A Hero's Death - Basis in mythology??

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 99828

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hedwigstalons" <hedwigstalons at y...> wrote:
> Hi!
> Would anyone out there be able to give me the msg. # of a posting by 
> Hans (may be from last summer) that talks about heroes and needing to 
> die (meaning Harry)? I thought the hero _can't_ die, but it seems 
> that they can - Argh!! Not the fate I want for our Harry!!
>  

Yeah, I can sort of remember this thread, but it didn't really cover heroic
figures much, more what defined heroism - and Hans was very keen to
put 'love' as the root  of Harry's actions. Not something I agree with, but
no matter.

In fiction (and reality) heroes quite often come to a sticky end. It's one
of the more depressing aspects of being a hero. Some pop their clogs
in a mutual blood-fest with the arch enemy (Arthur, El Cid), some cop
it in the neck from another monster at a later date later (Beowulf). The 
problem being once you've done something stupendous, every time 
something nasty turns up from then on, by common consent you're the
local pest exterminator. How can you say no? You can't; not without 
stepping down from your pedestal.
You end up a bit like being a mythological bomb-disposal expert - and 
sooner or later one's bound to get you.

Browsing through my big Boys Book of Heroes there are some recurrent
themes:
1. Very few seem to set out to be a hero. Usually it's more or less an 
inevitability, whether they like it or not. Traditionally not. Once they've 
seen the size/weapons of the baddy there's often a chronic shortage of
volunteers; the rest of the possibles find a damn good reason to visit 
their aged aunt in the next country but two, (leaving guess who? to strap
on his sword and do the necessary.) There are exceptions, sort
of; Achilles (topical!) was supposedly offered a choice by the gods - a
short life full of glory or a long-lived obscurity. Whether you class him as
a hero is up to you, but the choice offered is probably indicative of what
the ancients considered the proper status for a hero, i.e. dead.

2. Heroism is about more than brave deeds; it's also about self sacrifice.
Usually the ultimate self-sacrifice (Marathon, Roland). That's what you 
get when you put concern for the condition of others above your own 
safety. To my mind getting a race named after you doesn't quite make 
up for not being able to stroll down the course.

3. Heroes that do survive to celebrate the victory never seem to live 
happily ever after (Frodo,  Gilgamesh) or later fall victim to someone they
believed they could trust (Robin Hood, Merlin). 

4. Once the danger is over, the hero is redundant and  quite often an
unwelcome reminder to the more circumspect (the ones now involved in 
getting their feet under the table) of how ineffectual they were. How can 
you bolster your ego and impress the youngsters when there's this boring
old fart sitting by the fire who did all the hard work and can prove it. 

On the whole, being a traditional hero is not a happy condition. The "and
they all lived happily ever after" ending only seems to be the rule in Fairy 
Tales; more grown up and traditional stories stress the opposite. Certainly
both the ancient Greek and the Viking tradition place everlasting glory
above collecting your pension:
"Men die, cattle die; only the glory of heroes lives forever" as the Edda
puts it.

How this relates to Harry is up for grabs. Personally I don't expect him to
survive, or not in the form that he is now. He and Voldy are too close, too
intermingled for a straight-forward showdown on Hogmead High St. with
Butterbeers and a vote of thanks for the winner. McGonagall might have 
been prophesying when in PS/SS she mentioned that in the future there
could be a "Harry Potter Day." That's how they remember heroes - with
a holiday for the survivors.

Kneasy