On his website, John Byrne posted the following, which has gotten some notice throughout the internet:
“I have noticed that people have begun referring to
Christopher Reeve as a “hero”. I do not wish to take
away one iota of the courage he must have needed
not to wake up screaming every single day, but the
hard truth is there was nothing “heroic” in what
happened to him, or how he dealt with it. In fact, as
far as how he dealt with it, he didn’t even have a
choice. We could imagine he spent every hour of
every day (when not in front of the cameras) begging
family members to simply kill him and get it over with
— but none of them did, so he had no choice but to
deal with each day as it came.
Heroism, I believe, involves choice.”
John believes wrong.
“Heroism” is a word involving shadings. It has different meanings to different people under different circumstances, as do other words such as “love”…or “hate”…or…oh, I dunno…”prìçk.”
John F. Kennedy, when called a hero for saving his fellow crewmembers after the PT 109 was sunk, dismissed the term. “A hero? For what? Having my ship blown out from under me?” Yet hero he was called, and hero he was, for heroism–like art and beauty–are in the eye of the beholder, and it may not be easily defined, but we know it when we see it. To a Catholic, Mother Teresa is heroic because of her unceasing efforts to aid the needy. To Boston Red Sox fans, Curt Schilling is a hero for pitching through an injury that would have crippled someone else. To a child, his hero might be his dad or mom who goes out, earns a living, feeds and clothes the family and creates a safe haven in a threatening world. And who are we to say that any of them are wrong?
“Involves choice?” By that criteria, any draftee from World War I or II or Korea or Vietnam…they can’t be considered a hero under any circumstance because they had no choice about being there. By that criteria, there’s no such thing as a hero policeman or a hero fireman, because they’re just doing their salaried job. Die in the line of duty? Well, Jack, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it. Sucks to be you.
How dare anyone be so dismissive of Chris Reeve’s heroism. Yes, he had no choice but to deal with each day as it came, but it was HOW he dealt with it that was heroic. How easy it would have been for him to simply give in to despair. To make no effort beyond what was minimally required to keep functioning. For that matter, how easy it would have been for him to become a recluse. Actors, after all, have egos. Monumental, towering egos. Can it possibly have been easy for the former “Superman” to allow the public to see him immobilized, helpless, a crippled shadow of what he once was? I’m thinking not. I’m thinking that he had a lot to overcome, both physically and emotionally, just to put himself out there again and again.
Of course, it would be easy to say that his doing so was selfish. After all, the result of his money raising, awareness raising endeavors would ultimately be self-serving. If his efforts resulted in a cure, he could walk once again, and thus would benefit personally. Does that diminish his heroism? No. Not at all.
Because you’ll find that some of the greatest heroes in history did not, in fact, have a choice. Instead they were just guys who had their back against the wall and were trying to fight their way out of a bad situation so they could live to fight another day. They were the ones who seized a predicament and said, “I have no choice. I have to change this, I have to overcome this, because failure to do so is not an option.”
Heroes are what uplift people. Inspire them. Make them aware that there are ineffable qualities and capacities for human achievement that they had never considered before. Heroism is fulfilled capacity for greatness. And in that, Chris Reeve is indisputably, for all time, a hero.
PAD
• 
I’ve read a number of comments across the internet in the last week about how Reeve was a prìçk before the accident, and, because only after it did he decide to help people, he was still a prìçk.
Apparently, “flip flopping” applies to those outside politics as well.
And in the end, I just shake my head at it – I think alot of people would do the same thing Reeve did if they were in his situation, and I don’t think you could blame them.
It’s easy to ignore something until it happens to you, and only then take a vested interest. It’s human nature.
I don’t know about Reeve being a hero, but he was certainly courageous – I don’t know if I could live as he did, but it obviously takes a great will to live.
If with great power comes great responsibility then with a loss of power (and few losses are greater than Reeve’s loss of control over his formerly athletic body) comes at least the opportunity for a lessening of responsibility. Instead Reeve took responsibility for himself, for his family and for others.
As you said, he could have become a recluse. He could have retreated. But instead he came out fighting publicly for both research and treatment of his own and similar conditions as well as fighting privately (from what we have heard) to enjoy every possible moment with his family and friends.
I recommend his book. It was written by a hero.
