reverence for heroes essay

Memorial Day: How to Honor Our Heroes

Abraham Lincoln once said, "Any nation that does not honor its heroes will not long endure." Two and a half centuries into the United States...

Psychologist explains 'eggshell parenting' and how it impacts kids during their formative years

Titanic survivor reveals the one souvenir he kept from the tragedy that stunned the world in 1912

Bakery is asking its customers to look for a $4,000 diamond in one of their cookies

Homeless man surprised after restaurant offers him free meal of his choice when he asked for leftovers

Neuroscientists say this is the most relaxing song in the world

ALICE VON HILDEBRAND

Reverence: the mother of all virtues, catholic news agency, april 26, 2016.

One of the many ethical gems that Plato has left us is to be found in his last work: The Laws —a work alas often neglected by scholars. Born in the fifth century B.C.—the glorious century of Greece—Plato died in 348 B.C. when Athens was on a declining slope. Deeply sorrowed from witnessing this decadence, and referring to the glorious century of Pericles, and also of Socrates, Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, Plato wrote the following words: “… reverence was then our queen and mistress.” These golden words give us a key to moral decadence: lack of reverence. He seems to be addressing the twenty-first century: “Irreverence will be your downfall.”  

These words alone fully justify the fathers of the Church in honoring him with the words: “a preparer of the ways of Christ.” They also fully justify the role that he played in the thought of St. Augustine. Plato perceived with matchless clarity that respect for the natural moral law is the thermometer that will determine the future of a country. This should give us food for thought.  Alas, one of the laws of history is that we never learn from the eloquent lessons it gives us.

Plato saw clearly that reverence is a key virtue. Dietrich von Hildebrand calls it, “the mother of all virtues,” because none of them can possibly blossom without being animated by a feeling of awe for the greatness of creation—a creation that clearly points to a creator.

Reverence is the virtue reminding us constantly that we are “creatures”—that everything is a gift calling for gratitude toward the Gift-Giver. Reverence opens our eyes to the mystery of being, of life, of beauty. In his own unique style, Chesterton tells us about his enchantment as a child over the fact that he existed, and once for the mysterious beauty of the world surrounding him… but to his regret—not being at that time religiously awakened—he deplored the fact that he did not know to whom he should address his gratitude. A gift calls for a gift-giver. How tragically poor is the life of those who choke on the words, “Thank you.” Such people are metaphysical beggars—and do not know it.

The young child is born with a sense of “marveling,” be it the discovery of its own toes. Each day opens up a window that makes him grow wings. The Greeks were right indeed: “Philosophy begins in wonder.” How incredibly sad to be living in a world which no longer “wonders” and chokes on the words, “Thank you”:  a world in which we are told that thanks to “science” there is nothing that modern man cannot unravel and “explain” away. How true is the French saying: “A little science separates us from God; true science brings us back to Him.”

How desirable it is for all of us to go back to spiritual childhood and wake up every morning with a heart open to marveling.

I recall that as a tiny little girl, I once went to the kitchen, watched the cook cut an onion, and marveled with enchantment at all its admirable layers. To this very day, I have a special relationship with it. I also recall taking an egg in my hand, and once again being overwhelmed by its beauty. This enchantment still increased when the cook cut it open, and I witnessed this admirable combination of yellow and white—the papal colors—which I still experience today.

Another awakening to “wonder” was my first conscious perception to the enchantment of springtime. We lived one hundred yards from the Parc du Cinquantenaire in Brussels, where I took my first steps. My mother took us there daily to play. Upon entering the park, it must have been in late March, I noticed that the earth that was dark the day before, had broken open to permit the entrance of a crocus. I was so overwhelmed that I bent down and kissed it. To this very day, I have not lost my special relationship with this modest flower. I realized that grateful wonder and happiness are deeply connected. 

The curse of modern men, is that so many of them have lost their sense for wonder and gratitude. Boredom is a punishment for irreverence. Alas, our mind-boggling technological progress has brought with it the curse of taking things for granted and assuming with blind stupidity that there is nothing we cannot know—nothing that he cannot master. Having a small gadget in his hand, one feels that he is the master of the universe. He can click on a button and have the world at his fingertips. Regretfully, we never hear homilists say a word about the sin of being “blasé.” It is a sin because it is a consequence of ingratitude—because it is a fruit of pride and metaphysical arrogance. Every sin brings with it its own punishment. 

Alas the spiritual climate of our scientific age has killed our sense of wonder. We have become so convinced that (thanks to the mind-boggling development of science, especially in the course of the twentieth century that has invented the atomic bomb) we no longer need to “marvel.” There is no mystery that we cannot not only unravel but control. In fact, nothing deserves our “wonderment.” Being blasé is a twentieth-century sickness. Why are so many of us “bored” and unhappy? To have too much money is a curse; we can have anything without effort, just by paying the bill. I have reasons to assume that the children of peasants are never bored; nature keeps fascinating them. But I know children of the very rich that are always complaining of being bored; having everything, they enjoy nothing. A very rich financier who had one hundred ties in his closet, passing Brooks on Madison Avenue, might be tempted to get another one: of course, he will buy it, but will hardly ever wear it, if at all. Those of us who have worked hard to get a nice outfit, once we wear it, enjoy it and are grateful. There are children whom their parents take to Florida for Christmas, to California for Easter, and spend the summer in Europe traveling from country to country: they saw everything; “Of course, I saw the Parthenon—what about it? Of course I saw Santa Sophia; of course one short weekend I saw the Pyramids.” They do not know how to contemplate: the key concern is to brag about it to their “friends” at school: “I know it all. Nothing impresses me.” In a different context, this has been admirably sketched by Anthony Esolen in his book showing how “imagination” can be and has been killed in children. I am tempted to say because of our having lost our sense of marveling, we are feverishly looking for substitutes such as drugs which give one a “high”; rock and roll, the brutal sounds of which awaken in us—to quote Socrates—the monster that lies dormant in every one of us.

Whereas the St. Matthew’s Passion brings tears to our eyes and teaches us how to pray. Violent, deafening sounds act like a narcotic on the human soul and paralyze it spiritually. How right Plato was once again when he wrote that decadence starts with music (or rather brutal noise now called music) and prevents us from being “recollected”. 

Modern man assumes that he has a key to the universe, he is the master and should only marvel at himself; “ wie herrlich weit wir es gebracht haben ” (how wonderfully far we have made it) (Goethe, Faustus Wagner) .

We live in a mendacious world which promises that “technology” gives us a key to the universe, and that, being given time, man can solve all problems and conquer death. Indeed, man can become sicut dii (like God).

The punishment is that we constantly need more fun, more noise to make us forget at least for a while—how bored we are. These palliatives are addictive: the more we take them, the more we need them. This has produced the "Drug Culture.” Drug it is indeed, but “culture”? It should be called anti-culture. We have lost the art of marveling because there is nothing worth marveling at. Man is a bored “creator,” and has totally—and possibly willingly—forgotten that he is a creature who should recall daily that there is nothing that he has not received. The sacredness of receptivity has been destroyed because the latter calls for gratitude. 

Every sin—and metaphysical arrogance is a major one—brings with it its own punishment:  modern man can no longer “marvel” and has lost the art of rejoicing over the blinding fact that there are things greater than we are. Boredom is a modern plague. Now it should be obvious that there is a deep bond between gratitude—a key to happiness—and reverence. What a beautiful topic for a doctoral dissertation. As far as I know, it has not yet been done.

Assuming that because we have the world at our fingertips (thanks to modern gadgets) and only need to click on a key to “be in China” and also find answers to all questions: we are condemned to eternal boredom, and often turn to perversions to have some fun—something that makes us forget, be it only for a few hours, how boring life is. This fact explains the scary epidemic of devilish practices and of every conceivable perverse invention.

What is “reverence?” It is an uplifting and joyful feeling of awe, a response that man is called upon to give to God’s creation which clearly points to the Creator; it is an ever renewed and grateful discovery of the mysteries of being; it is an overcoming of one’s moral blindness preventing us from perceiving the glories of the universe that we live in. It is a joy to perceive how marvelous it is “to be,” and consequently, should make us respond with horror at abortion, willingly and brutally denying existence to others (for I doubt that abortionists would have chosen to be aborted themselves had they had a chance of doing it). They deny life to others;  not to themselves. We all should tremble with respect at perceiving a little creature making its dramatic entrance into our world.   

This increasing lack of reverence is, alas, strikingly expressed in our churches since Vatican II.  No one will ever convince me that in destroying the communion rails—many of which were artistic masterpieces—our reverence for the Blessed Sacrament increased. And this is apart from the scandalous expenses that this iconoclasm involved. The question we should raise is why was it done? It is not only pitiful, but shameful that people in authoritative positions did not say clearly and loudly, “We do not want this act of irreverent iconoclasm.” Alas, their silence was deafening. Man is made up of body and soul, and it is dignum et justum (right and just) that the body in harmony with the soul should express its trembling reverence toward the Body of Christ present in the Eucharist. If any one of us were blessed with a divine apparition, the first thing we would do would be to kneel in trembling adoration. How right Chesterton was when he wrote that modern man forgets “how tall he is on his knees.” But one “profanation” leads to the next. Now not only were communion rails destroyed, but others changes—for example, singing the same discordant music of irreverence—were introduced one by one. Why is it that people no longer beat their breasts while reciting the “Confiteor”? “Mea Culpa” calls for the beautiful duet sung by the soul, with the accompaniment of the body. Why is it that when reciting the “Credo” people no longer bow while uttering the words; et incarnatus est (and was made flesh)?—the glorious words of Christian revelation. Why is it that in a modern Belgian church the benches are so close to one another that it is physically impossible to kneel when the words of consecration are uttered? In the same church, people no longer get up for the reading of the Gospel, and when the words of consecration are uttered, they get up mechanically for a minute and then sit down again. Why is it that since Vatican II many are those who come to Sunday mass in their beach attire? Something they would not dream of doing if invited to the White House by Barack Obama. Would that be such an honor?

Religion should have a sacred language: a language which being limited to the cult is inoculated against slang and vulgarity. How tragic is the loss of Latin, uniting all Catholics all over the world—the precious bond of a sacred language. The construction of the Tower of Babel brought about its own punishment: the difficulty for men now to communicate. By abandoning Latin in the liturgy, we have chosen the punishment. Let me repeat: vulgarities are inconceivable in a sacred language. When one hears a visiting priest giving the homily at Sunday mass and referring to God as “the nice guy upstairs,” I know that if angels could weep, they would sob. It is nothing short of shameful.

The answer is tragically obvious: we have lost our sense of reverence—the trembling reverence that animated Moses when he was told to take off his shoes… for this place is sacred. How can Muslims possibly be convinced that we Catholics believe in the Real Presence of the Eucharist while witnessing the posture of very many Catholics coming to Sunday Mass? Sunt lacrimae rerum (There are tears for things). Any religious revival should begin with a re-awakening of our sense of wonder, awe, and trembling reverence for the sacred and whatever is greater than we are. He who walks on arrogant stilts faces the danger of breaking his neck.  

Again, no one would convince me that to give communion in the hand has increased our faith. Ever since I was a child, I heard the words: “Do not touch. This is precious.” If there is one thing which is not only precious, but sacred, it is the Body of Christ. Why are the hands of priests consecrated? Because this consecration allowed them to touch the body of our Savior. Apart from the fact that this dangerously unfortunate decision has decreased our sense of the sacred, it has also weakened the difference between priest and lay people—a Lutheran victory. All are called to holiness, but the fact remains that someone who can pronounce the words, “This is my body; this is my blood,” is granted a special dignity which today, while not being officially not abolished, has decreased our reverence for the priesthood. We should not forget that there are many ways to holiness: all claim our being transformed in Christ, but the vocation to the priesthood differs greatly from the vocation to marriage and parenthood. There are holy priests; there are holy fathers and mothers. A holy father, by his holiness, is much closer to a holy priest than the latter is to a mediocre one.

Let me add: allowing the faithful to receive under the two species, while done in the past, was permitted at the time when “reverence was our queen and mistress.” Today it has in fact decreased our reverence not only for the Holy Eucharist, but also for the priesthood: it in fact has abolished the difference between consecrated and non-consecrated hands. How difficult it is for young Catholic children today to have this sense of mystery, sacredness, and trembling reverence when their parents no longer have it?

I will only make a brief allusion to the way people dress coming to Mass on Sunday. Once again, years ago, out of reverence for the Eucharist, people covered themselves respectfully. Today many are those who come to church as to popular restaurants; “Come as you are”—how can Protestants and non-Catholics possibly believe that we believe that Christ is physically present?

Inevitably this lack of respect will impact our reverence not only for our own body, but also on the relationship between man and woman; how is a male to respect a woman who has no more sense for the mystery of her femininity and never thinks that she is privileged to have a body identical in “architecture” to the body of the holiest one among human creatures?

One thing is certain: old age is no longer respected. When I was a child in Belgium, in public transportation it was the rule that when at “rush hour” or when the trolley car or the bus was full, men would immediately give their seat to an elderly person or to a mother with young children. It was a matter of course. In a materialistic society like ours, youth is glorified, and old age is looked down upon as no longer productive or efficient. When one reads stories of Indian tribes, it was a matter of course that when they were facing a threatening situation, they turned for advice to the elderly because having lived longer, they had more experience, and were better acquainted with human problems and suffering. 

It is saddening indeed when young children in grammar school age address elderly persons with, “Hi, Joe.” It would have been inconceivable in my youth, not to address them as “Mr.” or “Mrs.” If I were to tell them that it is not the proper way of addressing the elderly, they would be baffled. “Why? We are all equal.”

This lack of respect is also manifested in the silly conviction that thanks to our amazing technology we are infinitely superior to people of the past—be it Homer, Dante, Cervantes, Shakespeare or Dostoyevski. A student of mine had the arrogance to declare in front of the whole class that he did not think that Shakespeare was a great writer. Horrified, I could only mutter: “Poor Shakespeare. Mr. X of the Bronx would, at best, give you a C-minus!” One thing is certain; none of these famous men was a computer expert!

It is pathetic when a grammar school child looks down upon his grandmother because she had difficulty handling a computer. But one thing is certain: many are grown up today who cannot write properly. Recently, I received the letter of a “big shot.” Looking at his signature, I would have sworn that he was in the first grade. 

Technology has no respect for nature: we have incredibly efficient and comfortable airplanes (let us think of Air Force I), but we are no longer capable of producing beautiful means of transportation: luxury and comfort have replaced beauty. I am tempted to say that one of the reasons why the British monarchy survived “modernity” is because of their sense of tradition; when the Queen goes to the Parliament, she is driven in a horse-drawn, beautiful carriage. How grotesque would it be if, to be modern, she rode there on a bicycle! How disappointed we would be if we were told by the Vatican that the Swiss Guards uniforms would soon be replaced by waiters’ attires, in a spirit of poverty. These beautiful clothes are too expensive to make. A Franciscan monastery of the twelfth century had neither electricity nor running water, but it was beautiful. It is still is. Can machines and tools ever be entitled to be called “beautiful”? The modern man builds up incredibly fast, knowing full well that in the near future, it will be demolished and replaced with something more efficient, more comfortable, more modern.

We ruthlessly destroy nature. Understandably because of population growth, certain pieces of land must be available for new buildings, but I am far from certain that profit making does not “trump” a practical need.

While reading this brief essay, it is most likely that I will be dubbed a “Cassandra.” Alas, she was right.

• Modernity/Secularism
• Liturgy/Catholicism

Recent Posts

Women and Redemption

A Plea: Back to Socratic Paganism

Benedict and Dietrich

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

An Empty Regard

By William Deresiewicz

• Aug. 20, 2011

William Deresiewicz is an essayist and critic, and the author of “Solitude and Leadership,” an address delivered at West Point in 2009 and widely taught in the armed forces.

NO symbol is more sacred in American life right now than the military uniform. The cross is divisive; the flag has been put to partisan struggle. But the uniform commands nearly automatic and universal reverence. In Congress as on television, generals are treated with awed respect, service members spoken of as if they were saints. Liberals are especially careful to make the right noises: obeisance to the uniform having become the shibboleth of patriotism, as anti-Communism used to be. Across the political spectrum, throughout the media, in private and public life, the pieties and ritual declarations are second nature now: “warriors,” “heroes,” “mission”; “our young men and women in uniform,” “our brave young men and women,” “our finest young people.” So common has this kind of language become, we scarcely notice it anymore.

There is no question that our troops are courageous and selfless. They expose themselves to inconceivable dangers under conditions of enormous hardship and fight because they want to keep the country safe. We owe them respect and gratitude — even if we think the wars they’re asked to fight are often wrong. But who our service members are and the work their images do in our public psyche, our public discourse, and our public policy are not the same. Pieties are ways to settle arguments before they begin. We need to question them, to see what they’re hiding.

The new cult of the uniform began with the call to “support our troops” during the Iraq war. The slogan played on a justified collective desire to avoid repeating the mistake of the Vietnam era, when hatred of the conflict spilled over into hostility toward the people who were fighting it. Now the logic was inverted: supporting the troops, we were given to understand, meant that you had to support the war. In fact, that’s all it seemed to mean. The ploy was a bait and switch, an act of emotional blackmail. If you opposed the war or questioned the way it was conducted, you undermined our troops.

As the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have dragged on, other purposes have come into play. The greater the sacrifice that has fallen on one small group of people, the members of the military and their families, the more we have gone from supporting our troops to putting them on a pedestal. In the Second World War, everybody fought. Soldiers were not remote figures to most of us; they were us. Now, instead of sharing the burden, we sentimentalize it. It’s a lot easier to idealize the people who are fighting than it is to send your kid to join them. This is also a form of service, I suppose: lip service.

The cult of the uniform also bespeaks a wounded empire’s need to reassert its masculinity in the wake of 9/11. “Dead or alive,” “bring it on,” “either you’re with us or you’re against us”: the tenor of official rhetoric in the ensuing years embodied a kind of desperate machismo. The war in Iraq, that catharsis of violence, expressed the same emotional dynamic. We’d been hit in the head with a rock; like a neighborhood bully, we grabbed the first person we could get our hands on and beat him senseless. Mission accomplished: we were strong again, or so we imagined, and the uniform — as George W. Bush understood when he swaggered across the deck of the Abraham Lincoln in a flight suit — was the symbol of that strength. The soldier is the way we want to see ourselves: stoic, powerful, focused, devoted.

This helps explain why the souring of the wars failed to tarnish the military’s reputation. There seems little doubt that our armed forces today are more professional, and at the small-unit level, at least, more effective, than they were in Vietnam. Still, Iraq descended into stalemate, and Afghanistan gives little hope, 10 years on, of ever being anything else. Does the fault lie with our civilian leadership alone, or with our client states? Do “our brave young men and women fulfill every mission we ask them to,” as the catechism goes? These are not rhetorical questions; these are the real questions that we haven’t been willing to ask ourselves. At the very least, our generals ought surely to come in for some criticism — as they did, when it was appropriate, in other wars. And yet the cult of the uniform has immunized them from blame, and inoculates the rest of us from thought.

There are other questions. Has the military really ceased to be the big, bumbling bureaucracy it was always taken to be? And if it is supremely efficient now, is that because there’s something uniquely effective about its command structure and values — a frequent implication these days — or rather because we’ve given it a blank check? Is America the world’s cop, as we like to say, or is our military something more like an imperial police force? (When it comes to places like Darfur or Ivory Coast, which are not felt to threaten national security interests, we leave the dirty work to someone else.)

It seems extremely unlikely anything like My Lai has taken place in Iraq or Afghanistan, but there have been some terrible crimes: the abuses at Abu Ghraib; the premeditated gang rape of a 14-year-old girl in Mahmudiya, Iraq, and the murder of her family; the executions of Afghan civilians by the self-described “kill team” from the 5th Stryker Brigade. Only the first has been widely discussed, likely because there were pictures. How many more of these have there been? Maybe none, maybe a significant number: until we ask — until we want to ask — we’ll never know.

As the national narrative shifts from the war on terror to the specter of decline, the uniform performs another psychic function. The military is can-do, the one institution — certainly the one public institution — that still appears to work. The schools, the highways, the post office; Amtrak, FEMA, NASA and the T.S.A. — not to mention the banks, the newspapers, the health care system, and above all, Congress: nothing seems to function anymore, except the armed forces. They’re like our national football team — and undisputed champs, to boot — the one remaining sign of American greatness.

The term most characteristically employed, when the cult of the uniform is celebrated, is “heroes.” Perhaps no word in public life of late has been more thoroughly debased by overuse. Soldiers are “heroes”; firefighters are “heroes”; police officers are “heroes” — all of them, not the special few who undoubtedly deserve the term. So unthinking has the platitude become that someone referred to national park rangers on public radio recently as “heroes” — reflexively, in passing — presumably since they wear uniforms, as well. Stephen Colbert picked up on this phenomenon long ago, which is why he slyly refers to his viewers — and now, to the donors to his Super PAC — by the same term.

