I aw this quote by Jack Welch: "The hero is the one with ideas."

And it made me start thinking about what makes a hero. Is the hero always the main character?  Can a villain be a hero? (I once read that, from the villain's point of view, he or she is the hero of the story. ) 

Hero doesn't have to necessarily be male or female, in this case.

Anyone have any thoughts on the matter?

I read once that the greatest villains are the ones that truly believe they are doing the right thing.

Great topic for discussion. It's actually something I've thought a litle about myself, though mostly because of an upcoming television show called Heroes. It's supposed to be about normal people that find themselves coming into various superheroish powers.

I definitely don't think the hero has to be your main character. That's typically the way things are written of course, but I know there are examples where the main character may, in fact, be the villain. Or, perhaps the main character is simply an incidental, a bystander that is affected by the hero's actions.

I read an entire chapter on this topic actually in "How to Write Science Fiction & Fantasy" by Orson Scott Card. It was a book that kept me from boredom during my stint on jury duty at the beginning of the year! I highly recommend it for anyone interested in those genres.

There is something to be said for not having your hero be the narrator. How stupid does it sound when you have a character going on and on about himself or herself, like the biggest bore at the party.  Much less tedious if a side character says things about the hero that the hero would (presumably) be too modest to say about himself or herself.  Of course, if you are Arnold Schwarzenegger  or Tom Cruise, modesty is not an issue...but then, personally, I don't consider either of them heroes

I completely agree. While seeing things through the hero's eyes can be useful, I think it's more likely in order to see a differing perspective, one that perhaps is more directly connected to the hurdles and problems they are trying to overcome. Other characters are very much suited to seeing the heroic traits in the hero that the hero characters would come off as a bit arrogant if they took the time pointing out.

I suppose it all boils down to the circumstances. It's easy to say someone like Superman is a hero because he possesses these powers that lift him above those of the average man. But of course, it's not really just the powers that make him a hero, as plenty of villains have equally impressive abilities. It's the self-sacrifice, compassion, and similar traits that make the character himself a hero.

This is rather relevant for me since I've got two story ideas currently percolating in my mind. One involves a story where the world the main character finds himself in is the subject, similar to Gulliver's Travels. The other story has a hero character that starts out as something of a villain and makes a transformation, and that's been a bit difficult to flesh out.

Hi Forum,

To begin with, I don’t think Mr. Welch meant “hero” as in protagonist in a literary work.  But as a subject for a forum discussion it’s an excellent topic.

When a writer decides to make his main character a villain, the amount of work put into this character is doubled.  The villain’s character must be described in more detail and to greater depth.

It is not necessary for the reader to identify with the main character, but it is vital that the motives and the fine tuning are clear.  I sometimes run across a story where the author tries to justify the actions of a villain protagonist.  This derives from the mistaken notion that the character would not be liked.  I say – on the contrary, a villain is what he is and as long as he/she holds the readers’ interest, that is fine.

I would also say that the word HERO as used in everyday language is not what it means in literature.  A hero(protagonist) in a book can often be a despicable man or lacking any attributes which will stand him above standard people.

As to discussing Tom Cruise and Arnold  Schwarzenegger or any other celeb of the kind – I can’t and won’t regard them as heroes in any capacity.

I’ve read an interesting book which teaches how to build your characters from scratch, how the relationship between them works and what gives the story a kick when the book has progressed and became complicated.  The book is called:

Dramatica: A New Theory Of Story
By Melanie Anne Phillips and Chris Huntley

I found it useful in my novel and I always recommend reading it when you have a lot of characters in your book and sometimes more than one main character.

Hanna

Here is the link to the Dramatica book: http://www.dramatica.com/theory/theory_book/dtb.html

I also would like to add that I found it useful in my novel and I always recommend reading it when you have a lot of characters in your book and sometimes more than one main character.  I made up a table which illustrates clearly the relationships between the character in a novel, based on Dramatica.  Anyone interested can have it.

Hanna

What makes a hero?

Good question. While lots of different characters can have prominent roles and do heroic things, I think “the hero” of the story almost has to be the protagonist, pretty much as Merriam Webster defines it: “Protagonist – the chief character of a novel or story in or around whom the action centers. ”

I think if the chief character is villainous, then yes, he or she would be the hero, or more appropriately, the antihero. Thomas Covenant comes to mind. The foil in either case would be the antagonist.

There aren't very many people in life who think of themselves as villains. My “evil-doer” very well may be someone else's hero. It's all in your point of view. Fortunately in writing the author, if he or she knows what they are doing, controls the overall point of view.

But this just talks about who the hero is, not your main question of what makes a hero. To me, the hero has to be the central active player. The key word here is active. They have to take direct action to control, or attempt to control, their own destiny. That pretty well meshes with Jack Welch's notion.

I also think that heroes have to be both vulnerable and believable. Of course vulnerability breeds believability, so they go hand-in-glove. If there is no risk to the hero then they are not acting heroic, they are simply taking action. The risk does not have to be physical. It can be emotional or psychological. But without risk, there is no drama.

I think passive characters, no matter how well developed, who simply let things happen, cannot be the hero.

~jon