–My
“I’ve read a number of comments across the internet in the last week about how Reeve was a prìçk before the accident, and, because only after it did he decide to help people, he was still a prìçk.”
And because it was said on the internet, it must be so.
I never met him, but Kathleen did on several occasions, spent time with him, knew a lot of people who knew him, and all knew him to be sweet, caring, unassuming and generous long before he fell off the horse.
PAD
Reeve making public appearances, advocating for stem cell research and progress for the disabled, not only reevaluating the importance of his family, but promoting the value of family to others and dealing with the humility needed to continue functioning in light of his accident are all factors that make the label “hero” workable in my mind. Unless Reeve did the best acting of his life in the years since he found himself in that chair, there was amazing growth, strength of character and heroism that inspired people throughout the world.
Fred
Regardless of Reeve’s personality, how he lived the last twelve years of his life certainly meets the criteria of the Hemingway Hero: Grace under Pressure.
Granted, a very strong argument can be made that he brought his condition on himself, that his horse-riding instructor cautioned him several times not to make the jump that was his undoing, but the example he made of his life after the accident is admirable.
Mark
…. and actually, when you think about it, the motivations behind one’s actions or even the actions themselves don’t necessarily dictate what makes a “hero”. If 1 person found inspiration from Reeve, regardless of any other factors, he is a hero, isn’t he?
The term hero is used way too loosely today. The “Jerry Springer” / “Oprpah Winfrey” effect has made it heroic to simply tell everyone you once wet a bed.
That being said, Christopher Reeves was heroic in almost any sense of the term. I don’t know what is bothering Byrne, but I *do* think how Chris R. responded to his situation is a choice, and the choices he made were heroic.
I personally do not agree with suicide or assisted suicide. But I can understand the temptation in a case such as this. He fought long and hard to overcome his disability. He stuck it out and never gave up. He never took the easy way out. As someone else posted, Reeve’s example is inspiring, and that, for me, is a core element of what makes someone a hero.
Jim in Iowa
And because it was said on the internet, it must be so.
Well, I won’t dispute that, and I never said that what I read was the truth of the matter.
I’m sure Reeve had his moments, but the comments and opinions are mind boggling nonetheless.
“Well, I won’t dispute that, and I never said that what I read was the truth of the matter.
I’m sure Reeve had his moments, but the comments and opinions are mind boggling nonetheless.”
Yeah, well, them fans, they do love to talk. I mean, according to some, I’m a wild-eye, extreme liberal nut who gets off on attacking people, rather than the sweet, lovable, non-confrontational candy-ášš I truly am.
PAD
I wonder if Bryne really feels this way, or just posts thinks like that to be contraversal. Either way, he is an ášš.
PAD:
>Yeah, well, them fans, they do love to talk. I mean, according to some, I’m a wild-eye, extreme liberal nut who gets off on attacking people, rather than the sweet, lovable, non-confrontational candy-ášš I truly am
….. my hero. 😉
I can’t believe people would even discuss this. Who the hëll are we to judge whether or not the man suffered enough, or accomplished enough after losing the ability to breathe without assistance? It’s ridiculous that anyone would attempt to attack the man after his death for not living up to some absurd ideals of what is required of a paraplegic to qualify as a hero.
If there are those who believe that he was a hero, and make no mistake, I am among them, then let them hold that belief. To issue public statement attacking that belief, and chipping away at the character of the man after his tragic death, is the height of cowardice.
Phinn
:And because it was said on the internet, it must be so.
I never met him, but Kathleen did on several occasions, spent time with him, knew a lot of people who knew him, and all knew him to be sweet, caring, unassuming and generous long before he fell off the horse.”
Yea but who are you gonna believe? Kathleen or the internet?
“Yeah, well, them fans, they do love to talk. I mean, according to some, I’m a wild-eye, extreme liberal nut who gets off on attacking people, rather than the sweet, lovable, non-confrontational candy-ášš I truly am”
Why can’t you be both?
😉
Hi everybody,
I personally don’t listen to “internet” opinion or JB’s ones. to me Chris was the one that made me really believe a man could fly…2 times. Yes He was ONLY an actor…till the moment he became something more (maybe only for me, I don’t know.): he became an inspiration,in the end he did something! maybe it was only public appearances but it was a lot more then somebody else is doing. Now all I’m hearing is: “he was a jerk!”, “he wasn’t a hero”, ok maybe a hero he was not, but he had a pair of B***s that I don’t see in people spittin’ on his grave!
he had courage.. he was a MAN (all capital)!
in the end this is important: he was a jerk? ok in the end he was not! someone else still is!!!
