posted
You know what I'm talking about, a tale of grandiose proportion in which the Heroes battle the ultimate villain, the embodiment of evil itself who must be defeated regardless of the cost.
In recent years, in discussions of Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Harry Potter and the like I have heard many people refer to the time honored mythic tale of the battle against the ultimate evil. People argue about what qualities such a tale must have and whether a particular story lives up to the tradition.
The only problem is that the mythic tradition itself doesn't seem to exist. Try as I might, I can't think of a single story that fits this mold that predates the 1950s.
You don't find it in greek mythology, nordic mythology, or any native american mythology I'm familiar with. It isn't in Beowulf, the Illiad, the Odyssey, Shakespeare or even the Bible.
What is it about our time, the last 50 to 60 years that makes us feel that this story is timeless? Why do crowds flock to hear this story even when it is poorly told (aka Star Wars)? Why do so many people have such strong feelings about this story and such strong opinions of what it requires?
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JonHecht: Those are fightin' words.
Are you seriously going to argue that Star Wars had great acting, riviting dialogue and brilliant directing?
Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed Star Wars. Despite its artistic flaws the story resonates with me. I think many people feel that way and that is part of my original question. Star Wars is one more illustration of how the literary critics are missing the point. Good story telling can make a fair story into a good story. But a truly great story can be great even if it is told poorly.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Back to the original topic. I don't think that the Odyssey really applies since that's a different story line all together. (Wandering soul trying to get home. Although the fact that he spent around five years on Calypso's Island having sex does decrease my sympathy for Odysseus.)
But if you're talking about the roots of the story of ultimate evil. I think (and I will preface this by saying that I'm not an expert on the subject) that roots of this story would be religious. Nearly all religions embody the belief in an ultimate good (God) and the ultimate evil (The Devil or negative energy or whatever you want to call it.) Most of these great stories are religious allegories: Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, and such.
Same package, different wrapping paper.
Posts: 208 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Philosofickle: But if you're talking about the roots of the story of ultimate evil. I think (and I will preface this by saying that I'm not an expert on the subject) that roots of this story would be religious. Nearly all religions embody the belief in an ultimate good (God) and the ultimate evil (The Devil or negative energy or whatever you want to call it.) Most of these great stories are religious allegories: Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, and such.
Same package, different wrapping paper.
But if they are religious allegories, why don't we have lots of them that predate the last half century? Why weren't people writing this kind of story in 1600 AD or 1800 AD or 500 AD? There aren't even any stories in the Hebrew or Christian Bible of Heroes who do battle against a villain who embodies evil.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Philosofickle: Back to the original topic. I don't think that the Odyssey really applies since that's a different story line all together.
That was after all my point. The battle against supreme evil is described as part of an epic tradition, but none of the great epic works have that story.
Please, if you know of a pre 1950 great epic battle against supreme evil that I've somehow missed. let me know.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about Milton,-- Paradise Lost How about Dante. Those are both good against ultimate evil stories, and both prior to this century.
The Hunchback of Notre Dame? The Mahabratta? (Hindu myth)
If you look closely there are a lot of those stories out there, but the "Classics", from the Illiad to "Immorte De Arthur" all shy away from the simple dichotomy of Good vs Evil, and show the depth what makes someone evil. By being more that that simple two dimensions they transcend popular short lived literature and become classics.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps the biblical account of Moses. Moses vs. Ramases
Or perhaps the idea of what the ultimate evil is has evolved. One of the earliest epic stories in history is that of Gilgamesh, where he has to fight both gods and death.
So do you think that Gilgamesh fits the criteria?
Posts: 208 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not surprised that religion and mythology don't often use ultimate good vs ultimate evil stories. Frankly, if your goal is to teach a moral, they're not useful. At least, not in and of themselves. Obviously, you can have degrees of good and evil even in an ultimate evil story (ie Harry Potter).
Personally, I think good vs. evil stories are just plain fun. The world is so complicated and never that simple, so if what you want is escapism in its purest form, good vs. evil is a great way to go. There's no second thoughts, no wondering if you're fighting for the right side...you're just cheering on your hero. It's better than a sporting event because there is a sense of true justification in what your team is doing...more than just being from the right city or school.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd say Christine has a point. It's a guiltless way of resolving the story to have a character who is irrevocably bad with no redeeming qualities. They die, and everyone is happy.
