The Sacrifice of Few for the Good of Many

Default_picture
Monday, November 16, 2009

Editor's note: Spurred by the rise of the heroes such as Batman in media, Mark examines the qualities and motivations of the antihero. I've always been partial to the Superman type of hero -- what sort of heroes do Bitmobbers favor? -Jason



"I've made myself feel every death...see every innocent face I've murdered to save humanity" -- Ozymandias (Watchmen)

While it's difficult to peg down when the antihero became a mechanic in Western literature, it's not hard to figure out its appeal. From Shakespeare’s plays to Marvel's and DC’s comic books, the antihero is a prolific figure rife with moral shades of gray, tragic flaws, and complexities the likes of which our everyday paladins and supermen could only dream of.

While this concept has been used for centuries, it seems that the antihero has taken center stage in video games only fairly recently. With moral choices and the desire to make artificial characters seem more “human” inevitably comes the classic exemplar of antihero.

To understand that statement is to understand the antihero itself. The term came about to make it easier to build a relationship with a writer’s characters. While you may find examples as far back as Shakespeare's Falstaff (from the plays Henry IV, Henry V, and The Merry Wives of Windsor), two of the best modern examples of the contrast between hero and antihero comes from two of the most recognizable comic book heroes: Superman and Batman.

 

Even though he does have flaws, Superman is the hero archetype. In almost all of his forms, he is the embodiment of the hero: sympathetic, caring, and most important of all, saves the world simply because it's his duty and it's the right thing to do. He has no underlying reasoning behind his heroism. He has the power to save the world and uses it. He does his best to not harm innocents and even sacrifices his own well-being to make sure only the unjust suffer.

Batman, in contrast, is a hero bred of vengeance. Consider his origins: If Bruce Wayne hadn't seen his parents' murder, he never would've created The Batman. Though the Dark Knight is a hero and follows many of the same ideals that the Last Son of Krypton does, Wayne dons the mantle of savior for his own ends (avenging the death of his parents) and then takes on the role of a public avenger once the realization occurs that no one else in Gotham capable of taking on its breed of villains.

Batman is not a hero because he wants to be but because he has to be. This means that his virtues, while still just, differ greatly from Superman’s and allow him some “acceptable” leeway when it comes to stopping crime.

Like many other antiheroes, Batman's separated even more so from other heroic paradigms by one main idea: the willingness to sacrifice more than just themselves for the greater good. In videogames, especially recently, we're witnessing the rise of the antihero as a major character and the theme of “justice by any means necessary”: the Grey Warden in Dragon Age: Origins, Cole MacGrath in Infamous, the Wanderer in Fallout, and numerous others have begun to bolster the ranks of the antihero.

We also have Joseph Allen in Modern Warfare 2. This isn’t a Call of Duty post, as I’m pretty sure we have enough of those on Bitmob. But the beginning mission of Infinity Ward’s newest title gives us a glaringly straightforward example of the antihero. Even being told before the mission begins that the few innocents that he may kill shall result in the safety of millions more, Allen's set up to be the game’s heroic blackguard.

The antihero and its extreme ideals on “minimizing casualties” has always been a hot topic of debate, even as recently as with Modern Warfare. But killing an innocent has the same moral repercussions whether you’re doing it for the good of mankind or taking over the world, and most mediums present this in this fashion.

It’s no different in gaming: Games like Fallout and Infamous treat it as “karma” (slowly making you more evil, which causes innocents to treat you in a negative light or downright hate you), and in Modern Warfare the risk taken to minimize casualties fails and causes an all out war between Russia and the United States.

These games, which certainly are just a few examples, try to convey the sacrifices as necessary risks for the betterment and safety of mankind. They don't show these actions as glorious performances where everything works out in the end and hail you as an angel.

Going back to our earlier example, Batman's regarded by most of Gotham City's politicians as a menace and as someone they must stop. He's forced to work in the shadows and with only the help of those that understand why he works the way that he does.

The reason why we all relate more to the antihero than the "Superman" variety is because the actions that they perform are more closely related to how we would act and perform in these situations. While some of them are grisly and extreme, we could take a look at Frank Castle, most commonly known as The Punisher, to see a truly human antihero. After the murdering of his family, Castle begins his pursuit of their killers and begins a crusade against injustice. There is no mercy, no quarter for those who have done wrong in the world.

We hear about it the news frequently: crimes of passion where emotions have taken over any shred of reasoning within one’s psyche and caused parents to avenge the deaths of their children, lovers to strike down cheating paramours, and suicides over people who have not been able to bear the grief of a mistake. In their minds, they're serving justice. It's only the breakdown of these emotional barricades that normally stop them that allow them to perform those acts.

This article is not a justification for these acts, whether fictional or real. This is simply an explanation behind the reasoning of the creation of these characters and allowing them to perform the actions that they do. Regardless of how you feel about these actions and ideals, there’s a reason behind why antiheroes aren't villains and are still allowed to be heroes.