I had often heard Byrne was an áššhølë until I met him at a convention about 10 years ago or so. And guess what, he was an áššhølë. From his comments about Reeve I have to say that things haven’t changed much.
Wow. He has no love for anything Superman related, does he? First he consciously and deliberately deconstructs one of the most iconic figures in American literature during his run on the book, and now he’s posthumously bashing the actor that brought that character to life for our generation. Jeez, what a piece of work.
As everyone else has said, the definition of a hero is a very personal definition – it is subjective. There are no objective measurements as to what defines a hero. Pat Tillman is an example – he’s just one of over a thousand US soldiers that have died in the Middle East since we started bombing Afghanistan. He could have had a life of leisure – making millions of dollars as a pro football player, but walked away from it to fight for what he believed in. In fact, every single one our boys and girls that have given the supreme sacrifice are heroes, but there are those that want to say that they’re not because our actions over there are not justified. It does not matter what side of the ideological fence you’re on – whether you believe our actions over there are justified or not, are legal or not, the fact remains that even though our troops had no choice in being sent over there they gave the ULTIMATE sacrifice in the service of their country.
Hëll, Peter, you can even consider yourself a hero – you made a permanent body alteration just to raise money for the CBLDF. I admire what you did and know it took guts for a “non-confrontational candy-ášš” to make good on his word and walk into that tattoo parlor. (In fact, I would love to see the completed tat, and I’ve got the $10 donation required, but you’ve got to make down to Memphis to get it :)).
A nice definition of “hero” can be found in Galaxy Quest, I think. “Never give up, never surrender.”
There’s always the choice between doing something and doing nothing. Or rather trying and not trying (and don’t go all Yoda on me, here; that line was inspirational bull).
Of course Reeve had a choice. Reeve had the choice of begging to be put out of his misery, or of not trying to walk again and just be waited on, or any number of choices boiling down to just accepting the blow fate dealt him and lie down in defeat. But he chose not to.
Reeve chose to try. So he fought, made great advances, ultimately failed, but he tried.
I choose to think Reeve was pretty heroic in his struggle. I choose to think John Byrne is being stupid in denying that. Every day I choose a lot of other things that put me nowhere near the greatness Reeve exhibited in his plight. Life’s filled with choices. It’s filled with little bits of heroism, big bits of heroism, and humoungous bits of cowardice. I’d have thought we could all take some inspiration from Reeve.
Silly me…
I’m with Byrne on this one… for the most part. I think that what Reeve did to further research and shine a light on this condition was admirable… but we’ve reached a point where the word “hero” has all but lost its meaning. I think Christopher Reeve may very well have been a great man, but I can’t say that he was a hero because I’m simply not sure it applies. He was a parapalegic crusading to find a cure for his condition. Admirable and honorable to be sure, but heroic? I dunno.
And anyway this is a really pointless discussion because a true hero wouldn’t want that label.
Granted, a very strong argument can be made that he brought his condition on himself, that his horse-riding instructor cautioned him several times not to make the jump that was his undoing
But the usual consequence of failing a jump in riding is a little humiliation and a lot of bruising. It’s not as though anyone told him “skip this jump or be a quadrapalegic; your choice.” What happened was a one-in-a-million accident, not something he deliberately courted.
Perhaps John Byrne is burned out and bitter about it.(pun intended).
It seems to me from what I have seen from John Byrne that he has become CRANKSHAFT.
I read something similar to Byrne’s rant a few months ago on another website well known for its crassness (which I’ll refrain from directing you to). The guy who runs this fairly popular site goes out of his way to be offensive to everybody, kind of like “South Park”. But even when read through that kind of lens, it’s still pretty offensive. It turns out, though, that Reeve did do quite a bit of charity work BEFORE the accident, so the argument that Reeve somehow repented and became a charity saint when he was the one in the wheelchair doesn’t hold much water with me.
That said, such commentary coming from an industry idol like Byrne is just uncalled for. It was borderline on a humor site, but coming from a guy who worked a run on ‘Superman,’ it’s just plain offensive. It’s this kind of stuff that forces me to use a goofy psuedonym when posting in comic forums.