I just watched the movie Collateral for the first time. Tom Cruise is the obvious bad guy in the movie *spoiler* but when he dies it wasn't "Yay he's dead!" They'd made him human enough that you could identify with him. So when he died you didn't really have only one reaction.
Nobody had regrets when palpatine got thrown down the powershaft. (Incidentally, why was there a powershaft in the thrown room? That's kind of like the main reactor in the hangar. It just doesn't make sense.)
Posts: 208 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:What is it about our time, the last 50 to 60 years that makes us feel that this story is timeless?
WWII and American Civil Rights. There you have mid-century villains who were competent, capable, well-publicized, thoroughly evil and deeply problematic. I think this is all the more disturbing because it could very well be the case that the Nazies and white supremacists win. It's cast a shadow.
quote: Nearly all religions embody the belief in an ultimate good (God) and the ultimate evil (The Devil or negative energy or whatever you want to call it.)
That's just not true. _________________________________
Dan_Raven, the problems with Dante is that the evil isn't live. Dante tours hell, but it's not as if he defeats the devil. It's as if he were going through a museum. Milton may be different, I've only ever read the first section of Paradise Lost.
Pure evil is inhuman, I think, and that's why it's not depicted often or well. At best, it's seen as zealous selfishness, but there are many virtues that go along with self-regard. You have sociopaths who may be considered evil, but nobody cares about sociopaths. I think that Dickens and Steinbeck do well in depicting evil because they make an evil system, then make the "evil people" beholden to that system, that way, it's not really a fight between good and evil people, it's a fight between a good person and an evil impersonal system and it's careless accomplices. One of the knocks against Dickens and Steinbeck is that they don't take their villains seriously as people. I tend to agree, for all of the intricate Okie trials and lamentations we are exposed to in The Grapes of Wrath, there is only one half-chapter from the oppressor's point of view. That's how I see it. The real tension in this world, I think, stems from opposing goods. The American housewife who'd vote to fight terrorism abroad than have to worry about an attack at home, and the Iraqi housewife who was doing fine until American democracy decided to make her neighborhood a staging ground for their war on terror.
_____________________
One of the reasons that Iliad is such an outstandingly structured story is that all sides are virtuous and committed, it's just that the world is necessarily an arena of competing virtues.
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: How about Milton,-- Paradise Lost
Doesn't really fit the Genre. In Paradise Lost, Satan is the classic tragic hero not the ultimate villain.
quote:How about Dante.
The devine comedy is a more of a tour of heaven and hell. Certainly not a battle against an evil villain.
quote:The Hunchback of Notre Dame?
quote:The Mahabratta? (Hindu myth)
I'm not familiar with this tale. If it is a hero battling against supreme evil then at best I can say that it is not part of the western literary tradition.
There are many stories deal with good and evil. But I'm talking here not just about stories that deal with good and evil but a very particular kind of epic in which the Heroes battle a villain so evil that it must be defeated at all costs.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Philosofickle: Perhaps the biblical account of Moses. Moses vs. Ramases
Or perhaps the idea of what the ultimate evil is has evolved. One of the earliest epic stories in history is that of Gilgamesh, where he has to fight both gods and death.
So do you think that Gilgamesh fits the criteria?
Good and evil don't even play a role in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Moses and Ramases comes closest but is still way off the mark.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Dante tours hell, but it's not as if he defeats the devil. It's as if he were going through a museum.
If you've only read the Inferno, I consider this a poor reading. If you've read the whole Commedia, I consider it a terrible one.
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My only response to the original post is to conclude that people are simply mistaken when they attribute the success of Harry Potter and Stars to a "tradition of battles between Good and Evil."
I'd have to say these people are either ignorant or just spouting fancy words to get on news programs. Newscasters trying to sound smart and scholars dumbing it down to get on TV specials. Any person who has seen Star Wars or read Harry Potter knows about the redemption of motivations of Darth Vader or Voldemort. These stories are the strongest where they blur the line between good and evil and ask real questions about choice, morality, and heroics.
Its why we're still intrigued by Odysseus, Hamlet, Harry Potter, Frodo, Luke Skywalker, etc.
