Different or one in the same?

Emilee Garcia-Guzman ’22

Features Editor

What is a hero; more accurately, what makes a hero good? Is it the way they only do what is best for the group? Is it how they bring a sense of hope or safety when they arrive? Is it the way they fight with everything they have?

In defining heroes, we are led to even more questions. If heroes are inherently good, what makes villains evil? Is it the way they are apparently driven to cause pain and bring revenge? Is it just that they have no morals? Is it that they have a mental illness or disorder that goes unnoticed?

Let us define what is good and evil. According to Dictionary.com the word good can mean many things: morally excellent, kind, profitable, righteous, merit, etc. Evil can mean a wicked character, defective, bad condition, morally reprehensible, deficient, etc. The words contrast each other in heroes and villains, a battle of good versus evil.

However, what makes heroes and villains earn these descriptions? Let’s look at one of the words used to define "good": profitable. “Profitable” is to do something that makes money. Now, you could say that heroes do their job to profit off of the safety and comfort of others. While that might be true for some heroes, not everyone is that moral when it comes down to it. Such as a hero who will drag out the fight to show off and make a performance out of it, being more focused on image and their fans’ approval than focussing on the safety of their fans.

On the other hand, with villains, the word “defective” can vary for many people. However, the pure definition of the word is “imperfect or flawed”. And if defective is to be imperfect or flawed, what stops heroes from being considered villains as well?

Isn't that the nature of being human - aren't we all flawed and imperfect? Even looking at who we call heroes in real life, we can see that some of them are flawed. People, like corrupt policemen, can use the power they have to flaunt it and abuse it. What's to say superheroes wouldn't do the same?

We can focus all we want on the good, but we must be willing to accept that no one is entirely good. The world is not black and white, and neither are people’s ideologies. Yes, some people don't have morals however, those people would also be considered defective by society.

Think about it. In any media where there are superpowers or even in our society, there's a judgment on how beneficial an individual is to others. This decision is done when hiring and evaluating workers for a job or comes when simply applying to schools like high school and college.

Everyone is good enough or defective at one point. For heroes to never be considered flawed is highly unlikely. Everyone is human; we all have our flaws and issues. There can be heroes who become heroes for fame, fortune and to show off.

Those are flawed heroes.

Then some become heroes for selfish gain: to be called a hero and to be praised like a god. Some get told all their life that they can do no wrong and become a hero just because it feeds their ego. Does that sound like a hero at all?

No.

Now, look at villains, they are flawed and hurt, and it shows, but they have their reasons and their morals. And, they are considered unuseful and defective by their society. There are questions to consider when evaluating why someone has been deemed a villain or if they deserve the title are questions such as what did they do, and why did they do it? What happened to them?

An example is Harley Quinn, she had fallen in love with the Joker, who manipulated her and her feelings into becoming the villain we know today. Was that her fault, not completely, she was used and broken down by the man she loved until he found no more use in her. At that point, she was already considered a villain due to what she had done for him, but we see in many comics that she isn’t completely evil, but she can no longer be considered good.

Was it a cognitive difference? Perhaps it could've been too much mental stress and they snapped? Did everyone beat them down due to something they cannot control? Were they shunned for being different, having a different idea/view?

What are their motives? Revenge, if so, then why? Could it be to protect something/someone? Is it out of anger towards a bigger picture?

Unless the story tells us, we cannot answer these many questions. We could speculate, theorize and guess based on their quirks, mottos and the words they say. However, that wouldn’t be the true story and wouldn’t do anyone justice. Let’s take a step back from backstories and definitions, and look at the morals.

Morals are what drive people to choose and act on those choices. Morals are what everyone judges. They describe good and evil and determine who is the hero and villain in stories.

They define how you see people; their character. They give meaning to a person's actions or words. They can also hint toward a more hidden side of a person. Think about a hero’s character like this: a hero, beloved by all, strong and fearless, who saves everyone with a smile.

The hero’s motto is "I want to help." Then, they do something that seems out of character, maybe sacrifice someone or something for their gain, which doesn't seem right. Then, going back and looking over everything that the hero has done and what they said, something seems different.

It was a hidden part of their motto. "I want to help...myself," be a better person, get ahead in life, become rich and famous. Selfish, isn't it? Well, again, ideals are not black and white.

Heroes are selfish, not that many people want to notice. Some want to be a hero to cement a legacy by laying down their lives as heroes. Dying a hero is easy; living on is tougher. It's why there is the phrase "you either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself as a villain."

Some heroes become what their society calls villains as they age because they no longer serve the community. They can grow to see just how corrupt the heroes and culture are, and they change their morals to line up more with what they truly want.

On the flip-side, some antagonists, or even regular criminals, can and are called villains. But should they be called villains or do their morals simply not align with mainstream society? Think of the questions people can be asked that revolve around moral dilemmas and people’s responses to them.

For example, if a pharmaceutical company raises the price of a life-saving drug and is only selling to those who can pay upfront. Then someone from an infected community, who can't afford even one dose of the medicine, steals the medicine to save their community. Who is the villain? Who is the hero?

There is no one right answer, it all comes down to your perspective. More so, it is the narrator who writes the story. If the narrative is from the company, the person who stole from them is the villain. The person broke the law to steal from them, and they lost money. However, if the story is from the community, the company is the villain. The company hoarded the medicine despite knowing how many lives it could save if cheaper. Or that more people would buy the product because of how affordable it is. The person may have stolen the meds because a family member or someone they know is sick.

It would be a selfish cause, but in the end, it still benefited others with the thought of making sure no one else in the community would get sick. There isn't anything that truly defines or separates a hero or a villain. The terms and labels mean nothing in general. What people call heroes and villains are two sides of the same coin; cut from the same cloth.