The 19th century Powerless Protagonist

[Anonymous No.8442573]

Hi /lit/ first time poster and ignorant pleb here, I have a question which really pissed me off for a long time and I want an answer.

To get straight to the point, I'd like to know why were most protagonists in 19th-early 20th century novels and novellas so powerless. What I mean by that is that most of them weren't able to escape danger and threats or fight it with weapons or strength. I have seen it happen mostly in the fantastic genre as well as gothic horror. I have never ever witnessed a protagonist empower the threats and gain the upper hand be it with wits, might or anything. They were slasher movie-tier kind of destitute in these situations.

The archetype of this charachter is mostly a young noble or moderately rich man that is faced with the paranormal. You can see that cliché in Lovecraft, Poe, Maupassant and countless others. Why can't these guys defend themselves? Why were they so weak, even if they're faced with ancient evils, they would be able to act or do something. But no, they're always saved by deus ex machinas and stuff like that or just die or kill themselves.

This view of the powerless character has subsided in gothic horror movies like the ones made by Mario Bava. Basically, the hero in most of his movies is a young healthy noble guy faced with monsters and shit but doesn't do shit against them. He doesn't use his intelligence, nor his skills, nor even strength or anything. What drives me crazy is that they end up not being characters at all but puppets around which the plot evolves.

Another great and relatable exemple of this is the video game Amnesia where you play as this exact archetype of powerless protagonist. You can't fight, you can only hide and run. My question is: why were they so popular at that specific time in the history of fiction, from the 19th century until the 1960's?
Nowadays, you have exemples of powerless and unprepared protagonists that are still believable (for instance in Jeremy Saulnier movies like Blur Ruin and Green Room). The characters in these movies don't have any particular skills but still put up a fight.

So why were characters like that so widespread and popular at that time? Were they made to oppose the all-powerful characters of kights tales and epics in order to ground the book in a more realistic setting?

Tell me what you think about that /lit/.

[Anonymous No.8442626]

>>8442573
cant read all that

[Anonymous No.8442642]

>>8442626
B-but I thought this was /lit/?

[Anonymous No.8442665]

Most gothic horror novels talk about how powerless humanity is, and how ancient demons are far above us. I think the protagonist being powerless enforces that feeling. I like it.

[Anonymous No.8442666]

>>8442573
Lovecraft was really the first to get this archetype right.
He used his character to portray the horrors that we not only can't fight, but the ones that we can't udnerstand. That's why his characters are alwasy doomed, because the thing they are fighting against are just to great for them.

It's not like they don't do anything tho, read Randolph Carter or Charles Dexter Ward. They try to fight it, hell, The Shadow Over Innsmouth is all about how the guy tries to escape that godforsaken town as if it was some short of "Escape from the Cabin" movie. It's just that when things get real they can't go toe to toe with them.

It's a ncie way to give you the inner chills. Just think, hundreds of men fought that kind of stuff and no one, even the most wellread, most rich, most prepared people, were able to defeat it. What would you be able to do? Jackshit, that's what.

[Anonymous No.8442686]

>>8442573
it's immersive, dip
you're afraid if powerless
therefore you're afraid

[Anonymous No.8442687]

>>8442665
>>8442666
Yeah I guess I just wasn't getting what they were trying to convey.

Thank you for these answers, I might appreciate and understand these kind of books more easily now, thanks.
Here's a nice wallpaper.

[Anonymous No.8442696]

>>8442687
Cool

Post more often here, we need more nice people

[Anonymous No.8444305]

>>8442573
>Why can't these guys defend themselves? You can see that cliché in Lovecraft,
Lovecraft's characters fight. Why do you think the retarded "lmao the big squid guy got defeated by boat" meme came about? Other examples: Dunwich Horror, Whisperer in Darkness, Thing on the Threshold, Red Hook, Shunned House, Kadath, Dreams in the Witch House, Case of Charles Dexter Ward, The Hound, The Lurking Fear.
Problem is, fighting generally doesn't really work against the things that come up in his stories. It can be a temporary annoyance at best and sometimes it just doesn't work. Other times you just can't do anything aside from running away (and sometimes, your plans get rekt due to bad luck, like in The Hound). Granted his guys are sometimes a little too easily 2spooked, but literally nothing would change if they weren't. Empowering humans goes in the opposite direction of what cosmic horror wants to accomplish.
There are plenty of stories in the "expanded" Cthulhu Mythos where the protagonists are empowered (example: August Derleth). It doesn't work.
>Poe,
There are pretty much 0 instances in Poe's stories where the protagonist faces something he can fight. Did you even read him?
>Maupassant
See above. Also the protagonist of The Horla fights against the Horla. He burns his house down -it doesn't work. In fact the Horla might have never existed at all in the first place anyway.

>>8442665
That's not what gothic horror is about.

[Anonymous No.8444351]

The hanging spectre of globalism before the world wars.

The hunch something terrible was about to fall and nobody could stop it

[Anonymous No.8444363]

>>8442573
A realistic view of the world before Hollywood distorted everything.

[Anonymous No.8444364]

Why is it that Lovecraft is appreciated by "nerds"? Is it because he's so science/fantasy fiction, or is it because of the darkness of his works?

[Anonymous No.8444370]

I think it has to do with the puritanical mindset of these novels. If you were being tormented by horrors, you damn well had it coming because of your moral defects and no amount of resistance would change your fate.

[Anonymous No.8444381]

>The archetype of this charachter is mostly a young noble or moderately rich man that is faced with the paranormal.

The nobles were getting absolutely wrecked during that time, and the best they could do was suffer nobly. There's also the advent of industrialism and people abandoning religion and traditional morals which lead to nihilism.

[Anonymous No.8444426]

>>8444364
Hype factor maybe?
Most people really don't appreciate Lovecraft aside from "dude tentacles and madness" and "this is my new elder god rutsah, oc do not sttel"

[Anonymous No.8444491]

>>8442573
Basically, because it's easier to sell a scary story if the protagonist is really, really scared. Scared to the point where they can instinctually feel that whatever action they'd take would be useless against the horror they are facing.

[Anonymous No.8444636]

>>8442573

The non-powerless version of Amnesia is an older PC shooter called Call of Cthulu. You start out powerless but by the end you're fighting back with stealth and a gun. Not quite as spooky, but the atmosphere is amazing. Condenses a few lovecraft stories together, though its mostly Shadow over Innsmouth and Dagon. It's on steam.

[Anonymous No.8445059]

>>8442573

I find it annoying when a character fails to act in a realistic scenario, like being attacked by someone. However, if a ghoul or goblin leapt from your closet right now I can grantee you would be too scared to act. At the most you would groan and shit your pants.