That OTHER John Byrne
Well waddaya know?
Back in the early ’80s I had occasion to go to San Diego. John Byrne had a table where he was doing sketches and signing comics for fans. I had never met him, and he had never met me, even though I was a reasonably decent-sized cog in the distribution wheel at that time. (Big deal)
I was excited because I really enjoyed his work.
I came up to the table and began to address him:
“Mr. Byrne, I just wanted to tell you how much I love your work. I’m from Canada too,” at which point I offered my hand to shake his.
He looked up at me, checked his watch, looked up again and spoke, “I have a screening I have to get to. I’ll be back in about an hour or two.”
And with that he got up from his chair and walked away, literally leaving me with my outstretched arm in place! I stood there dumbfounded for a few seconds, took my left hand and placed it on my right arm and moved my right arm back to a vertical position next to my body, then turned and walked away. It was literally like a scene from a cartoon!
That incident is one of the kind that sticks with you your entire life.
Even so, we must still look at things from the bright side: Assuming that Chris’ dream of stem cell research bears fruit, John will be able to benefit from the Alzheimers treatments that will surely result.
PAD,
You left off part of Mr. Byrne’s comment. The full text (taken from his own site) reads as follows:
I have noticed that people have begun referring to Christopher Reeve as a “hero”. I do not wish to take away one iota of the courage he must have needed not to wake up screaming every single day, but the hard truth is there was nothing “heroic” in what happened to him, or how he dealt with it. In fact, as far as how he dealt with it, he didn’t even have a choice. We could imagine he spent every hour of every day (when not in front of the cameras) begging family members to simply kill him and get it over with — but none of them did, so he had no choice but to deal with each day as it came.*
Heroism, I believe, involves choice.
*Not in any way suggesting this is what was
happening, just in case there are those who are
paralyzed from the neck up who might be
reading these words. . .”
I encountered this whole mess yesterday, and it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Based on the context of what came before it, I have begun to suspect that Mr. Bryne wrote in an attempt to illustrate a point by stating an extreme example. Thus, I now find it only incredibly insensitive and assinine.
Oh and for the record, I DO think that Christopher Reeve was a hero. I can’t imagine what it cost him to go on as a public figure after he lost so much that he loved. It would take a blindly narrow view of what it is that makes a hero to not consider him such.
I tend to think the media labels Christopher Reeve as a “hero” even though he’s probably for the same reasons VH1 labels people like Beyonce or Jewel as “Divas” even thought they are definitely are not. Christopher Reeve was an admirable, honorable man who turned a horrible tradgedy into a wonderful crusade for good… but in my opinion he was no more a hero than Jewel is a diva. She’s just a pretty decent musician.
John Byrne acted like an ášš again. Is this news?
I’ve hit a point with John where I’ve given up being infuriated with him. It does me no good. I’ve been called Insult Boy twice on his board, and gave up looking at the board in January because I was tired of being insulted. It’s amazing that a person with that talent, being able to provide joy through his comics to so many people, could be so…anti-human in the “real world”. Maybe that’s what require of artists of his caliber- you view people as black and white lines, rather than as souls.
I still love his work (yes, even his current work still holds the potential to thrill me). I just ignore the rantings of the man behind the work.
Hëll, Dale Earnhardt [i]was[/i] an áššhølë, but everybody seems to think [i]he[/i] was a hero, and all he did was drive a car into a wall. Screw Dale Earnhardt.
Christopher Reeve was a great actor — after Superman, it was great seeing him played against type, and he did it extremely well. I honestly don’t know that heroism is the term that comes to mind for me, but I won’t deny that it took courage not to give up in his situation. One of the websites I read that bashed him said he was a selfish prìçk because he didn’t start it until after it happened to him, rather than after he was aware of the sort of problems people have that eventually did befall him. Apparently he played a character in a movie with a similar ailment, and he’s regarded as selfish because it wasn’t until this condition of which he was already aware wasn’t important enough to work to help until after it had befallen him. It’s a valid point, but it doesn’t cancel out the work he’s done or the value it’s had.
