least physically). How is this not doable as well?

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4676632]

>>4676601
It's a deep part of our heritage.
If you want something about a group of heroes, as large as you like, the standard can still work.

Or a hero that enables the masses to take control instead of assuming command over them. The hero cycle needn't be so predictable.

[Anonymous No.4676638]

No.

[Anonymous No.4676645]

>>4676601
>poisonous for society.
?

[Anonymous No.4676649]

>>4676631
Depending on how you spin it, it can be narcissistic or heroic, remember sometimes we need an leader, not everyone can be a follower, by creating the image of "the hero" we can apply it to our own leaders, thus making people happy that they are being lead by someone exceptional even when they are not.

[Anonymous No.4676654]

this is why games of thrones is GOAT

[Anonymous No.4676659]

I think people like you, OP, are poisonous for society. You attempt to take away and fix what you perceive to be problematic for the masses and end up doing more harm than their simple fairy tales would ever have done.

[Anonymous No.4676663]

>>4676645
By that I mean that instead of wanting to contribute to society in a group effort, the solitary hero makes people want to go off and do their own thing, thinking they can thrust humanity into a new age, getting discouraged when they realize their limitations, languish in the fact that they aren't head and shoulders above their peers.

[Anonymous No.4676690]

>>4676663
Im fine with that

[Anonymous No.4676710]

>>4676663
You must be extraordinary to be considered a 'hero'. That's not a problem with heroism, but people not knowing their boundaries and have the wrong impression of themselves.

Not everyone will radically change a field, but it would be foolish to discourage all outliers if you value advancements.

[Anonymous No.4676720]

>>4676649
>>4676659
>>4676710
Sorry, it's late, i'm being unclear. What I mean is, the lone hero is neither a follower, nor a leader. They lift the entire fucking mountain all on their own. No one in the human history has ever been a Superman or Commander Shepard, and it's unhealthy to aspire to be one.

[Anonymous No.4676744]

>>4676720
yfw Jesus Christ
yfw Alexander the Great
yfw Genghis Khan
yfw Immanuel Kant

[Anonymous No.4676759]

>>4676744
Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan had lots of people to help them. But Immanuel Kant might actually be a good example.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4676773]

Some people's definition of a hero is kinda messed up

[Anonymous No.4676863]

>>4676720
Heroes are admired for being exceptional, not just something anyone can be and necessarily what is actually possible. But heroes do embody the values of their culture, and can inspire people to do so as well by being the best they can possibly be (and at what they are best).

I still think the fault falls on those people who believe they are what they are not and can be what they cannot be, not with the "lone hero" narrative. And truthfully, most of these heroes aren't really alone; I can't think of one that is. They have assistance of some manner that allows them to do what they are best at doing.

[Anonymous No.4676926]

>>4676632
>a hero that enables the masses to take control instead of assuming command over them.
I love this.

Any novel with that? Help a pleb here.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4676936]

>>4676926
I'm working on it.


...I think.

[Anonymous No.4676959]

But anon, the great leaps and bounds in history have always been made by a single man or group of men. Science, for example, doesn't gradually "evolve", it waits for a single man to violently thrust it into a new paradigm when the time is right. The lone hero narrative is both inspiring and truthful, and therefore most valuable. It may cause people to have unrealistic aspirations, but it also encourages them to try their best. We'd all be better off if everyone tried to be an Alexander the Great or an Isaac Newton - someone who changed the world through sheer willpower and cunning.

[Anonymous No.4676964]

>>4676601
>Do you think the idea of a hero and their plucky band of misfits saving the world is a poor narrative?
Yes.

[Anonymous No.4676973]

do u ever get this weird feeling that your literature professor is posting on /lit/

[Anonymous No.4676974]

>>4676601
A hero is a man who's qualities exceed his peers

Idiots like to put moral barriers on it but everyone smart knows morality doesn't real

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4676975]

>>4676959
Oh, is THAT why it's taking so long!

[Anonymous No.4676996]

>>4676975
yeah, right now it seems like philosophy is dead and there are no new ideas just autistic americans doing their analytical crap and that silly man from hungary telling his tiolet jokes and that philosophy has run it's course...but there have been flat spots in philosophy in the past, couple more decades and some crazy new dude will bust on the scene

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4677005]

>>4676974 -> >>4676773

[Anonymous No.4677032]

>>4677005
>butterfly shitposting

[Anonymous No.4677035]

>>4676996
Philosophy is dead: but considering the state the species Man is in, there will perhaps be caves, for ages yet, in which its shadow will be shown."