Why should one person be the hero? This is something I have been griping about for many years now. This notion of the individual hero – be it Batman (the rich guy with all the tools money can buy) or Superman (not of this world, and not a God) – is so ingrained in literature from the Western Canon. Stories from the Indian sub-continent have many many protagonists (if you thought LOTR had a character list, you should check out Ramayana) and the ‘hero’ isn’t quite a hero – like Rama is always sad and irritated. In Arshia Sattar’s Ramayana, he at one point says that if this is what it means to be the good boy, I don’t want to be that anymore. I give up.
Neo from the Matrix is also the reluctant hero. I read a fantastic article yesterday – it makes so much sense about Matrix is a trans-allegory – https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/3/30/18286436/the-matrix-wachowskis-trans-experience-redpill
And there, the author speaks of how Matrix subverts the idea of the One:
“The film’s two sequels — which subvert and blow up the Chosen One myth in favor of telling a story about how salvation will come not from domination but from synthesis, from people (and machines) coming together…”
The one makes sense when there’s an ‘Other’ that needs to be overcome. Changing the frame will involve synthesis, and not just inversion.
–
Of course, when there’s a discussion on the Western canon and the One, you have to talk about Harry Potter. While cooking, I ended up listening to Lit-Pickers, a podcast by Deepanjana Pal and Supriya Nair. There they speak about Harry Potter and JK Rowling’s universe – the conversation seemed a tad predictable (1). I like Harry Potter at the level of a well-spun yarn – if you look for deeper political layers, it doesn’t live up to any measure. One article that unravels it is Penny Red’s ‘Harry Potter and the fascist ubermensch’
http://pennyred.blogspot.com/2009/07/harry-potter-and-fascist-ubermensch.html
–
Maybe another blogpost on the nature of these heroes, and why they appeal to us at different points in time. And maybe another one on books that subvert magnificently the whole ‘one’ genre.
(1): A note on Lit Pickers – I didn’t enjoy it much. Most of the discussions seemed predictable – and the chemistry between the two anchors wasn’t quite there. Somehow, there was an affectation – unlike how say Paromita Vohra or Nisha Susan speak in English – they own the language and make it rooted in who they are, rather than speak of clutching at pearls.
Middle aged 