"Battles between Good and Evil" just lack sophistication to me and I think people get bored with them. I know that I've read several books and seen countless movies that mistaken "good/evil" as quality storytelling. At most those stories become quick fads or summer blockbusters, but you don't see legions of devoted fans decades later.
Strict duality is boring. But maybe I'm just the dork who thinks that the creation of Satan and his pitchfork are the worst things Christianity could have done to itself.
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:My only response to the original post is to conclude that people are simply mistaken when they attribute the success of Harry Potter and Stars to a "tradition of battles between Good and Evil."
Perhaps I haven't clearly explained myself. I haven't heard anyone attribute the success of Harry Potter to a "tradition of battles between Good and Evil". What I have heard are people comparing Harry Potter (or Star Wars or LOTR) to as proported great epic tradition of Heroes who must defeated a supreme evil Lord.
I remember one commentary in which Rowling had been occused of copying basic plot from LOTR (Sauron=Voldemort, Frodo = HP, Gandalf = Dumbledore, etc) in which it was said, no both of them a simply part of an ancient epic Heroic tradition. This story where the underdog Hero must battle the supreme evil Lord to save the world has only been a tradition for the past half decade.
Which returns me to my original question. What is it about the last 50 - 60 years that has lead rise to this new Heroic tradition?
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
My first impulse is to turn you to the great body of apocalyptic literature. I mean, Revelation of John describes quite vividly the epic battle between embodied good and evil. There are several other non-canonical apocalypses that describe similar conflicts.
Zorastrianism, which is of ancient origin, is strongly rooted in the global (or universal) clash of good and evil which culminates in a great battle.
As far as popular literature, I can't immediately think of any examples. Lewis' space trilogy predates the 1950s somewhat, as does (in conception if not publication) the Ring series.
Another thought is of Beowulf, which is a battle between what, for the time, could be considered an embodied Savior figure against an absolute evil. It doesn't have the global scope, but I would include it as in the same tradition. Wagner's ring cycle, culled from various Germanic and Scandinavian epics also has many of the elements, including a great last battle of the gods.
Finally, I think much of the tradition is rooted in the more localized battles of good and evil related in western and northern European folk tales (e.g. Snow White, Jack & the Beanstalk) which can be read symbolically in much the same way as the dramatic epics you refer to.
But those are just a few thoughts.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:What is it about our time, the last 50 to 60 years that makes us feel that this story is timeless?
WWII and American Civil Rights. There you have mid-century villains who were competent, capable, well-publicized, thoroughly evil and deeply problematic. I think this is all the more disturbing because it could very well be the case that the Nazis and white supremacists win.
Certainly WWII had a profound impact on Tolken and Lewis. I think its woth note that "The Hobbit" which was written before WWII is a relatively lighted hearted adventure. Evidently LOTR started out in that same vein before the war, but during the war evolved into a much more serious tale.
But I think there is more to it than that. I sense that our culture has evolved from seeing the battle between good and evil as a largely personal struggle, to seeing it as also a communal struggle. More than ever we perceive evil as something that destroys not only individuals but something that can destroy the world.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
The Lensmen series by Doc Smith very much fits the bill and dates from the 30s and 40s.
Another epic fantasy battle between good and evil was The Worm Ouroboros which was published in 1922.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you think Herodotus wasn't playing into the idea of "brave heroes defeating the evil empire" when he wrote about the Spartans at Thermopylae? And the rest of Greece, for that matter?
What about the monster-slaying heroes?
---
Offhand, I'd say that the "heroic defeat of evil" in Classical (Greek) mythology is more along the lines of "Order is imposed on the chaotic world." I'll definitely have to think about this specific heroic trope with regards to myth; but nothing immediately comes to mind - which may or may not support your point. Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Philosofickle: Nearly all religions embody the belief in an ultimate good (God) and the ultimate evil (The Devil or negative energy or whatever you want to call it.)
I think I disagree here. There are a lot of religions that have entities that represent destruction, mischief, or darkness, but that isn't the same as ultimate evil. It makes me wonder if religions that DO have ultimate good and ultimate evil figures are in the minority.
I wonder if Hero vs. Ultimate Evil stories were encouraged by messianic (is that a word?) cultures/religions, such as christianity? Maybe it wasn't the source, but certainly an influence.