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (15)
Default_picture
November 14, 2009
Excellent article,sums up the meaning of antihero perfectly. Antiheroes are almost always my favorite characters,in both comics and games.They are much more "human" and relatable.
Default_picture
November 14, 2009
I thought you were going to put fable 2 antics up. :) Good article.
Default_picture
November 14, 2009
This is a great article, Mark! I didn't really know about the origins of the anti-hero, so it was really interesting to learn a bit about the beginnings of this type of character and how they're used in video games.
Default_picture
November 14, 2009
I love the concept of anti hero. I get lots of shit in my Current World Issues class for always suggesting the actions that kill a few and save many more, the anti hero approach. Really, I just think that the shining and perfect hero characters are just kinda pussies.
November 14, 2009
[quote] I get lots of shit in my Current World Issues class for always suggesting the actions that kill a few and save many more, the anti hero approach. Really, I just think that the shining and perfect hero characters are just kinda pussies./quote] Also, in he real world there are no super powers or gamma radiation which grant super strength. I think in the Watchmen (the movie), people were so focused on the big blue dong that they completely missed the fact that Ozymandias just murdered thousands of people and was completely right about the effects it would have bringing the world together. Just another sign of what is truly important to people, Big blue dongs.
November 14, 2009
Lame....broke a bracket.....
Default_picture
November 14, 2009
Great article. I am actually playing through Infamous again right now and am realizing again how let down I am by that karma system. What did you guys think of that?
Alexemmy
November 14, 2009
This perfectly explains why I like you so much Mark. You're such a bad boy, but with a heart of gold.
Default_picture
November 16, 2009
@Alex Yes, Mark is from the wrong side of the tracks. Great article.
Default_picture
November 17, 2009
Before I state the following, I must admit I didn't read this article. I stopped the minute you said "The Watchmen".
Redeye
November 17, 2009
@Reed calm down. this isn't a comic nerd battle royale. @Mark. I personally draw a specific distinction with the hero anti hero thing. I prefer characters that have an air of rationality about their motivations. So I liked Ozy from watchman and batman but wasn't too much of a fan of the punisher. Theirs just a fine line between being willing to sacrifice or disobey things that society takes for granted to promote an agenda and just being a kill crazy sociopath without sympathy for the things you are sacrificing. It's really to me sort of about responsibility. When you do something that is immoral or indecent to promote a cause you are responsible for that choice. Some writers simply don't get that and end up making anti heroes that come off as inconsistent, selfish twerps. Mercer from prototype comes to mind. He spends his entire game killing people remorselessly, building no sympathy in the player's mind because you just become dead to how irresponsible he is. Then at the end of the day when he whines about wishing he didn't kill all those people you just find yourself saying 'well then why didn't you stop and think after innocent corpse number 9000?' Anti heroes go horribly wrong in writing more then they are done right so i like both heroes and anti heroes. Just only when each one is written by someone with half a brain and an actual moral compass instead of a clique book.
Default_picture
November 17, 2009
It's interesting that you say Superman has "no underlying reason behind his heroism." While such pure goodness may not be immediately identifiable among us humans, I think the point of Superman (though I have no knowledge of comics) is precisely the underlying reason behind his heroism: good for goodness' sake. This is still a problem in ethical philosophy, right? What is good? Why is it good? What is the foundation of goodness? Kantians suggest goodness is its own foundation and that this concept is provable by logic alone. I'm not sure, though I'd like to agree. I see what you mean though: antiheroes have convictions that are easier to relate to, whereas archetypal heroes may be too loftily righteous. Next time, I'd like to read more about the writers' motivations for creating antiheroes that you touched on above, and also what you personally think about antiheroism (without being political, of course).
Default_picture
November 17, 2009
@Reed The quote was last minute, I didn't notice it until now. But if that one thing has you not reading my article. I really don't care if you read it or not. Also, you didn't state anything. Unless your statement was your reasoning behind why you weren't going to state something. Please look at your very critical and very idiotic post before you criticize someone's post. @Jeffrey I completely agree with you. The Punisher is certainly not my favorite antihero, but he's a perfect example of why we can relate. You have to admit he is very human. He's not a genius like Batman or Ozymandias and is simply reacting to something that is beyond comprehension in most people's minds. Having people that I care about more than I care about myself, I have wondered a million times (probably because I watch too much television) what I would do if they were ever killed. I have to admit, I would probably go a bit off the deep end.
Default_picture
November 17, 2009
@Chris That's kind of the point though. There is no personal motivation behind his heroism. He only does it because it is the right thing in his mind to do. This does fall into the ethical philosophy of humanity. It falls into the discussion of "is man inherently good or is he good to serve his own needs?" Tons of people donate to charities, help old ladies cross streets, and work at soup kitchens. But are they doing it because they are truly good people or because it makes them feel better about themselves (in other words: their good deed for the day, "karmic balance", etc. etc. ) The antihero was created, in my opinion, to show the author's ideas on that very philosophy. It is the writer's way of saying that he believes people are good because it accomplishes something not just for the people the hero is saving but for the hero himself whether it be vengeance, justification, you name it.
Redeye
November 18, 2009
I certainly do understand what the writers were trying to do with the punisher as an antihero. He is a very human character but he's not the sort of human I'd want to be around is what i'm saying. As for the 'good for goods sake or good for personal gain' argument. I think that everyone who does good does do so to satisfy something for themselves as much as helping another. The thing is that I think that's a good thing in and of itself. 'good is it's own reward' is in my opinion a bit of a narrow minded philosophy. It is up to society and people to reward good deeds so that more people will do good deeds and we will be happier and more positive as a species. Personally, as a fledgeling writer, a lot of my writing focuses on the fact that society often doesn't reward goodness in people. Profiteering and social darwanism have given people too many excuses to not be good and the people who genuinely care about doing what is right are often twisted by life and society and cast aside. That's the particular type of anti hero I sympathise with the most. The misunderstood altruist.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.