This Ain’t No Jolly Ole Saint Nick

In the book Room by Emma Donoghue, I find the character of Old Nick to be the most confusing so far.  So this guy has had Ma locked up in this 11 x 11 room since she was in college.  The only time we read scenes with Old Nick, is when he comes back to Room to have sex with Ma, throw out the trash, and pick up the list of necessities.  Two years into Ma’s captivity, she gives birth to a son named Jack, who, although he gives Ma some company and a reason to take better care of herself, he also has to live in this 11 x 11 room with Ma, not yet having experienced what the outside is like.  

So the question is: What is Old Nick getting out of this?  In the beginning of Ma’s captivity, I suppose it was the feeling of control and dominance, but that theory only comes from watching numerous crime tv shows.  Even if Old Nick’s satisfaction from this situation is over, and to him, it’s just becoming tedious to have to provide for both Ma and Jack, he can’t really quit now, he’s too far into his own “game”.  If he were to release Ma and Jack, they would just report him to the police.  He’s been caught in his own trap, in his own room.  

This leads to the question: Does Old Nick actually cares about Ma and Jack?  He does bring them things, not just the necessities (like food, electricity, etc), like games, books, and different toys.  It could be argued that these things are just used to keep Ma and Jack preoccupied and distract them from the fact they are trapped in their limited 11 x 11 room, but it still brings light to the dismal situation of Room.  It could also be argued that he brings toys and games for Jack as a way of messing with Ma.  In the beginning of the book, Jack has a good impression of Old Nick, for he only hears about him when he brings them their Sunday Treat, because of this, Jack is reluctant to believe Ma when she reveals that Old Nick is an evil man.  Even though Jack has never interacted with Old Nick, he still thought of him as a good man, which gets on Ma’s nerves since she can’t prove otherwise.  

Because of these different views we get of Old Nick, I don’t know what to think about him.  I know what he has done is wrong, but I am intrigued to see what he will do as Jack’s world becomes enlightened as he becomes older and Ma will begin to have a stronger helper.  

Keep Calm and Bike On

Contrary to the general consensus about the ending of Smithy’s quest and The Memory of Running, I find myself actually liking the ending.  It’s what you would expect, and usually want, from a typical ending: Most of the ends are tied up and the hero of the story, Smithy, has grown and developed drastically.  

Smithy has seen Bethany’s body.  This moment in the book is one of the most powerful scenes to read.  Although he is skeptical, he has closure and confirmation of where she is and that she’s moved on to another life.  Hook has found Bethany for the last time.  Originally, I assumed that Smithy would have his closure by seeing Bethany and then fly home and have his moment with Norma.  I didn’t expect so see Norma there at the funeral home, (but now I see how that could have been very predictable).  I admit that it’s a little weird for Smithy and Norma to have their romantic scene right after they get out of the funeral home that houses Smithy’s dead sister, but I still think it was a touching moment.  It reminds me of a typical movie ending, when Smithy turns Norma around in her wheelchair and kisses her.  Although Smithy “getting the girl” isn’t truly a “Smithy ending”, it’s still a touching moment and ties the book together.

A lot of people in class were saying that they believed that McLarty rushed the ending, and that he could of either dragged something out longer or played with it more.  But, if you think about it, no one can make the perfect ending.  If the ending had been different, I may of have mixed feelings, while other people would have been satisfied.  You can’t please everyone.  But people fail to see how well McLarty has made things come full circle.  Even though we are left at a cliffhanger, wondering what Smithy will do now, that’s the beauty of this ending.  We are left theorize what he will do.  Will he go back? Will he stay in California? How will he get back? By leaving these questions open ended, McLarty sets up an opportunity for us, as readers, to answer them and think of a new quest and new life for Smithy and Norma.  

Now, as I said above, no ending is perfect.  I’m not just going to write about how pretty perfect this ending was, because it wasn’t.  Believe it or not, I too had qualms.  First, I can’t really see how Smithy is a hero.  Yes he’s made a journey and has grown into a new person.  But, I am someone who favors the typical plot line of an underdog going off on a journey, coming across a twist in their original plan, but then things work out in the end.  In The Memory of Running, obviously the underdog is Smithy, and obviously things have worked out in the end, but where’s the twist?  You could argue him getting his bike stolen was, but that doesn’t seem to affect his journey much.  In a way, Smithy’s journey seems just smooth sailing the whole time.  Although he does face obstacles on the way, none of them seem to seriously affect his journey.  It just seems to me that a bike ride across the United States of America would be harder than Smithy narrates.  

All in all, although the storyline bothered me a little, I still like the ending.  It’s a nice short sweet ending that does a good job tying up most of the loose ends in Smithy’s life.  It both concludes The Memory of Running nicely, as well as sets the scene for a possible sequel in the future. (*cough* *cough* McLarty).  

Judging a Book by its Cover

One point that Isaac brought up in class that really sparked my attention is the way we see and sympathize for Smithy in comparison to the way the people Smithy meets on his long journey perceive him.  When we look at Smithy from the start of his journey to where he is now, we see a vast improvement.  He’s eating healthier (and less), he becoming more physically fit, he’s losing weight, he is becoming more confident when talking with Norma, etc.  Smithy has drastically changed; he is not his old, fat, drunk self anymore, nor is he his young, scrawny, socially awkward self either.  He has created a new path, and with it, a new Smithy.

Although we see how Smithy has evolved throughout his journey, and feel proud of him, the same feeling is not apparent with the people he meets on his journey.  Many of the people Smithy meets look down upon him, judging only upon his looks and way he presents himself.  This proves to be a classic example of someone who judges a book by its cover. (Of which I am usually guilty of).  An example of this is with the doctor who takes care of Carl, Dr. Donna Trivitch.  Dr. Trivitch takes one look at Smithy, and immediately comes to the conclusion that he is going to abuse Carl for his condition, when in reality, Smithy is one of the nicest people you’ll ever meet and wouldn’t dream of doing those kind of things.  Never the less, Dr. Trivitch’s skepticism gets the best of her, and she sends for her cop friend to beat him up, unaware that Smithy hasn’t been anything but nice to the man who ran him over with his truck.  

I suppose the reason we sympathize for Smithy and respect the progress he has made is, as Isaac stated, because we have seen his rock bottom.  We’ve seen him at his worst, and are beginning to see him at his best.  Because of this, we see the vast amount of progress and growing Smithy has done throughout his journey.  He has left his home, which was full of unwanted memories of his fat, drunk self, and has set out to find Bethany and explore the big USA on the way.  But people only seem to dwell on the fact that Smithy has left his home, and is now roaming homeless, and don’t ask why.  

Therefore, I am curious to see if Smithy will make a true friend, other than Norma, that he can talk to and bring on the rest of his journey, although he is almost there (with respect to the entire journey).  I think one of the only things that is missing on Smithy’s journey is a companion.  One he can talk to without the restriction of phone lines.  

Poor Norma

Everytime Smithy and Norma talk, I just end up feeling really bad for Norma.  Obviously, Norma is the closest friend Smithy has at the moment, and so he decides to share his whole journey with her.  At first, their conversations are so awkward and are almost unbearable to read, but later on in the book, they become more familiar with each other.  But even though they are getting used to talking to each other, their phone calls never fail to make me feel a tad bit uncomfortable.  

First, I don’t know how they can be fine with the awkward pauses.  After almost every pause, one of them asks if the other is still on the line.  Maybe they don’t have that much to talk about, but I would expect they wouldn’t waste their infrequent conversations with frequent silent pauses.

Another reason is just Norma.  Oh, poor Norma.  When she and Smithy are ending their phone calls, she almost always says something like: “I love you, Smithy.”  But Smithy never replies back “I love you too”!  The only time he mentions the word “love” to her, is when he reads his letter.  He initially doesn’t want to say it, instead he says “Good Bye, Smithy”, but then tells her.  It’s just disappointing and I end up feeling really bad for Norma.  I know Smithy has feelings for her, but it’s so unfortunate for both the reader and Norma that he hasn’t figured out how to convey them to her.

All in all, I’m glad Norma’s and Smithy’s relationship is growing, and that they are becoming more comfortable.  I really hope Smithy will soon be able to say the word “love” to her, because, from the narration of the dream and purchasing of the book, we know Smithy does have feelings for Norma.  He just needs to learn how to come out of his shell and express them, which is what I hope will be one of the outcomes of his long, adventurous journey.  

Initial Thoughts on The Memory of Running

I have decided to write this blog post, where I will discuss my initial feelings on the characters we have read about so far in The Memory of Running, for I feel it will be interesting to see how my opinions change throughout the book.  

First up is the main character, and supposed hero, Smithy Ide.  Initially we read that he is a drunk fat-ass with no real friends. “I told [Mom] I would be sure to have a nice sandwich and maybe some soup.  What I really was planning was two six-packs of beer and a bag of those crispy Bavarian pretzels.  maybe some different kinds of cheeses. And because I had been limiting my smoking to maybe a pack a day, I planned to fire up a chain-smoke, at least enough to keep the mosquitoes down, and think” (McLarty 2-3).  As I continue reading, all I can think about is how sad Smithy’s life is.  He’s let himself go, lost both parents, has no real friends, is unaware where Bethany, his sister, is, and he blames himself for everything.  I just feel really bad for him.

The next characters are Smithy’s mom and pop.  We, as readers, don’t get much description of Smithy’s mom.  We just read that she is small but powerful.  We also learn that she isn’t as part of a tight circle of friends as pop is.  In contrast, pop is a very popular character.  Not only is he the main man in his circle of friends, but he also very admired in the eyes of Smithy. Their father-son relationship is very powerful and it helps Smithy appear more genuine.  Although the father-son relationship is very strong, it definitely contrasts with the father-daughter relationship of pop and Bethany.  Pop seems unaware of how to deal with Bethany’s mental health problems (which is understandable).  The way he approaches her situation, is he acts like a detective and tries to make out the ununderstandable, which is very noble, but is, at times, unsuccessful.  

This segways into Bethany, Smithy’s sister.  Bethany’s character is honestly a mystery to me.  I can’t really understand her, but that’s probably how it’s meant to be.  But, she and Smithy also have a strong relationship, stronger than most sister-brother relationships.  But she is a very unpredictable character.  At times, she is fine, playing with Smithy and Norma, but sometimes she just goes crazy.  She can’t be blamed since it’s not her fault.  But it does make her one of the most interesting characters to read about in Smithy’s narration.  

Finally, there’s Norma.  I didn’t really see the significance of her, until Smithy meets her at the funeral service.  I can now get a glimpse of how her character will become more and more important as the story goes on.  In my opinion, Norma is the connection from Smithy’s past and present.  In fact, she is the only human connection, since his parents and sister are all gone.  Although Smithy’s and Norma’s interactions are awkward at first, I assume they will become more accustomed to eachother and their relationship will become more important as we read on.

With these character descriptions in mind, I can already see a “hero’s journey” forming.  For what purpose, I am not sure.  But I am definitely enjoying the process of figuring it out.  

Who is Anse Bundren?

Initially, I thought I knew the answer to this question when we first began “As I Lay Dying”, but now I’m not so sure.  Throughout the book, Anse Bundren has definitely evolved as a character, and has effectively confused me in the process.  

When we first discussed the character of Anse Bundren in class, we came to a consensus that he was just an “Anse”: a predictable man who stayed at home and always seemed to attract unfortunate outcomes, as was the general consensus of the neighbors of the Bundrens.  But, as the book comes to an end, and the Bundrens have completed their journey, Anse begins to not act like a typical “Anse.”  First, he takes this journey, which is well out of his comfort zone.  In the beginning of the book, before Addie has even died, Anse states: “When He aims for something to be always a-moving, He makes it long ways, like a road or a horse or a wagon, but when He aims for something to stay put, he makes it up-and-down ways, like a tree or a man.  And so He never aimed for folks to live on a road” (Faulkner 36).  In this, Anse says that people are supposed to stay put.  That there’s no need for traveling to places because we are built upright, like a tree, and we need to be rooted down and work, not move around. This idea totally contradicts the whole journey of taking Addie to Jefferson.  Not only has Anse decided to get up and move, but he has chosen a very difficult journey to do so.  Since no Anse situation is a fortunate situation, the Bundrens face multiple obstacles they must overcome.  There is no smooth sailing when it comes to Anse Bundren.  

Another surprising act by Anse appears at the end of the book.  Surprisingly, this last chapter is narrated by Cash Bundren, not Anse, but I’m not even gonna try and explain why that is.  What I’ve chosen to focus on, is the fact that Anse disappears into this house to return the shovels the Bundren's used to bury Addie, their dead mother, and then he comes back out the house with a woman by his side, along with a new set of false teeth and a gramophone.  He proceeds introduce his children to this mystery woman, and then ends the book by saying “meet Mrs. Bundren” (Faulkner 261)....WHAT?? Anse has just completed this journey, for Addie, and now he has replaced her.  He literally just returned the shovels he used to bury his wife into the ground, and he felt that that was the best time to remarry.  I can’t even begin to explain why he would do this, but all I can say is that Anse Bundren has definitely changed. For better or for worse, I haven’t decided yet.  

Star or Problem Child?

Initially, when we first began As I Lay Dying, I thought to myself: “Wow, Jewel is one pessimistic person.” Honestly, he just didn’t seem like a friendly dude.  It’s wasn’t until I read further into the book, specifically at the scene where Jewel is “entering the water”, along with Tull and Vardaman, to help collect Cash’s tools.  Tull and Vardaman won’t enter too far into the water, for fear of floating away, but Jewel is seen diving deep under the waves while Tull and Vardaman just “stand there, leaning back against the current, watching the water where he disappeared” (160 Faulkner).  

Reading this creates very conflicting ideas in my head.  At first, we see how Jewel doesn’t listen or really care about his family members.  He likes to be independent, and is very introverted.  But in the scene in the river, Jewel is risking his life to retrieve Cash’s tools that have fallen into the currents.  We know that Cash is very skilled in carpentry, and therefore, his tools are very valuable to him. By knowing this, we are able to see a side of compassions from Jewel.  He dives into the water, while Cash is vomiting on the shore, in order to retrieve his brother’s most valued possessions.  

After reading this scene, I decided to evaluate the relationship between Cash and Jewel.  Cash is a hardworking carpenter, who enjoys his work.  He works when told, and even when his skills aren’t required.  He even meticulously works on his own mother’s coffin.  But, even though he works hard to please both his family (especially his mother) and himself, Jewel is still seen as Addie’s favorite.  

In contrast, Jewel is not so motivated.  Well, I should say, not motivated to do things that won’t benefit him.  He obviously sees that the work he is assigned doesn’t change anything, for his family is still poor, so he takes it upon himself to find a new job: “He cleaned up that forty acres of new ground Quick laid out last spring.  he did it single handed, working at night by lantern” (135 Faulkner).  He uses the money he earned to buy himself a horse.  The horse symbolize Jewel’s independance, for he bought it without the consent of his father or mother.  In fact, the strong purchased horse helps when Jewel, Darl, and Cash are drying to cross the huge river while pulling the wagon with Addie’s coffin in it (along with Addie in it too).
 

This difference between Cash and Jewel leads me to doubt that they are even brothers.  Their personalities are almost complete opposites.  Although these characteristics of Jewel may portray him to seem arrogant, they also show how he has learned to live a successful life: to find the right kind of work, work hard, and you will be rewarded.  

With this realization, although I initially had negative feelings towards Jewels character, I now understand him more and can rationalize with him.  He has become a more appealing character.  It’ll be interesting to see how his character develops (and if we ever will get a part of the story narrated by him) and if my liking in him will still hold true.  

PS: I wrote this blog post before we read about Addie’s affair, so the last paragraph, especially, is just a theory and personal opinion.

Oh Brother Where’s Ithaca?

Although there are many connections that can be made between Homer’s The Odyssey and Joel and Ethan Coen’s Oh Brother Where Art Thou, one of them that really stood out to me was similarities between Odysseus and Ulysses Everett McGill.  Both characters have similar motives for their own Odysseys (in trying to get back to their wives), extreme hubris, and are skilled in trickery.

The common theme/ drive for both Odysseus and Ulysses is the task of getting back to their wives.  Odysseus, as we know, has been trapped at Calypso’s island, and has been away from his home for twenty years.  Throughout the epic poem, he longs to get home to see his wife, Penelope, son, Telemachus, and his city or Ithaca.  Throughout his journey, there are many obstacles and distractions that derail him from his trail, but this drive of getting home is what keeps him (somewhat) focused during his journey.  Ulysses, having been imprisoned for practicing law without a licence, also longs to return home.  But, in the case of Odysseus, who has no idea what has been going on at home, Ulysses has received a letter from his wife, Penny McGill, explaining that she has decided to remarry a man named Vernon T. Waldrip, who is apparently “bona fide”.  After being informed of this, Ulysses decides to plan a breakout with his inmates Delmar and Pete.  These motives both drive the characters, Odysseus and Ulysses, and the plot forward to create an interesting adventure, both for them and the reader.  

The second similarity involves both Odysseus’ and Ulysses’ excessive pride.  Their prideful personalities both help and hurt their own respected journeys.  If Odysseus hadn’t mocked Polyphemus so much, he might not of have so much beef with Poseidon, and might of gotten back sooner, maybe even with some of his original crew.  On the flip-side, if Ulysses didn’t care so much about his hair, and the certain kind of hair gel he must use,  he and his pals wouldn’t of had to go out of their way to keep restocking in hair products.  So, although they share similar motives, Odysseus’ pride and Ulysses vanity drag out their own journeys at their own expenses.  

Lastly, both Odysseus and Ulysses have very fine tuned skills in deception.  It helps make up for their hubris.  Odysseus uses his skills in tickery to convince people he is either more than made out to be, or is a foreigner.  He doesn’t fully reveal himself until the end, when he shows himself to Telemachus and then Penelope.  In this case, Ulysses is sort of the same.  He is able to dig himself out of most situations, or make the most of it.  Such as with Mr. Lund, the blind radio station man, he tricks the man with lies about the band “The Soggy-Bottom Boys’” numbers and races.  What comes from his lies is more money for their journey, which is unfortunately stolen. Each of their skills in trickery help both characters get through the many obstacles they experience in their respective journeys, but also extentuate their pride.

These similarities make it very easy to connect The Odyssey to Oh Brother Where Art Thou. Each of the qualities play off each other, changing the pace of their own Odysseys.  It’s unfortunate that Odysseus’ pride and Ulysses’ vanity cause major obstacles in their paths, but their motives and skills in deception almost make up for it.  All in all, although these qualities seem to drag on both Odysseus’ and Ulysses’ journeys, they make for a more interesting story, to say the least.

Are You Satisfied Yet?

After reading Book 22 of the Odyssey, a question that has been asked in class is: Was it satisfying?  Honestly, I have found that I can’t really answer this question.  I mean, the slaughtering of the suitors was what the whole book was building up too.  It’s what we, as readers, have been waiting for, all signs pointed to it, and so it seems “right”.  But is it really? Is that really all there is to it?

The whole scene is very ruthless.  Odysseus has painted his walls with the blood of the suitors, “so the suitors lay in heaps ,corpse covering corpse...Odysseus in the thick of slaughtered corpses, splattered with bloody filth like a lion that’s devoured some ox of the field and lopes home, covered in blood, his chest streaked, both jaws glistening, dripping red--a sight to strike terror” (22.414, 426-430).  Not only does he slaughter the suitors, men in the household during his leave of absence, but he also gave the unfaithful maids, women of the household, a daunting sentence. Their punishment denigrated their lives: “they carried out the bodies of the dead and propped them under the courtyard colonnade, standing them one against another...Next they scrubbed down the elegant chairs and tables, washed them with sopping sponges, rinsed them clean” (22.473-5, 478-9).  If that wasn’t enough discipline, the unfaithful maids, “sluts--the suitors’ whores” (22. 490), are sentenced to death.  I won’t quote this part of the book, for it is very gruesome, but in short, they are hung by Telemachus.  

In a macabre way, I get why we, as readers, are supposed to see this scene as justified.  I mean, these suitors have been lounging around Odysseus’ palace during his absence, using up his resources.  I assume, in the minds of Odysseus, Telemachus, Athena, and others, that it seemed justified to slaughter all the unfaithful.  But, from a 21st century American perspective, I don’t believe it was really justified.  Must Odysseus slaughter to solve his problems?  In my opinions, that action seems more villainous and hedonistic than heroic.  There were other ways to deal with this situation.  These alternatives did not involve intense violence; they include banishing the suitors from Ithaca, making them repay him, etc.  

Returning to Odysseus, how should we interpret his decision to revert to extreme violence.  This act reveals his insecurity more than heroism.  It’s a bit childish, when you think about it.  (Of course, not the actual slaughter, but the concept behind it).  Children, because they have yet to mature, believe the only way to a problem is the throw a tantrum and freak out.  When then mature as adults, they learn that either you can either talk to the problem-maker(s), or you can walk away.  Odysseus did neither of these mature responses, he lost control and killed everyone.  By doing this, it implied that Odysseus is a little immature in his actions as king.  He killed the suitors, before even talking/ reasoning with them.  That tells me that he is worried about his kingly stature, and feels self-conscious enough to kill the problem-makers, the suitors and unfaithful maids, instead of reasoning through it.  

So, back to the question: is this scene satisfying?  Partially.  I mean, I don’t think I would be satisfied if it ended in non-violence either.  I guess that means I’m a hard reader to please or my mind is not totally convinced that he could have ever reasoned with them.  Although I may not agree with the morals of Odysseus’ actions, I do think it made for an exciting ending.  

Homer, y u so sad?

Throughout reading the Odyssey, I have noticed that there is a considerable amount of tears being shed, especially involving Odysseus and his son, Telemachus.  This quality probably stands out to me because I am not used to male characters in heroic stories being so teary eyed, or even emotional for that matter.  The act of crying isn’t usually considered a “manly” act, and therefore is seen as degrading to a man's manhood.  

But when you consider what both Odysseus and Telemachus have been through, is makes sense why they would be so emotional.  They haven’t seen each other in years.  Telemachus has had to wake up every morning with rude suitors using up all his home’s resources.  He must deal with the fact that possibly, on of these suitors may be his new father-in-law, and the new king of Ithaca.  Odysseus becomes more disappointed as he tries to travel home, but he keeps getting pushed back.  He has battled numerous monsters and gods, and still has not made it home.  The scenes of Odysseus crying, tend to occur when stories are retold of the battle of Troy.  The battle of which, even though they were militarily successful, emotionally, they were not.  Almost no one from that battle made it home.  The crew Odysseus set out with have perished, leaving Odysseus alone.  

By knowing all of this, I consider the amount of tears being shed to be acceptable.  Both of the men, Odysseus and Telemachus, have been through a lot, so let it’s reasonable to cut them some slack.  Real men cry.  Real heroes get emotional.  They are no different.

Batman...Who da Punk?