“HEROES,” like “support our troops,” was also deployed early, in Iraq. Within a couple of weeks, we were treated to the manufactured heroism of Jessica D. Lynch, the young supply clerk who was rescued from an Iraqi hospital a few days after her capture by enemy forces (both events turning out to be far less cinematic than initially put out) and who finally felt compelled to speak out against her own use as an instrument of propaganda. In the case of Pat Tillman , the former professional football player who died the following year in Afghanistan by friendly fire, not in an ambush as originally claimed, it was left to his family to expose the lies with which the Army surrounded him. The irony is that our soldiers are the last people who are likely to call themselves heroes and are apparently very uncomfortable with this kind of talk. The military understands itself as a group endeavor. As the West Point professor Elizabeth D. Samet recently noted, service members feel uneasy when strangers approach them to — as the well-meaning but oddly impersonal ritual goes — thank them for their service, thereby turning them into paradoxically anonymous celebrities. It was wrong to demonize our service members in Vietnam; to canonize them now is wrong as well. Both distortions make us forget that what they are are human beings.

What is heroism? What kind of psychological purpose does the concept serve? Heroism is bravery and selflessness, but more than that, it is triumphant action, and in particular, morally unambiguous action. In most of life — and certainly in public life — there is scarcely such a thing on either count. Politics is a muddle of moral and practical compromise. Victories are almost always partial, ambiguous and subject to reversal. Heroism belongs to the realm of fantasy — the comic book, the action movie — or to delimited and often artificial spheres of action, like space exploration or sports.

The Marine who saves his buddies in a firefight, the cop who rescues a child from a well — the challenges they face are clear and simple and isolated from the human mess. Capt. Chesley B. Sullenberger III , the pilot who successfully landed an airliner in the Hudson River, was, everyone agreed, a hero. But note how frequently the element of salvation or rescue comes up when we talk about heroism. It was a beautiful coincidence that Captain Sullenberger’s moment came just five days before the last presidential inauguration, for heroism and rescue were the subtext of Barack Obama’s campaign, especially for his legions of young believers. He was the one we’d been waiting for; you could almost imagine the “S” on his chest, underneath the suit. (Once in office, of course, he descended into the muddle, and showed himself a mortal after all.) Heroes are daddies: larger-than-life figures, unimpeachably powerful and good, who save us from evil and hurt.

“America needs heroes,” it is sometimes said, a phrase that’s often uttered in a wistful tone, almost cooingly, as if we were talking about a lonely child. But do we really “need heroes”? We need leaders, who marshal us to the muddle. We need role models, who show us how to deal with it. But what we really need are citizens, who refuse to infantilize themselves with talk of heroes and put their shoulders to the public wheel instead. The political scientist Jonathan Weiler sees the cult of the uniform as a kind of citizenship-by-proxy. Soldiers and cops and firefighters, he argues, embody a notion of public service to which the rest of us are now no more than spectators. What we really need, in other words, is a swift kick in the pants.

A picture with an earlier version of this article was posted in error.   It showed a uniform with mismatched military insignia, rank and badges. The current image is the one that was published in print editions on Sunday .

How we handle corrections

The Aeneid Essay Questions

The many gods and goddesses in the Aeneid are invested with highly distinctive, often capricious personalities. Choose several deities with distinct characteristics, and compare how their efforts influence the lives of mortals. Which deity is the most powerful? Which has the most influence over Aeneas and his companions?

Respect for one's ancestors is important to many characters in the Aeneid . How does Aeneas reveal his deep reverence for his forebears?

Aeneas has been criticized by some for being "too perfect" of a hero. Are there any episodes where his limitations are revealed? Where does he seem to demonstrate flaws? Would a modern audience see flaws that Virgil's earliest readers might have overlooked in their founding hero?

Many argue that Turnus is, in essence, a counterpart to Aeneas - one of the few characters with comparable strength and leadership abilities. Although it is easy to characterize Turnus as purely evil, do you think that Virgil intends him to be interpreted as wholly malevolent? What makes this character complex?

There are numerous sacrifices and omens throughout the Aeneid. Select some of these and discuss their specifics: why are the particular elements of the sacrifice chosen? How effective is the sacrifice? What makes the omen especially resonant in that moment? Is the omen interpreted correctly by those who witness it?

Dido is one of the most fascinating characters in the Aeneid. She knows that Aeneas is destined to build his kingdom elsewhere, but she refuses to accept the dictates of fate. To what extent is Dido a victim or responsible for her own tragedy, and in what ways does she share the characteristics of a hero?

Aeneas is destined to sail to Italy and build a great new empire that will one day become Rome. There are numerous references throughout the Aeneid to the inevitability of fate. When are the episodes where fate might have been thwarted? Could Aeneas have abandoned or failed to fulfill his destiny? What are the limits of free will when the endpoint is already set?

Many of the minor characters in the Aeneid , especially the mortal women (but not Dido or Camilla), are presented vaguely and as relatively uninteresting. But where would the story be without them? Discuss the potential and actual roles of some of the secondary characters.

The Aeneid Questions and Answers

The Question and Answer section for The Aeneid is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel.

In what ways does it espouse typical Roman virtues of Fortitudo (toughness), Prudentia (wisdom and planning ahead), Iusticia (justice), and Temperantia (moderation)

How does Aeneas reveal his deep reverence for his forebearers?

Aeneas pays proper respect to the gods and strives to always do his duty.

He is the son of Venus,

Aeneas makes purposeful visits to his home. Troy holds his allegiance, as does his family.

Study Guide for The Aeneid

The Aeneid study guide contains a biography of Virgil, literature essays, a complete e-text, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.

• About The Aeneid
• The Aeneid Summary
• Character List

Essays for The Aeneid

The Aeneid literature essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of The Aeneid.

• Is Aeneas a Good Warrior?
• Aeneas, and the Reinvention of the Hero
• The Facets of Passion and Duty
• On Such a Night as This: Analysis of Vergil's Aeneid, II.248-259
• Two Treatments of a Woman Scorned

Lesson Plan for The Aeneid

• About the Author
• Study Objectives
• Common Core Standards
• Introduction to The Aeneid
• Relationship to Other Books
• Bringing in Technology
• Notes to the Teacher
• Related Links
• The Aeneid Bibliography

E-Text of The Aeneid

The Aeneid E-Text contains the full text of The Aeneid

Wikipedia Entries for The Aeneid

• Introduction
• Virgil's death, and editing

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — Beowulf Hero — Beowulf Epic Hero: Characteristics and Relevance

Beowulf Epic Hero: Characteristics and Relevance

• Categories: Beowulf Beowulf Hero

About this sample

Words: 869 |

Published: Sep 12, 2023

Words: 869 | Pages: 2 | 5 min read

Table of contents

Characteristics of beowulf as an epic hero, beowulf as a model for heroism, relevance to contemporary issues, heroic deeds and their reflection of epic heroism, promotion of values: courage, perseverance, and sacrifice.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Literature

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 817 words

3 pages / 1188 words

4 pages / 1774 words

2 pages / 933 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Beowulf Hero

Beowulf is a classic Anglo-Saxon epic poem that has been studied and revered for centuries. The tale of the eponymous hero Beowulf has captivated audiences with its themes of heroism, valor, and the eternal struggle between good [...]

Beowulf, the famous Anglo-Saxon epic, is a tale of heroism, bravery, and moral integrity. The protagonist, Beowulf, embodies the heroic ideal of the time, which was characterized by a combination of physical strength, moral [...]

Beowulf, the epic poem written in Old English, tells the story of the legendary hero Beowulf and his incredible feats of bravery. The poem is a prime example of the importance of bravery in the Anglo-Saxon culture, and it [...]

Beowulf is one of the most significant works of literature in the English language. The poem tells the story of the hero Beowulf and his battles against the monster Grendel, Grendel's mother, and a dragon. While Beowulf is often [...]

The epic poem Beowulf highlights the role of God as a guiding protector who provides earthly wealth and well-being to the people of 6th century Denmark and Sweden. Beowulf and his people worship a pagan god who serves to [...]

In the Anglo-Saxon literary work, Beowulf, heroic culture is presented in the values that heroes should possess and is one of the most prominent themes presented throughout the work. The values that the heroes should possess [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Numéro Cinq

On reverence: essay — richard farrell.

Rather than words comes the thought of high windows: The sun-comprehending glass, And beyond it, the deep air, that shows Nothing, and is nowhere, and is endless —Philip Larkin, from “High Windows”

It seems to me that reverence, as something intrinsic to an individual’s sense of meaning, as a principle of human communities, has been on the decline, if not under downright assault, in the culture at large. I’m not arguing that there’s a scarcity of people leading reverential lives. From monks to poets, from special-education teachers to astronauts, we live amongst many still capable of being awestruck. Nor is the raw material which inspires reverence eroding, like polar ice caps and old-growth forests, under pressure for mankind’s increased footprint. Just a mile from my front door, a traffic jam occurs each night as hundreds of people crowd along the cliffs to watch the sun drop into the Pacific.

When I was young, I would wake early and head off to serve as an altar boy for the weekday, sunrise mass. The same rag-tag band of true believers filed into the pews at 6:30 every morning. Something about being tired, a whiff of candles, incantations, and carefully articulated rituals always mesmerized me. I’ve yet to encounter a more consistently sacred sight in my life than dawn breaking through the stained-glass windows at Christ the King Church. At twelve, I gave serious consideration to the seminary, and heretically repeated the priest’s gestures in my living room, with Ritz crackers for the body and grape soda for the blood. But I had no calling from God. In time, the rituals themselves lost meaning.

Looking back, it’s hardly surprising that I chose to go to college at the Naval Academy, an institution awash in rituals and codes. Anyone who’s ever witnessed a sunset dress parade along the Severn River—four-thousand midshipmen marching in lock step, bayonets and belt buckles polished, blue and gold spinnakers billowing on the river—and not felt something akin to awe, surely has lost the ability to be stirred by great pageantry. By the time I was 18, I’d traded in the vestments of the altar for the vestments of war but marveled no less at the lore and history of it all, the flag lowered at sunset, the distant bugle call of taps.

During my sophomore year at Annapolis, a plebe committed suicide by stepping out of his fifth-floor window. The young man had wanted to quit the Academy, but was encouraged to stay by well-meaning parents and company officers. I watched as paramedics attempted to resuscitate the broken and bloodied midshipman, his once-pristine, navy-blue uniform suddenly a torn and grisly mess. Later, as fireman sprayed his blood from the brick walkway, I felt a desperate emptiness about the institution I’d committed to. The shame of quitting was certainly not worth that young man’s life.

“Reverence is an ancient virtue,” Paul Woodruff writes in Reverence: Renewing a Forgotten Virtue . Woodruff, a humanities professor, approaches the subject of reverence with a philosophical lens. Handed down from early cultures, across a variety of religious and secular systems, reverence has less to do with mystery and mysticism and more to do with shaping individuals and societies who can recognize the limitations of what humans can (or should) control. Reverence, according to Woodruff, begins in a capacity for awe and wonder for the world around us. This capacity for awe leads to a deepening respect for fellow human travelers. “This in turns fosters the ability to be ashamed when we show moral flows exceeding the normal human allotment.”  Shame arises, in part, when humans fail to remember that each person, whether prince or pauper, is dwarfed by the sheer grandness of existence.

Reverence, Woodruff also argues, is on the decline in contemporary culture.

My children have recently begun their summer vacation and the moments in my day which might let in a little reverence have been few and far between. It’s hard to experience awe amidst battles over television remotes, pop-radio stations and who gets to play on the iPad. At times, it seems that the experience of reverence demands things in short supply these days: silence, stillness, time to think. And in most of my daily life, the once sacred rituals have either lapsed into quaint memory or feel contrived. Perhaps I’ve convinced myself that I’ve outgrown them, like acolyte robes and military uniforms. Perhaps the only solution is to get away from it all for a while.

So at the end of June, I leave California for Massachusetts with my kids—Maggie, almost 12, and Tom, who’ll be 8 in a few weeks. These are transitional times as a parent. Maybe all time and ages are transitional, but these years in particular feel downright seismic. Less and less snuggling, more and more driving, from horse lessons to baseball practice to sleepovers on the other side of town. Because I’ve taken Maggie and Tom to see their grandparents in Massachusetts most summers since they were born, these trips retain something of a ritual in our family. The grandchildren, welcomed as mini-deities, are worshiped with burnt offerings of Cheetos, ice cream bars and endless hours of over-indulgence.

Children make for wonderful case studies of reverence. Anyone who’s ever spent ten minutes waiting for a child to stop staring in wide-eyed wonder at a green caterpillar on a leaf knows that a child’s capacity for awe is without peer. And anyone who’s ever chastened that same child for being distracted certainly knows how deeply a child feels shame. Respect, awe, shame—a child’s life is awash in reverential moments. What child does not, as Annie Dillard says, live in all they seek? If only they could articulate their experience. Because what a child lacks, it seems, is the eloquence to communicate that experience. This comes with maturity, with reading the great books, studying the big ideas, sharing in the human conversation.

This point is driven home most clearly by one of my son’s friends in Massachusetts. John, 6, suffers from significant autism. What might well be a deep, if scattered, concentration and intelligence (John knows all the world’s countries and their capitals, knows all the elements of the periodic table and hears and repeats verbatim anything you say) crashes around him when he encounters other people. While John twirls around on the beach, gathering shells with a naturalist’s curiosity, he also seizes up, clenching his hands into tight fists and his face into a grimace, when given basic commands by an adult. He remains isolated in a room of children, able to make only the slightest contact. The simple, if cruel, reality is that John doesn’t fit into the world as typically constructed. It’s like he hears the music playing in the background but can’t find the rhythm.

And yet it’s hard not to wonder and marvel at his freedom, the absolute and unadulterated pleasure he finds in a vibrating restaurant pager or the garden hose at my mother’s house. For John, it’s as if all the moments in his world were reverent ones, but they remain utterly trapped inside, un-spoken, only thinly connected with those around him, and thus those moments verge on being lost to meaning.

“We live in all we seek,” Annie Dillard writes. “The hidden shows up in too-plain sight. It lives captive on the face of the obvious – the people, events, and things of the day – to which we as sophisticated children have long since become oblivious. What a hideout: Holiness lies spread and borne over the surface of time and stuff like color.”

Dillard reminds us that the sacred surrounds everything, waiting only to be noticed. And intellectually, this makes perfect sense, though it’s another thing entirely to live this way, to actively overcome the obliviousness of daily pursuits, all those small tasks that take up so much time and energy. Reverence, for the most part, always feels set apart, reserved for mountaintops, cathedrals and forest trails. The trick of recognizing the numinous in the mundane, seeing the sacred patterns—the color, as Dillard calls it—in the landscape we walk everyday, seems elusive, frustrating at times, the stuff of dreams.

What Dillard seems to be arguing, and Woodruff no less, is that reverence involves a choice. “We have not lost our capacity for reverence,” Woodruff writes. “The capacity for virtue belongs to all of us as human beings. What we are losing is a language of behavior—a self-conscious sort of ceremony—that best expresses reverence in daily life.” But how to learn that language?  Harder still, how to remain fluent in it? In my youth, the rituals of the church or the military helped shape those choices for me, or perhaps they co-opted them, no matter. The priest used the mass to dramatize the crucifixion. What stood behind the dress parade were not just shiny shoes and individuals submitting to the larger unit, but also history, the great battles of the past, the fallen, the horror of war, camaraderie, sacrifice, virtues, regardless of how tenuously political these things may have been. Those rituals always pointed the way for me, like an illuminated highway sign on a dark and lonely road. The destination, the actual feelings of profound mystery and awe, must remain just out of reach, ineffable and abstract. But the road signs reassure, keep us moving on what appears to be a path, however dimly lit and confusing. The stylized and polished constructs become containers for the missing virtue (courage, honor, integrity, deity), for those things that can be felt but not grasped. And in this, the rituals themselves become imbued with meaning and importance.

But most of the rituals are gone now, at least for a large portion of people I know, myself included. Routine has taken over, and routine and ritual are very different creatures. Routine shares none of the symbolism, none of the communal aspects of ritual. Taken to an extreme, routines can become neurotic prisons of obsessive rigidity, closed off from the world at large. Whereas rituals, even the most esoteric and sealed, exist within part of the larger human society.

In the town center of Holden, Massachusetts, just a short walk from my mother’s front door, there is pre-Civil War cemetery. Holden is the quintessential New England town, with flags fluttering, white church spires and sun-dappled maple trees. The granite, moss-mottled headstones, tilting in all directions like teeth in need of braces, want to tell a story, if only I could listen. Many of the markers contain poems chiseled into the face, and many of the graves are for young children. In the cemetery, I think about Robert Bly’s introduction to William Stafford’s poems, in which Bly talks about the golden thread. “I asked Stafford one day, ‘Do you believe that every golden thread will lead us to Jerusalem’s wall, or do you love particular threads?’ He replied, ‘No, every thread.’ He said, ‘Any little impulse is accepted, and enhanced.”

The golden thread is, of course, a form of reverence. The transformation of the objective experience into a poem, into the holiness of Jerusalem’s wall, is precisely what my son’s friend, John, lacks. For children like John, and for many others too, the golden thread is only a piece of string.

Dillard and Bly arrive at similar conclusions. Any little impulse can lead to the sublime. Every detail can become a golden thread, garden hoses, church spires, and headstones. The sacred is all around us. Why travel across the country to look for it? We hear this message again and again, but how to trust it? How to experience it as a real part of the day-to-day?

Instead, we seem perpetually distracted. We cash in on our humanity, and turn our backs to the sacred moments with such a blithe indifference that at times it feels as if life were one giant video game. I indict myself in all of this. As often as not, I am oblivious to awe, wandering around in an over-saturated haze of consumerist fervor, kinetic schedules and endless detachment. How to plug-in to reverence?

It seems easy to do here, in this old cemetery, where the light and the silence are vibrating with possibilities, with a type of sacred energy, with history and stories and the march of time. But reverence depends less on circumstance and more on how we transform what’s offered.

I arrive, at last, not at a conclusion, but perhaps at a bit of understanding. For the more I consider it, the more reverence begins to seem like a type of triangulation. There is, on the first level, the phenomenon itself. The sunset. The caterpillar. The ritual of the mass. The dress parade. The suicide. These things exist independently, whether observed or not, whether intended or attended. If a tree falls in a forest , as Bruce Cockburn and a thousand Zen monks sing, does anyone hear ? The event is indifferent to our attention. Barry Lopez can describe the thousand-mile migrations of polar bears with such detailed elegance that I can imagine the journey happening before my eyes, but the bear remains utterly ambivalent about who’s watching.

Enter the observer. The poet, the prophet, the biologist sailing on a brig sloop between the Galapagos, the astronaut hurtling through the heavens. Humankind bears witness as much as anything else we do. As Dillard points out, we uncover what lives captive on the face of the obvious. The witness shuttles forth into the unknown and comes home with a tale to tell, whether that tale is On the Origin of Species , Arctic Dreams , the Upanishads or worn letters carved into the face of granite headstone.

It’s not that Neil Armstrong’s experience of stepping onto the lunar surface was any less personally reverent for him, with or without the world watching on television. But, as Armstrong’s own words remind us, in order for that one small step to live beyond itself, for the unity of experience to become that giant leap for mankind, it needed to be shared. Thus the third side of the triangle, the reception, the acknowledged and expressed substance of what it all might mean.

I am certain that John experiences reverence in his life; I’m certain that in every tactile roll in the grass, in every confusing (to us) choice he makes, John ingests the sensory world with a ravenous hunger and perfect pitch. But the circuit is shorted somehow, and no signal passes from his interior experience to others. This seems the great tragedy of autism. Also the great tragedy of tyranny, suicide, repression, violence and the apathy of tuning out. When we lose the ability to form the connection, the world suffers.

The poem needs the poet, but the poet needs the reader. In this triangular symmetry, the three sides form the whole.

Reverence lives somewhere inside this sacred geometry, somewhere between my ability to be stirred by something greater than myself, my ability to articulate that experience, and my willingness to hear that message when its shared with me. For in the end, aren’t we working out the mystery on our own? Aren’t we all lonely fishermen, perpetually taking in the world through a small hole each of us carves in the ice? And when we get a nibble, or when we get too cold to continue, or when we just get too damn lonely to go it alone any longer, don’t we all yearn to share that experience with others?

And where better to find the sacred than in the sky above and the earth below. “Reverence at home is so familiar to us,” Woodruff writes, “that we are hardly aware that this is what it is, and we may have to visit homes of a different culture before we recognize the places where family pictures hang, or where a grandmother’s unused teacups gather dust, are shrines.”

