Several years back, I wrote the following reflection on the topic... admittedly, I may have had a little too much fun naming the different categories. With the return of this team of anti-heroes, it seems the fitting time to revisit that fun little study of the antihero, considering where the Guardians themselves fall. Perhaps the most striking thing about this ridiculous cast of characters is precisely how ridiculous and broken they are. This is primarily played as comedic relief, albeit in sometimes far too crude of a manner. Yet, it also becomes an opportunity to show the collision of various types of human (even though none of the characters are completely human) brokenness around a unified purpose that pulls them outside of themselves and cause them to devote themselves to something bigger and greater. This becomes the irony of the title itself, as the most unlikely group become guardians to the whole galaxy.
+++++++++++++++
Who is the antihero? Perhaps if I had a background in Literature, I would reproduce a standard definition for you. But, if you wanted that, there's always Wikipedia. Starting from the basic experience of those of us who simply like good stories, the question is not easy to answer. This is because the identity of the antihero
remains so very ambiguous, amorphous, and perhaps even bipolar. If one looks for examples, he will likely
notice that, as well as being relatively undefined, the antihero is also
varying in kind. A working general definition
which I would propose for the antihero is one who does not fit the mold of
the hero, flirts with the line between good and evil, yet ends up serving the
good much of the time. I will
identify four types (with two sub-types) that fit this definition, as well as
some examples. A number of my choices for examples were my own, while others were made at the recommendation of others more familiar with certain stories. While there is no limit
to the genres in which the antihero can be found, many of my examples are drawn
from adventure stories, especially those that appeal to the young and the young
at heart. Besides my own familiarity
with them, this is fitting because it is very pastorally relevant. After all, what father does not wish for his
children to have good heroes? What father
does not wish to be his child’s hero?
At the end I hope to, at least implicitly, approach the question of who
is the antihero and why are we attracted to him? Is he a villain? Or is he just like you? Or is he both? And what does that say about you?
The first
type of antihero which I recognize is the quasi-converted villain who
easily slips into his or her old ways. Examples
of this sort may be Captain Jack Sparrow (Pirates of the Caribbean),
Michael Corleone (The Godfather), Catwoman (Batman), Sabretooth (X-Men),
and possibly even Gollum (Lord of the Rings)... From among the Guardians, or related characters, this is where Yondu falls and perhaps Nebula in the near future.
The second
type is the “idiot” who is indifferent or apathetic of standards,
ideals, and systems of morality, goodness, and heroism, yet holds fast to high,
often noble, ideals. While often found
serving the good, not being socialized, the idiot is characterized by “finding
his or her own way,” often acting and living as a lone ranger or at least not
readily adapting to community. In this
way, this type is very common in our radically individualistic culture. In adventure stories, this is often the image
of a hero who operates outside of the law or does not do things “by the book.” Examples of this are Han Solo (Star Wars),
James Bond, The A-Team, Jack Bauer (24), Wolverine (X-Men), and
more recent depictions of Batman... Let's look at the sub-categories to see if we can find examples among the Guardians.
A
sub-category of the idiot is the seductor/seductress, who uses charm or
physical sexual attraction as the preferred means of manipulating others to achieve
the intended end. Examples of this would
be Templeton “Faceman” Peck (The A-Team), Mystique (X-Men), and
some Bond women... Not sure if there is really a Guardian in this category, but we'll see what characters still have yet to enter the scene.
A second
sub-category of the idiot is the dirtbag. This one is simply morally reprehensible,
even if he is found serving the good. In
a culture that has largely lost hold of moral truth, this one is very
common. Typically, the dirtbag’s biggest
character flaw is selfishness, from which all else flows. However, I will note that the dirtbag has some
power to grow beyond this problem by seeking basic human ideals such as
selflessness. Examples of the dirtbag
would be Iron Man (Marvel Comics/Avengers), Gregory House (House),
John Hancock (Hancock), and maybe Martin Riggs (Lethal Weapon)... Our Guardian dirtbag is Star-Lord, but perhaps also Rocket.
The third
category is the “forever changed,” who has been manipulated by some
outside intervention (usually evil) and forever after, acting out of his or her
own brokenness, often deviates from the good. Examples are Archangel
(X-Men), Jason Bourne (Bourne Identity), Harry Osborn (Spiderman)
and debatably George Lonegan (Hereafter)... The clearest example of the "forever changed" is probably Gamora, but this category probably also fits Rocket, to some degree.