I think this is a wonderful topic for folkloric/anthropological research! Thanks for bringing it up, Rabbit.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then again, we could also say that stories like Tolkien and Lewis aren't myths of ultimate evil. If you read the Silmarillion you learn that Sauron is just a servant of Morgoth, and that evil does in fact still exist and rises again nonetheless after the ring is destroyed. (Movies to the contrary.)
Same with the chronicles of Narnia. Narnia is ultimately destroyed and a new place is created where we aren't sure weather or not "evil" still exists.
In the star Wars series Palpatine or Vader might represent the main force for evil in their times. But if you read the books, there are definitely worse things that come along afterwards. To borrow an idea from the movies, perhaps the moral of the Star Wars movies is balance. "Balance to the force." and all that.
The only series that I can really think of where the characters are really fighting the ultimate force of evil whould be the Wheel of Time series. However those are so badly written (In my opinion) That I would almost discount them from the list.
We could go into the Incarnations of Immortality series by Piers Anthony, but even in that series Satan has some good elements.
Perhaps the closest you'll ever get to a pure good vs. bad is when we were five and played cowboys and indians. Although now of course we know through the politically correct media that all of us white people are horrid thieves and interlopers and turned out to be the bad guys after all.
Anyway, I'm off to play dungeons and dragons where characters at least have clear alignments and I don't have to feel guilty about killing anything as long as it's chaotic evil.
Posts: 208 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Boy do you play D&D different from me. I once argued that it was ok to assassinate the escaped criminal because that's basically what we do. Orcs are running around and will probably do something evil? Kill them before they kill us! The noble wants us to kill the human instead of bringing him in for trial? Not much difference in my book.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:You know what I'm talking about, a tale of grandiose proportion in which the Heroes battle the ultimate villain, the embodiment of evil itself who must be defeated regardless of the cost.
You know, I am not sure exactly what you are talking about. Is it an individual who takes on the armies of evil to defeat it? Is it an individual who takes on another individual who is equally as evil as the hero is good? Depending on what you mean I could look for examples of both from history. Probably the closest to these is apocolyptic writings, with the book of Daniel and the Book of Revelations as the most familiar. Most recently there has been the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls of the Quamran Community with the basic belief that the "Children of Light" will take on the ultimate evil with the help of a Man of Righteousness.
I think that Hugh Nibley (to those who know him) touches on this very question in some of his works. His Pearl of Great Price lectures and the book "Temple and Cosmos" come to mind. I don't know if he specifically talked about the plot elements you describe, but he did at least hint at them.
I do think that events in the past 100 years (WWI and WWII, the bomb) have changed the way these stories are told. That is why someone can say they are of ancient value when they aren't exactly what you find when looking carefully. Shouldn't be surprising. Each culture and generation tell the stories in new ways that reflect concerns of time and place. That is actually the presumtion used in how historians date texts.
Edit:
I can't help myself Rabbit. Everything you describe seems to be something that the Book of Mormon is filled with. Isn't the hero Capt. Moroni the embodiment of this very ideal? You could say the whole Nephi nation is a nationalized ideal of the hero as described by you. Of course, the ultimate hero in the Book of Mormon is Christ who comes down and destroys the most wicked and sets up a hundred year old utopia. Never mind the testimony it contains that Christ will ultimately defeat death and evil at the end of the last days.
There are differences, of course. The Book of Mormon is a warning that the hero can win, but the ideals must remain or all could be lost and destroyed. Then there is the First and Second book of Nephi that explains that Christ will overcome all evil in time, but not before defeat after defeat and a constant threat to the righteous who live in a wicked world. The Book of Mormon seems to be a compilation of hero stories wrapped up in the precaution that victories are short lived in this life.
posted
Norse mythology has a great final battle between good and evil, or anyway between the Aesir and the older earth gods. And Norse and English folk tales are full of heroes who must use luck or wits (not usually fighting skill) to defeat the elves or trolls, who while not evil on the scale of Hitler are often quite malevolent. Maybe it's just that the scale of evil has changed in accordance with humans' ability to be evil? Recall also the Nibelungs, where the dragon is certainly quite evil.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