Somewhere between California and Massachusetts are those shrines. Somewhere between Annie Dillard, William Stafford and an autistic boy trying to make sense of a confusing world, lies reverence. In the epigraph to Dillard’s For the Time Being , she quotes Evan S. Connell, who asks, “Should I mark more than shining hours?” The ambition, if not the answer, as best as I can figure it, is, yes. Mark all the hours as sacred. Many more of them are actually shining than I’ll ever recognize.

“Reverence is all around us,” Woodruff writes, “so there are plenty of starting points.”

And so Maggie, Tom and I come home to California, to the long and restless routines of summer. They hug their mother and rub their dog’s belly and quickly re-acclimate to home. It so happens that we return on the 4 th  of July. Fireworks fresco the cloudy sky, booming explosions echoing around us like cannon fire. The dog cowers. The kids ooh and ah. These days, perhaps, will not always feel as sacred as I might wish. Many of the hours that follow will glide past without meaning or context. I’ll wake up, play with my kids, read a little. I’ll clean the house and get dinner ready for my wife. There will be quiet hours, busy days, whole weeks that will blend from one into the next, with little to mark them as shining, except, of course, by their very accumulation, by their unfolding. The only meaning they acquire is that which I attach to them. I’ll only find reverence by seeking it out, by listening to it, by sharing it. This conclusion may lack the certainty of the altar or the parade field, but it is girded with a realization, both terrifying and awesome, that time is fleeting, and that soon, all this will have passed.

—Richard Farrell

Richard Farrell is the Creative Non-Fiction Editor at upstreet and a Senior Editor at Numéro Cinq  (in fact, he is one of the original group who helped found the site). A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, he has worked as a high school teacher, a defense contractor, and as a Navy pilot. He holds an MFA in Writing from Vermont College of Fine Arts. He is currently at work on a collection of short stories. His work, including fiction, memoir, essays, interviews and book reviews, has appeared in Hunger Mountain, A Year in Ink, upstreet, New Plains Review, Descant (Canada)  and Numéro Cinq . He lives in San Diego.

•   Add comments
•   2013 , Essays , NC Magazine , Nonfiction , Vol. IV, No. 8, August 2013

  16 Responses to “On Reverence: Essay — Richard Farrell”

Beautiful Rich! I think a way to bring back reverence in our lives is to be constantly and consciously grateful, and maybe that’s a part of the routine? I’m here at VCFA, about to start the residency, and your post has inspired me! I’ve got 2 hours before the faculty meeting, I think I’ll take a drive over to Hope Cemetery in Barre and experience some oooo and awe and some reverence…

Diane! Nice to hear from you again! Glad you are back in Vermont. I hope you have a wonderful rez and hear/play/compose some great music! Thanks so much for reading and for commenting.

Such a beautiful essay! Thank you for sharing this.

Thanks, Jeanne.

Yes, beautiful! Rich, you are always so honest and so profound. As a teen, I sniffed at “meaningless rituals” until I realized there is no such thing: every ritual has meaning. And I agree with Diane Moser, reverence can be born from gratitude. I’m working now with lifers out on parole who never expected to be free again, and “reverence” is certainly the word to describe how they respond to the sky, to every bird in every tree and stray cat in the street, to anyone who smiles and greets them in the grocery store. They are still at the point where the overwhelming feeling is gratitude for this second chance in life. They take nothing for granted.

Diane, As always many thanks for reading and commenting. The work you’re doing sounds amazing. I spent some time at the website the other day and I’m looking forward to reading more. I’d love to get up to LA and sit in on a workshop some time. Again, many thanks.

Thank you for checking out the website. I think I will quote you as we prepare the book of the men’s writing. Your essay really hit home as I find so much reverence in them. After their decades in prison, every glimpse of sky, every tree, bird, alley cat, bicycle ride fills them with awe.

Wow, amazing. Your essays are such a joy to read, Rich. Thank you. Sometimes I feel like you are in my head speaking to me–such is the intimacy you create for/with your reader.There is so much here. I have for a long time been obsessed with this idea of awe and I guess reverence. I have thought often of the way certain things that inspire awe in me or bring reverence to my life are inexplicable. I have no words, no way to articulate to my husband the way the sunset over the lake of my childhood feels to me as I stand for a moment barefoot on the beach on my way to the house from the sauna where I have just stoked the fire and I can smell the scent of wood smoke on my hands…how much this landscape has given to me. Yet isn’t that what we seek in writing? Oddly (to me) because we seek to do it in words, and words are what fail me in moments of awe. I want to replicate that experience for the reader, I want to offer to the reader my sense of reverence, my sense of terror over my existence and its smallness, its fleeting nature, its unimaginable beauty. I want also to find this in the books I read and I do.

As a child visiting the rocky mountains or the pacific ocean I was awestruck, I was filled will something, it was as if something in me opened and said, here, this is how you can live… this will heal you. Dillard, I believe, in “For the Time Being” really tries to capture this stuff (awe, reverence, grace, ?) in a big way. I adored this book and wanted to write my lecture at VCFA on it, but then I could never figure out what I wanted to say exactly, I could never pin something down. But your essay does. And yes, where is reverence in our daily, modern lives? Must we seek it out? Train ourselves to see? I think so, but I don’t really know. Thanks again.

Emily, Thank you for the kind words. I think you’re exactly right, that so much of what we want to do is convey those feelings, those emotions, those moments of awe. How wonderful to find ways to do that.

“Any little impulse can lead to the sublime”–this is one of the most hopeful (and astonishingly accurate) observations I’ve read in a long, long time. Thank you, Rich, for daring to re-open all our eyes to the world around us. Stillness, silence, reverence: how different would the world be if these were central values and not considered luxuries or only reserved for vacations? Beautiful, Rich, just beautiful.

Bob, Thanks so much for your kind words and encouragement.

Exquisite piece, Rich. Oh, how it resonates with me: “I’ll only find reverence by seeking it.” How about recognizing that which is meant to be revered? The quotidian seems to get in the way, even technology – texting, email, Facebook, twitter, etc. My husband and I are in Florida, on the beach, visiting family, where the gulf licks our feet, lightening bolts splice the sky, a toddler digs his unadulterated toes into the sand, and a passerby coddles a baby snake in his arms: “I don’t want him to get hit by a car,” he says. Yes, that’s reverence – awareness. Thanks again for sharing such an important piece.

Many thanks, Melissa, for reading and commenting. How quickly we forget to be aware. I appreciate the reminders too!

Your extraordinary essay reminds us of what is truly important in life, and in this sense it gives me hope. But hope is a fragile thing, all too easily shattered by the machinations of life. It is undeniable that reverence, in your words, “is on the decline, if not under downright assault, in the culture at large.” What is it about the culture “at large’ that has given rise to this decline or assault, and what can we do about it? As you rightly observe, a sense of reverence involves sharing this most precious of experiences and that it is still-born without finding a voice in community. And, Richard, this is precisely where my hope runs aground. I suspect that there are fewer and fewer real opportunities to share experiences of reverence for those individuals who are truly lighting the way today. I have in mind those creative souls who are constitutionally opposed to the devaluation of experience for the sake of a profane and instrumental view of existence. Unlike the autistic child in your essay, the “short circuiting” of the triangulation process (the phenomenon, the enlightened individual, and the communication of the reverential) is all too often not the result of the individual’s limitations or makeup, but stems from the radical restructuring of culture. The restructuring in our era is along corporate lines, a change that is elevating the profane above all else.

Paul, Thank you for this thoughtful and sobering reply. Your words and message remind me how hard it is to grasp anything worthwhile in the great noise of the culture around us. I ran into this experience just this afternoon, after reading an incredible essay by the poet (and NC contributor) Rick Jackson. The essay, “Re(In)fusing Heaven” (in the most recent The Writer’s Chronicle”) staggers the mind, both in it’s profound message and in it’s formal structuring. “What literature, what poetry, asks forgiveness for is its inability to say what’s unsayable,” Jackson writes. The essay goes on to inquire about the nature of language and creativity in the most elegant, the most dizzying display of erudition and eloquence I’ve read in quite some time.

And yet, I couldn’t help thinking, how can this message be heard? Above the clamor of what you called, “The restructuring in our era is along corporate lines, a change that is elevating the profane above all else”? I read this essay then come home and was assaulted by images on the television, the internet, my phone, etc. Art asks for forgiveness because it recognizes and even embraces its failures, while the larger, dominant culture sins with an unreflecting arrogance borne of certainty and lies. What’s the solution? And you’re right, absolutely right, that the individual feels powerless, perhaps even is rendered that way, by the restructuring of the culture. But hasn’t it always been thus? Hasn’t the poet, the artist, the thinker, always stood in defiance against the church, the state, the corporation? I keep thinking of something Kathleen Norris once wrote that affected me deeply. I’m paraphrasing this…forgive me!: She compared poets and monks, and said that the world may little care that monks are praying and that writers are writing, but somehow the world needs this, and takes some measure of comfort in these things, is comforted by them, even while it doesn’t value them. Perhaps this is woefully naïve (certainly it is) but it’s all I have to go on. I look at the work you’re doing and am reminded again how quietly important it is. I don’t know, Paul, this is such a existential tug-of-war for me personally. I think, what the fuck am I doing, trying to commit my life to this when no one seems to care. As a friend recently and thoughtfully reminded me when I began to complain that I’d lost my way on this road, ‘what’s the alternative?’

I appreciate your reply. I appreciate you taking the time to read and to share your thoughts with me. It matters, however quietly. As Rick Jackson writes, “Despite the fact that the world, the cosmos, now seems like a madhouse with few consolations, few means for understanding ‘where we are going,’ there is yet a faith here…”

The salvation for those of us trying to make a difference in the arts (or even society in general) is to be found in ourselves. This seems self-evident. The simple act of recognizing each other in terms of our talents and abilities can be the first step in building a lasting community of artists and thinkers who share similar values, at least where art is concerned. Those of us with alternative visions of what culture might be and how our society might evolve …can only endure this darkness by taking solace in each others gifts.

Thank you, Richard, for your kindness.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Professor Florence S. Boos

Department of english.

• Study Questions
• Publications
• Art Galleries
• Other Resources/Links

Thomas Carlyle, On Heroes and Hero-Worship

"the hero as divinity".

• Why does Carlyle place the hero as divinity first in his sequence, rather than begin with, say, the hero as prophet or king? (He represents the elemental form of the hero, one of the original Thinkers who gave thoughts to other men--Pagan religions struggled to set forth this elemental respect for the Heroic, 15. The Hero, the world child-man, perceives the unity of nature and spirit, 7.)
• What is the assumed most appropriate landscape or environment for the divine hero? What forms of national myths does Carlyle prefer, and why? Do his preferences suggest his own background? Do they follow Victorian trends? (assumes this primal response to nature should occur in a rustic and simple landscape; prefers Norse myths to Greek ones, 19)
• Why is the heroic vision also religious? (The heroic vision is a religious one, in that it perceives the unity of man and nature: the hero is sincere, earnest, and courageous. This is the stage before moral dichotomies arise, the stage of perceiving, 30, 31. Further, heroes must occur from the beginning of time, since all history is the story of Great Men and is progressive. We must choose one of our first heroes from the earliest known history, on the edge of human records of our existence. That Carlyle knows little of Odin seems to prompt the assumption that Odin must have beeen simple and elemental--he projects his ignorance of Odin, and his desired scheme, onto Odin.)
• What rhetorical methods does Carlyle use to inspire respect for Odin as divinity? Would more argument or attempted proof have helped? (uses metaphor; biblical analogies and language; repetitive, incremental evocations; assertion through word play, paradox, emphasis (!), emotive language, denial of the obverse, and tautology; use of legends, false etymological data; circles around point, restating all possible combinations of elements)
• Can you give some reasons for the choice of Odin as the representation of divine heroism? Also, why do you think he prefers Norse to Greek myths? increasing interest in medieval characteristic of the period attempt to link English culture with Norse ancestors (36); Shakespeare seen as heir of Norse myths Norse culture still exotic and unknown--no complete translation of the Norse Elder Edda appeared until that of William Morris and Magnusson in the latter third of the century. But some knowledge of Norse legend was becoming fashionable: e. g. Thomas Gray, "The Descent of Odin," and "The Fatal Sisters"; Thomas Percy, Reliques; Paul Mallet, Introduction to the History of Denmark, trans. 1770; W. Herber, trans. of a great portion of the Edda, 1804; and about 50 translations from the Icelandic of various degrees of accuracy and completeness appeared 1770-1820, and later collections of myths by George Dasent and others. Norse myth appealed to an awakened taste for the "sublime"--the powerful, stark and impressive. So Carlyle was here speaking to an already awakened interest.
• What views on the nature of history seem implicit in this essay? history as biography the view that only heroes are a significant force--non-heroes cannot imitate them, nor presumably, influence history truth seems to be progressively revealed--heroes come to greater anticipatory prophetic insight (cmp. Hallam in Tennyson’s "In Memoriam") the outer world of appearances is a show; the world is instead governed by a true idea (36) present hierarchies have some basis in moral truth (i. e., social distinctions) nations have souls--e. g. the French are frivolous and rebellious, the Germans true and faithful the emphasis on great men is so severe that it would seem to exclude women man is the crown of creation--the only significant truth is human truth (no importance given to the perspective of animals or other forms of life) history is cyclical; periods of belief are followed by periods of skepticism influential ideas (e. g., hero-worship, Mahometism, must contain some truth)
• Which of Carlyle’s beliefs or features of language remind you of the English Romantics? emphasis on wildness, sincerity, nature--Romantic, esp. Wordsworthian metaphors of light and darkness great world tree, cmp. Wordsworth’s metaphor for the universe of thought in The Prelude poet represents a primitive, elemental man dislike of skepticism respect for silent song poet compelled to write, 181 influence of Platonic thought in Shelley and Wordsworth; Carlyle also shared the Romantic suspicion of the improper uses of science (Blake, Wordsworth, Keats, 18)
• Against what philosophical and historical beliefs do you feel Carlyle is reacting? belief that history is a series of accidents and natural processes--Hume, Gibbon, Voltaire, Scottish enlightenment thinkers such as Frances Hutcheson and Adam Smith detests skepticism, its alleged view of the universe as a machine; this leads him to the paradox that although he is not religiously orthodox, he finds religious skepticism morally destructive dislikes history as Dryasdust--the importance of history lies not in facts but in its essential meaning, a useful antidote to Victorian accumulations of data. History is a work of moral perception, an art. dislikes science, which according to him is a mere reduction of the mystery of things (18)
• What do you feel are some philosophical beliefs inherent in this essay? universe is organic--its Idea rather than its outward form is significant all things are moving forces, electric--life is fundamentally mysterious central emotion of life is reverence for what is higher than the self (11) not pantheism--the divine spirit moves in man, not the lower creatures or inanimate nature
• What effect is served by Carlyle’s constant use of biblical language and metaphors? (enforces a sense of divinity; to his audience would have seemed inspiring and soothing, a proof by analogy)
• What is the relation of the content and manner of On Heroes to the Scottish Calvinism of Carlyle’s background? (accepts Christian belief in the supernatural, the primacy of man in creation, divine intervention in history, the moral dichotomy between good and evil, individual salvation 176, the condemnation of false appearances of the world)
• In short, several early nineteenth-century Presbyterian moral and metaphysical assumptions are maintained in metaphorical garb, as are also many of the social judgements and concern for discipline prevalent in his background.
• Do you feel his description of Christianity is an accurate one? (11) (ignores levelling and ethical emphases of Christianity--the believer is to improve, to become a better person, not merely to reverence a perfection he/she cannot imitate)
• What political attitudes seem implicit in Carlyle’s writing as early as "The Hero as Divinity"? (12, 13, 15, Obedience and reverence are the duties of man. Individual genius is not granted to everyone; not democracy but moral hierarchy must be worked out in the world. Revolutions are misguided rebellions against imperfect heroes, but even with good ones, no egalitarianism is possible or desirable. Revolutions may be inevitable, but they are never good--by definition they are upsurges of masses of men, and thus violations of the importance of individuals. Chartism, ballot-boxism, and other appeals to a broader populace are a social pestilence, 175.)
• In your view, are there any political realities which Carlyle avoids or refuses to face? (Carlyle avoids the basic issue: how can we discern the heroic? In an evil world, aren’t some powerful men evil rather than heroic? Surely this is a world of anti-heroes as well? This question is important in assessing Carlyle’s legacy, perceived by some retrospectively as enabling the extreme forms of leader-worship associated with Nazism. But to be fair to Carlyle, his hero is a religious man with a unitive vision, not a megalomaniac empire-builder and exterminator of peoples.)

"The Hero as Poet"

• Does Carlyle assume that all would agree with him about the identity of the two most important poets? (85) Would he be correct in this assumption? (Dante a recent taste)
• Is Carlyle’s account of Dante’s biography accurate? How does his version fit into his narrative pattern? (86) How might it have influenced Dante’s Victorian reception? (possibly influenced D. G. Rossetti, especially his poem, "Dante at Verona")
• Which episode from the Divine Comedy does Carlyle most admire? Was this a common Victorian taste? (94; the Victorians most admired the story of Francesca and Paolo, which was the subject of several sculptures, paintings and other artworks, e. g. Rossetti’s "Francesca and Paolo")
• What does Carlyle see as Shakespeare's relation to his age? Would this be consistent with many of the strands of recent Shakespeare criticism?
• Why do you think he fails to discuss individual works? What does Carlyle see as Shakespeare's importance to the British nation?

"The Hero as Priest"

How do you account for the choice of "priest" to describe Protestant ministers? What aspects of his background would have motivated his choice of Luther and Knox as his chief examples of heroic priests? What difficulties does the biography of Knox present to him, and how does he justify Knox's more violent acts, such as the destruction of statues?

"The Hero as Man of Letters"

• What is significant about this "new kind of hero"? Who is the greatest man of letters, according to Carlyle, and why does Carlyle not discuss him? (158) (155, only a century old, our most important and greatest modern person. How about statesman or king?)
• What is distinctive about the hero as man of letters? (books are vehicles for the perception of divinity behind the appearances of things
• What may be the man of letters’ class situation? (167, struggles from lower to upper classes) What does Carlyle seem to imply about class differences? (accepts some moral validity to these distinctions) To what extent may Carlyle’s remarks be autobiographical?
• What has been the chief enemy of the man of letters? (170, age of skepticism) According to Carlyle, what is the basic error of Benthamism? (173) Do you feel this is a reasonable critique? (174, debate is false, assertion or denial true; 176, opposes mission of saving world, i. e. reformism)
• Why does Carlyle choose for this category Samuel Johnson and Jean Jacques Rousseau?
• As we approach the modern age, does Carlyle seem more doubtful about his heroes? What reasons may have influenced his choice of Rousseau and Burns?
• Do you find the essay’s conclusion satisfactory?
• What is the contrast between the poet and the "man of letters"?
• Why, according to Carlyle, is Shakespeare greater than Dante? What assumptions lie behind this judgement?
• Why no "women of letters," do you think?

"The Hero as King"

• According to Carlyle, why is "French Sansculottism" a form of madness? Why is it not a struggle toward order? What is wrong with the notions of Liberty and Equality? (202, 217; "I have no quarrel with. . . ", but does, 202; cmp. his denial of Divine Right of Kings, followed by a qualified defense,198; marches and countermarches across topic)
• What does Carlyle give as the reasons for submitting to a hero? (203) Are these good reasons? (poetic courtesies make life noble--cmp. Burke’s defense of chivalry)
• According to Carlyle, why must all substance be clothed in forms? (205) How is his statement altered by an appeal to "forms" rather than "form"? (of course substance needs form, but conventional forms are a different thing altogether)
• Do you think Carlyle is consistent in sympathizing with the Puritan Reformation above the French Revolution? (the former also a destruction of false idols, yet he does not call it "madness")
• How do we know that Cromwell was not false? That he was heroic? Do you think Carlyle’s arguments are convincing? (210, a skeptical age disliked him--the enemy of my enemy is my friend; 211, no great man is false; he was silent, delayed his kingship, engaged in deep prayers)
• Why, according to Carlyle, was it necessary for Cromwell to dissolve three parliaments?
• Why was Napoleon a great hero at all? Do you consider him a fit end for the sequence? Would all Victorians have agreed with Carlyle?
• Does the book end anticlimactically? Or alternately, do you think the ending provides adequate closure?

Some Final Questions:

Are there any inconsistencies between the various presentations of the "hero," or is that an improper standard by which to assess these essays? Why do you think Carlyle was able to become one of the most influential thinkers of his century?

Carlyle was incalculably influential; every educated man and woman of the century read Carlyle’s writings. His works were praised by Tennyson, Ruskin, Morris, Mill--by conservatives, liberals, and even working-class reformers--and almost everyone recorded that he had had an inspirational effect on their lives. His style influenced that of Dickens and Hopkins, among others.

Carlyle held many Romantic and biblical/Calvinist attitudes, but he also expressed a Victorian concern with social problems, the nature of government, and he motivations for an active life. His arguments were sufficiently energetic yet unspecific so that all could feel inspired by them--he could serve as all things to all--an exhorter to a higher, more energetic view of things, a preacher of faith but not a specific faith. Many Victorian intellectuals had lost orthodox Christian belief but still wanted sermons and a sense of conscious affirmation.

Less positively, Carlyle also shared Victorian Francophobia, and the sense of the alleged racial and moral superiority of Great-Britons/Anglo-Saxons. His cultural nationalism is shown in his choice of English and Scottish heroes--Shakespeare, Burns, Cromwell, Johnson--as models of intellect and action, though his eclecticism is shown in the inclusion of several non-British ones as well--Mahommed, Odin, Dante, even Napoleon.

What are some Victorian writings which may have been influenced by Carlyle’s notion of the hero? (e. g. Tennyson’s portrait of Arthur in The Idylls of the King ) How may Carlyle’s Scottish background have influenced his style, beliefs, or choice of heroes? Why do you think none of his "heroes" are women? Can you think of women admired by the Victorians who might have fit well into his definitions of heroism? How are On Heroes and Hero-Worship and Carlyle’s other writings influenced by his study of German literature and social thought? (Fichte, Hegel, Schelling, etc.)

University of Notre Dame

Fresh Writing

A publication of the University Writing Program

• Home ›
• Essays ›

Medea and Dido’s Power and Tragic Downfall: Cautionary Tales of Female Empowerment

By Katie McCurrie

Published: July 31, 2022

Ancient Greek and Roman societies were highly patriarchal. Women lacked power, belonged to the domestic sphere of life, and were overly emotional. Beauty, seduction, and emotional upheaval were their most distinctive virtues. To contrast, men were at the center of the public sphere, and earned the title and fame of heroes.

Ancient Greek and Roman narrative texts confirm and further reinforce this pattern by consistently celebrating men’s power and heroism. The most famous heroes display either “military” or “founder” heroism. The first ideal consists of a combination of divine favor, fame, and power; Achilles from Homer’s Iliad is its quintessential example, since he is favored by the goddess Athena, marked by glory and fame, and demonstrates tremendous prowess in battle. “Founder heroism” consists of a combination of leadership, destiny, and reverence for the gods; Aeneas from Virgil’s Aeneid fully embodies this ideal, since he leads his people away from Troy to found Rome, in close obedience to the gods’ will.

In reflection of this societal pattern, ancient Greek and Roman texts rarely present female heroines, and when they do, they introduce women who obtain power by fully embodying male ideals and renouncing their femininity, as we see in the Amazons, the famous race of warlike women noted for their fighting skills and their renunciation of marriage and motherhood. Through characters like them, ancient Greeks and Romans were not intending to give power to women, but rather to confirm that women could not play an essential role in the ancient Greek and Roman public sphere, unless they stopped being women, which is possible in literature but not in real life.

On close examination, there are two exceptions to this consistent pattern. Both Medea and Dido, two female characters from ancient Greek and Roman epic poems, manage to acquire power and heroic status by simultaneously embodying male ideals and keeping their femininity. This paper explores these two heroines’ lives and discusses whether their presence was meant to challenge the societal pattern and introduce a new way to perceive the role of women in the ancient Greek and Roman worlds. Despite their exceptionality, this paper concludes that neither Medea nor Dido truly introduce a new approach to female power, since their heroic feats are stopped by the gods’ interventions, which lead both heroines to experience tragic downfalls. In light of this downfall, these stories can be read as cautionary tales about female empowerment, which paradoxically reinforce the patriarchal system characteristic of ancient Greece and Rome.

Medea’s story is narrated in two different works: Euripides’s Medea (fifth century BCE) and Apollonius of Rhodes’s Jason and the Golden Fleece (third century BCE). Medea, a foreigner princess who lives far away from Greece, falls in love with the Greek hero Jason and decides to leave her homeland to help him in his quest for the Golden Fleece. Jason, however, despite having promised to marry Medea, later abandons her and their two children for a new wife. Enraged, Medea gets revenge against Jason by murdering her father, his new wife, and the children she and Jason share. Throughout her life, Medea displays features of “military heroism,” especially through her revenge, and maintains traits of her femininity such as seduction and charm.

Dido’s story is told in Virgil’s Aeneid (first century BCE). Dido is the widow and queen of Carthage who falls in love with Aeneas when he comes to Carthage on his journey from Troy to Italy. After sharing love for a short period and celebrating their marriage, however, Aeneas decides to leave Dido in obedience to his “founder heroism,” namely his divinely-inspired desire to found a new nation in Italy. As Dido finds out about Aeneas’s flight, she is emotionally ruined and commits suicide. Throughout her life, Dido exhibits traits of a “founder heroism” like Aeneas in that she is responsible for the foundation of Carthage, and she does so in obedience to the gods’ will. Moreover, like Medea, Dido maintains her femininity, as is especially suggested by her oath of fidelity to her first dead husband.

The first section of this paper analyzes the military and founder heroisms which Medea and Dido respectively display. The second section examines how both heroines lose their heroism and experience a downfall during their lives. The third section analyzes the major factor leading to their downfall, Eros, who was considered an emotional force targeting women; Eros’s major culpability, which consists of making Medea and Dido as fully emotional as only women could be, further emphasizes the incompatibility between ancient femininity and power.

1) Embodiment of Both Military and Founder Heroisms, and Femininity

Medea and Dido are two female characters who exceptionally display power and heroism, and they do so by maintaining their femininity. The former displays the divine favor and power characteristic of military heroism, while the latter embodies the “founder heroism” through her leadership and reverence to the gods’ will.

Medea’s name and glorious reputation are such that the Greek Argonauts know of her before meeting her. In Jason and the Golden Fleece, Argos describes Medea to the crew as “a young girl who lives in Aietes’s palace; the goddess Hekate has taught her extraordinary skills in handling all the drugs which the dry land and the boundless waters produce. With these she charms the blasts of unwearying fire, stops still the flow of crashing rivers, and puts bonds on the stars and the holy paths of the moon” (Apollonius 3.78). Hekate’s divine favor has given Medea superhuman skills. This favor, combined with her glory and power, characterize her as a “military hero” as is proper of men in the ancient Greek and Roman worlds. Medea is not only at the center of the public sphere, but she even dominates it in a way that is traditionally reserved to male heroes, since she enables Jason, the male and weak hero, to embody “military heroism.” Her crafty advice and her drugs help him in his tasks: “burning heat enveloped Jason, striking him like the lightning bolt; but the maiden’s drugs protected him” (Apollonius 3.96). Medea’s proud Iliadic heroism is so strong that she manages to transfer it onto Jason.

Yet, on close examination, in all these characterizations she is referred to as “a young girl” or a “maiden.” While embodying features of male heroism, Medea maintains her femininity, especially by means of seduction, as she manipulates those around her with drugs or incantations. In her attempt to help Jason obtain the Golden Fleece, Medea faces a dragon while Jason cowers behind her: “As it rolled towards them, the maiden fixed it in the eye and called in a lovely voice upon Sleep, the helper, the highest of the gods, to bewitch the beast; she invoked too the queen, the night-wanderer, the infernal, the kindly one, to grant success to their enterprise” (Apollonius 4.102). Medea’s power in this scene stems from her “lovely voice” and ability to charm divine beings and subsequently the dragon. Medea shows her power again when she kills Talos by calling upon divine help with incantations of spirits: “that man, bronze though he was, yielded to destruction through the grim power of Medea, mistress of drugs” (Apollonius 4.138). Medea’s characterization as “mistress” further highlights her seduction and charm by means of manipulation.

Dido’s characterization is similar. At an early stage of her life, she displays “founder heroism,” a characteristic of men, when she obeys her dead husband’s dreamlike call to leave her homeland of Tyre occupied by her dangerous brother to find a new city named Carthage. In Virgil’s Aeneid we thus read: “Dido prepared for flight, joined by others | Who either feared or hated the cruel tyrant [her brother]. | They commandeered ships, loaded them with gold...” (Virgil 1.442-445). By performing this traditionally male task, Dido is helping her people to build a better life away from Tyre. Moreover, after the foundation of Carthage, Dido shows reverence to the gods by offering hospitality to Aeneas and his men despite their status as strangers. Dido thus explains to Aeneas her desire to welcome him and his men: “My fortune too has long been adverse | But at last has allowed me to rest in this land. | My own acquaintance with suffering | Has taught me to aid others in need” (Virgil 1.768-771).

Dido serves as a leader of her people, but she is still a woman and is often referred to as “queen.” More precisely, with concern to her dead husband, she displays both modesty and chastity by swearing an oath of fidelity to him. In a proleptic speech, after meeting Aeneas, Dido laments to her sister:

If I were not unshakable in my vow Never to pledge myself in marriage again After death stole my first love away— If the mere thought of marriage did not leave me cold, I might perhaps have succumbed this once. (Virgil 4.18-22).

Here Virgil describes Dido’s virtuous attitude by means of allusions to Penelope, the exemplary wife from Homer’s Odyssey . Thus, through this Penelopean fidelity, Dido retains her femininity while embodying various elements of the traditionally male “founder heroism.”

2) Tragic Downfall and Loss of Heroism, Power and Femininity

No matter how strongly Medea and Dido embody power and heroism without renouncing their femininity, they are both unable to display this power until the end of their lives; rather, they undergo a tragic downfall that highlights their heroic failure and includes the loss of specific aspects of femininity.

As I mentioned in the introduction, Medea’s decision to help Jason implies the flight from her own house. Her time with Jason, however, progressively undermines her “military heroism” and power. In the midst of her journey with Jason, Medea aids him to kill her brother by stabbing him in the back. And yet, at this precise moment, Medea’s attitude turns from active to passive: “The maiden turned her eyes away and covered her face with her veil so that she should not have to look upon the blood which marked her brother’s death by the sword-blow” (Apollonius . 4.109-110). In this passage, by averting her eyes, Medea displays a helplessness that reveals how her feelings for Jason have overpowered every other aspect of her life and herself. As a result, the glory of her “military heroism” is overshadowed by her helplessness. Moreover, from now onwards, helplessness prevents Medea from displaying her feminine seduction by means of manipulation.

In the tragedy Medea , this helplessness turns into downfall as a result of Jason’s decision to abandon Medea to start a new family. From then onwards, Medea progressively loses her previous self, and out of revenge decides to murder Jason’s new bride, his new father-in-law, and her own sons. Before she does so, she is very insecure and again displays helplessness. Medea thus laments, “I cannot do it. Goodbye to those earlier plans of mine. I’ll take my children from this country. Why harm them as a way to hurt their father and have to suffer twice his pain myself? No, I won’t do that. And so farewell to what I planned before” (Euripides 1227-1233). At first, Medea resists the murderous course of action, but then she reaches a point of desperation leading her to kill her sons. The murder of her own children highlights Medea’s loss of any feminine quality, including her status as mother

A similar trajectory concerns Dido. By deciding to marry Aeneas, a hero coming from abroad, Dido distances herself from her role as protectress of the Tyrian race, and she feels to have betrayed her own fellow Tyrians and her previous “founder heroism”:

It is because of you The Libyan warlords hate me and my own Tyrians Abhor me. Because of you that my honor Has been snuffed out, the good name I once had, My only hope to ascend to the stars. (Virgil 4.361-365)

Here Dido acknowledges that she is losing her heroic status, “the good name [she] once had,” and shows her awareness of having betrayed her former husband, which points to her loss of the feminine aspect characteristic of her past, namely her conjugal fidelity. As a result of this loss, Dido is helpless to her fate, and she argues weakly with herself against committing suicide:

Should I entertain once more My former suitors—and hear them laugh at me? Go begging for a marriage among the Nomads, After scorning their proposals time and again? Shall I follow the Trojans’ fleet and be subject To their every command? (Virgil 4.622-627) 

Dido concludes that she is out of options.

In light of this helplessness, Dido views death as her only escape from the misery awaiting her in life. Referring to her thought process, she exclaims, “We will die unavenged, but we will die. | This is how I want to pass into the dark below. | The cruel Trojan will watch the fire from the sea | And carry with him the omens of my death” (Virgil 4.765-768). Then, Dido curses Aeneas before she kills herself in one final act of revenge. Her helplessness and suicide highlight the complexity and depth of her downfall. Her attempt at embodying founder heroism has failed.

3) Downfall through Eros’s intervention: Subtle Criticism of Femininity

Both Medea and Dido’s downfalls are not only similar for their effect upon their heroisms, but also because of their origin, which lies in the god Eros, Aphrodite’s son, who intervenes and transforms Medea and Dido from rational women capable of great feats of heroism into women overcome by passion. After having lost specific aspects of their femininity, the god Eros makes Medea and Dido gain other feminine aspects which highlight their weakness. In this way, the discussed ancient texts further highlight the incompatibility between femininity and power.

In Jason and the Golden Fleece , Eros shoots Medea with his bow and makes her fall in love with Jason: “Eros darted back out of the high-roofed palace with a mocking laugh, but his arrow burned deep in the girl’s heart like a flame. Full at Jason her glances shot, and the wearying pain scattered all prudent thoughts from her chest; she could think of nothing else, and her spirit was flooded with a sweet aching” (Apollonius 3.72). This description of Eros as “mocking” Medea and of his arrow as “burning like a flame” contributes to a destructive characterization of him as a god acting upon and transforming Medea.

In his influential work, James J. Clauss highlights Eros’s primary responsibility in Medea’s downfall: “As the daughter of Aeetes and priestess of Hecate, Medea possesses the ability to create a Heracles or destroy a man of bronze. Yet she would not have lost her soul, together with her shame, if she had never known such an all-consuming, self-destructive passion” (Clauss 176).

Moreover, in the text itself, the goddess Moon speaks to Medea as a victim of Eros: “But now you yourself, it would seem, are a victim of a madness like mine; a cruel god has given you Jason to cause you grief and pain. Be off then and for all your cleverness learn to put up with a misery that will bring you much lamentation” (Apollonius 4.100). In this passage, the Moon links Medea’s downfall (“misery”) with the “madness” of “a cruel god.” It is through Eros, a god traditionally affecting women, that Medea has transformed from a hero into a disempowered “victim” who strongly represents women’s emotional and powerless status in antiquity.

Similarly, Eros takes advantage of an unsuspecting Dido. Aphrodite commands Eros: For a single night, no more, feign his looks. Boy that you are, wear the boy’s familiar face. And when amid the royal feast and flowing wine Dido, her joy knowing no bounds, takes you Onto her lap, embraces you and plants Sweet kisses on your mouth, breathe into her Your secret fire and poison her unobserved. (Virgil 1.835-841)

Eros is both deceptive and deadly, and Dido falls for his tricks and is thus “poisoned” with love for Aeneas. Dido’s love is described as a wound, “But the Queen, long sick with Eros, | Nurses her heart’s deep wound | With her pounding blood” (Virgil 4.1-3), and as fire: “Dido is burning. | She wanders all through the city in her misery, | Raving mad.” (Virgil 4.80-82)

In this final quote, Dido is described as “mad” in the same way Medea was. The effect of Eros upon her shows that she has become lost in her emotions. Her wandering in misery causes her to neglect her male heroic duties; her return to a purely female status further proves the ancient heroines’ distance from embracing power and heroism in the public sphere.

In ancient Greece and Rome, women, unlike their male counterparts, did not have any power, and ancient literature traditionally confirmed and reinforced this pattern. Dido and Medea, however, represent a striking exception, since they display military and founder heroisms that are typical of male heroes, while preserving aspects of their femininity. And yet, as their lives develop, both Dido and Medea’s performance of power and femininity is interrupted by Eros’s intervention imposing a disempowering love upon them. This intervention restores in Dido and Medea’s lives the traditional pattern of subordination typical of ancient Greek and Roman women.

Why did these ancient authors decide to introduce such extraordinary examples of female power only to limit their exceptionality immediately afterwards? In the short space of this conclusion, I suggest that the quoted Greek and Roman authors may have constructed these stories of female empowerment as cautionary tales, within which the gods’ interventions by bringing power back to men further stress the existence of the patriarchal system.

Moreover, it is relevant that divine intervention is introduced by Eros. Eros, the god of love, is at the origin of a series of experiences that can be associated with femininity, such as passion, lovesickness, and seduction. On the other hand, masculinity traditionally capitalizes on strength, independence, power, and leadership. Recognizing this juxtaposition, not only Dido and Medea’s downfall, but also the way in which this downfall happens serve as warnings of the pointlessness of trying to embrace both femininity and power. In the ancient Greek and Roman worlds, these two elements could not and ought not be combined.

Works Cited

Apollonius of Rhodes. Jason and the Golden Fleece . Translated by Richard R. Hunter, Oxford University Press, 2009.

Bryce, T.R. “The Dido-Aeneas Relationship: A Re-Examination.” The Classical World , vol. 67, no. 5 (March 1974), pp. 257-269.

Clauss, James J. “Conquest of the Mephistophelian Nausicaa: Madea’s Role in Apollonius’s Redefinition of the Epic Hero” in Medea: Essays on Medea in Myth, Literature, Philosophy, and Art , edited by James J. Clauss and Sarah Iles Johnston, Princeton University Press, 1997, pp. 149-77.

Euripides. Medea . Translated by Ian Johnston, Vancouver Island University, 2008.

Virgil. Aeneid . Translated by Stanley Lombardo, Hackett Publishing Company, 2005.

Katie McCurrie

Katie McCurrie is from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania originally and now lives in Breen-Phillips Hall on campus. She is studying Finance and Global Affairs. In her class “Ancient Heroes: Achilles to the Avengers,” Katie learned to analyze how society and culture can transform the defining characteristics of a hero. She thus chose to research and dissect how the lives and downfalls of female heroines Medea and Dido may be considered a reflection of ancient gender norms. Her plans after graduation include growing the good in business and the world as a whole. These are admittedly lofty aspirations, but she is still discerning what being a modern hero means to her. Katie wishes to thank her professor, Aldo Tagliabue, and teaching assistant, Lucy Grinnan for their time, enthusiasm, and inspirational insight throughout the entire writing process.

Characteristics of an Epic Hero

This essay about the characteristics of an epic hero explores the quintessential traits that define these legendary figures. It highlights their unparalleled bravery, moral integrity, and the transformative challenges they face. These heroes, celebrated for their noble origins and divine favor, are not just warriors but also beacons of virtue, navigating through trials that test their physical strength and moral fiber. The narrative emphasizes how epic heroes are relatable through their complex nature, showcasing their human emotions and weaknesses amidst their extraordinary feats. Ultimately, the essay reflects on the enduring appeal of epic heroes, portraying them as symbols of hope, resilience, and the indomitable human spirit, reminding us of the potential for heroism in every individual.

How it works

In the grand tapestry of storytelling, epic heroes stand tall, their capes billowing in the winds of legend and lore. These characters, from the cunning Odysseus to the valiant Beowulf, embody qualities that transcend time and culture, inviting us into worlds where valor, honor, and resilience are etched into the very essence of their being. The characteristics of an epic hero, while varying slightly across narratives, share a common core that resonates with the human spirit’s longing for adventure, justice, and the triumph of good over evil.

At the heart of every epic hero lies a bravery that knows no bounds. This isn’t the everyday courage that nudges us to try a new food or to venture into the unknown. It’s the type of valor that faces monstrous adversaries and daunting quests head-on, without a quiver of fear in their voice or a tremble in their stance. This bravery often finds its roots in noble origins or divine favor, setting the stage for a journey that intertwines fate with sheer willpower.

Yet, what truly sets these heroes apart isn’t just their brawn or battlefield prowess; it’s their unwavering moral compass. They operate under a code of honor that guides their actions, making them paragons of virtue in times when darkness threatens to overshadow the light. Their decisions, though fraught with peril, are often driven by a deep-seated sense of duty not only to themselves but to their people and the realms they protect. This commitment to righteousness, even at great personal cost, illuminates their path through trials and tribulations, earning them the reverence of those who witness their saga unfold.

Moreover, an epic hero’s journey is never solely their own. It’s a voyage that molds them, shaping their character through tests that are as much about inner strength as they are about external conquest. These trials, often presented as seemingly insurmountable challenges or riddles, demand not only physical strength but wisdom, ingenuity, and a resilience that bends but never breaks. Through these ordeals, the hero emerges not just victorious but transformed, their triumphs etching their names into the annals of history and the hearts of those who will tell their stories for generations to come.