I was banned from Byrne’s board a half a year ago or so. Why? I dunno. It was never explained to me. In fact, I didn’t even know I was banned until I tried to log in to post one afternoon and kept getting an error message. I had to reregister with a different name and email one of the admins (because you can’t contact them unless you’re registered) and asked what was happening. After exchanging a few emails where he said next to nothing, he finally admitted that I had been banned. When I asked why, he admitted that he didn’t know, just that “Byrne had said so.”
Ok. So in no way am I defending Byrne. Clearly, I have first-hand evidence that he’s about as big a jerk as everybody claims. But being an áššhølë doesn’t mean he’s always wrong… he’s just *usually* wrong. But in this case he’s right, in my opinion.
You know, I was wondering why we had not had a conversation on Reeve’s death on this blog, and it is a shame that it has to be in response to someone who more and more comes across as a cruel jáçkášš.
Whether or not you want to argue that a “true hero” would not want the label, the way he lived his life, especially these last few years, was unquestionably heroic.
The politics of stem cell research aside, the fact that Reeve was always OPTIMISTIC about his situation (“I will walk again”), was able to progress physically and was able to act again (how precious those “Smallville” appearances are to me now) was absolutely inspiring to those who found themselves in similar predicaments, and of course those whose burdens weren’t quite as severe.
To knock the good he did because “he had more money than the rest of us” or “he brought it on himself” or whatever other vile stuff has been said is beyond distasteful.
We all, each of us, have the ability to not only live our lives to the fullest but use the gifts we have to help others. Not all of us do so. Christopher Reeve did.
That certailnly makes him heroic.
It reminds me of the scene in PAD’s “Star Trek” annual where Scotty’s nephew is killed in an accident. When told that her son died heroically, she responds, “Who cares how he died? He’s just as dead.” To which someone responds that none of us have attained physical immortality – not yet, anyway. But that the memory of her son will live on, and when it does he will be remembered as someone who died doing his duty.
That was one of your most memorable and powerful exchanges of dialogue ever, PAD. I think it applies here as well.
In the long run, Reeve will be remembered more for his help with spinal cord research and the like than he was playing Superman on screen, and that’s saying something.
Something very good, indeed.
Somebody correct me if i’m worng, but isn’t there a story about Christopher Reeves Flying to South America in order to draw attention to the plight and possibibly help rescue a group of actors who were going to be deported and/or killed? (Pre-Accident, Natch)
I could have sworn i’ve heard something like that.
If i remember correctly, I’d sure as shooting say that makes the man a hero.
“Whether or not you want to argue that a “true hero” would not want the label, the way he lived his life, especially these last few years, was unquestionably heroic.”
Saying something is unquestionable doesn’t actually make it so. the fact that this conversation is actually taking places proves that it *is* questionable. There is no such thing as absolute heroism. As PAD himself wrote, heroism exists in the eye of the beholder. It is a lable others put on somebody else in reflection of the opinions they hold about that person.
So the idea that somebody can absolutely be a hero or that somebody’s opinon can be unquestionable wrong or right in a case like this is a little silly and illogical, in my opininon.
I don’t consider Christopher Reeve a hero, some people. We can both be right… because it’s all a matter of personal opinion.
I think that’s really enough of that.
I’m with Donald Pfeffer on this one.
A hero steps up and fights when he doesn’t have to. Reeve suffered his injury horse-riding (not a neccessary activity in this day and age) and after being crippled, THEN he got all “Let’s find a cure”.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s admirable how he didn’t give up under the weight of his handicap and the massive change is his life, but “hero” is used way too often these days…
I can only assume Byrne has never faced a serious illness, been artificially paralized, or simply had a bad day where he had to choose how he would act (and given his behaviour over the past years, it seems Byrne simply has one mode of behaving – áššhølë – and that might explain a lot).
I have a choice when I get out of bed every morning. I can choose to be positive, negative, apathetic, or a variety of attitudes. I choose what to eat, drink, wear, whether to go to work or class or both or neither. Life is made up of hundreds, if not thousands, of choices on a daily basis. Get into the realm of years and it becomes awesome to even contemplate how many decisions we make.
For the last 12 years, Chris Reeve made the decision to wake up every morning and face the day with grace, dignity, humour and kindness. He dedicated his time educating the public and campaigning for research so much, much more important than just him, and he realized that in order to get human embryonic stem cell research approved, federally funded, and legal, it needed to have a spearhead. A visible presence to the world, and a face that people could put with it.