When I hear the name “Batman”, I initially think of the costume/ uniform he wears.  The slick black ears, long black cape, and tight-fitting black and grey onesie, with a black and yellow Bat insignia placed on the chest.  The next thing I think of is the incredible strength Batman has, being able to defeat multiple villains a day and never seeming to tire.  Lastly, I imagine Bruce Wayne, the multi millionaire man behind the mask.  Knowing that there is a normal human being behind that mask, although I never realized it until now, gives me great comfort.

You never realize this until you put yourself in the shoes of the people of Gotham.  The innocent civilians. The ones who receive their information by the media or word-of-mouth.  To them, there is this unknown vigilante who is beating up people in the streets, some of those people turn out to conveniently be criminals.  Their perspective is limited, because they hear what the media wants them to hear.  A story can be told in many ways, so only hearing one side of the tale doesn’t really give you the right to pass judgement.

Granted, if I heard about an unpredictable vigilante taking the law into his/ her own hands, I would be very afraid.  When growing up, we are always told to “leave it up to the professionals”.  I don’t know how I would feel if I couldn’t put an actual face the the person handling the law and order of the city.  It really twists your brain when you watch the Batman movies, and root for Bruce/ Batman, because you understand his motivation. His tragic childhood and encounterance with untrustworthy people led him to hate the minds of criminals and for him to want justice.  In Bruce Wayne’s case, he created the Batman figure so he could live a double life.  One that, he thought, wouldn’t affect his day life.  But in real life, I think law enforcement would be more interested in unmasking the Batman than catching the real criminals of the city.  

In the movies, its the mystery of the Batman that keeps the petty criminals off the streets of Gotham, but it also brings forward the most devious and powerful villains of all.  In real life, I feel like the real mystery would be why a full grown crazy man is leaping around Gotham, causing trouble, in tights wearing cat ears. It automatically comes down to perspective, which can be altered by who or what surrounds you.

I Need a Hero...But Who do I Call?

We hear many people use the word “hero” to describe someone who has acted extremely brave or has the ability to inspire you on a day-to-day basis.  The word “hero” is a term that has become colloquial in society today.  In movies, we consider the hero of the story to be the courageous warrior who fights off the evil forces terrorizing his city, country, or even the world. (This is a very general presumption, of course).  

But, nowadays, athletes, fictional characters, and even animals are considered the heroes of our generation.  But is “hero” really the correct term?  Even though an athlete can be inspiring to many, I wouldn’t consider any of them a hero.  For example, as a swimmer, I look up to Michael Phelps with great reverence for his passion for the sport.  But I wouldn’t consider him a hero of mine.  I am drawn more to the Greek view of heroes/ heroines; the all powerful, courageous person fighting against evil for the good of society.  So, naturally, as a swimmer, Michael Phelps doesn’t really fit that description.  In my opinion, although he has won many titles in his career, hero is not one of them.  

The reason the ancient Greek interpretation of heroes/ heroines appeals to me is because of the multitude of people considered “heroes” in society.  People today are either drawn to a sources of power, or yearn for a leader of the source.  As people are either sheep or shepherds.  The sheep do over power the shepherds in numbers, but refuse to rebel unless they are moved by choices made by the shephards.  Since sheep/ followers are so eager to find someone to lead or inspire them, they tend to appoint many figures in society to fill that need.  For example, if a man saves a dog that is stuck in a tree, he automatically becomes a hero.  I consider this act a very heroic deed, but I wouldn’t immediately give him the title “hero”, because that is one small act of kindness.  It’s not like he saved thousands of people in a burning city. It was just one dog.  

As my rant comes to an end,  I would like to reiterate the point that not everyone is a hero.  Anyone can inspire or be inspired, but not everyone is hero material.  To answer the question I asked in the title “I need a hero... but who do I call?”, depending on the amount of trouble you are in, I would say call 911.  But if you are in search of true hero/ heroine, you are looking for the person who, inspite of a glorious title, puts forth their lives to serve society and its needs.