The Inferior Hero

[Blackrook]

It makes sense to make your hero a superior man, since that makes it easier to overcome all challenges, defeat the villain and his minions. So most stories feature heroes who are smarter, faster, stronger, more handsome/prettier, and harder to kill that the typical person in that world. Many heroes have superpowers, or magical powers, or powers endowed by an ancient religion, to help them accomplish their goals.

But my favorite stories feature the inferior hero. The hero who is actually inferior to the villains in almost every way, and may even be inferior to the typical person.

Gattaca is one of my favorite movies and features a hero is inferior to almost everyone else in his world because he was born naturally instead of artificially selected for superior genetic traits. His efforts to keep his job as an astronaut become heroic because of all the disadvantages he must overcome: bad eyesight, bad heart, less stamina, lower life expectancy, etc.

Bladerunner features a hero who is not inferior to the norm, but is certainly inferior to the androids he must hunt down and "retire". They are smarter than him, faster, stonger, and have better good looks than the hero. Also, there are four of them, so he is outnumbered.

Lord of the Rings features a hobbit as a hero, who is smaller than humans, clumsier than elves, and weaker than dwarves. Frodo is just an ordinary hobbit, with no combat skills. His only advantage is he's good at hiding.

When Frodo can no longer bear the ring, an even more inferior hobbit named Sam takes over and becomes the hero. Sam is even more inferior than Frodo because he is simple-minded and naive.

The classic story about the inferior hero is Rudy. The hero is small in stature, not very bright, has dyslexia, has no talent at football, but despite his inferiority he gets himself enrolled in Notre Dame, joins the Notre Dame football team, and gets to play football in a real game.

What the inferior hero has is "pluck", defined as "Resourceful courage and daring in the face of difficulties; spirit."

"Pluck" is what helps the inferior hero overcome all his disadvantages and win the day anyway. We admire the inferior hero more because he had to put in more effort to get the same result. His victory is our victory, because we've all been in situations where we felt we were out of our league.

An inferior hero does not need to save the world to get our admiration. He is a hero if he can accomplish things that are merely extraordinary.

 

[Doctor Crankenstein]

Best

Example

Ever

 

[Deathfrommassive]

In the case of LotR, Frodo does not come out at the end an inferior hero. Along with Pluck, I would have to add growth makes a hero.

 

[Doctor Crankenstein]

Frodo reminds me of this guy, just with a blue sword and a ring instead of a giant mecha:

All of the children in Evangelion are inferior in more than one way, for Shinji almost every way. If it wasn't for the EVA's...

 

[Blackrook]

Frodo changes but the heroes of Gattaca, Blade Runner and Rudy do not change. They acheive their goals but not through self-improvement, but through a determination to succeed no matter the odds.

 

[Blackrook]

If you're going to bring up anime, I have to mention the heroine of Sailor Moon, who is in a group of five girls. Of all the girls in the group, she is the stupidest, most cowardly, most selfish, most immature, and least interested in actually saving the world.

 

[starrypawz]

Good points, in a way I can think of an 'inferior' hero.
Naruto, at the start of the series at least he is the worst shinobi of the bunch, he's considered stupid and apparently can't do any of the justus and the like. But he's bascialy made up of pure nerve and deterimation as he 'wants to be the hokage', he becomes more powerful a the series goes on and people do realise he's not a complete faliure.

Lee is a similar character as he's only skilled in one jutsu class and he was a complete and utter faliure when he was younger and then became very skilled as time went on, if only in one type.

 

[Toby Frost]

Well, I've not got much to say except that I agree with the original post. For some reason, presumably cultural, we seem hard-wired to instinctively root for a small, flawed, normal guy against larger, more supposedly-perfect enemies. Perhaps it comes from living in democracies: a fascist country would presumably want its citizens to think the opposite.

The vast majority of stories of heroism we hear in history and the news tend to involve some chap who was going about his business until disaster struck and he overcame it. I suppose there have been explorers who have gone out to face danger, but I'm not sure a "born hero" type exists in real life at all.

From a writing perspective I think this is why the characters in a lot of SFF stories (and films and games) about soldiers don't ring true for me. The writers spend too much time trying to make them sound hard that they forget the characterisation. A guy who spends 95% of the time growling slogans and 5% staring at his girlfriend's photo simply isn't convincing.

If I'm going to be picky, Deckard is a tricky example as, being in a noir-type setting, he really has to end the story almost as battered and disillusioned as he started out. But your point definately still stands.

 

[MistingWolf]

I think an interesting example of one such "inferior" character is Todd from the movie "Soldier". He is a man bred and raised from an infant to be a perfect soldier. He does his job well, until he is defeated by a more "gene selected" class. He gets dumped onto a waste planet where he meets some regular people. He struggles among their culture, as he doesn't quite get the concept of emotion due to his upbringing. It's a really good movie.

I usually find "born heroes" like Superman to be a bit boring, since they're, well, too super. For me he's uninteresting because he has no physical weaknesses (aside from kryptonite, but who has that on hand?). Just too many of the cool features. A lot of other Marvel comic characters are all right, though.

