On the Hero

Most definitions of the hero veer between the wildly inclusive, to the rigorously restrictive. So while some claim that all good, self sacrificing people are hero's, others define the title so rigorously that it cannot be applied to anyone short of Jesus. Both seem excessive, and do not apply to the word as we use it. Nor is the hero simply the main character of a story, for that has often been the villain, as in The Picture of Dorian Grey. 

     Personally, I am inclined to think that the hero is one who finds himself at the turning point of destiny. The hero is poised upon a balance, and with a little nudge, he can tip the scales. Hence, George Washington could be considered a hero, but Tom Sawyer could not. There may be many people who make the hero's journey possible, but the final choice rests with the hero. Mentors, side kicks, and prophets all have their own unique roles to play, but in the end, it is Frodo who must bear the ring. 

Furthermore, the hero must choose virtue. If he does not, he is a villain. In this sense, both the hero and the villain are the chosen ones. Sometimes they serve as the representatives of the forces at work in the story. They are the anointed, one by Heaven, the other by Hell. Aeneas is an example of the divine hero, Voldemort is an example of the infernal villain. It is not that Voldemort actually makes a deal with the devil, but that he embodies the ideas that are the source of the books evil. And there is an idea that demons and angels are ideas, perhaps there is not so much difference between being possessed by a bad idea and being possessed by a demon.

Anakin Skywalker is a good example of all these concepts. He is the chosen one who becomes a villain and brings down the galaxy, then later he uses his unique position to restore it. The point of the hero's journey is to become able to choose well when the moment upon which all things hang has arrived. Joan of Arc, Harry Potter, and Prospero all have to decode the fate of their world. As the knight in Indiana Jones said "Choose wisely."

On the Art of Speaking: Dr. Soong Chan Rah's Chapel

It was not a topic for which I felt much enthusiasm. It seems to me that racial integration needs to come about organically, rather than by compulsion. Don't get me wrong, racism is a great sin, and should be rooted out wherever it rears its head, but that hardly seems the foundation for a friendship. Friends have got to be united by something other than a duty to have a racially diverse circle of friends. Hence Dr. Rah's had some uphill work to do with me.

The introduction featured statistics concerning the rapid rise of diversity in America, and the Church's failure to keep up with the process of integration. This had the effect of drawing in the dominantly Christian audience that filled the gymnasium. It piqued curiosity and  probed a generally sensitive topic. 

Throughout the speech, there was a steady rise in energy, then at the end, there was a gradual release in tension. It had some of the characteristics of a dissolve ending. The final story and the challenge to apply the lesson pulled upon the pent up energy to appeal to the audience to live differently. His method was rather like him showing us the world through an enchanted mirror, and then at the end, turning the mirror upon us, so that in ourselves, we saw the things he spoke of in a new light and startling light.

His language was not so much poetic as Spartan. His words were swift and clean as a blade. The dramatic force came from the passion with which he spoke. Yet he used several tricks of structure. One part of his speech involved an almost mystic stream of three triple repetitions. There was also antithesis in the juxtaposition of God's purpose for the Church and the Church's actual state. He also compared the glorious and original Star Trek, and that meager and shallow knock off known as The Next Generation. Lastly, although he used a lot of abstract words, he nailed them down in his stories and examples. Indeed, the frequent use of stories and statistics was one of his great strengths.

Despite my initial doubts, I wonder if he may be right. Perhaps the sin of racism is too deeply ingrained to be healed without deliberate intervention. Certainly we should not glorify a fragment of the Church at the expense of the other members. Further, perhaps many friendships are prevented by a failure to mingle with those of another ethnicity. I must keep thinking on this. Whatever the case, this was one of the most moving chapels I have heard at Biola, and I hope to hear from Dr. Rah again.