What Makes a Hero?
Stories are about people. Or possibly anthropomorphic animals or aliens, but the key is, they should be relatable. It’s especially important for the reader to care about the story’s protagonist(s)–it’s through them that the reader connects to the story. Characters should seem real, especially the main characters, like someone you might know intimately. And the characters should be memorable. A memorable character could be unpredictable, be passionate about something, carry a “ghost” or “wound” from their past that affects them in the present, have inner conflict, be resourceful, courageous, or fighting for a just cause. The more of these, the better.
In a good story, the protagonist’s inner and outer journey are intertwined with the plot; each affects the other. Most important, a protagonist (and other major characters) should care about something. They should have a vision for the future and a high-stakes goal (in the mind of the character) within the story. Outside forces and internal flaws and conflict present obstacles to achieving this goal, which the character must overcome (unless it’s a tragedy and they fail).
As the story progresses, the protagonist can change for the better, the worse, or not at all. Positive change arcs are the most common in literature, and often the most resonant. In the beginning, the protagonist has both strengths and flaws, but is handicapped by deep-held erroneous assumptions. For example, in The Others, Will thinks the world sucks and there’s nothing you can do about it. It is not until he meets Andreia that he begins questioning this.
Positive-change characters are forced to challenge their dysfunctional beliefs until finally they conquer their inner demons and are able to overcome the internal and external barriers preventing success.
In a negative change arc, often found in tragedies or horror stories, the protagonist succumbs to their flaws or external pressures, and ends up in a worse place than they started. In my horror novella The Survivors, Lucy has morals that her clan leader lacks, but is too afraid to act on them, to everyone’s ultimate detriment. In a flat arc, the character doesn’t appreciably change, but may change the world around them. In literature, this is more common among mentor characters like Yoda than for protagonists.
Not all protagonists are heroes. What is a hero? They act to make the world a better place and thereby inspire others to do the same. Their concern could be local, like protecting a patch of woods (The Council), or all the way up to global (The War for Reality).
What makes an ordinary person become a hero? While superheroes and elite soldiers are fun to read about, I think it’s much more interesting to read about average people thrust into a situation way above their head, and seeing how they cope. In most of my books, the main characters are typically ordinary people, or even from the underclass (The War for Reality: Books 1-3 of the BetterWorld Trilogy; Born in Salt). The characters change as the story progresses, and must overcome their flaws and increase their skills in order to defeat their enemies. If not, they may break (as in The Survivors).
In the real world, most people are too afraid, self-absorbed, apathetic, or detached to step up and put their lives on the line, whether literally or figuratively, for a greater cause. Only a small fraction of people become activists or heroes. Heroes generally have a strong moral code, a feeling of obligation to something bigger than themselves, have passion and commitment, are willing to sacrifice, have knowledge of the issues they care about, and may feel anger, hope, or desperation. And they may not start out that way, and have to change internally to overcome the obstacles before them.
Hopepunk pioneer Alexandra Rowland wrote,
How do you do it? How do you manage when the task before you is enormous and impossible?
Sheer, simple, bloody-minded obstinacy.
What’s the point?
The answer is, of course, that the fight itself is the point.
This is very existential; exactly the sort of thing that Jean-Paul Sartre or Albert Camus might have said. Sartre wrote that humans are “condemned to be free.” They are constrained by their birth circumstances, but are responsible for their actions and should recognize this. So, if you know something is wrong, and you take no action, that’s entirely on you. The characters in Camus’ novel The Plague are powerless to affect their destinies, but the more heroic figures in the book (Dr. Rieux, Jean Tarrou, and Rambert) fight the plague and help the sick with everything they have. The plague might be seen as a metaphor for death, which is inevitable. But hopepunk heroes do the right thing regardless of whether they succeed in the end or are rewarded. It’s a code of conduct–an active choice, knowing that things might be bleak or even hopeless, but you’ll keep hoping, being kind, and do the right thing anyway.
In a good story, the protagonist’s inner and outer journey are intertwined with the plot; each affects the other. Most important, a protagonist (and other major characters) should care about something. They should have a vision for the future and a high-stakes goal (in the mind of the character) within the story. Outside forces and internal flaws and conflict present obstacles to achieving this goal, which the character must overcome (unless it’s a tragedy and they fail).
As the story progresses, the protagonist can change for the better, the worse, or not at all. Positive change arcs are the most common in literature, and often the most resonant. In the beginning, the protagonist has both strengths and flaws, but is handicapped by deep-held erroneous assumptions. For example, in The Others, Will thinks the world sucks and there’s nothing you can do about it. It is not until he meets Andreia that he begins questioning this.
Positive-change characters are forced to challenge their dysfunctional beliefs until finally they conquer their inner demons and are able to overcome the internal and external barriers preventing success.
In a negative change arc, often found in tragedies or horror stories, the protagonist succumbs to their flaws or external pressures, and ends up in a worse place than they started. In my horror novella The Survivors, Lucy has morals that her clan leader lacks, but is too afraid to act on them, to everyone’s ultimate detriment. In a flat arc, the character doesn’t appreciably change, but may change the world around them. In literature, this is more common among mentor characters like Yoda than for protagonists.
Not all protagonists are heroes. What is a hero? They act to make the world a better place and thereby inspire others to do the same. Their concern could be local, like protecting a patch of woods (The Council), or all the way up to global (The War for Reality).
What makes an ordinary person become a hero? While superheroes and elite soldiers are fun to read about, I think it’s much more interesting to read about average people thrust into a situation way above their head, and seeing how they cope. In most of my books, the main characters are typically ordinary people, or even from the underclass (The War for Reality: Books 1-3 of the BetterWorld Trilogy; Born in Salt). The characters change as the story progresses, and must overcome their flaws and increase their skills in order to defeat their enemies. If not, they may break (as in The Survivors).
In the real world, most people are too afraid, self-absorbed, apathetic, or detached to step up and put their lives on the line, whether literally or figuratively, for a greater cause. Only a small fraction of people become activists or heroes. Heroes generally have a strong moral code, a feeling of obligation to something bigger than themselves, have passion and commitment, are willing to sacrifice, have knowledge of the issues they care about, and may feel anger, hope, or desperation. And they may not start out that way, and have to change internally to overcome the obstacles before them.
Hopepunk pioneer Alexandra Rowland wrote,
How do you do it? How do you manage when the task before you is enormous and impossible?
Sheer, simple, bloody-minded obstinacy.
What’s the point?
The answer is, of course, that the fight itself is the point.
This is very existential; exactly the sort of thing that Jean-Paul Sartre or Albert Camus might have said. Sartre wrote that humans are “condemned to be free.” They are constrained by their birth circumstances, but are responsible for their actions and should recognize this. So, if you know something is wrong, and you take no action, that’s entirely on you. The characters in Camus’ novel The Plague are powerless to affect their destinies, but the more heroic figures in the book (Dr. Rieux, Jean Tarrou, and Rambert) fight the plague and help the sick with everything they have. The plague might be seen as a metaphor for death, which is inevitable. But hopepunk heroes do the right thing regardless of whether they succeed in the end or are rewarded. It’s a code of conduct–an active choice, knowing that things might be bleak or even hopeless, but you’ll keep hoping, being kind, and do the right thing anyway.
No comments have been added yet.