 

[starrypawz]

I think an interesting example of one such "inferior" character is Todd from the movie "Soldier". He is a man bred and raised from an infant to be a perfect soldier. He does his job well, until he is defeated by a more "gene selected" class. He gets dumped onto a waste planet where he meets some regular people. He struggles among their culture, as he doesn't quite get the concept of emotion due to his upbringing. It's a really good movie.

I usually find "born heroes" like Superman to be a bit boring, since they're, well, too super. For me he's uninteresting because he has no physical weaknesses (aside from kryptonite, but who has that on hand?). Just too many of the cool features. A lot of other Marvel comic characters are all right, though.

Same, I find Superman to be rather boring too many powers, only one flaw. Actually, I find Jean/Phoenix a bit boring as she seems 'ultra perfect' a lot of the time but also is apparently super uber, destroy the universe powerful. Heroes with the 'one true weakness' can be really annoying as well.

 

[Mouse]

Um, why does it have to be a man? My story has a small weedy looking girl who ends up as the kick ass hero.

I can't actually think of any examples, other than those already mentioned. Frodo is a good one.

I think that the 'hero' in Garth Nix's books had asthma and was a bit of a wimp. But I don't know for definite as I only read the first one 'Mister Monday.'

I don't mind big and strong, so long as they're not completely perfect. Like Shadow in American Gods. He's a bit dim.

 

[paranoid marvin]

I'd say from experience that it is rare for the hero of the story to have the upper hand from the outset.

 

[Langadune]

I'd say from experience that it is rare for the hero of the story to have the upper hand from the outset.

It's actually better if the hero doesn't have the upper hand in the beginning... or if he at least doesn't know he does.

To keep a reader invested, they have to believe the hero could actually lose. To build a stronger conflict and intensify the suspense, make things so bad that the hero probably will lose. Then find a way to overcome those overwhelming odds.

 

[Rand]

It makes sense to make your hero a superior man, since that makes it easier to overcome all challenges, defeat the villain and his minions. So most stories feature heroes who are smarter, faster, stronger, more handsome/prettier, and harder to kill that the typical person in that world. Many heroes have superpowers, or magical powers, or powers endowed by an ancient religion, to help them accomplish their goals.

But my favorite stories feature the inferior hero. The hero who is actually inferior to the villains in almost every way, and may even be inferior to the typical person.

Gattaca is one of my favorite movies and features a hero is inferior to almost everyone else in his world because he was born naturally instead of artificially selected for superior genetic traits. His efforts to keep his job as an astronaut become heroic because of all the disadvantages he must overcome: bad eyesight, bad heart, less stamina, lower life expectancy, etc.

Bladerunner features a hero who is not inferior to the norm, but is certainly inferior to the androids he must hunt down and "retire". They are smarter than him, faster, stonger, and have better good looks than the hero. Also, there are four of them, so he is outnumbered.

Lord of the Rings features a hobbit as a hero, who is smaller than humans, clumsier than elves, and weaker than dwarves. Frodo is just an ordinary hobbit, with no combat skills. His only advantage is he's good at hiding.

When Frodo can no longer bear the ring, an even more inferior hobbit named Sam takes over and becomes the hero. Sam is even more inferior than Frodo because he is simple-minded and naive.

The classic story about the inferior hero is Rudy. The hero is small in stature, not very bright, has dyslexia, has no talent at football, but despite his inferiority he gets himself enrolled in Notre Dame, joins the Notre Dame football team, and gets to play football in a real game.

What the inferior hero has is "pluck", defined as "Resourceful courage and daring in the face of difficulties; spirit."

"Pluck" is what helps the inferior hero overcome all his disadvantages and win the day anyway. We admire the inferior hero more because he had to put in more effort to get the same result. His victory is our victory, because we've all been in situations where we felt we were out of our league.

An inferior hero does not need to save the world to get our admiration. He is a hero if he can accomplish things that are merely extraordinary.

A truly inferior hero is problematic, rarely seen, and generally only fits into a specific story type where the stakes are very low and purely personal.

The characters you discuss are situationally inferior characters, which are common and can be seen in most stories where they save the day through luck, the help of others, or the help of some deus ex machina style conflict resolution. From the movies you noted:

Blade Runner: Rick Deckard, the hero, requires the help and mercy of his opponents at key points in the story. Lacking that, he's dead or he fails. The luck is found in the unexpected development of other characters; a rival investigator who turns a blind eye, a brutal superman who, at the last moment, develops an aversion to killing, suddenly valuing all life.

Gattaca: Vincent Freeman requires the help of a damaged valid to even get started. He then requires mercy from people who could have ended his dream with a word. He's lucky in that the people who find him out don't want to stop him, and the one who would stop him, and is very close to getting the information needed to do so, is prevented from getting that evidence by the actions of others.

Rudy: He was determined, but without finding just the right type of friend who can figure out that he's dyslexic, he doesn't get into Notre Dame. He also requires the help of most of the team to even be allowed to put on a uniform for one game. He got lucky in finding that initial friend, then he got help from many to achieve his dream of being "on" the team. Also, he didn't really achieve his dream of playing that sport for Notre Dame, he modified his dream to be something more achievable for him: Wearing the uniform in one game.