What’s perhaps most fascinating about epic heroes is their complexity. They are not infallible deities, immune to the pitfalls of human emotion and weakness. Their greatness is often punctuated by moments of doubt, grief, and rage, making their victories sweeter and their characters more relatable. It’s in their struggles that we see reflections of our own, reminding us that even in the face of overwhelming odds, there’s a hero in each of us, waiting for the moment to rise.

As the sun sets on the realms of epic heroes, their stories lingering like the last light on the horizon, it’s clear that the allure of these characters isn’t just in their deeds but in what they represent. They are beacons of hope, resilience, and the enduring power of the human spirit. In their journeys, we find escapism, inspiration, and the reminder that heroes come in many forms, but it’s their virtues, their trials, and their triumphs that immortalize them in our collective memory. So, the next time you find yourself lost in an epic saga, remember that within its lines lies the blueprint of heroism, a testament to what it means to face the darkness and emerge, not just unscathed, but unforgettable.

Cite this page

Characteristics Of An Epic Hero. (2024, Apr 22). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/characteristics-of-an-epic-hero/

"Characteristics Of An Epic Hero." PapersOwl.com , 22 Apr 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/characteristics-of-an-epic-hero/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Characteristics Of An Epic Hero . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/characteristics-of-an-epic-hero/ [Accessed: 23 Apr. 2024]

"Characteristics Of An Epic Hero." PapersOwl.com, Apr 22, 2024. Accessed April 23, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/characteristics-of-an-epic-hero/

"Characteristics Of An Epic Hero," PapersOwl.com , 22-Apr-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/characteristics-of-an-epic-hero/. [Accessed: 23-Apr-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Characteristics Of An Epic Hero . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/characteristics-of-an-epic-hero/ [Accessed: 23-Apr-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

419 words essay on Reverence

Reverence is a mixture of admiration and awe or won­der. We can admire without wonder or awe, as when we admire a pretty garden or a Kashmir silk shawl. We can feel awe, too, without admiration, as at the power of a tyrant or the cruelty of a tiger. But when we revere a person or thing, we both fear and admire or even love. So we reverence God; for we admire and love Him as perfect goodness, yet we feel awe at His infinite power and greatness.

The faculty of reverence is innate in all human beings. But it needs to be cultivated and guided. The teaching of reverence should be an essential part of every child’s educa­tion. Children are naturally great hero-worshippers; and one way of teaching them reverence is to put before them for their worship heroes who are worthy of their respect, admiration and imitation. This can be done by means of stories of heroic actions and great deeds, and the examples of good and great men. .

Most people reverence something or someone. But their reverence is often misplaced. They reverence the wrong things. The savage kneeling down in awe to worship some ugly idol of wood or stone is full of reverence; but he is paying reverence to what is unworthy of reverence. Yet even he, in his ignorance, is groping after some being whom he can rightly worship.

At the same time we have no right to sneer at the poor ignorant savage, provided his reverence is sincere. Mark Twain tells with disgust a story of a Yankee, who was shown a lamp burning in a temple in Burmah. The priest told him with awe that the lamp had never been extinguished for hundreds of years. “Is that so?” said the Yankee; “well, guess it’s out now”; and he stooped down and blew it out. This led Mark Twain to remark that, “True reverence is the reverencing of other people’s reverence”. If we did this al­ways, there would be more charity and tolerance in the world.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

We must learn to give reverence where reverence is due-first to God, then to all real goodness, nobility and heroism in man. And we must learn to despise all that is not worthy of our reverence, such as mere wealth, worldly success due to trickery, the accident of noble birth, or power used ill. To reverence a man merely because he is rich or powerful is to be no better than the savage worshiping an idol.

Related Articles:

• What was the main theme of Heroic plays
• What were the purposes of the Heroic play
• 648 words essay on Obedience
• 168 Words Paragraph for Kids on LOVE

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Does Rizal Deserves to be Our National Hero? - Veneration Without Understanding

Related Papers

Daphne Baybayan

Pacey Dela Paz

Althea Hannah D . Deloso

Rizal: Hero or Traitor?

Drea Nicole Marcelino

Jestoni B . Castro

This is a reflection paper questioning the position of Dr. Jose Rizal as the Philippines national hero. This paper do not have the intention to disrespect Rizal but more often that he should not the only national hero that Philippines must have. Let always put in our mind that an opinion without respect on the other side is not an opinion it was a mere foolishness of a man.

Does Rizal deserves to be our national hero

Maria Luisa Fiel

Castillo, Marianne - Does Rizal deserve to be a national hero? - Veneration Without Understanding

Marianne Castillo

Hannah Borromeo

John Vincent Cruz

RELATED PAPERS

yvonne maggie

Ronald Aarts

den kemproez

Rbne Revista Brasileira De Nutricao Esportiva

Antonio Felipe Correa Marangon

José Barbot

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition in Environmental Informatics

golsa mousavi

تحقیقات جنگل و صنوبر ایران

Rahim Maleknia

Dyna (Medellin, Colombia)

Jose Miguel Ramirez P

WALLASON FARIAS DE SOUZA

Journal of Cultural Heritage

Ruben Paul Borg

zainab majid

Social Science Research Network

luis miranda serrano

Populis : Jurnal Sosial dan Humaniora

Cindy Dwi Aulia

BMC Urology

Adam Murphy

Successful Professional Women of the Americas

Miguel R Olivas-Luján

Resource and Energy Economics

Mitesh Kataria

Global Journal Al-Thaqafah

Suzy Aziziyana Saili

Nature Genetics

Rhian Gwilliam

Jose Leandro Felix Salles

krishnendu Mondal

Journal of European Public Policy

Francesco Duina

Laurence Mazzeno

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Lay perspectives on the social and psychological functions of heroes

Elaine l. kinsella.

1 Department of Psychology and Centre for Social Issues Research, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

Timothy D. Ritchie

2 Department of Psychology, Saint Xavier University, Chicago, IL, USA

Eric R. Igou

3 Department of Psychology, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

Declaring and thinking about heroes are common human preoccupations but surprisingly aspects of heroism that reinforce these behaviors are not well-understood. In four thematically consistent studies, we attempt to identify lay perspectives about the psychological functions served by heroes. In Study 1, participants ( n = 189) freely generated open-ended descriptions of hero functions, which were then sorted by independent coders into 14 categories (e.g., instill hope, guide others). In Study 2, in an attempt to identify the most important functions associated with heroes, participants ( n = 249) rated how each function corresponded with their personal views about heroes. Results from a confirmatory factor analysis suggested that a three-factor model of hero functions fit the data well: participants thought that heroes enhanced the lives of others, promoted morals, and protected individuals from threats. In Study 3 ( n = 242), participants rated heroes as more likely to fulfill a protecting function than either leaders or role models. In Studies 4A ( n = 38) and 4B ( n = 102), participants indicated that thinking about a hero (relative to a leader or an acquaintance) during psychological threat fulfilled personal enhancement, moral modeling, and protection needs. In all, these findings provide an empirical basis to spur additional research about the social and psychological functions that heroes offer.

INTRODUCTION

Heroes have played an important role in society for centuries ( Campbell, 1949 ) and their influence remains evident and prevalent in modern life ( Zimbardo, 2007 ; Sullivan and Venter, 2010 ; Allison and Goethals, 2011 , 2013a ; Franco et al., 2011 ; Kinsella et al., 2015 ). Survey data from one recent sample revealed that 66% of the participants reported having a personal hero ( Kinsella et al., 2010 ). This underscores the fact that heroism is a pervasive and everyday phenomenon. Unsurprisingly, it has been posited that heroes exert psychological influence on others ( Sullivan and Venter, 2005 ). The variety of heroes that exist—whistle-blowers, martyrs, civil heroes, political heroes, and humanitarians ( Zimbardo, 2007 )—suggests the far-reaching utility of heroes. Yet, heroism has received relatively little attention in psychology ( Becker and Eagly, 2004 ; Sullivan and Venter, 2005 ). Related topics such as generativity (e.g., Mansfield and McAdams, 1996 ), prosocial behavior (e.g., Hart and Fegley, 1995 ), whistleblowing (e.g., Lewis et al., 2014 ), and moral exemplars (e.g., Matsuba and Walker, 2005 ; Walker and Frimer, 2007 ; Frimer et al., 2011 , 2012 , 2013 ) are present in the literature and offer insights into persons who display some prototypical hero features. Few researchers, however, have considered why individuals have or want heroes ( Goethals and Allison, 2012 ).

Empirical endeavors to understand heroes are gaining momentum (e.g., Allison and Goethals, 2011 , 2013a ; Franco et al., 2011 ; Goethals and Allison, 2012 ; Kinsella et al., 2015 ; Allison et al., unpublished). So far, many of these endeavors have progressed our understanding of what constitutes a hero in modern times; however, researchers have not yet explicitly theorized and empirically substantiated the array of social and psychological functions heroes might fulfill for individuals. A person who shows the prototypical hero features of bravery, sacrifice, conviction, risk-taking, and moral integrity for an honorable purpose (see Kinsella et al., 2015 ) is likely to provide psychological and social functions for individuals who encounter (or cogitate about) them. The focus of the present article is to systematically examine lay perspectives about the psychological and social functions provided by heroes. We believe that studying the psychological influence of heroes on individuals is a fascinating and worthy topic of study, especially given that heroes are often spatio-temporally distant (e.g., sometimes dead or remote). Focusing on understanding hero functions is likely to offer insights into the processes by which heroes influence individuals and help to discern ways to effectively harness the positive influence of heroes in education, healthcare, communities, or organizations. Examining possible functions fulfilled by heroes may provide another source of evidence about prototypical hero features (e.g., a hero described as providing an inspiring or uplifting function is likely to be characterized as inspirational), thus informing our understanding of the concept.

Understanding how people comprehend the social world can be enlightened by the ways people think about and infer meaning from what occurs around them ( Heider, 1958 ). Increasingly, in health care settings, the lay conceptions explanatory model ( Kleinman et al., 1976 ), is increasingly applied by medical professionals to gain critical insights into what is most important to the individual, what they believe about their health, and what they think will influence them psychologically. As research on attitudes, attitude and behavior, person perception (e.g., stereotyping), self-regulation, and metacognition has shown, people’s beliefs shape their reality and behavior ( Heider, 1958 ; Kruglanski, 1975 ; Snyder, 1984 ; Dweck and Leggett, 1988 ; Igou, 2004 ; Fiske and Taylor, 2008 ). We adopt this perspective for investigating the topic of heroism. In order to understand how heroes are used in everyday life, it is important to examine how heroes are perceived, what qualifies as a hero, and how people think they can use them. Systematically identifying lay perspectives about a topic can be useful in helping to formulate common views that dominate thinking about a given psychological construct. Importantly, examining lay conceptions can be helpful for contributing to a conceptual framework for the development of explicit theories ( Sternberg, 1985 ). In essence, our research makes an important first step toward understanding the social and psychological functions that heroes provide.

Existing literature typically focuses on one aspect of heroic influence, such as social control ( Klapp, 1954 ), rescue from physical harm ( Becker and Eagly, 2004 ), or symbolic immortality ( Becker, 1973 ). In all, the result is a fragmented and diverse interpretation of the many possible functions that heroes may serve for groups and for individuals. This makes it difficult to develop a psychological theory of heroic influence. Before detailing four new empirical studies, we offer a synthesis of existing literary accounts of functions provided by heroes into three broad themes: enhancing, moral modeling, and protecting, which are briefly summarized below.

First, heroes are described in the literature as uplifting and enhancing the lives of others. Heroes may arouse positive emotions such as awe, gratitude, or admiration ( Algoe and Haidt, 2009 ). People may experience positivity as result of being associated with their hero’s exceptional accomplishments ( Allison and Goethals, 2011 ); this process is termed basking in reflected glory ( Cialdini, 2007 ). Heroes may motivate individuals toward being a better person by raising awareness of ought or ideal selves ( Klapp, 1969 ). Also, heroes have been described as directing our own ambitions away from “narrow, self-centered concerns” ( Singer, 1991 , p. 249). These type of encounters may trigger a period of world-focused savoring and social connectedness ( world focus ; Bryant and Veroff, 2007 ), evoking a sense of positive communion with nature and with others. Applying these ideas, The Heroic Imagination Project 1 was set up to offer information about heroism that individuals may use to transform negative situations. Also, the Hero Construction Company 2 uses inspiring narratives about heroes to promote heroic (rather than condemning bullying behavior) in schools. These projects use accounts of heroes such as Nelson Mandela, Rosa Parks, Daniel Ellsberg, and Irena Sendler to educate and inspire others toward create positive change.

Second, heroes are described as modeling morals and values. Heroes uphold the values of society ( Carlyle, 1840 ), act as comparison targets for the masses ( Pretzinger, 1976 ), and model virtues ( Cohen, 1993 ). Also, heroes may help people to understand the norms and values within society ( Erikson, 1977 ; Cohen, 1993 ). Heroes have been described as displaying moral integrity ( Kinsella et al., 2015 ), doing the right thing ( Schwartz and Schwartz, 2010 ), and showing a noble purpose without selfishness ( Singer, 1991 ). Heroes prompt people to do what they can for those who need help, endorsing other-regard ( Flescher, 2003 ). In fact, most heroes meet Colby and Damon’s (1992) criteria for serving as moral exemplars. It may not be realistic to emulate heroes that show moral fortitude, but the encounter may evoke a period of introspection which helps individuals to avoid moral complacency ( Flescher, 2003 ).

Third, the etymology of the word heroes (from Greek heros ) suggests that heroes protect others ( Harper, 2010 ). Some philosophers and psychologists have alluded to the idea that heroes protect against threats to perceptions about one’s own meaning or purpose in life. For example, Hobbs (2010) suggested that heroes offer resources to adults who feel disillusioned. Heroes who uphold cultural values and norms may also serve as a resource for dealing with threats to uncertainty, meaning, or other existential dilemmas ( Becker, 1973 ). Similarly, individuals often strive to create a meaningful life ( Duckworth et al., 2005 ) based on society’s values, often modeled by heroes. Through such means, people create a lasting impact and achieve symbolic immortality ( Goethals and Allison, 2012 ).

Based on our literature review, three broad categories of hero functions are accounted for: enhancing, moral modeling, and protecting. To reach consensus about the types of social and psychological functions that heroes provide, we suggest that examining lay conceptions about hero functions is a useful precursor to developing a theory of hero functions. As such, we first attempted to distill the range of functions that people associate with heroes, and then synthesized this information into meaningful categories (Studies 1 and 2). Second, we illustrated the extent to which individuals perceived that heroes influenced others in a similar or distinct ways to other persons of influence (Study 3). Third, we examined the extent to which people perceived benefits from thinking about heroes, leaders (Study 4A), or acquaintances (Study 4B) during times of threat or unfulfilled needs (e.g., low self-esteem, social isolation, uncertainty) as predicted by Klapp (1969) and Becker (1973) . Thus, the present article responds to the call for further research on heroes ( Zimbardo, 2007 ; Franco et al., 2011 ) and particularly to the call for further research on what good that heroes might do for people ( Allison and Goethals, 2011 ).

The study of the impact of persons’ lay theories on their social understanding has a long history in personality and social psychology (e.g., Hong et al., 2001 ). Following in that tradition, Study 1 aimed to systematically analyze lay persons’ responses to the question: “In your view, what functions do heroes serve?” The term functions was adopted in order to facilitate participants’ inclusion of both positive and negative assessments of heroic actors. The resulting exemplars were analyzed systematically, in accordance with prototype methods ( Hassebrauck, 1997 ). We expected that the most representative functions provided by heroes would be those that our participants expressed most frequently.

Participants

One-hundred and eighty-nine participants (116 women, 73 men, M age 29.98 years, SD age = 11.88, age range: 18–73 years) were recruited via Facebook TM and snowball sampling via email ( n = 164), and in the local city center ( n = 25). Participants originated from North America ( n = 90), Europe ( n = 89), and Australasia or Africa ( n = 10). Gender frequencies by geographical location were as follows American (59% female), European (65% female), and Australasian or African (56% female). The mean ages of participants in each geographical location was as follows: American ( M = 28, SD = 11.10), European ( M = 32, SD = 12.89), and Australasian or African ( M = 32, SD = 8.80).

Materials and procedure

Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Limerick’s Research Ethics Committee (Studies 1–4). Informed consent was obtained from all participants (Studies 1–4). Participants completed standardized materials either on paper or online. Those who completed the questionnaire online did not receive any compensation for their participation. Those who filled out the questionnaire in the city center received a coffee as a token of appreciation. Participants were asked: “In your view, what functions do heroes serve?” Participants were informed that “There are no correct or incorrect answers, and this is not a psychological test.” Responses were not timed. Participants were then thanked and debriefed (Studies 1–4).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A verbatim list of exemplars ( n = 344) was compiled. An exemplar is defined as one item from a list, or one unit of meaning ( Joffe and Yardley, 2004 ) from responses that contained multiple connected descriptions of hero functions.

During Phase 1 of coding, two research assistants sorted the original exemplars into superordinate thematic categories without prior knowledge about our predictions. This was achieved by grouping (a) identical exemplars, (b) semantically related exemplars (e.g., “give people hope” and “instill hope”), and (c) meaning-related exemplars into categories (e.g., “keep people safe” and “protect people from evil”) in accordance with the approach taken by previous research ( Hepper et al., 2011 ). In the first round, the first coder identified 13 categories and the second coder identified 14 categories. To reach full agreement it was necessary to create a new category. The first coder’s category, to inspire and motivate , was split into two categories (i.e., to inspire , to motivate) , resulting in 14 function categories.

During Phase 2 of coding, the third and fourth coders independently matched each original exemplar (e.g., “helping somebody to pave the way toward a personal goal”) with the 14 categories (e.g., to help) identified by the first and second coders. There was 76% consistency between the third coder’s ratings and the original coding. There was 67% consistency between the fourth coder’s ratings and the original coding. Most of the inconsistencies arose where coders placed exemplars such as “builders of self-esteem,” “punish the bad,” and “they epitomize what we should be” in multiple categories. If we take semantic units that were multiply classifiable as confirmation of reliability, the figures rise to 83 and 87% which are comparable with other published articles (e.g., Gregg et al., 2008 ).

Categories of hero functions

The independent coders identified 14 categories of functions provided by heroes from the original 344 exemplars (see Table ​ Table1 1 ). The categories of functions that were identified are as follows: to help, to inspire, to motivate, to save, to be a role model, to protect, to instill hope, to improve morale and camaraderie, to make the world a better place, to do what no one else will, to remind people about the good in the world, to guide, to show morals and values, and to act against evil or danger. On average, participants described two exemplars ( M = 2.05, SD = 1.30) 3 .

Fourteen hero functions and relatedness ratings in Study 2.

Linguistic analysis of hero functions

To provide additional information about the exemplars, all responses were subjected to analysis using the textual analysis software, Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count Version 2007 for Windows (LIWC; Pennebaker et al., 2007 ). LIWC compares each word from every participant’s response against an internal dictionary that contains English words, and then, reports a percentage of words that represent a psychological theme. For example, one participant wrote that heroes “remind us of the human potential,” and LIWC flagged the word human as belonging to the social theme. On average, participants’ descriptions consisted of 26% social (e.g., people, others), 20% affect (e.g., happy, positive), 19% positive emotion (e.g., love), 17% cognitive mechanism (e.g., ought, know), and 8% achievement (e.g., earn, win) themes. This is consistent with the view that heroic benefits are described in positive ways, in particular, relating to social topics, emotions, attitude formation, and taking action to pursue goals.

Some heroes were described as enhancing positive feelings about the self and others (to inspire, to motivate, increase morale) and modeling morals (to provide morals and values, to remind people of the good in the world). Other heroes were described as protecting people, either physically (e.g., “saving lives”) or emotionally (e.g., “to help people in a situation where they are in distress or despair and they are almost ready to give up”). These findings present empirical support to some ideas about why people need heroes presented by Allison and Goethals (2013b) . For instance, those authors suggested that heroes give people hope and offer nurturance (enhancing); educate people about right and wrong, and validate our moral worldviews (moral modeling); and, save us when we are in trouble, pick us up when we are down, and deliver justice (protecting). Each are consistent with the three themes that we identified in the literature.

Participants were invited to rate the relatedness of each heroic function (identified in Study 1) to their own view of heroes. Researchers have used similar methods to identify exemplar representativeness of a prototype (e.g., Hepper et al., 2011 ). Based on the themes that emerged from the literature and from an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) 4 , we expected that the ratings of some functions would cluster together into three categories, with each factor a latent construct representing hero functions: enhancing , moral modeling, and protecting . We tested the extent to which a three-factor model fit the data via a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

Factor loadings from factor analysis based on ratings in Study 2.

Two-hundred and forty-nine participants were recruited for this study in a local city center, on the University of Limerick campus, and via the psychological research website, http://psych.hanover.edu/ (120 women, 129 men, M age = 32.64 years, SD age = 12.48, age range: 18–67 years).

We offered the participants who we recruited on campus or in the local city center chocolate for their participation in the study. Participants recruited online were not compensated. Participants rated how closely each of the 14 functions of heroes related to their personal view of heroes. After each function category, some common exemplars were provided in brackets: “Inspiration (make you dream, show people what is possible, remind us of the human potential)” and “Shows morals and values (give us a set of values, conserve morals, and values).” All ratings were indicated on a Likert scale that ranged from 1 (not at all related) to 8 (extremely related). Readability statistics for the functions of heroes and associated exemplars include the Flesch Reading Ease = 67.6% and Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level 8.

Descriptive statistics

The ratings for hero functions ranged from 5.65 (to remind people about the good in the world) to 6.48 (to make the world better), on an 8-point Likert scale (see Table ​ Table1 1 ). These results support the idea that these 14 functions represent some of the most important functions provided by heroes.

Confirmatory factor analysis

A CFA tested the three-factor structure that was predicted from our analysis of the literature and from our preliminary results that emerged from an EFA. The analyses were conducted with LISREL 8.8.

In the CFA model, to save, to protect, to help, to do what no one else will, and to act against evil or danger were each specified as the latent factor protecting . To motivate, to role model, to inspire, to instill hope, to provide morale, and to guide were specified as the latent factor enhancing . Finally, to remind people about the good in the world, to show morals and values, and to make the world better were specified as the latent variable moral modeling . Results confirm that this three-factor model fit acceptably with the data, χ 2 (74, n = 248) = 232.82, p < 0.05, goodness of fit index (GFI) = 0.89, the non-normed fit index (NNFI) = 0.92, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.94, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.08, and standardized root mean residual (SRMR) = 0.08. Bentler and Bonett (1980) recommended that measurement models have GFI, NNFI, and CFI of at least 0.90. According to Browne and Cudeck (1993) , RMSEA between 0.05 and 0.08 represents a reasonably close fit, and, RMSEA > 0.10 represents an unacceptable model. Also, Hu and Bentler (1998) suggested that SRMR larger than 0.08 represents an unacceptable model fit.

In accordance with the variety of our participants’ responses, the data suggest that heroes provide more than a single, overarching psychosocial function. Indeed, a one-factor model fit the data inadequately, χ 2 (77, n = 248) = 584.73, p < 0.05, GFI = 0.70, NNFI = 0.81, CFI = 0.19, RMSEA = 0.19, and SRMR = 0.11. None of the fit statistics for the one-factor model reached 0.90 and the RMSEA was well above 0.10. We predicted three categories of heroic influence based on a review of the literature and our EFA results; indeed, the data suggest that this model fit the data well.

Leaders are typically described as persons who are responsible for organizing a group of people to achieve a common goal. More specifically, transformational leaders have been described as those who inspire others and create a future vision ( Bass, 1990 ). Previous research suggests that transformational leaders may provide psychological functions to their followers ( Ilies et al., 2005 ). Leaders are sometimes considered heroic. Allison and Goethals (2011 , 2013a ) draw attention to the number of leaders who are represented on their lists of popular heroes. Some hero functions could also describe the influence of leaders. We wondered if lay theories about hero functions would be measurably distinct from those of leaders.

Next, role models have been described as influential people who are often geographically close, similar in age, and share comparable experiences to their supporter ( Brownhill, 2010 ). In 1991, Singer explained that role models who are closer to their follower are observed carefully and mimicked. Role models have previously been found to engage followers in prosocial behavior ( Bryan and Test, 1967 ) and inspire others ( Lockwood and Kunda, 1997 ). The words hero and role model are often used interchangeably. Thus, we wondered if lay theories about hero functions are measurably distinct from those of role models.

Given the etymology of the word hero (meaning ‘protector’), we expect that heroes would be the best protectors of psychological and physical well-being. Hence, Study 3 examines whether participants would rate the 14 functions (generated in Studies 1–2) equally for heroes, leaders, and role models.

Two-hundred and forty-two post-graduate students (136 females, 106 males, M age = 30.60 years, SD age = 10.64, age range: 18–66 years) were recruited for this online study via the University of Limerick intranet.

The study employed a between-groups design. Participants completed an online questionnaire that prompted them to bring to mind either a leader ( n = 73), a role model ( n = 95), or a heroic individual ( n = 74). Persons were randomly distributed across conditions. Participants rated how closely each of the 14 functions of heroes (described in Studies 1 and 2) related to their personal view of heroes. After each function category, some common exemplars were provided in brackets: “Inspiration (make you dream, show people what is possible, remind us of the human potential)” and “Shows morals and values (give us a set of values, conserve morals and values).” All ratings were indicated on a Likert scale that ranged from 1 (not at all related) to 8 (extremely related).

Rating heroes, leaders, and role models on 14 hero functions

A multivariate General Linear Model evidenced a significant association between type of influential person and associated functions, Wilk’s Lambda F (28,452) = 2.48, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.13. Univariate tests shows significant relationships between type of individual and ratings for the following (see Table ​ Table3 3 ): to help, to save, to motivate, to make the world better, to guide, and to do what no one else will do. Participants rated heroes as more likely to help, to save, to protect, to make the world better, and to do what no one else will. They rated leaders as more likely to motivate and to guide.

Mean (SD) and inferential statistics tests that evidenced significant differences between type of influential person and the participants’ ratings of each in Study 3.

Rating heroes, leaders, and role models on categories of hero functions

Each heroic function was coded as belonging to one of the three categories from Study 2: protecting, enhancing, and moral modeling. A multivariate General Linear Model revealed an association between the type of influential person and the categories of hero functions, Wilk’s Lambda F (6,494) = 3.07, p < 0.01, η p 2 = 0.04. Univariate tests indicated that there were significant relationships between type of individual and ratings for protecting. For instance, heroes were rated as more likely to save, to help, and to do what no one else will do.

There was a significant difference between ratings of protecting for heroes, leaders, and role models, F (2,249) = 4.07, p = 0.02, η p 2 = 0.32. The pairwise comparison revealed mean differences between heroes ( M = 6.09, SD = 1.46) and role models ( M = 5.60, SD = 1.56), t (175) = 2.17, p = 0.03, d = 0.68. Further, the mean differences between heroes ( M = 6.09, SD = 1.46) and leaders ( M = 5.40. SD = 1.50) was significant, t (151) = 2.77, p = 0.01, d = 0.33.

The data highlight some important conceptual distinctions between persons of influence. Heroes, role models, and leaders have potential to serve both enhancing and moral modeling functions. Heroes may provide a protecting function beyond that of role models or leaders. Overall, heroes are more likely to help, save, protect, make the world better, and do what no-one else will than leaders or role models.

The findings illustrate that leaders were rated as more likely to guide and motivate than heroes or role models. This is probably not surprising given that political leaders such as Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi are considered heroic by millions of people and are famous for their ability to guide and motivate others. Leaders who display prototypical features of heroism may influence people in different ways than other leaders. For example, transformational leaders are defined as leaders who raise followers to higher levels of effort by appealing to their morals and values ( Chmiel, 2000 ). Also, Allison and Goethals (2013a) helpfully point out that the distinction between indirect and direct leaders (e.g., Gardner, 1995 ) may help us to further understand the overlap between the concepts of hero and leader.

Participants in Study 3 most likely brought to mind direct leaders (e.g., Barack Obama, Angela Merkel), rather than indirect leaders (e.g., Helen Keller, Wesley Autrey). Thus, this study is most likely comparing heroes with direct leaders. Conceptual clarification is needed in order to tease apart the possible functions of direct and indirect leaders, and the overlap with heroic actors.

Role models, due to their accessibility to their follower, are often scrutinized in detail and mimicked ( Singer, 1991 ). Whereas, heroes tend to be distant figures who have endured tremendous suffering and sacrifice for purposes of great nobility, whom we would not wish to emulate ( Singer, 1991 ). These ideas are reflected in recent research that suggests that role models are generally physically close, from the same generation, and have comparable experiences to the follower ( Brownhill, 2010 ).

Previous research has found that lay persons tend to think of role models as more talented, honest, personable, exceptional , and humble than heroes or leaders ( Kinsella et al., 2015 ). Researchers have found that altruistic role models increase the likelihood that those around them engage in prosocial behavior ( Bryan and Test, 1967 ). This is consistent with the findings here that role models provide a moral modeling function. Also, Lockwood and Kunda (1997) described the enhancing function of role models which is consistent with the present research. Of course, negative or ‘bad’ role models are unlikely to be a positive influence on others.

STUDIES 4A AND 4B

In Studies 4A and 4B we examined the extent to which participants indicate that heroes, leaders and acquaintances fulfill enhancing, moral modeling, and protecting functions when experiencing social or psychological threats. We hypothesized that participants would consistently indicate that heroes fulfill the enhancing, moral modeling, and protecting functions to a greater extent than a leader or an acquaintance.

In a pilot study conducted on the University of Limerick campus, we asked participants ( n = 42) to state whether they believed Nelson Mandela (former President of South Africa), Enda Kenny (Taoiseach, Leader of Fine Gael in Ireland) and Michael O’Leary (Chief Executive of RyanAir airlines) to be either a hero or a leader. Sixty-seven percent of our participants believed that Mandela is a hero rather than a leader or neither (i.e., non-hero/non-leader), in comparison with 64% who believed that Enda Kenny is a leader, and 67% who indicated that Michael O’Leary is a leader. In a study that we conducted in Kinsella et al. (2010) , we found that Mandela was one of the most frequent heroes mentioned. Therefore, in Study 4A we used these target persons to examine perceived functions fulfilled by heroes and leaders in an Irish sample.

Participants and design

In Study 4A (within-subjects design), 38 participants (18 men, 20 women, M age = 22.53, SD age = 2.02) were asked to rate three persons of influence in three different scenarios (enhancing, moral modeling and protecting conditions). In Study 4B (mixed design), 102 participants (55 men, 47 women, M age = 26.34, SD age = 11.58) were randomly assigned to the enhancing, moral modeling, protecting, or control conditions, and then asked to rate both target persons (hero, acquaintance). Participants were recruited in the local city center and did not receive any compensation.

Procedure and materials

In Study 4A, participants were asked to read three statements representing the enhancing, moral modeling and protecting functions of heroes. For enhancing, participants read “If I felt negative about myself and others, thinking about (see person below) would increase my positive feelings about myself and other people, and motivate me to further develop my potential.” For moral modeling, participants read “If I felt disconnected from others and unmotivated to act for the good of the group, thinking about (see person below) would remind me of morals, values and ethics, and encourage me to behave in ways that benefit others.” For protecting, participants read “If I felt threatened in some way or worried about the future, thinking about (see person below) would increase my feeling of protection and safety, and help me to cope with uncertainty.” Participants were then requested to indicate how much they agreed with these three statements, in relation to three named targets (i.e., Nelson Mandela, Enda Kenny, and Michael O’Leary) on the rating scale provided (1 = strongly disagree , 7 = strongly agree ).

In Study 4B, participants were assigned to one of four conditions: enhancing, moral modeling, protecting, and control. To rule out the possibility of a valence effect, we included a control condition that refers to more mundane social interactions (i.e., talking about the weather). This condition was included to control for the potential effect that heroes, positively represented targets, are generally rated more positively than others (i.e., valence effect), or whether heroes are rated more positively only on hero functions. Participants rated self-generated heroes and acquaintances. Specifically, participants were asked to write the name or initials of either a person in their life who they know slightly, but who is not a friend (i.e., an acquaintance), read a statement relating to one of the four conditions, and rate their responses on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree , 7 = strongly agree ). On a separate page, participants were asked to write the names or initials of their personal hero, read a statement and rate their responses on the 7-point Likert scale. In Study 4B, the acquaintance (i.e., non-hero) is the main reference point. Crucially, we predicted that heroes would be viewed more positively than acquaintances at providing enhancing, moral modeling, and protecting functions; further, we expected no differences between targets in the control condition.

Participants in both studies rated specific targets, rather than abstract ideas, of heroes, leaders, and acquaintances. The enhancing, moral modeling, and protecting statements used in Study 4B were identical to those used in Study 4A. A control condition was included in Study 4B to reduce the possibility that heroes received higher ratings across all dependent social measures. As such, the control condition stated “If you think about the weather and how strongly you feel about it, can you see yourself having the wish to talk about it with __.” Discussing the weather in social settings is a prevalent norm in Ireland which forms the basis of relatively mundane social interactions. We use this control condition to examine whether heroes receive inflated ratings across all positive conditions.

Enhancing condition

In Study 4A, for enhancing, there were statistically significant differences between the mean ratings for Mandela ( M = 5.51, SD = 1.21), O’Leary ( M = 3.24, SD = 1.53) and Kenny ( M = 2.89, SD = 1.58), Wilk’s Lambda = 0.478, F (2,35) = 25.59, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.59. Paired samples t-tests were used to compare ratings for each of the target persons. There was a significant difference between mean ratings for Mandela and O’Leary, t (36) = 6.02, p < 0.001, d = 2.01 and for Mandela and Kenny, t (36) = 7.00, p < 0.001, d = 2.33 but not for the leaders, O’Leary and Kenny, t (36) = 1.17, p = 0.09, d = 0.39. Finally, in Study 4B, in the enhancing condition ( n = 25), there was a statistically significant difference on ratings for acquaintance ( M = 3.84, SD = 1.78) and for hero ( M = 4.92, SD = 1.63), t (24) = –2.52, p = 0.02, d = 1.03.

Moral modeling condition

In Study 4A, for moral modeling, there were statistically significant differences between ratings for Mandela ( M = 5.6, SD = 1.36), O’Leary ( M = 2.68, SD = 1.75) and Kenny ( M = 2.51, SD = 1.43), Wilk’s Lambda = 0.221, F (2,35) = 61.78, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.78. There was a significant difference between mean ratings for Mandela and O’Leary, t (36) = 8.50, p < 0.001, d = 2.83, and for Mandela and Kenny, t (36) = 11.25, p < 0.001, d = 3.75. However, there was no significant difference for ratings between the leaders, O’Leary and Kenny, t (36) = –0.67, p = 0.51, d = 0.22. Finally, in Study 4B, in the moral modeling condition ( n = 27), there was a statistically significant difference between acquaintance ( M = 3.59, SD = 1.87) and for hero ( M = 5.74, SD = 1.70), t (26) = –4.45, p < 0.001, d = 1.75.

Protecting condition

In Study 4A, for protecting, there were statistically significant differences between ratings for Mandela ( M = 4.70, SD = 1.83), O’Leary ( M = 2.62, SD = 1.53) and Kenny ( M = 2.65, SD = 1.57), Wilk’s Lambda = 4.78, F (2,35) = 19.12, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.52. There were significant differences between mean ratings for Mandela and O’Leary, t (36) = 6.27, p < 0.001, d = 2.09, and for Mandela and Kenny, t (36) = 5.19, p < 0.001, d = 1.73. However, there was no statistically significant difference on ratings for the leaders, O’Leary and Kenny, t (36) = –0.13, p = 0.90, d = 0.04. Next, in Study 4B, in the Protect condition ( n = 26), there was a significance difference between acquaintance ( M = 3.08, SD = 1.50) and hero ( M = 5.38, SD = 1.86), t (25) = –5.34, p < 0.001.

Control condition

In Study 4B, as predicted, there were no reliable differences between heroes ( M = 4.67, SD = 2.12) and acquaintances ( M = 4.21, SD = 1.87) in the control condition, t (23) = 1.14, p = 0.27.

Interaction analyses for Study 4B

The findings from Studies 4A and 4B supported the hypotheses that participants reported that heroes (to a greater extent than leaders or non-hero targets) provide enhancing, moral modeling and protecting functions if a particular need is threatened or unfulfilled. To further examine this data, we created a heroic function variable comprising of an aggregate of the enhancing, moral modeling and protecting conditions. The non-heroic function variable represents the control condition.

Overall, heroes ( M = 5.36, SD = 1.74) were rated by participants as more likely to provide a heroic function than acquaintances ( M = 3.50, SD = 1.73). A mixed ANOVA was conducted for target person (hero and acquaintance) and functions (hero functions or non-heroic function), with repeated measures on the target person variable. There was a significant interaction between type of function provided and the target person associated with that function, F (1,100) = 7.10, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.07. Participants who thought about a personal hero while imagining social psychological stress expressed greater fulfillment for hero functions than thinking of an acquaintance. Participants who thought about a personal hero while imagining a need to talk socially about the weather (control condition), showed no significant effect. There was a significant main effect for target person, Wilk’s Lambda = 0.84, F (1,100) = 19.42, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.16. There was no significant main effect for functions, F (1,100) = 0.98, p = 0.98, η p 2 = 0.

In Study 4, two studies elucidated lay beliefs about the functions of heroes and in particular, how individuals may use heroes as a resource if a given need is threatened or unfulfilled. Participants rated heroes as more likely to fulfill enhancing, moral modeling, and protecting functions than other targets, offering support to our hypotheses. Study 4B illustrated that participants did not rate heroes higher across all positive social functions. Study 4B replicates and extends the findings from Study 4A. We think that participants were discerning in their beliefs that heroes serve enhancing, moral modeling, and protecting needs, but not necessarily other social or emotional needs (e.g., daily social pleasantries). In sum, we demonstrated that participants view heroes as a resource for coping when psychological or social needs are threatened or unfulfilled.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

A primary goal of this research was to clarify lay perspectives about hero functions and to ascertain the extent to which such functions are similar to or different from each other, and to the themes that we identified in the exiting literature. This review led us to the assertion that the subjective functions provided by heroes can be represented in three categories: enhancing, moral modeling, and protecting.

Independent coder analyses of lay conceptions (Study 1) revealed 14 perceived functions provided by heroes, for example, to inspire, to protect, to guide, to instill hope, and to motivate. Another sample rated each of the 14 function categories in terms of importance (Study 2). CFA established that our predicted three-factor model, including the factors protecting, enhancing, and moral modeling, fit the data well in comparison to a poorly fitting one-factor model. In Study 3 we asked participants to rate heroes, role models, or leaders across all 14 hero functions. The results illustrated that heroes were perceived as more likely to help, to save, to protect, to make the world better, and to do what no one else will. Heroes were perceived by participants as protecting others more than both leaders and role models. In Studies 4A and 4B the results evidenced that participants viewed heroes as a resource for experiencing enhancement, moral modeling, and protection when psychological or social needs were threatened or unfulfilled. The present studies suggest that lay theories can provide a useful assessment in the study of heroism. We use the information from the literature and lay conceptions of heroes to form a conceptual framework, the Hero Functions Framework, which is integrative and can serve as a basis for future research. We describe this framework below.

THE HERO FUNCTIONS FRAMEWORK

Enhancing function.

According to lay conceptions, heroes motivate, act as a role model, inspire, instill hope, improve morale and camaraderie, and guide others. Participants described feeling positive affect when thinking of heroes, “making them feel happy” and “helping people to live a happy life.” Heroes were frequently described by participants as making people “feel better about the world,” “more positive about humanity,” and reminding people of “the good in the world.” To us, this makes sense, because when a person feels good about the self they are more positive and less misanthropic toward other people too (e.g., Ybarra, 1999 ). One person described heroes as “builders of self-esteem.” Heroes were portrayed as elevating and motivating people, for example, “[they] elevate the rest of us to a place of courage” or “elevate the consciousness of others.” The enhancing function is linked to previous writings about heroes who instigate periods of transcendence ( Klapp, 1969 ), induce a perspective shift ( Allison and Goethals, 2011 ), increase the positive emotions experienced by others ( Algoe and Haidt, 2009 ), and increase social connectedness ( Smith, 1976 ). Future research will help to clarify the apparent role of heroes in helping individuals to cope with or transcend difficult situations.

Upward social comparisons with role models ( Lockwood and Kunda, 1997 ) and do-gooders ( Minson and Monin, 2012 ) can sometimes result in perceived self-threats and self-deflation. Individuals do, however, sometimes actively seek out upward social comparisons in order to gain an accurate self-assessment and to self-enhance ( Collins, 1996 ). In fact, a person can consciously prevent upward comparisons from influencing their self-evaluations and choose to use that information to inspire, motivate, and promote positive affect instead ( Taylor and Lobel, 1989 ).

When experiencing the threat of uncertainty (e.g., during major life transitions), superior others and role models can be perceived as inspiring if the more established person has successfully overcome similar adjustment difficulties and their behaviors are perceived as attainable ( Lockwood et al., 2012 ). The mystery behind heroes is that, although their exceptional behavior is normally out of reach of regular people and even though they are single exemplars which are particularly likely to induce judgmental contract effects, heroes still appear to produce motivational assimilation effects. We suspect this is because heroes, though individuals, embody abstract values. We believe that people typically process information about heroes at an abstract level and use the information as a source of motivation for their goals. Future research on heroes could draw from construal level theory ( Trope and Liberman, 2010 ) to investigate the role of psychological distance on the social comparison interpretations of heroic influence.

Alternatively, the positive (and non-threatening) influence of heroes could be interpreted from a recent theory of inspiration. For instance, Thrash et al. (2010) note that people first appreciate the exceptional efforts of the inspirational target (resulting in feelings of transcendence and meaning) which in turn is translated into a personal desire to perform at a higher level in one’s own life (evoking feelings of self-responsibility and volitional control). In all, theories of social comparison and inspiration both help to generate specific hypotheses about heroes. Taken together, these ideas pave the foundation for future research into the psychological processes associated with the enhancing influence of heroes.

Moral modeling function

Some hero functions are abstract and symbolic, for example, reminding people about the good in the world, showing morals and values, and making the world a better place. Research about moral exemplars may elucidate the moral modeling function of heroes ( Colby and Damon, 1992 ; Matsuba and Walker, 2005 ; Walker and Frimer, 2007 ; Frimer et al., 2011 , 2012 ). In our studies, lay persons described heroes as “increasing positive feelings about humanity” and promoting “confidence that there is good in the world.” When a person feels good about their own self they are more receptive to negative information about themselves ( Trope and Neter, 1994 ). Given this, it is no coincidence that heroes boost our feelings of happiness and simultaneously reveal our missing qualities.

Fascinatingly, participants described heroes as “moral symbols to protect everyday innocent people,” “providing moral goals for society,” and that they “personify the things we cannot articulate.” In our studies it was clear that some heroes were perceived by participants to act as agents of social justice, striving to improve the situations of the disadvantaged. This is consistent with Sorel (1912) who argued that social movements require a narrative with sufficient moral and emotional force to give clarity and inspiration to an account of events. Indeed, heroic individuals can give meaning to collective action and promote group solidarity. Narrative psychology offers a useful lens through which researchers and individuals can seek to understand the role of heroes in moral narratives.

Lay conceptions refer to heroes that make them “aware of the rest of humanity,” perhaps shifting their focus away from individual concerns and redirecting toward a world-focus perspective ( Bryant and Veroff, 2007 ). This is consistent with previous research that suggests that moral exemplars typically integrate both agentic and communal motives ( Frimer et al., 2011 , 2012 ). In our research, one participant described how heroes teach us that it is possible to be altruistic in an egocentric world [similar to scholarly points made by Flescher (2003) ], regulating the self toward more noble purposes ( Singer, 1991 ), even when those decisions may require courage, conviction, and integrity. The extent that heroes influence moral willpower and moral decision-making, perhaps via a process of self-regulation, has not yet been investigated.

Protecting function

Lay conceptions suggest that heroes provide a protecting function: they save, help, guide, protect, act against evil or danger, and do what no one else will do. Heroes may help people to restore positive feeling about others and buffer negative feelings about themselves. For instance, one participant described a hero who helped her in a car crash. Another participant wrote about a hero who assisted her “to get through the tough times,” offering additional coping resources (suggested by Hobbs, 2010 ).

Heroes were frequently depicted as representing the “fight for good against evil” or “stopping the bad in humanity.” Those who believe that heroes are proactively taking action to combat evil or danger may feel safeguarded (e.g., “a hero’s job is making citizens feel safe”) and more certain about the future (e.g., “tomorrow we will be safe”). Other scholarly work indicates that persons use metaphors, myths, or symbols to give coherence to their lives ( Campbell, 1988 ; Lakoff and Johnson, 2003 ). Perhaps heroes, similar to powerful myths and metaphors, are used as tools for dealing with uncertainty ( Van den Bos, 2009 ). Both leaders and heroes were described as offering guidance and leadership through the complexity of daily life. This is interesting given that many heroes do not occupy formal leadership positions. Formal and informal leadership theory ( Gardner, 1995 ) may help to elucidate the influence of heroes who occupy direct or indirect leadership positions ( Allison and Goethals, 2013a ). Traditionally, direct leaders pull a group toward a tangible goal, whereas indirect leaders (and heroes) guide a new way of thinking, being, or doing within a particular group, sometimes without tangible outcomes. This point underscores the value of current efforts to unveil the complexity of lay perspectives about the psychosocial functions fulfilled by heroes.

CONTRIBUTION AND LIMITATIONS

Writers have alluded to the psychological benefits derived from heroic encounters, yet this fragmented information has not been synthesized or empirically studied. Until this point, the functions of heroes have been dealt with in a relatively superficial and piecemeal manner. Thus, the present research aimed to narrow the gaps in our understanding of heroes by presenting four studies that elucidate lay perspectives about the social and psychological functions of heroes. Similarly, we synthesize ideas about heroes in the extant literature, in an attempt to offer a novel conceptual framework, the Hero Functions Framework. With this framework in place, researchers can systematically assess the influence of heroes while simultaneously taking into account the type of hero, individual differences, and situational influences. Our research is a starting point, an important step in understanding how heroes are used psychologically and socially.

Klapp (1969) suggested that the media capitalize on the desire for heroes and present heroes (and more often pseudo-heroes) in order to fulfill this need and “vainly do we make scores of artificial celebrities grow where nature planted only a single hero” ( Boorstin, 1992 , p. 76). Other authors similarly noted that “the need for heroes is so strong that the media will manufacture pseudo-heroes to meet it” ( Schwartz and Schwartz, 2010 , p. 32). The impact of pseudo-heroism, celebrity culture, and negative role models is of serious concern for parents, educators, governments, researchers, and many others. For instance, a great deal of debate exists about the over-sexualization of children and teenagers as a result of exposure to negative role models and the absence of real heroes who help others to move toward more noble purposes ( Singer, 1991 ). If people need external reference points for goals, standards, and ways to behave ( Schlenker et al., 2008 ), it is important to make salient heroes, role models, and leaders who serve as models for desirable conduct in a particular group. We study heroes empirically with the hope that this information will be used in responsible ways that benefit others, albeit not heroically but with good intensions. Unfortunately the great tyrants of history have been held up as heroes by the unsuspecting masses, skillfully manipulated through propaganda. Part of the value of this research may be in deterring inappropriate hero worship as much as encouraging appropriate hero worship.

So far, we have examined lay conceptions of heroes—perceivable and conceivable functions expressed by hundreds of mostly young adults—rather than actual or measurable functions that heroes fulfill. It is possible that lay persons overstate the psychosocial functions that heroes provide in their everyday lives, or that heroes provide functions which are outside of their conscious awareness. In view of the introspective illusion (e.g., Pronin, 2009 ), one might question whether and to what extent people, if they are not experts on their own mental processes, can provide valid reports about how heroes function psychologically. Although, lay theories about mental processes can be accurate (see Nisbett and Wilson, 1977 ), we acknowledge that the present research offers suggestive evidence only; it is part of a relatively new empirical story and impetus for further research.

FUTURE RESEARCH

Future research needs to examine how lay perspectives relate to actual changes in the self and self-regulatory processes. The next phase of this research will be to demonstrate the effects of information about heroes on participants in lab settings. Specifically, there is a need to examine the protecting, enhancing, and moral modeling functions of heroes as dependent variables affected by exposure to heroes of heroic acts. This is a broader research question than we intended to study in the present article.

So far, the functions listed for ‘known’ versus ‘unknown’ heroes have not been independently assessed. People’s relationship with their heroes varies widely and as a result they may derive different benefits from encounters. For instance, it is likely that people who have a personal relationship with their heroic grandmother will derive different benefits than a person who has developed a parasocial relationship ( Horton and Wohl, 1956 ) with Nelson Mandela. The types of parasocial relationships people have with influential people, such as heroes, celebrities, or sports stars, are underexplored.

Heroes have been described as shaping and representing culture ( Hegel, 1975 ) and providing a source of social control ( Klapp, 1954 ). The heroes worshipped in a given group may reveal that a group’s most cherished values. In some cases, heroes represent minority values, speaking out against dominant cultural values, and as agents of change. In the present article, a full analysis of cultural differences in lay perceptions about heroes was not possible. The few participants from Africa, Australia, and Asia preclude us to make generalizations across countries or continents. Nonetheless, we think that studying the variety of cultural representations of heroes is a fruitful avenue for future research. For instance, research suggests that Japanese individuals tend to cherish the suffering of their heroes ( Benedict, 1946 ); whereas, in Western cultures, there is a tendency to savor heroic efforts that result in a happy outcome ( Heine et al., 1999 ). Such research looms on the horizon in our labs.

The present research studies potential social and psychological functions served by heroes using deductive and inductive methods. Our research offers a conceptual framework that facilitates the development of a psychological theory of heroism, as well as helping to pave the way for additional research on hero functions and the consideration of how gender and culture might each influence and be influenced by heroes. Given the assortment of physical, psychological, and social reward people associate with heroes, it is unsurprising that many individuals offer “homage, commemoration, celebration, and veneration” to their heroes in return ( Klapp, 1954 , p. 57).

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We thank A. Gregg, P. Ryan, and reviewers for comments on previous versions of this manuscript. We thank F. van Dongen, G. O’Malley, K. O’ Malley, and W. A. P. van Tilburg for their help with data collection.

1 http://heroicimagination.org/

2 http://www.theherocc.com/

3 There was no significant sex differences between the number of exemplars reported, t (187) = –1.01, p = 0.31. There was no relationship between age and number of exemplars reported ( r = 0.07, p = 0.36). There were no significant differences between USA and European participants regarding the number of exemplars provided, t < 1. There were no significant differences between community and online participants regarding the number of exemplars provided, t < 1.

The results of the EFA (see Table ​ Table2 2 ) suggested three factors that represent our respondents’ ratings of hero functions. The ratings that loaded onto Factor 1 included to save, to protect, to help, to do what no one else will, and to act against evil or danger. We termed this factor protecting . The items that loaded strongly onto Factor 2 were to motivate, to role model, to inspire, to instill hope, to provide morale, and to guide. We call this factor enhancing . The items that loaded onto Factor 3 were to remind people about the good in the world, to show morals and values, and to make the world better. We named this factor moral modeling .

• Algoe S., Haidt J. (2009). Witnessing excellence in action: the other-praising emotions of elevation, admiration, and gratitude. J. Posit. Psychol. 4 105–127 10.1080/17439760802650519 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Allison S. T., Goethals G. R. (2011). Heroes: What They Do and Why We Need Them . New York, NY: Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Allison S. T., Goethals G. R. (2013a). Heroic Leadership. New York, NY: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Allison S. T., Goethals G. R. (2013b). 10 Reasons Why We Need Heroes. Available at: http://blog.richmond.edu/heroes/ [accessed May 17, 2013]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bass B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: learning to share the vision. Organ. Dyn. 18 19–32 10.1016/0090-2616(90)90061-S [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Becker E. (1973). The Denial of Death. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. [ Google Scholar ]
• Becker S. W., Eagly A. H. (2004). The heroism of men and women. Am. Psychol. 59 163–178 10.1037/0003-066X.59.3.163 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Benedict R. (1946). The Chrysanthemum and the Sword. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bentler P. M., Bonett D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol. Bull. 88 588–606 10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boorstin D. J. (1992). The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America . New York, NY: Vintage Books. [ Google Scholar ]
• Browne M. W., Cudeck R. (1993). “Alternative ways of assessing model fit,” in Testing Structural Equation Models eds Bollen K. A., Long J. S. (Newbury Park, CA: Sage) 136–162. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brownhill S. (2010). The ‘brave’ man in the early years (0–8): the ambiguities of the role model. Paper presented at British Educational Research Association University of Warwick; UK. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bryan J. H., Test M. A. (1967). Models and helping: naturalistic studies in aiding behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 6 400–407 10.1037/h0024826 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bryant F. B., Veroff J. (2007). Savoring: a New Model of Positive Experience . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [ Google Scholar ]
• Campbell J. (1949). The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Campbell J. (1988). The Power of Myth. New York, NY: Doubleday. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carlyle T. (1840). On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History . London: Chapman and Hall; (Reprinted by The Echo Library in 2007). [ Google Scholar ]
• Chmiel N. (2000). Introduction to Work and Organizational Psychology: A European Perspective . Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cialdini R. B. (2007). Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion . New York, NY: Collins. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cohen S. (1993). For parents particularly: lessons in moral behavior: a few heroes. Child. Educ. 68 168–170 10.1080/00094056.1993.10520921 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Colby A., Damon W. (1992). Some do Care: Contemporary Lives of Moral Commitment . New York, NY: Free Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Collins R. L. (1996). For better or worse: the impact of upward social comparison on self-evaluations. Psychol. Bull. 119 56–69 10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.51 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Duckworth A. L., Steen T. A., Seligman M. E. P. (2005). Positive psychology in clinical practice. Ann. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 1 629–651 10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.1.102803.144154 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dweck C. S., Leggett E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychol. Rev. 25 109–116. [ Google Scholar ]
• Erikson E. H. (1977). Toys and Reasons: Stages in the Ritualization of Experience . London: Marion Boyars. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fiske S. T., Taylor S. E. (2008). Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture . Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. [ Google Scholar ]
• Flescher A. M. (2003). Heroes, Saints, and Ordinary Morality . Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Franco Z., Blau K., Zimbardo P. (2011). Heroism: a conceptual analysis and differentiation between heroic action and altruism. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 5 99–113 10.1037/a0022672 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frimer J. A., Biesanz J. C., Walker L. W., MacKinlay C. W. (2013). Liberals and conservatives rely on common moral foundations when making moral judgements about influential people. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 104 1040–1059 10.1037/a0032277 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frimer J. A., Walker L. J., Dunlop W. L., Lee B. H., Riches A. (2011). The integration of agency and communion in moral personality: evidence of self-interest. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 101 149–163 10.1037/a0023780 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frimer J. A., Walker L. J., Lee B. H., Riches A., Dunlop W. L. (2012). Hierarchical integration of agency and communion: a study of influential moral figures. J. Pers. 80 1117–1145 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00764.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gardner H. (1995). Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership . London, UK: Harper Collins. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goethals G. R., Allison S. T. (2012). Making heroes: the construction of courage, competence and virtue. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 46 183–235 10.1016/B978-0-12-394281-4.00004-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gregg A. P., Hart C. M., Sedikides C., Kumashiro M. (2008). Everyday conceptions of modesty: a prototype analysis. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34 978–992 10.1177/0146167208316734 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harper D. (2010). Online Etymology Dictionary. Available at: http://www.etymonline.com [ Google Scholar ]
• Hart D., Fegley S. (1995). Prosocial behavior and caring in adolescence: relations to self-understanding and social judgement. Child Dev. 66 1346–1359 10.2307/1131651 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hassebrauck M. (1997). Cognitions of relationship quality: a prototype analysis of their structure and consequences. Personal. Relationsh. 4 163–186 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1997.tb00137.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hegel G. W. F. (1975). Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art . Oxford: Clarendon Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Heider F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley. [ Google Scholar ]
• Heine S. J., Lehman D. R., Markus H. R., Kitayama S. (1999). Is there a universal need for positive self-regard? Psychol. Rev. 106 766–794 10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.766 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hepper E. G., Ritchie T. D., Sedikides C., Wildschut T. (2011). Odyssey’s end: lay conceptions of nostalgia reflect its original Homeric meaning. Emotion 12 102–119 10.1037/a0025167 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hobbs A. (2010). “Heroes and heroism,” in James Cook (Producer), Free thinking festival ed. Cook J. (Gateshead: BBC Radio 3). [ Google Scholar ]
• Hong Y., Levy S. R., Chiu C. (2001). The contribution of lay theories approach to the study of groups. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 5 98–106 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0502-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Horton D., Wohl R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry 19 215–229. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hu L., Bentler P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modelling: sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychol. Methods 3 424–453 10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Igou E. R. (2004). Lay theories in affective forecasting: the progression of affect. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 40 528–534 10.1016/j.jesp.2003.09.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ilies R., Morgeson F. P., Nahrgang J. D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic well-being: understanding leader-follower outcomes. Leadersh. Q. 16 373–394 10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Joffe H., Yardley L. (2004). “Content and thematic analysis,” in Research Methods for Clinical and Health Psychology eds Marks D. F., Yardley L. (London: Sage) 56–68. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kinsella E. L., Ritchie T. D., Igou E. R. (2010). “Essential features and psychological functions of heroes,” in Poster session presented at the Northern Ireland British Psychological Society Annual Conference Enniskillen. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kinsella E. L., Ritchie T. D., Igou E. R. (2015). Zeroing in on heroes: a prototype analysis of hero features. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 108 114–127 10.1037/a0038463 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klapp O. E. (1954). Heroes, villains, and fools, as agents of social control. Am. Sociol. Rev. 19 56–62 10.2307/2088173 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klapp O. E. (1969). Collective Search for Identity. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kleinman A., Eisenberg L., Good B. (1976). Culture, illness, and care: clinical lessons from anthropologic and cross-cultural research. Ann. Intern. Med. 88 251–258 10.7326/0003-4819-88-2-251 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kruglanski A. H. (1975). The endogenous-exogenous partition in attribution theory. Psychol. Rev. 82 387–406 10.1037/0033-295X.82.6.387 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lakoff G., Johnson M. (2003). Metaphors We Live 2nd Edn. Chicago, IL: aUniversity of Chicago Press; 10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lewis D., Brown A. J., Moberly R. (2014). “Whistleblowing, its importance and the state of the research,” in International Handbook on Whistleblowing Research eds Brown A. J., Lewis D., Moberly R., Vandekerckhove W. (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited). [ Google Scholar ]
• Lockwood P., Kunda Z. (1997). Superstars and me: predicting the impact of role models on the self. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 73 91–103 10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.91 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lockwood P., Shaughnessy S. C., Fortune J. L., Tong M. (2012). Social comparisons in novel situations: finding inspiration during life transitions. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 38 985–996 10.1177/0146167212447234 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mansfield E. D., McAdams D. (1996). Generativity and themes of agency and communion in adult autobiography. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 22 721–731 10.1177/0146167296227006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Matsuba M. K., Walker L. W. (2005). Young adults moral exemplars: the making of self through stories. J. Res. Adolesc. 15 275–297 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2005.00097.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Minson J. A., Monin B. (2012). Do-Gooder derogation: disparaging morally motivated minorities to defuse anticipated reproach. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 3 200–207 10.1177/1948550611415695 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nisbett R. E., Wilson T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: verbal reports on mental processes. Psychol. Rev. 84 231–259 10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pennebaker J. W., Francis M. E., Booth R. J. (2007). Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC): LIWC 2007 . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pretzinger K. (1976). The American hero: yesterday and today. Humboldt J. Soc. Relat. 4 36–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pronin E. (2009). The introspection illusion. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 41 1–55 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)00401-2 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schlenker B. R., Weigold M. F., Schlenker K. A. (2008). What makes a hero? The impact of integrity on admiration and interpersonal judgment. J. Pers. 76 323–355 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00488.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwartz J. A., Schwartz R. B. (2010). The Wounds that Heal: Heroism and Human Development . Lanham, MD: University Press of America. [ Google Scholar ]
• Singer M. F. (1991). Heroines and role models. Science 253 249 10.1126/science.253.5017.249 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith G. J. (1976). An examination of the phenomenon of sports hero worship. Can. J. Appl. Sport Sci. 1 259–270. [ Google Scholar ]
• Snyder M. (1984). When belief creates reality. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 18 248–305 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60146-X [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sorel G. (1912). Reflections on Violence ed. Hulme T. E. (New York, NY: B. W. Huebsch; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Sternberg R. J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 49 607–627 10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.607 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sullivan M. P., Venter A. (2005). The hero within: inclusion of heroes into the self. Self Identity 4 101–111 10.1080/13576500444000191 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sullivan M. P., Venter A. (2010). Defining heroes through deductive and inductive investigations. J. Soc. Psychol. 150 471–484 10.1080/00224540903366602 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tabachnick B. G., Fidell L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics 5th Edn Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. [ Google Scholar ]
• Taylor S. E., Lobel M. (1989). Social comparison activity under threat: downward evaluation and upward contacts. Psychol. Rev. 96 569–575 10.1037//0033-295X.96.4.569 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thrash T. M., Elliot A. J., Maruskin L. A., Cassidy S. (2010). Inspiration and the promotion of well-being: tests of causality and mediation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 98 488–506 10.1037/a0017906 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Trope Y., Liberman N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychol. Rev. 117 440–463 10.1037/a0018963 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Trope Y., Neter E. (1994). Reconciling competing motives in self-evaluation: the role of self-control in feedback seeking. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 66 646–657 10.1037//0022-3514.66.4.646 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Van den Bos K. (2009). Making sense of life: the existential self trying to deal with personal uncertainty. Psychol. Inquiry 20 197–217 10.1080/10478400903333411 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Walker L. J., Frimer J. A. (2007). Moral personality of brave and caring exemplars. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 93 845–860 10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.845 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ybarra O. (1999). Misanthropic person memory when the need to self-enhance is absent. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 25 261–269 10.1177/0146167299025002011 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zimbardo P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. New York, NY: Random House. [ Google Scholar ]

• Breaking News
• Press Release
• Special Features
• From the Courts
• Regional / World
• Our Readers’ Opinions
• Bassy – Love Vine
• Dr. Fraser- Point of View
• R. Rose – Eye of the Needle
• Dr Jozelle Miller
• The World Around Us
• Random Thoughts
• Kitchen Corner
• What’s on Fleek this week
• Health Wise
• Physician’s Weekly
• Business Buzz
• Prime the pump
• In Memoriam / Acknowledgement
• Advertise With Us
• Letters To The Editor
• General Contact Information
• Contact our Webmaster
• Privacy Policy
• Interactive Media Ltd
• St. Vincent & the Grenadines

Local historian Dr Adrian Fraser has set a very positive tone for National Heritage Month, this month of March, when we honour the invaluable contributions of our nation-builders, including our sole national hero, Paramount Chief Joseph Chatoyer. His lecture last week in support of his contention that George A. McIntosh should join Chatoyer on that exalted national pedestal, presented a most fitting backdrop to this distinguished month.{{more}}

It is my fervent hope that such an introduction as provided by Dr Fraser will contribute towards lifting the level of public debate and discussion. Such an elevation is sorely needed in our society, given the crap which dominates the daily exchange of opinions in the media. Our heroes surely deserve much better than the fare we serve up daily. In one breath we talk of honouring our heroes and cherishing the memory of their contribution towards national development, but on the other, we literally drag our country’s good name through the muck and stench of the worst forms of partisan politics.

This does little to ennoble our nation and people or to enrich public discourse. Instead of trying to focus and to bring out all that is good and noble in us, we find ourselves wallowing in the filth being generated by many politicians and political charlatans. Our level of discussion so often degenerates into “who did what, where, when and why”, relatively trivial issues, “who lie”, “whose mouth nasty”, and the resort to “sue” and counter-sue before the local courts.

What is this state of affairs doing to our national psyche? How can this state of degeneration help to ennoble us, to make us worthy successors and inheritors of the sacred mantle passed from Chatoyer to McIntosh to Joshua and successive generations? Is such a daily diet of diatribe all we can serve on the national plate?

It is not that current issues and personal misdemeanours do not count, but we have to be able to place them in their proper perspective. The focus on personalities, on who is right or wrong, rather than what are the solutions to our multiple challenges, is not helping us to grow and develop. We are fast approaching the sickening stage where salacious gossip and mud-slinging, the drawing of imaginary lines, are gnawing away at our ability to keep our nation together, weakening our national resolve.

If we really love personality discussion, then March is the best month to train our attention on the glorious achievements of many remarkable Vincentian patriots. We have in fact started a process to try and arrive at a consensus on designating national heroes. Yet, even in that pursuit, political partisanship seems to influence the consideration of some who should know better. As if not conscious of the elevated status of a national hero, names are being tossed in the ring, confusing solid contributions to nation-building with hero status.

Clear guidelines have been given to guide us in expressing our choices. For one, the outstanding contribution of any candidate considered must have “altered positively the course of the history of our country”. Then, that contribution must have been exemplified by “visionary and pioneering leadership, extraordinary achievement and attainment of the highest excellence” to the benefit of our country as a whole. Thirdly, any candidate for this revered status, must have “through heroic exploits and sacrifices, contributed to the improvement of the economic, social and political conditions” of SVG generally.

From the above it is clear that the field can only be very limited. Dr Fraser makes a strong case for McIntosh’s inclusion, which few can dispute. Importantly, he has carried the discussion to another plane, a level which must be maintained. But it is also more than who deserves such status; it is also about how we value such a position.

For instance, our official calendar of events for March omits the birth date commemoration of two candidates for national hero, McIntosh and captain Hugh Mulzac. We have allowed the precious residences and “stomping grounds” of McIntosh, Ebenezer Joshua and Robert Milton Cato to fall into private hands. We have no relics, no shrines to show our young ones. The sacred Workingmen’s Hall, fondly called “Association Hall”, is now a warehouse; the historic Market Square, scene of the major political battles of the 20th century, is now no more.

So, how serious are we about our national heritage? We need to do much more to make it meaningful and everlasting.

Renwick Rose is a

community activist

and social com-mentator.

• Interactive Media Ltd. • P.O. Box 152 • Kingstown • St. Vincent and the Grenadines • Phone: 784-456-1558 © Copyright Interactive Media Ltd.. All rights reserved.

• Remember me Not recommended on shared computers

Forgot your password?

081 Patriotic reverence for the history of a nation often do

By nsoonhui June 13, 2003 in GRE Analysis of an Issue

• Reply to this topic
• Start new topic

Recommended Posts

81. "Patriotic reverence for the history of a nation often does more to impede than to encourage progress."

Is patriotic reverence for the history of a nation does more good or harm? Some believe that patriotism is the impetus behind all the progress. However I believe exactly the opposite. I shall argue, in fact, patriotism has done more harm than good to the development of the society.

We love our country, and we are proud of our ancestors. This sort of feeling is natural for all of us, and it is easy for us to develop affection towards our country. Thus when we look back to our history, we will develop a sense of awe for our ancestors who did much to fight imperialism and our hearts go to hero who secures the independent from Outsiders. However in doing so, we tend to embellish their barbarous acts and thus distorting the facts to fit our vision of irreproachable hero. In my country, the British who conquered Perak were depicted as villain in the secondary school textbook. Those who fought Britain’s authority was delineated as heroes and textbook portrayed their murderous act as heroic move. In the textbook, there is a chapter devoted to the murder of Birch, a British governor. Instead of condemning this criminal act, textbooks calls it an "awakening" and shamelessly praise the murderer for his courage. Under the spectacle of "patriotism", the textbook writer lost their sensible judgement. If we let our patriotism sentiment to get in the way, we may distort history to fulfil our wish.

Cunning politicians may misuse this patriotic reverence to canvass mass support for their own benefits. Whenever western media reports something negative on China, the ruling party will immediately resort to patriotic and historical sentiment. Government will tell their people that westerners are conspiring to impede the nation's development. Out of historical sentiments, most credulous Chinese can’t accept the westerner’s criticism for they believe that westerners don’t understand their culture and thus their criticism are invalid. Take the democratic movement as an example. Chinese believe that their unique culture and history disallow radical democracy movement. They believe that someday government will become more democratic after the nation achieved the developed country’s status. In doing so they allow government’s power to grow incontinent. Under bewitch of patriotism, most Chinese fail to see the mishap of their government and thus they keep bad governors in office. Their pride for their history and tradition has hindered the democratic movement.

The pride in nation's history can open doors to discrimination as well. We may feel so good about what our country had achieved in the past that we look down on other civilizations that is not as advance as ours. We will thus refuse to learn from them for we think that there's no point to do so. This sort of attitude hinders the development of society. Ancient China is such an example. China dynasty treated neighbouring countries with contempt. They viewed the Mongolians as barbarians because Mongolians didn't achieve much in history. The same attitude led China's dynasty to stop trading with Europe. As a result China was impounded in Dark Age for a few hundred years. If the Chinese were humble enough and nimble enough to learn from other civilizations, they would not suffer humiliation in the hands of imperialists.

To sum up, I believe that the patriotically reverence for the history of a nation is detrimental to the development of a country. We should think with our brains, not with our guts. If we can achieve this, then we are at least on the right track to become a great nation.

Link to comment

Share on other sites.

Originally posted by nsoonhui   81. "Patriotic reverence for the history of a nation often does more to impede than to encourage progress." Is patriotic reverence for the history of a nation does more good or harm? Some believe that patriotism is the impetus behind all the progress. However I believe exactly the opposite. I shall (shall is not needed here) argue, in fact, patriotism has done more harm than good to the development of the society (Repetition of sentence. You are conveying the same meaning in both the sentences with little difference. One can be omitted or changed)   We love our country, and we are proud of our ancestors. This sort of feeling is natural for all of us, and it is easy for us to develop affection towards our country. Thus when we look back to our history, we will develop a sense of awe for our ancestors who did much to fight imperialism and our hearts go to hero who secures the independent from Outsiders. However in doing so, we tend to embellish their barbarous acts and thus distorting the facts to fit our vision of irreproachable hero. In my (who u r? how come anyone know which country are you talking about) country, the British who conquered Perak were depicted as villain in the secondary school textbook. Those who fought Britain’s authority was (number mistake: were) delineated as heroes and textbook portrayed their murderous act as heroic move. In the textbook, there is a chapter devoted to the murder of Birch, a British governor. Instead of condemning this criminal act, textbooks call it an "awakening" and shamelessly praise the murderer for his courage. Under the spectacle of "patriotism", the textbook writer lost their sensible judgment. If we let our patriotism sentiment to get in the way, we may (might …..may is used where you wish something to happen or be true…) distort history to fulfill our wish.   Do you really believe what you have written in the above paragraph! Any way …there are many obvious arguments which can be given against what you have said in the above paragraph. 1. How can you shamelessly (…. word taken from your paragraph…… Pleeeeeeease don’t use such words) forget what British did with Chinese, Indians and others while calling the acts of freedom fighters barbaric. 2. How can you call these acts criminal acts/ unlawful when there was no law at all? Can you call what English men imposed on Chinese: Law? The way you have deplored the freedom fighter of a country reflects your negative attitude. How can you forget Mahatma Gandhi (father of Non violence movement) from Indian was also a freedom fighter?   Cunning politicians may misuse this patriotic reverence to canvass mass support for their own benefits. (Good reason) Whenever western media reports something negative on China, the ruling party will immediately resort to patriotic and historical sentiment. Government will tell their people that westerners are conspiring to impede the nation's development. Out of historical sentiments, most credulous Chinese can’t accept the westerner’s criticism for they believe that westerners don’t understand their culture and thus their criticism are invalid. Take the democratic movement as an example. Chinese believe that their unique culture and history disallow radical democracy movement. They believe that someday government will become more democratic after the nation achieved the developed country’s status. In doing so they allow government’s power to grow incontinent. Under bewitch of patriotism, most Chinese fail to see the mishap of their government and thus they keep bad governors in office. Their pride for their history and tradition has hindered the democratic movement. (How can you say that communism is bad and democracy is good? This is another topic of controversy …..Which you can’t state as if it is true))   The pride in nation's history can open doors to discrimination as well. We may feel so good about what our country had achieved in the past that we look down on other civilizations that is not as advance as ours. We will thus refuse to learn from them for we think that there's no point to do so. This sort of attitude hinders the development of society. Ancient China is such an example. China dynasty treated neighbouring countries with contempt. They viewed the Mongolians as barbarians because Mongolians didn't achieve much in history. The same attitude led China's dynasty to stop trading with Europe. As a result China was impounded in Dark Age for a few hundred years. If the Chinese were humble enough and nimble enough to learn from other civilizations, they would not suffer humiliation in the hands of imperialists.   To sum up, I believe that the patriotically reverence for the history of a nation is detrimental to the development of a country. We should think with our brains, not with our guts. If we can achieve this, then we are at least on the right track to become a great nation.   Hi nsoon, Although, I am of the opposite opinion but I must appreciate the reasons you have given for your stand. Especially the last three (including the conclusion) paragraphs are good to read. I am not very much convinced by your reasoning in second paragraph? There are some grammatical mistakes which you need to take care. Some of the words you have used can be replaced with more suitable words.   When is your exam? Milli.    

First of all, I wish to thank you for having the interest to read through my essays and posting your valuable comments.

However, in this post I wish to defend my stand:)

We love our country, and we are proud of our ancestors. This sort of feeling is natural for all of us, and it is easy for us to develop affection towards our country. Thus when we look back to our history, we will develop a sense of awe for our ancestors who did much to fight imperialism and our hearts go to hero who secures the independent from Outsiders. However in doing so, we tend to embellish their barbarous acts and thus distorting the facts to fit our vision of irreproachable hero. In my (who u r? how come anyone know which country are you talking about)

You are right...I need to mention my country's name.

country, the British who conquered Perak were depicted as villain in the secondary school textbook. Those who fought Britain’s authority was (number mistake: were) delineated as heroes and textbook portrayed their murderous act as heroic move. In the textbook, there is a chapter devoted to the murder of Birch, a British governor. Instead of condemning this criminal act, textbooks call it an "awakening" and shamelessly praise the murderer for his courage. Under the spectacle of "patriotism", the textbook writer lost their sensible judgment. If we let our patriotism sentiment to get in the way, we may (might …..may is used where you wish something to happen or be true…) distort history to fulfill our wish.   [ Do you really believe what you have written in the above paragraph! Any way …there are many obvious arguments which can be given against what you have said in the above paragraph. 1. How can you shamelessly (…. word taken from your paragraph…… Pleeeeeeease don’t use such words) forget what British did with Chinese, Indians and others while calling the acts of freedom fighters barbaric. 2. How can you call these acts criminal acts/ unlawful when there was no law at all? Can you call what English men imposed on Chinese: Law? The way you have deplored the freedom fighter of a country reflects your negative attitude. How can you forget Mahatma Gandhi (father of Non violence movement) from Indian was also a freedom fighter?

1. First, I never called imperialists' act "honorable" and I don't deny the fact that imperialists were mistreating indegenous in the past. Nevertheless murdered an innocent is, and was consider as sin. If the opressed has the right to kill anyone without being incarcerated by law, our world would be in a state of great chaos. There are other legitimate ways to solve conflict, and murdering a governor isn't one of them.

2. I realised that some laws might not hold ubiquitous, but there are some universal moral standards which all civilasations adopt. Those natives didn't need others to tell them killing is bad, they knew it inside their heart.

3. I have no intention to played down the role of freedom fighters; in fact I respect them. The fact that Gandhi earned world wide deference is because he insisted on using non-violence means to fight imperialism. Murderer of birch breached the law to achieve his political agenda, while Gandhi relied on hunger strike to achieve nation's independance.

Anyway, thanks a lot for correcting my grammatical errors and also expressing opposing opinion. I realised that I hone my essays skills without other's comments.

I shall be taking GRE in October

harikrishnan

hi nsoonhui & milli,

I read your essay, the points you chose were strong, but as milli said I found that you sound harshly critical. I 've marked the words which speak too much emotion than the meaning they convey. So try to get better choices.

*************************************

We love our country, and we are proud of our ancestors. This sort of feeling is natural for all of us, and it is easy for us to develop affection towards our country. Thus when we look back to our history, we will develop a sense of awe for our ancestors who did much to fight imperialism and our hearts go to hero who secures the independent from Outsiders. However in doing so, we tend to embellish their barbarous acts and thus distorting the facts to fit our vision of i rreproachable hero. In my country, the British who conquered Perak were depicted as villain in the secondary school textbook. Those who fought Britain’s authority was delineated as heroes and textbook portrayed their murderous act as heroic move. In the textbook, there is a chapter devoted to the murder of Birch, a British governor. Instead of condemning this criminal act, textbooks calls it an "awakening" and shamelessly praise the murderer for his courage. Under the spectacle of "patriotism", the textbook writer lost their sensible judgement. If we let our patriotism sentiment to get in the way, we may distort history to fulfil our wish.

***********************

Your second point was very good, it will be better you use it as a climax point of your essay which would strengthen the message you convey. one more hing is that you have been too specific in refering every example to the chinese and history of china. Try to be more general, state the same fact as a universl one.

Here I post a very short essay on the same topic feel free to correct this.

Patriotic reverence to the history a country is a base of existence of a country. It is due to this stern respect that citizen of a country have, that makes men duty bound to serve the nation. Once this is lost the country loses its definition. The following are the reasons that may be stated form this.

The respect to the country’s heritage and history, imparted early from the childhood, creates an unconscious control over the actions. For example, if the child is brought up in a patriotic environment, his mind automatically fixes some principles which are governed by the respect to one’s nation. This saves the child from the confusions created in the adolescence, where everyone tends to generate iconoclastic views on everything. Since this adolescent child views these from a platform where he has set his foot firmly, decision making and opinion formation at this age would be easy and will be in the right way.

Secondly, history itself presents stories of patriotism and self sacrifice for the country. Every country has its own legends like war heroes, social reformers and great political leaders. When we learn about their contributions to the country, we gradually recognize how the face of the society was changed by these great people. In the words of Abdul Kalaam, President of India, this ignites the mind of the citizens with the duty which they owe towards the country. It is this ignited mind which contribute to the country’s up-liftment the most. All these are possible only when the reverence for the history of the country exist.

The time may have changed but the morals remain the same, so patriotic reverence seldom impedes growth, even if it rises to the level of chauvinism. One may get self conscious of such acts, but the results will always show up positive.

Although, there are arguments procecuting what you have said but I should admit that you have defecnded your stand very well. I think your essay can score 6.0 if you add these points in your essay.

" Critics of the idea might argue that what the British did with the Chinese was not worth any respect and any action to counter such barbaric acts ............. I ergue that ......First, I never called imperialists' act "honorable" and I don't deny the fact that imperialists were mistreating indegenous in the past. Nevertheless murdered an innocent is, and was consider as sin. If the opressed has the right to kill anyone without being incarcerated by law, our world would be in a state of great chaos. There are other legitimate ways to solve conflict, and murdering a governor isn't one of them."

BTW, what do you mean by this statement ?

I realised that I hone my essays skills without other's comments. .

thanks for your comments....

BTW, what do you mean by this statement ?   I realised that I hone my essays skills without other's comments..

I guess I should put a "cannot" between "I" and "hone"........:):)

• 8 months later...

hi, nsoonhui

Although I do not know whether you have finished your exam and will never come here again, I still want to post this.

I have read your essay and I think the example of Chinese situation you used is unconvicing and suittable. I do not know whether you have once been to China or read or hear something about the details, but I guess we Chinese are not in the way you depict towards such issues as history and democratic government. At least it is not the situation as you mentioned that most of us are credulous. I know exactly there are a lot of problems in Chinese social and political life, but I think it is not just because our foolish patriotic reverence for the history.

• 2 weeks later...

Does patriotic reverence for the history of a nation impede out progress? The issue statement asserts so. However, in my view, deference for our freedom fighters encourages us for doing progress. Moreover, study of history acts as tutelage in our real life. Therefore, I strongly disagree with the issue statement.

Firstly, we should be gratified of all our martyrs, who bravely sacrificed their lives for achieving independence. Their stories give us courage to fought against our daily life fallacies and adversities. For example, Mahatma Gandhi, a freedom fighter of India, strived hard for unshackling India from British government. His non-violence movement for getting independence shows his perseverance in extreme conditions. We should be obliged and respectful to all our patriots, because of whom we are breathing in a democratic nation.

Furthermore, respect for the history of nation help us for edifying the mistakes done by our ancestors. Revealing through history, we would understand that how insatiable lust for power and wealth would become the cause for destruction. For example, the tyrants like Hitler, who used to suppress people's feelings and opinions in long-term practice invariably resulted in downfall. Thus, respect for the history teaches us many things that we can implement in out real life. Therefore, patriotic reverence for history encourages us rather than impede.

Additionally, the culture and arts of which we are part now can be studied only through history. The drastic changes in human life are reflected through history. Study of history makes us cognizant about development in civilization and the efforts of our ancestors for making our lives comfortable. Knowledge of all these things initiates a feeling of respect within our hearts for our ancestors. Moreover, it fosters our spirits for the development of our nation.

In sum, patriotic reverence for the history of nation is not impediment for the progress but it contributes for the welfare of the nation. History is full of anecdotes, which insists us to think. Respect for the history of nation acts as a guide for us and renders path for our bright future.

• 2 years later...

bold_n_beast

Any one please can help me to understand the meaning of this topic:

"Patriotic reverence for the history of a nation often does more to impede than to encourage progress"

I have very throughly surveyed the meaning of each word in the literature and web, and none of them relate "patriotic reverence of history" with freedom fight, heoric acts of the ancestors or political endeavors. But almost all of the test-takers present take it in that way.

To my understanding, history is a very broader term, it includes our cultural traditions, our geographical history, language, social and economical past, scientific achievements, literature, etc. Please comment.

Seeking your guidance.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

×   Pasted as rich text.    Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.    Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.    Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

• Insert image from URL
• Submit Reply
• Existing user? Sign In
• Online Users
• Leaderboard
• All Activity
• Create New...