Greatest Hero of All Time (Preliminary Research before Poll)

[gamecat]

And if I did? Pickety-pick-pick-pickety...

 

[kenaustin]

The last couple of posts brought this back to me. After seeing the 1984 version of Dune, and hearing how "Kwizatz Haderach" was pronounced, I can't see or hear that name without thinking...."With a Kwizatz Haderach, give a dog a bone, this old man came rolling home."

I guess it's me.

 

[MaxKaladin]

Perhaps some of these will be controversial choices, perhaps not.

Non Fiction:

• John Wayne
• Martin Luther King
• Ghandi
• Theodore Roosevelt
• William B. Travis, Jim Bowie, Davy Crockett and the other 186 men who defended the Alamo.
• George Washington.
• King Alfred the Great
• Jesus Christ
• Arminus/Hermann
• Solon of Athens

Fiction:

• King Arthur
• Beowulf
• Indiana Jones
• Robin Hood

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Re: my vote in some categories

On a related subject; favorite Anti-Heroes
Literature: Iago

Whoa- perhaps we have different ideas on what makes an anti-hero, but how the heck do you see Iago as any type of hero!?

FD

 

[jester47]

King Arthur was a pissant, in all the versions. He doesn't do Jack, from Chertian to Malory to Pyle to even Ms. repeat it ad nauseum MZB. Galahad is the ass kicker and name taker, he's all the good parts of all the nights rolled into one.

James Bond and Drizzt are the same Character. Well Drizzt Books to James Bond Movies.

Kirk is falls into the Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon archetype,

Sparhawk is essentially dick tracy.

Ok, whoever started this thing needs to give a criteria for hero...

I take it that we are looking for the greatest hero. I would assume means that they are not simply a protagonist, or someone that has a keen tactical mind. A hero in this definintion would not be someone simply doing his job and being good at it (i.e. a lot of military leaders already named.)I would say that they are people with the balls to clearly do good and avoid the pitfalls that come with power. The greatest hero I would say is not insane. I assume that the sources are open to any media. Heroes cannot be national heroes as many national heroes are seen as criminals by other nations. Case in point: Che. Unilaterally they have to be accepted over political boundries or they are not GREATER heroes.

The greatest hero:
is recognised as such universally
always tries to do the right thing
wins most of the time
must be mortal

Aaron.

 

[Deedlit]

Ashram, post-death of shooting star(TV series version)

 

[Eosin the Red]

The greatest hero:
is recognised as such universally
always tries to do the right thing
wins most of the time
must be mortal

By this logic - any heroic act performed without an audiance is not heroic?

It also creates a situation where you have to win to be a hero. Is a man who sacrafices himself for a greater cause less of a hero in your eyes than one who actually has a chance at success?

By your criteria these people cannot be heroes -

The Guy at Tianiaman square.
The men and women of flight 93
A guy who gives the only life jacket to a child.
A nurse who walks into a room with a small pox victim.
A firefighter who knows he most likely won't make it out of a building - but knows there are kids inside.

Fictionally - Michael Dorn in the Outer limits episode "The Measure of a Hero" which incidentially address's this very topic.

The character sacrafices himself to save humanity knowing that no one else will ever know the sacrafice he made. Others will believe it to be a senseless accident or "pilot error." The final moral to the story - you know that dude who talks at the end - says something like.

"The true measure of a hero lies in his ability to sacrafice, knowing that none will ever know of his deeds"

 

[Tyler Do'Urden]

Heroes of the East

Nonfictional:

Padmasambhava (Fighter of evil spirits, magician, and founder of Tibetan Buddhism)

Milarepa (Vengeful necromancer turned tantrist saint. Quite possibly one of the greatest anti-heroes in history.)

King Ashoka (United the kingdoms of northern India and tried to redeem himself of the pain he had caused by bettering the lives of his people... another fascinating historical figure)

Fictional:

Prince Kumaradvitiya (Tshering Dbangrgyal's "Tale of the Incomparable Prince"): A fascinating figure from one of the few pieces of Tibetan fiction ever printed in the West. A model warrior, mystic, and Bodhisattva.

I highly recommend Tibetan literature and biography to anyone looking for a different flavor for an Oriental Adventures campaign... it's really interesting stuff.

 

[kreynolds]

Fictional:

Harry Keogh.
Joey (Friends).
Phish (sp?) (Ally-and the only reason I put up with that show)

EDIT: Found the correct spelling for Harry's last name.

 

[jester47]

By this logic - any heroic act performed without an audiance is not heroic?

It also creates a situation where you have to win to be a hero. Is a man who sacrafices himself for a greater cause less of a hero in your eyes than one who actually has a chance at success?

<snip> hero examples

No, that is not what I am saying.

Lets run through your examples.

The man at Tianiaman (actually he was not there, he was on the higway to the square, taking his groceries home):

Most everyone everywhere will say that this guy was a hero when presented with the situation.

He was trying to do the right thing. Keep the tanks from getting to the square.

For the time of his confrontation he won consistantly. If he had gotten run over or shot, he would not be a hero, he would be a martyr.

There was a chance that he could have died and that did not stop him.

Thus he is a hero.

Flight 93 is the same thing. They all fit the criteria. They won.
The guy with the life jacket, same thing. He achieved his goal, he wins.
The nurse helps the patient, fits all criteria.
The firefighter is the same. He fits the criteria. The fact that he is a Firefighter and still alive indicates that he wins most of the time.
You need to redefine your definition of winning and success.

The only reason you are tellingme that Mike Dorn's character is a hero is because you know of the story. You accept the story as heroic because it is. Most everyone else would too.

There is a whole slew of people that we do not hear about. But, if we were to hear their story (because we do not hear it does not mean it did not happen) and it is the type of story everyone the world over would appreciate the deed of the person the story is about, then that hero is universal. The term universal does not mean everyone is aware, but that the deed done would be considered good in all cultures and to most people. I never said that people had to know about it. What I meant was that even if the events are unknown, if the story found a way to be told, and was told worldwide, a true hero would be recognised as such from Congo to Bangladesh to Nicaraugua, to New York.

Winning does not equate survival or defeating another, universality does not equate recognition.

And remember that my criteria were for the [[[GREATEST]]] hero. This is not the greatest NATIONAL hero, or the myriad of daily heroes, but the BIG KAHUNA, THE CHEESE OF THE CROP, THE BEST OF THE BEST. The person in the 99.999999 percentile. The one person the whole world would stop and say "yes, that guy is a hero."

So the GREATEST hero (and all the others too):

1. would be recognised as a hero universally if everyone heard about that person.
2. always tries to do the right thing
3. achieves whatever right thing it is they set out to do or dies trying (meaning they never give up on a fight, challenge, or goal)
4. must be mortal (i.e. they have to fail sometime)

That is what I mean.

Aaron.