The fourth and final category is the obsessed. Most often the object of the obsession is revenge. Examples of this would be Bryan Mills (Taken), The Punisher (Marvel Comics), The Mercer Brothers (Four Brothers), and Thomas Craven (Edge of Darkness)... Clearly, the obsessed Guardian is Drax. On that note, I am especially intrigued by Rocket's response to Drax, after he foolishly calls Ronan (the villain of the first movie, who Drax is determined to kill). After Groot is shocked by Rocket's mock-crying, he continues, "I don't care if it's mean. We all got dead people. It's no excuse to get everybody else dead along the way!" This really resonates with my response to the popularity of 'the obsessed' in our culture.
The starting point for my thoughts on the antihero was the observation of how incredibly common this sort of antihero is becoming, particularly in film. I had grown sick and tired of revenge movies that ultimately amount to one man (or woman) obsessively seeking revenge on another and destroying anyone in their way. It seems that audiences have lost a true sense of justice as an ideal. This makes sense, considering justice hinges on objective morality and absolute truth, which are seldom valued or even believed in. Man has experienced evil and longs for justice, but has abandoned its foundation. Revenge is what remains.
At last,
this matter touches on the basic relevance of the antihero. It seems that there has been a post-modern shift
toward the antihero as the one to whom we are to look, rather than a source of
conflict and contrast with the true hero.
Along with absolute truth and objective morality, the classical image of
the hero has been largely lost. I
propose that this tragedy is connected to a loss of faith in the
Incarnation. Without this faith, we grow
tired of the classical image of the hero, so bold and so pure. Failing to recognize that the Bold and the
Pure has become human, we turn toward what we more readily identify as human: brokenness,
woundedness, fallenness.
 |
| Saint Paul: A Real Life Hero Who Better Reflects the Model |
Ultimately, Christ is the model of
every hero, as every true hero is to be an image of Christ. Perhaps it is still Christ Himself whom we
wish to know and conceive of in the shift toward the antihero. We are posed with a problem. How does one conceive of a King of peace who
comes to bring the sword and to bring fire upon the earth? Perhaps in the longing of the human heart to
portray this Mystery Incarnate, he ends up falling back on himself, projecting
his own darkness and brokenness and yet also his deepest yearnings for victory
(on the part of the ideals he holds as good).
Seeking to portray Christ, we wind up in ourselves, dim reflections of
the image of God that we are. We love
ourselves and we hate ourselves. We wish
to love Christ, but we do not understand Christ. Still, we identify with Him in the realm of
mystery. From this dynamic, the antihero
is born.
We love the antihero because he
best reflects our culture, lost in our desperate search for the Truth we have
abandoned, the Truth which we fear. In
the spirit of the transformation of culture, an important part of the New
Evangelization, I propose that we may find hope in seeking out instances where
an antihero, with whom many identify, grows and evolves into true heroism, to
which all should aspire, because I believe this is the story of the
redemption of the post-modern world. Perhaps, even for those who are not artists ourselves, this inspiration can be
offered to any artists we may find in our parishes, social circles, etc.
I will close this reflection by considering
the example of (one of my favorite antiheroes from my childhood and, I must
admit, even present day) Archangel in X-Factor
53. Archangel battles, and is
practically defeated by, the villain Caliban, who is now under the power of the
same villain, Apocalypse, that once bound Archangel, and who stills holds
influence over his deadly, razor-sharp wings.
When asked by a policeman who or what Caliban was, Archangel
answers: “What I would be… were I to follow the dictates… of my wings.” His awareness of the fact that his wings
could be his undoing may remind us of the figure of Icharus. Hopefully, it also makes us consider the basic
Catholic moral principle that we must consider not only what we can do,
but what we ought to do.
For me, this image of an antihero fighting the evil to which he knows he is vulnerable calls to mind the final nuance I would like to add to my definition of the anti-hero. He does not fit the mold of the hero, but he has what it takes. He is a potential hero (though he may even be called a villain for a time). With this in mind, I finally dare to answer the question of who is the antihero… I am. And I suppose you are too.
