Once upon a time
I read John Howard Griffin’s “Black like Me”. It’s an okay book, was then, is now. It’s an interesting insight into the differences- at least when it was written- between the races and the way they live.
Having read the book, I was all on fire to go out and fight the injustices being perpetrated on blacks by whites, and I was pretty vocal about it. My mother tried to argue me out of my newfound fervor, but dad just got me in the truck, and we went for a ride around downtown Gary.
There was gunfire, and plenty of it. There was a lot of disorder and disaster. Even as Itried to retain my righteous indignation I realized that ‘Black like me” contained a piece of a story, and there were other pieces it didn’t contain.
It dawned on me- and this was a p[retty early ages- that maybe just because someone writes a book and gets paid to do so, it doesn’t make them the expert on anything.
Quite a few years later, but still many years ago, I managed to lay my hands on an email address for Sir (Not sir at the time, btw) Arthur C Clarke. We had, over the course of two or three years, an email correspondence. One of my very early emails to him explained that I was a devoted fan, who loved literally all his work, and that even if he should turn out to have feet of clay, I would still enjoy his work.
There were allegations that Clark was a shorteye, later on, though I never saw any concrete evidence of this. My fears of the author having feet of clay were founded in some reality.
His response?
“I assure you, my feet are made of the Very Finest Clay”
I have always looked- not at the shining visage of the hero, but lifted up his pantleg and pulled down his sock. Invariably, clay. Inevitably, heroes fail, they fail themselves, they fail each other, they fail you. I have come to eschew Heroes. Perhaps it’s because I’m older and more cynical, perhaps i just came to smart on the subject sooner than many. Nobody can question my heroes because I have none- even the people I respect most, I’m often more familiar with their failures than successes.
Of couse, as I’ve found out in the last several days, God forbid you question the integrity of someone else’s heroes. Eric Hoffer, god rest his ornery soul, was spot on, on that one.
20 comments Og | Uncategorized

Most people who get on the soapbox about “the injustices being perpetrated on blacks by whites” would take that drive with your dad and blame what he saw on white oppression.
yep. I was fortunate at the time I was less than a total dumbass.
Maybe not a LOT less, but still.
Addressing your second point, you can still be a hero to yourself. It simply helps to be alert and open to honest critique, and maybe not so much cynical as skeptical, and resist temptation to blame the hero because he’s not everything you wish. Some heroes are betrayed by their decency, and then their fickle worshipers blame them for it.
The following concludes observations of another heroic effort. The cross pollination may do some good.
“You must see that it was not their spirit which had betrayed them, just as it is not our American spirit which would betray us. It was their believing that somehow they could beat the establishmentarian web of corruption by their valor alone. They were betrayed on every level but one….”
Hells bells, as a hero, I’d be SURE to disapoint myself.
Maybe, though, what you’re saying is that you should be answerable to yourself and nobody else; if that’s the case, I cannot in any way disagree.
…about heroes, Og:
Its the message, not the messenger.
There are times when all of us reach beyond our own capacity and debauched humanity and show that glimmer that is in each of us.
Heck, I am sure those who are counted as heroes are amazed at how and why they did what they did.
…and to those who are counted among the great, they have my pity for I am sure it is a burden to always be on your best behavior, lest you disappoint some idealistic child.
it’s not a question of disapointment, Cond. Point me to a well known hero- they’re all either fictional or real life clusterfucks.
We are not in disagreement here, Og.
You wrote a nice essay pointing out one of the rites of passage that most of us deal with in our ongoing journey into adulthood – though soemthing we do not put into words many times.
By necessarily pointing it out in written form (or verbally) you’ve established a landmark for people to work off of and solidify a readers own thoughts on the subject by saying – wow… that was a nice way to put.
That’s what writers and poets do – put things into words that have not coalesced in the minds of the readers so succinctly.
If it is good enough to be a ‘classic’, it becomes quotable and passed on.
This was a good essay – And necessary (from my perspective). Otherwise I would have said nothing.
imho
The Power of Words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hzgzim5m7oU
Don’t stop writing, Og.
Heck, even Peter, the first leader of the Christian church, was a ruffian with a temper who even himself asked the Lord why He lets him hang around. If people were perfect, no one would have to enter the Confessional booth. Remember, even the Pope goes to Confession. The secular celebrities have Oprah to whom to confess.
I don’t know where we got to the point of expecting a person’s whole life to be perfect for them to be heroic. Einstein was an incredible genius, Clarke could write a great book, Anthony Robbins could inspire a lot of people, and Trump knows how to put Humpty Dumpty back together whenever he knocks it off the wall (goes insolvent then rebuild his wealth).
The point of the discussion, MTS, is that people invest so much in their heroes that they become sacrosanct, and wont’t tolerate any discussion of their flaws, especially if those flaws are very real.
It helps to keep in mind that your hero is still a human being.
That’s why I was neither disappointed nor surprised to learn that Heinlein was a believer in “free love”, and all that entails.
I didn’t have a chance to get an alabaster image of Richard Feynman, since his autobiographies make plain that he has his foibles.
The only personal hero that I’ve got about whom I know very little of his failings would be Harold Edgerton; but I don’t have any illusions about him, either.
I look up to these people for various reasons, but that doesn’t blind me to the fact that they eat and shit and screw, and do all the other messy stuff humans do. When you keep that in mind, you can have as many heroes as you like; you admire them for their admirable traits and their triumps in spite of their flaws.
IMHO of course.
“A hero ain’t nothing but a sammich.”
But there are little everyday heroes around us all the time.
Sometimes we are called upon to do the appropriate thing … the good thing … the right thing. That is not always the same as the most popular thing, or the most fun thing, or even the most accepted thing. But it is the right thing when you know it and you do it, even when there are consequences and repercussions.
Little things and big things. Some seen to all, others known only to you and god.
Living through those times and doing what must be done, that’s really being a hero. But I suspect most of you know exactly what I’m talking about.
Jenny
“Hero” is a title bestowed on someone for an act of heroism.
The idea that anyone is constitutionally heroic is silly, and is one of the droller facets of Ms. Rosenbaum’s “Perfect Philosophy”.
hero, idol, god, inamorata, icon, whatever. Hero was laying on my desk, so I used it.
I used “hero” deliberately, since Strident Ayn used the term to describe the natural state of man: “My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.”
You have to wonder how somebody who regularly excommunicated friends for the looniest of reasons could say man is a “heroic being”.
Then again, she seemed to think that her husband was strong, self-contained, and aloof rather than passive, meek, and henpecked.
Thank-you Tam for illuminating more of the Rand-recesses.
Most mythologies consider Heroism as a goal or point-of-passage, like a verb – a vehicle or means of becoming – not a natural state already in existence.
Personally I have a lot easier time with accepting the imperfection of people and prefer it to the (ridiculous to me) notion of Human Perfectibility. That’s been the cause of more trouble than any thing else.
Clay feet don’t make a hero less heroic, it makes them human. What makes them a hero doesn’t change, it just has the addition of human frailty to temper it.
That’s my point. People paint their heroes- like Rand, or Marx, or whomever- as perfect and inviolate, and God forbid you point out a flaw, they go apeshit on you. Nine people, I pissed off this weekend, by suggesting that Rand wasn’t God herself.
I just wanted to tell you that having emailed Clarke, you’re now *my* hero lol