Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Applied Virtue's avatar

Not a very good essay. It all presumes to read into the Old Testament Nietzsche and Moses as a secular, empire-building visionary. Christianity, it is presumed, is all "slave morality." No examples are cited.

All of this overlooks the examples of saintly Christian kings and the prideful men brought low in both classical myth and in the Old Testament.

In other words, it's an essay that could only hold true in a world in which God does not exist (except maybe as a pretense for conquest).

Expand full comment
AlexTFish's avatar

This sounds like you're fed up with the "Villains Act, Heroes React" trope. To be fair I'm also fairly fed up with it and like the aversions too. TVTropes lists these categories of aversions, where good guys get to be the ones with a plan:

* Variations on To Be a Master which require the hero to go beat up the other masters to claim the title

* Some forms of The Quest, like "Hey, I found a treasure map!"

* Most Great Escape stories

* Any story set in a Villain World where The Bad Guy Wins and the hero must reverse this outcome

* A variety of HeroesActVillainsHinder examples like Odysseus, Dorothy or Alice have the somewhat unsatisfying goal of just trying to get home, which still feels rather reactive

* Lelouch from Code Geass as mentioned by Sam

And, yes, I guess we could characterise Moses' story as The Great Escape (of the whole people of Israel).

There's a bit more discussion on TVTropes on why "Villains Act, Heroes React" is so much more common. Something they don't point out is that a reactive motivation for the hero makes it a lot easier for the hero to undergo character growth. If the plot is set in motion by the hero's vision, and they stand by that vision for the whole story, they're not having a life-changing growth experience.

Either way, I agree I would like to see more proactive heroes.

Expand full comment
30 more comments...

No posts