As defined by Oxford Languages, a hero is “a person who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities”. However, in mythology and folklore, another definition of hero emerges, again defined by Oxford Languages as “a person of superhuman qualities and often semi defining origin, in particular one whose exploits were subject of Ancient Greek myths”.
So: Why is there a difference in definition?
As society expands and modernizes, people’s view on things often change. Something that was socially acceptable before is now a crime, but then again, there are old traditions that are lost to time. An example can be found in Ancient Greek traditions where even if your enemy was sleeping under your roof, you could not harm them. In theory, that principle remains today but under the umbrella term of murder, but, people still have the liberty to do it under their own roof without getting attacked by the gods from breaking the laws of hospitality.
That sounds really bad.. wait..
Never mind that, I hope what I’m trying to convey in understandable.
Yet, even if there is a difference in the definitions, all heroes go through the same cycle, some a little easy to detect than others. This cycle was first defined by Joseph Campbell, author of The Hero with a Thousand faces.
In simple terms, the cycle is as follows :
00. Status quo - where the story both begins and ends
1. Call to adventure - The hero receives some sort of invitation, challenge, or message
2. Assistance - the hero receives help in the form of either a companion (aka sidekick, friend, etc.) or a magical item!
3. Departure - The hero now leaves the comfort of his home (the ordinary world), and enters the special world (where the quest *really* starts)
4. Trials - Meant to test the hero’s strength and will, this section can include puzzles, fights, etc.
5. Approach - The hero is forced to face their biggest fear be it the big bad villain or an inner conflict which sometimes results in the swapping of sides.
6. Crisis - This is the point in the story where the hero faces their darkest hour. As stated by Matthew Winkler, some heroes die at this point and are reborn both physically and metaphorically.
7. Treasure - The hero gains something from his journey be it new knowledge, an item, or power.
8. Result - Depending on the direction of the story this can vary. Perhaps the hero is hunted down, or they leave untouched. The result does not always have to be good!
9. Return - The hero crosses the boundary back into the ordinary world
10. New Life - how has this adventure changed the hero? Are they someone better? Are they someone worse? Is there no change?
11. Resolution - every aspect of the story becomes clear.
00. Status Quo - The hero has reached a new level; the cycle may potentially restart.
Of course the hero does not have to follow this cycle strictly, after all, some of the heroes choose to deny the quest at first (ex: simba refusing to return to pride rock). Sometimes this cycle is not clear until after, or, the reader/watcher does not understand who the hero is until later.
However, the hero cycle can be mocked by villains because in their own sense, they are the heroes of their own story. If you follow the perspective of the “lesser” person then your own perspective might change. As an example, I’ll be using David Haller from FX’s Legion.
(so, if you haven’t watched and don’t want spoilers, don’t look!)
Through the entirety of season one and most of season two, the audience is led to believe that David is the hero of the story, only to be revealed as the villain. What happened? How did we suddenly change sides?
The revelation that David is the one who would bring about the end of the world comes at the end of season two, where Division 3 in unison with Farouk stage an intervention in attempt to help David, where he escapes and ends the season. When it became understood what had occurred, many turned their faces from David because of it, now, they were cheering for Division 3 (who had started as a villain), Farouk (someone “mistaken” for a villain but in the end, he was just playing them all), and new faces (Jin-Yi/Switch, Lenny free from Farouk’s grasp).
Despite being a villain, David went through his own hero’s cycle. First, the discovery that the voices in his head weren’t from an illness but rather the side effect of one of his abilities, from there, David embarks on his journey. His treasure? Beating Farouk in a fight, losing Sydney, finding out the truth about his father and arguably, being revealed as the villain. Season three would place David in step.10 of the cycle, New Life, as he begins to build his own cult and recruits Switch to help him.
Through Legion, it is proven that a villain can follow the hero’s cycle so that begs the question if just because someone follows these steps, does that make them a hero?
As Oxford languages defined it, a hero needs to have courage, be someone admirable, outstanding achievements and outstanding qualities.
Take a look at your favorite heroes, do they fit this description? What about the villains? Do they for this description as well? What stops them from reaching these qualities if you look at things through their sides?
Is batman’s brutal treatment of criminals something you should admire? What about Booster Gold’s selfish nature, is that something you should aspire to mirror? Heroes may have their flaws, but by those standards, the line between hero and villain becomes blurred. It becomes impossible to tell apart the good from the so called evil, and vice versa.
Is anyone who goes on a journey a hero? Or do they *have* to met the standards society set in place as good and evil? If majority disagrees, does that make you a villain?
David was 100% sure his decisions were that of a hero (he claims multiple times he is a hero, he keeps painting himself as a god who should be trusted), yet, as an audience we are suppose to view him as the villain. Division three who was supposedly bad became a hero based on the sole factor that they wanted to go against David, again restating that David was the villain. Yet, if you look at things through David’s eyes, you can sympathize with him. His father left him, lied to him, didn’t come to his aid, living most of his life in a mental institution because no one cared to tell him that he was a mutant and not schizophrenic. Can you blame him for his decisions? Is he truly a hero?
He helped Switch escape her father, is that not something admirable? Or is it a ploy to convince us that David was nothing but a villain using people to his advantage (which, he does use Switch but at the benefit of freeing her from the shackles her father placed around her).
On that note, I end my little speech. Feel free to add your comments and offer input! I’m happy to hear your ideas and beliefs, even a counterargument. My ask box is also open if you have any requests!
Hope you enjoy your day and thank you for taking the time to read this!