Again, these are not examples of truly inferior people, but people who were situationally inferior. Deckard is only inferior in contrast to the genetically enhanced creations he's pitted against, in any other regard he's superior at his job. Freeman is inferior compared to the "valids", but is otherwise quite above average when compared to other non genetically enhanced people (us). Rudy is small for college (American) football on a nationally ranked team, but he's not physically impaired, he was a star on his high school team, and even with his dyslexia left undiagnosed he would have no problem fitting into the town where he was born. Also, if he'd chosen a team that wasn't in the national spotlight, he probably would have played. Even Frodo was very capable in his wit and stealth, abilities which helped keep him out of trouble, and was quite above average for a Hobbit.

Most stories I've read or watched feature situationally inferior heroes.

For an example of a truly inferior hero, I'll go to the main stream.

The Karate Kid. Daniel is a small, weak, under skilled, and not terribly bright, would-be tough guy. He's going to be the underdog in any physical conflict, and probably most intellectual ones. But, like most truly inferior heroes, he does have the patented Heart Of Gold which gets him liked by people who would otherwise ignore him, and also gets him into trouble. His conflict is the local gang of genuine tough guys who target him after he valiantly does something noble and stupid, and keep targeting him because he refuses to stop doing stupid things which retain his tormentors' attention.

While trying to learn the skill he needs to survive, he proceeds to spend the rest of the movie getting his buttocks handed to him by the tough guys. In the end, he gains just enough skill and luck to allow him to win a series of highly supervised staged fights which earn him the respect of his tormentors. This respect was also gained, in no small part, due to said tormentors losing faith in their own teacher who was responsible for teaching them to be brutal.

Daniel exits the movie almost as unskilled as he began it, no longer a target for these tormentors, but we Learn The Lesson of the movie; Might doesn't make right, and if you're kind and pure of heart you will eventually prevail no matter how bad things seem.

If this is the type of tale you want to tell, then the truly inferior hero is yours to tell it with.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

The characters you discuss are situationally inferior characters, which are common and can be seen in most stories where they save the day through luck, the help of others, or the help of some deus ex machina style conflict resolution.

This says Harry Potter all over, to me. I do love the Harry Potter books and movies, but he has always struck me as a totally useless sort. He gets through everything and saves the day because of luck, his friends, and the occasional black box.

 

[Blackrook]

This says Harry Potter all over, to me. I do love the Harry Potter books and movies, but he has always struck me as a totally useless sort. He gets through everything and saves the day because of luck, his friends, and the occasional black box.

I agree that Harry fits into the model of the inferior hero. He is, after all, a child taking on grown-up villains.

 

[Doctor Crankenstein]

Ahhh but who's the real hero in Karate Kid? Daniel or Miyagi?

I don't think Harry Potter works. He has a "superpower" (his mothers love).

 

[Rand]

I agree that Harry fits into the model of the inferior hero. He is, after all, a child taking on grown-up villains.

The character was a disappointment even for a YA series. Harry wasn't so much inferior as he was an underachiever. If it didn't involve solving a mystery he had no business being involved in, his motto seemed to be: if at first you don't succeed, find Ron and do something else.

I think he could fit the situationally inferior hero profile except, and this is a big exception, he really didn't try very hard. A lot of the other kids were much better at - almost everything. Hermione had the same disadvantage of not being raised in the magical world, but she became one of the best magic students in the school. Harry, whose very life was at stake, became a Quidditch player.

 

[Deathfrommassive]

Harry was LOADED both finacially and with allies that kept poping out of no where. Now Ron seems more like a inferior hero but as we saw he wasn't really a hero at all at least not without Harry's help.

 

[MeriPie]

I think the important thing is empathy. If someone's got no weaknesses, you can't have empathy for them. I started reading the Chronicles of Amber by Roger Zelazny and had to stop because the main character is so capable, so up himself, so smug. It's all, 'Then I realised I had to do this, so I smiled to my handsome face in the mirror and did it, and it worked. So then I had another look at my manly jaw, and I did this other thing that needed doing with my powerful muscular hands.' I didn't give a damn about whether he succeeded or failed because all I really wanted was for someone large to punch him in the face. I don't think a character has to be inferior, exactly, but I can't stand a character who's entirely superior.

One of my favourites ever ever is Fitz from Robin Hobb's books. He's a big strong guy, a skilled assassin, he has the ability to talk to animals and psychic powers (sort of), a few characters tell us he's handsome, but he's so completely stupid and emotionally and physically damaged that you could never hold all of his skills against him. Half the time he's too much of an idiot to use the right one at the right time and is too busy moralising and whining about how he just wants to live in a shack on his own. I agree that it's interesting to write an underdog hero, but I think it's more of a challenge to create a character who IS skilled and powerful but is still human and fallible and lovable. The only reason Harry Potter as a character doesn't fail entirely is because he is (sometimes) human and fallible.