If you or I were faced with the choice of putting ourselves in the limelight daily, to have our injury constantly talked about by everyone, would we? Would we have the strength of character to not give up, to not beg to be taken off life support in those first few, harrowing months? Would we have the ability to get out of bed daily, with a smile, with optimism and belief, and then go outside and share that with all the people equally afflicted, and bring them hope because you have the ability, through a few silly and loved movies, to catch the attention of people making laws so much better than someone stuck in a house in Illinois?
I’m not sure I’d be able to do that and I’d eat my nalgene bottle of Byrne ever had half so much grace under pressure.
To make the choices Reeve made, to live the life he did, is nothing short of miraculous, for himself and for all the people he so positively affected. If that’s not heroism, I don’t know what would be.
-Kelly
“Actors, after all, have egos. Monumental, towering egos. Can it possibly have been easy for the former “Superman” to allow the public to see him immobilized, helpless, a crippled shadow of what he once was? I’m thinking not. I’m thinking that he had a lot to overcome, both physically and emotionally, just to put himself out there again and again.”
Yes! This is what I have been saying all over the place, you just put it much better.
And the thing is…even before the accident Reeve was doing a lot of good work. It just that the accident shifted his attention.
Based on what I know of Byrne, and comments I’ve read from (eg, on Jessica Alba’s being cast as Sue Storm), I am less than surprised.
In various interviews, Mr Reeve and his wife had said that immediately following the accident, he had (like, frankly, any sane individual) seriously thought about suicide. He decided not to follow through. He also decided to become an advocate for those like him. To me, that showed (to use a cliche) great courage in the face of adversity.
In addition, let me say that if something like that accident happened to me, I truly do not know whether or not my decision would be to end it all. However, I do know that if I decide to literally choose life, the way Mr Reeves lived his life post-paralyzation would be a significant factor in that choice.
Once again to me, that is heroic.
I myself agree that the word
I’m with Donald Pfeffer on this one.
A hero steps up and fights when he doesn’t have to. Reeve suffered his injury horse-riding (not a neccessary activity in this day and age) and after being crippled, THEN he got all “Let’s find a cure”.
Sorry, but this is all wrong.
A) No, he didn’t have to do what he did. He could have confined it to occasional events from his home. He didn’t.
B) He was doing considerable charity work and donations BEFORE the accident. Why are people dismissing it when he’s just changed the focus?
This all seems like part of our modern culture’s mania to degrade and defile those who are better than us; we constantly thirst for heroes and and compelled to degrade anyone who comes close to that standard.
I think Byrne was trying to say that surviving in the face of what G-d throws at you is not heroic in itself. And with that I agree. But as you put much more eloquently than I was able to on my blog, Reeve did much more than that in his last 12 years.
Personally, I don’t think Reeve had much of a delusion that he could save himself through his actions. He knew research took time. He was acting for those who came after him.
Byrne’s comments are beyond galling, beyond ludicrous.
When we discuss Christopher Reeve, we discuss a man who single-handedly shifted the paradigm on how modern science views paralysis. Towards the end of his life he could wiggle his fingers, move his arms and legs in an aquatic environment, and breathe on his own for extended periods of time- all things that were deemed medically impossible before his injury. Reeve raised enormous awareness and funding for an affliction that affects tens of thousands of people worldwide. If being a one man juggernaut in the face of debilitating illness isn’t heroic, I don’t know what is.
And oh, let’s not forget that he CONCIEVED OF, DIRECTED AND STARRED IN the remake of Rear Window, wrote two books, started his own charitable organization, and lended his directorial abilities to two other films. I know plenty of fully mobile folks who lack the willpower to tackle such endeavors.
How easy would it have been for him to gather dust in a corner under a morphine drip? How many other people in his position would have done so, or taken their own lives?
Chris did neither, he chose to battle his affliction and help others who shared his condition. And THAT, Mr. Byrne, was a choice.
“A hero steps up and fights when he doesn’t have to.”
No. That’s an idiot, or perhaps a thrillseeker.
A hero is someone who steps up and fights because he feels he must. Because to refuse to fight is simply unacceptable.
PAD
Putting Reeve aside entirely, John Byrne’s comments were wrong, because he was attempting to define the word “hero” in a way that is far narrower than is used in this country.
