The idea of a hero is different character to character and
can be understood as the admirable characteristics that “I” can’t embody.
Throughout most of the film, neither Halloran nor Sellinger would necessarily
call themselves a hero. They both see flaws within themselves that sum up to
less than heroic.
Sellingers view of
heroism is based off the qualities he feel that he lacks. Sellinger does not
consider himself a hero. From his perspective, he sees himself working in an
office having the same sort of schedule everyday which is full of unimpressive
and sedentary actions. To him, a hero is full of action, bravery, and
excitement. After their plane
crashes, Sellinger assumes that traipsing through the woods is something
Halloran is used to and does on the regular. That adventurous explorer image
already fits one of Sellingers facets of a hero.
To Halloran, flying into air attacks and being on the
frontline are normal everyday things. He isn’t exactly acting out of any
element of extreme bravery in the beginning; he just has nothing to lose. This
idea is expressed by Pfeiffer and Lewis, “He is courageous only because his
loneliness prevents him from having a fear of death.” (84) Eventually, once his
feelings for Margaret have escalated, he finds reasons to fear death. The
recklessness or fearlessness that once stemmed from loneliness now had no place
in the cockpit to keep him from ‘imagining’ the mechanical problem in the
propeller.
At the end when Sellinger asks Halloran to tell his wife that, "he died a brave man," we see that he fulfilled most of what he expected out of a hero in himself. He pulled the file out if the safe himself. He out ran the Gestapo. He's in the middle of a crossfire running over a bridge with said stolen file. In his mind, there is no denying that he is a brave hero now.
Emily Szklarski
--Andrew Wlos
ReplyDeleteI agree that the concept of heroism is not formulated in a way that easily allows a person's "I" to view themselves as a hero. Being heroic involves an individual going the extra mile and essentially doing more than what's asked or expected. When somebody carries out their life choices, they are completely in the know behind their inner motivations and are essentially carrying out what they can expect from themselves. I think this logistical view of heroism is something to remember when looking at where heroes come from.
Can we know ourselves to be heroes? I see similarities between heroes and the individuals driving iconic brands (Michael Jordan, Eminem, etc.). Iconic brands are considered iconic because they are perceived as the greatest representation of something. For instance, Michael Jordan, despite the fact that he had flaws and doesn't own every record, provides the best representation of basketball success which is why he is deemed and icon. Could someone ever view themselves as an icon? Nobody could ever see themselves as a representation of something, they know themselves too well. But they could indeed identify that they represent something for other people. In that sense they could understand the the presence of their "iconic" effect, but not necessarily feel it. A man who runs into a burning building might realize that others see him as a hero but he will not see himself in that light, for to him, his actions were an experience of something, not a representation of something.
--Andrew Wlos
I agree with your statement that "hero" varies based on the eye of the beholder. I am wondering about your conviction that Halloran's heroism changes once he falls in love with Margaret, however. I don't disagree or agree; it was actually a point of confusion for me while I was watching the movie. Do his feeling's for Margaret change his actions throughout the movie? Perhaps they do. We see this when he turns back on a mission that ended up killing others. Dying in place of someone wouldn't have been heroic for Halloran, but his reasoning for turning back lacked courage. However, these feelings also create in him a new type of hero, in which he does something not because he has nothing to lose, but because a man he respects (Sellinger) has everything to lose. In my opinion, Sellinger's naively prevents him from ever becoming a true hero in the eyes of the audience. Yes, he is a man that, by the end of the film, has gained exponentially more respect than when we first met his broken wife. And yes, he is likely a hero of sorts in his own eyes and even in some ways in the eyes of the audience. However, his lack of knowledge of the situation creates a certain naivety that, in my opinion, prevents him from ever truly becoming a hero.
ReplyDelete