Rather than examining this article in light of the monster,
I was drawn toward looking at it in consideration of the hero. What does it
mean to be a hero? Why must we have them? It has never been so clear to me, as
it was upon reading, “When fear is at a fever pitch, they always move onto the hero
phase… Life and art seek to mutually conquer vulnerability” (Asma 5). As
monsters serve to highlight our collective fears, heroes serve as a resolution
to both external and internal conflict.
Monsters spring forth
from both superstition and the exaggeration of fact in a myriad of shapes and
sizes, and are often framed as obstacles – the hoard of gold is always guarded
by a dragon. Regardless of their form, however, facing them is, “… an
illuminating exercise in hypothetical reasoning and hypothetical feeling” (Asma
3). In contrast, the job of the hero is to confront and ideally overcome these
obstacles. Externally, monsters can represent threats against life, limb, loved
ones, or even something such as wealth. Using their wit, guile, bravery, and
whatever other weapon deemed appropriate, heroes face the odds and surmount
these challenges – they serve to let audiences experience a potential method of
coming out of a harrowing event minimally-scathed. The external component of
this age-old battle begs the question of whether we are physically prepared for
whatever life might throw at us. On the other hand, the hero must usually
prepare for their encounter with the monster, or otherwise face some sort of
moral decision. Do you save the damsel, or the school bus full of children? To
kill or not to kill? Do you possess the resolve to accomplish whatever task is
at hand? This internal struggle on the part of the hero asks whether we are
morally equipped to handle the stressors of life. Granted, these decisions may
be as simple as deciding to attend class on any given day, but they are no less
impactful.
 |
| Original Image © Crowsmack |
By this logic, monsters are a method by which we assess our
own preparedness for everyday life – which can only be the case when they
reflect our real fears. Similarly, heroes are the ideal measure of competence –
the hero always saves the day, which
is the metric we aspire to. The monsters that thrive in our imaginations allow
us to test ourselves in a safe environment, in order to breed self-assuredness.
After all, if we cannot conquer the terrors in our heads, then how can we do so
in reality?
Reference:
Asma, Stephen T. "Monsters and the Moral Imagination."
The Chronicle of Higher Education (2009): 1-6.
Never really thought of the "monsters are a measuring tool of our preparedness" angle before. I always assumed they reflected our inner attitudes and thoughts that we rarely display in everyday life. Your argument has its merits, though. They often represent natural or unnatural forces that we may or may not encounter in real life. It's like how the zombies in the novel World War Z were a metaphor for religious extremism and Islamic terrorism. If we can't decide on how we'd act in an idealized scenario in our heads, we would probably react to that scenario even worse in reality. Conquering the fears in our heads is the first step in overcoming obstacles in our lives.
ReplyDeleteI think you bring up some interesting points. The concept of testing ourselves against monsters in our heads is one I have not thought of. It almost makes one wonder which is more dangerous: the monster outside or the monsters and decisions in one's head? I believe we've seen a good number of heroes battling external foes, but a hero's descent into madness isn't covered quite as extensively. If only I could be so grossly incandescent as to find the answer.
ReplyDeleteI like your point that "monsters are a method by which we assess our own preparedness for everyday life," as monsters so deeply, deeply woven into the fabric of our existence. Monsters serve a social function, and that function (at least in my head) is to reinforce those norms and values that have become "standard." But I also like that you pointed out the value of the monster, and what it does, is only really THERE when the monsters reflect us and our fears accurately. If we are not afraid, is there a monster? This is a loaded and extremely broad question, but how do we - as a people/species/etc - decide what to be afraid of?
ReplyDelete