According to the Merriam-Webster website, the definition of hero is:
1 a : a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability b : an illustrious warrior c : a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities d : one that shows great courage
2 a : the principal male character in a literary or dramatic work b : the central figure in an event, period, or movement
3 plural usually heros : SUBMARINE 2
4 : an object of extreme admiration and devotion : IDOL
There’s no question Reeve meets several of those definitions. I don’t know if Byrne’s narrower defintion of the word was accurate at some point in time, but it’s certainly out of synch with the world today.
I don’t think the word hero is used enough.
For me, a hero is somebody who consciously tries to make the world a better place for other people, especially when it is inconvienent for them.
I don’t understand why teachers in public schools are not considered heroes. Teachers take crap pay, work in a sometimes dangerous environment, just so they can make a difference in other people’s lives.
I had a teacher named Dr. Eades. He taught chemistry in my highschool. He originally tried to join the army, but they wouldn’t let him. His IQ was too high. So the government paid for him to get his doctorate and he became a researcher for the army. He was making the big bucks. After that, he went on to teach at a university, again making a really good living for himself but it was a paycut. While there, he formed the opinion that students were not coming into the university with enough science fundementals. So he took a huge paycut to teach in a High School…just to make sure that some teenagers got the education he thought they deserved.
Can somebody explain why he isn’t a hero?
“In my opinion, Christopher Reeve was heroic. He didn
Goodman:
>Putting Reeve aside entirely, John Byrne’s comments were wrong, because he was attempting to define the word “hero” in a way that is far narrower than is used in this country.
This is consistant with many of the controversies surrounding John Byrne’s statements. Whether he talks of the definition of “hero” “What makes Spider-Man Spider-Man” or why almost every comic not written in the way that he would do so is wrong, he tend to believe that his interpretations are truth.
Impossible to discuss with anyone who thinks in this fasion.
Fred
What really amuses me about that disgusting old coot is that being disrespectful to real people like Jessica Alba and Christopher Reeve is all well and good, but God help you if you call your favorite hero “Supes” or “Bats”. Because you MUST respect the characters.
What I think is being overlooked is that some people, in trying to so Reeve is not a hero, are defining the term so that you have to be physically fit (or at least nominal) in order to be a hero. I think they are saying essentially that a physically handicapped cannot, inherently, be heroes.
That doesn’t sit right with me.
I’ve always thought of a hero as a larger than life figure who goes out to fight the good fight in order to make life better for others. Christopher Reeve could have quietly stayed home, made all these improvements in his quality of life and only concentrated on himself. He did not have to become an advocate. He did not have to put pressure on politicians. He did not have to give speeches to inspire others. But he did. He was and always will be a hero. Those of you who cannot see this will never have heroes to look up to. Your standards are too high. I find that quite sad. Meanwhile, the rest of us will find inspiration and comfort that people like Christopher Reeve exist in a world full of negatives.
Break out the torches and pitchforks! John Byrne has once again said something that people don’t agree with. He had the ultimate NERVE to state his opinion of what a hero is. HOW DARE HE!? Why to give his opinion on a matter of semantics is about the worst thing anyone could ever do.
There are already calls on other message boards to start petitions and to contact DC to have Byrne removed from the books he’s working on because of his opinion on the definition of a word. What next, trying to have someone thrown off of a book because of their political beliefs?
Donald Pfeffer,
“I think that’s really enough of that.”
I agree, especially since you chose to focus on a small snippet of what I said that didn’t jibe with your belief.
Okay, it’s my OPINION that Reeve’s actions and the way he carried himself were heroic.
Happy now?
Jesus. What is it with so many people today? Why are so many jaded? Why do we thirst for those who try to do good and try to make the world a better place and then take the first opportunity to cut them down when they do?
As I stated earlier, I feel a person’s actions, not their status, define them as heroes or at the very least inspirational.
But it seems these days not only do more people seem to no longer truly believe in the existence of a Higher Power (not necessarily a bad thing, depending on your perspective) but they no longer choose to see good in their fellow man. Which is quite sad, since there is so much good, in so many people, and so many people striving not only to better themselves (which not everyone does) but the lives of others.
But it’s more fun for many to be negative.
That’s sad.
Karen,
For once, we agree. 100%.
Thank You.
Jerome
Jerome Maida wrote: