The Hero Problem

I recently read Doc Savage: Man of Bronze, the first in the Doc Savage series. I thought it was pretty bad. In fact, I’ve never been a fan of the Doc Savage books. I’ve read maybe a dozen or so and while they often have interesting beginnings, and some rather cool concepts, I’m usually pretty bored before the end. So I started to wonder why, and I believe I’ve figured out a major reason.

I just don’t like the character of Doc Savage, mainly because he’s just too damn perfect. Don’t get me wrong, I like for my heroes to be heroic. I like to root for the main character in a story, and I don’t root for true anti-heroes, such as Hannibal Lecter in Silence of the Lambs. But I like my characters to have complexity and at least some areas of gray.


Conan the Cimmerian, created by Robert E. Howard, is a good example of the kind of hero I like. Some call him anti-hero but I disagree. He certainly doesn’t always follow the rules of societies he finds himself in, but he clearly has an internal moral compass. He doesn’t betray a friend. And when he becomes king he indeed rules for the betterment of his people. He’s far from perfect, though. He was a thief when young. He’s ambitious, not above drunkenness, and has a weakness for women. These things make him far more human than Doc Savage and far more real. They also mean that he isn’t 100 percent predictable, as Doc Savage is.

There is one character who is pretty close to a true anti-hero that I do like, and that is Karl Edward Wagner’s Kane. But even Kane isn’t “quite” out for just himself. He has respect and liking for some people. He’s not just a vicious psychopath, which is how Hannibal Lecter was drawn in Red Dragon and through Silence of the Lambs.

I’d like Doc Savage a lot more if he ever had a lazy moment, or drank too much once in a while. Or, for goodness sake, what’s up with this “no women” thing? As I was reading this last volume there were several places where it talked about how Doc couldn’t allow himself to be weak toward women because he had such lofty goals. Reading it with today’s eye, I immediately thought, is he gay? Of course, many of these books were written in the 1930s and 1940s so they are dated in this way. But Howard wrote about Conan in the 1930s too and the character doesn’t seem nearly as dated.

A too perfect hero just doesn’t work for me. Give me a Conan type every time.

-----
-----

Fantasy Heroes: High Fantasy

JRR Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings trilogy is the prototypical High Fantasy series, but it’s much harder to describe the “archetypal” hero in this type of fantasy than in Sword and Sorcery. The main reason is that there is more likely to be a group of heroes in this kind of fiction, rather than one, and the heroes are much more varied. I do believe there are some general commonalities, however. These are:

1. The heroes in High Fantasy are closer to real people than in Sword and Sorcery. They often don't have any great strength or unusual fighting abilities. In fact, they often start the story out as rather weak. But they get stronger and they develop skills as they go. Frodo from Tolkien's trilogy is an example here. Stretching the point a bit, so is Luke Skywalker from the Star Wars series.

2. The hero of High Fantasy is seldom a loner. Almost always he or she has companions, and often the companions have some particular skills that the hero needs to help him succeed in his quest. The companions also have weaknesses as well, and the hero must know these and take them into account.

3. High Fantasy heroes are almost always honorable. They are good, upstanding citizens who are trying to cope in tough circumstances. As a correlate of this, many of these heroes would have been happy to stay at home and are forced into adventure by the circumstances of their world. (In Sword and Sorcery the hero wants the adventure.)

4. High Fantasy heroes generally undergo much more character development than do those in Sword and Sorcery. They change more over the course of the story, and this is typically illustrated by their growth in strength and maturity. The Sword and Sorcery hero begins the story already at the full tide of his/her strength. Contrary to what many people think, I don’t believe this reflects an immaturity on the part of the writer of Sword and Sorcery. Rather, I think it reflects that fact that Sword and Sorcery is typically “episodic” while High Fantasy is “epic.” Of course in an epic you have more room to develop characters.

5. High Fantasy heroes also have a goal, but it can be more properly termed a "quest." It is something that is both personal and universal. They are not seeking to enrich themselves but to save the world. This also reflects the more epic scale of this type of story.

So what should I add to this list?
----
----

Fantasy Heroes: Sword and Sorcery

I thought I might run a short series of posts on the nature of fantasy heroes. My comments will necessarily be rather broad and there may be plenty of exceptions to these rules, but this is my general reading on the subject. Feel free to throw in your two cents, or a buck 0 five if you're a mind to. I begin with Sword and Sorcery.

Conan is the archetypal Sword and Sorcery hero, though in many ways the character Kane from Karl Edward Wagner's books is the most original and powerful of these heroes. The traits of the Sword and Sorcery hero are:

1. They are bigger than life. Almost all physical features are described to the extreme. They are faster, stronger, and more dangerous than real life people. This doesn't mean, though, that they are supernatural or have special powers of any kind. They are like a human who has been honed and honed and honed as a weapon.

2. They have an indomitable will to survive. They can stand immense amounts of pain. They will not give up, even though they may on occasion feel fear or dread. Most of them particularly dislike sorcery. Karl Wagner's Kane is an exception to this; he is a sorcerer.

3. They are quick to resort to violence. They are very good at it and have no qualms about using it.

4. They are quick witted but generally not given to philosophical debate and considerations. Karl Wagner's Kane is, again, an exception. Robert E. Howard's Conan is an exception more often than most casual readers think.

5. They like action and can get bored easily, though they are also capable of predator-like patience when the situation demands it. They usually delight in pleasures of the flesh, such as drink and sex.

6. They are usually loners.

7. They are usually wanderers.

8. They are often at least on the edge of being amoral. They may often be, or have been, criminals, but they do have their own ethics and their own sense of loyalty. Almost all of them are immensely loyal to their friends.

9. They usually have some type of goal to accomplish in a story, but oftentimes that goal is very personal. They want wealth, or revenge, or maybe just some excitement. Power for power's sake seldom interests them, though. Once more, Karl Wagner's Kane is an exception.

Note: In addition to Conan and Kane, other Sword and Sorcery heroes include Druss the Slayer by David Gemmell, Thongor by Lin Carter, and Gath of Baal by James Silke. A particularly notable sword and sorcery hero is Imaro, created by Charles Saunders, which is, as far as I know, the only black hero in this genre. Most of these heroes are male, but a notable exception is Raven, who appeared in a fantasy series by Richard Kirk (whose real name is Robert Holdstock).