They Forgot How To Be Heroic

A corollary to my recent post about villains who may have had a point after all: I am not advocating for the “sympathetic villain” trope.

In fact, I generally dislike that trope. But I have a theory that a lot of new and new-ish writers can’t help but write villains like this because they forgot how to make heroes actually heroic. This is not because our traditional culture is bad and out if step with the times. It’s because a cadre of nihilistic relativists hijacked the culture with the intent of changing it to suit their own spiritual and psychological hangups. It’s a tale as old as time.

People who are miserable weirdos are going to write miserable, weird stuff about miserable and weird people.

Jon Mollison detailed this pretty nicely in how William Golding, author of Lord of the Flies, was a creepy perv who pitted children against each other for, presumably, research:

. . . The goal of post-modernists is to make the world as ugly as themselves.  They paint normal people with broad brushes and focus laser-like attention on the exceptions to the rule of mankind as a generous creature.  They prop up the lies and the bleakness and tell us they are wise and profound and expect us to fall in line.

You might think I’m being harsh, but I haven’t even rolled up my sleeves yet.  Turns out old Golding was exactly the kind of guy you would think it took to write a book like Lord of the Flies.

Typical feminist male and 1960s science-fiction author in his native habitat.

Again from The Guardian:

The Nobel laureate Sir William Golding, whose novel Lord of the Flies turned notions of childhood innocence on their head, admitted in private papers that he had tried to rape a 15-year-old girl during his teenage years, it emerged today.

Golding’s papers also described how he had experimented, while a teacher at a public school, with setting boys against one another…

The author’s psychological experiments with his classes at Bishop Wordsworth’s school, in Salisbury, caused his eyes “to come out like organ stops”, according to his private journal.

He divided pupils into gangs, with one attacking a prehistoric camp and the other defending it.

So yeah, it turns out Lord of the Flies was child-abuse porn written by a drunken lout of a man who, in a better age, would have been given a lot more knuckle sandwiches and a lot fewer laurels.  He was just another typical cultural ignoramus who loved tearing down fences when he didn’t know why they were built in the first place.  There’s something deeply satisfying about seeing this iconoclast, a pale stale male, getting metooed by the next generation of iconoclasts.  His works will soon be forgotten, consigned to the dustbin along with the rest of the Boomer detritus, while the works of giants with more faithful and Faith Full approaches to story survive and are revered.

There are lots of reasons for this, many of them related to the creator in question featuring their hurt and inflicting their own issues on you, and many the result of otherwise would-be normal people brainwashed into thinking these twisted worldviews are the correct ones:

Cynicism: The belief that everybody has a pride, altruism doesn’t exists, and when people are acting in a selfless, decent manner, they’re really just hiding something dark and sinister. This is also conflated with being “realistic.” Psychologists have another word for it though: projection.

Moral Relativism: This warped ideology holds that there is such thing as absolute right and wrong or good and evil, and that it’s all dependent on who is doing the act to whom. Therefore, no one judge anybody for any reason, because who are we to say that something is right or wrong? Mind you, this is completely one-sides, since all cultures and ideologies are equal, except Western (read: white Christians people), who are always evil and wrong. If you don’t think this seeps into the stories being written, you need to open your eyes.

Nihilism: Nihilism is “realistic,” right? Everybody knows there really are no “good guys,” and that life doesn’t have happy endings, so why should stories? Stories where good prevails just set people up for disappointment and give the wrong answer. That’s the conventional wisdom, at least. Rawle Nyanzi takes issue with this, as does Jon Del Arroz, who sums it up perfectly: “All realism does is leave you with cancer.” In light of this, why have heroes?

Disappointing Heroes: This is what these theories lead to: Heroes who aren’t heroic. Because after all, without heroism, who needs heroes? I wrote about this not too long ago, how cynicism, relativism, and nihilism lead to disappointing heroes like the anti-hero, the reluctant hero, and the snarkbuckler. Adam Lane Smith has a really interesting generational theory about this phenomenon–it’s a lengthy post I’m not going to reproduce here, but its worth a read. Needless to say, modern heroes need to feature their hurt because the authors need to feature theirs. No flat-arc heroes here. They have to be conflicted, twisted, and morally ambiguous. Because that’s realistic, and the cycle repeats on and on. Or, heroes will be, as Bradford Walker and Misha Burnett point out, never emerge due to their skill and determination. No, they are top-down supermen gifted with extraordinary powers they did not have to work for. Again, this is not realistic; it is reflective of the authors themselves. It is art imitating a certain type of life.

Screw that.

Escapism is meant to be fun, but also an escape to something better. It is to show the reader what could be, not some twisted version of reality.

This is the mindset we need if we are to create heroes that actually resonate. There is no shame in demonstrating humanity’s better nature. In fact, crafting stories that reflect the True, the Beautiful, and the Good is in large part the purpose of storytelling. What good is there in pumping messages full of despair into people’s heads?

That’s the true mind control, the dangerous propaganda we are warned so much about by the cognoscenti of science-fiction and fantasy.

Reject this. Embrace heroism. Your descendants will thank you.

Garrett and Ghryxa are true heroes who do the right thing not because they are forced to do it, but because it is right. Read about them here.


  1. I’m starting to wonder if the problem in fiction today is not “realism” per say, but more how “realism” has been redefined to mean nothing but suffering, boredom, dispair and nihilism. Good things never happen in real life, dontcha know. This is an idea pushed by authors who themselves are bitter losers with crabby souls, who wish to treat fiction both as a therapy but also as a validation for their demoralizing worldview, hoping to convert others to it because misery loves company.

    And yet here comes a REAL LIFE story of a group of boys that were stranded on an island that completely refutes this toxic idea. Instead of them descending into barbarism, the kids worked to keep themselves alive and cheerful, and didn’t backstab each other in the back! And the story actually has a happy ending! Inconceivable!!

    I felt so re-moralized after reading that post by The Guardian. Life can admittedly be sometimes just as dark as pictured in GRRM’s Game of Thrones or like Golding’s book, but it can also be beautiful and hopeful, and as the real life story of the rescued kids shows also a testament to the human spirit’s strength. No matter how many lies they try to foist upon us, the Truth will always come out eventually.

    (It was also stated in the article that the kids began and ended their days with a song and a prayer. That 100% helped. Let it not be said that God never listens to us when we call him).

    As for Golding himself, while I don’t really hate him, I’m ok if his literature ends up being tossed away and forgotten. There may be some merit to the text itself(from what I understand it’s actually a deeper commentary on Civilization itself and how it’s destined to fall because of human infallibility), it’s ultimately done more harm than good. Instead of being a cautionary tale like 1984 or Moby Dick, it’s weeping, more about Golding dealing with his own personal demons and his fatalistic worldview of the world. At the very least, kids shouldn’t be exposed to it at an early age.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Read Lord of the Flies in High School. Didnt really understand it very well until my college years though. This blog entry is really on point. Its showcasing vital components I have been missing in “modern” entertainment. SO its why most of my re-watch stuff is from before 2006 nowadays.

      Misery Fiction is King right now in most trad publishing parts of the world, so its why I’ve felt drawn to more old fashioned stuff that has black/white setups. I want to be inspired again.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Fiannawolf
        Same here. Hated it with a chemically pure fiction of a teen

        English lit classes are humiliation ritual where the teachers choose the most awful book and teach it as aridly as possible because Literatur(tm)

        No wonder boys don’t read and girls prefer instagram

        Luckly I was reading more fun books and not in English.

        Agreed about misery lit(c) it’s why I refuse to read contemporary young adult or post apocalypse novels. I have absolutely no tolerance for this crap.
        I’m an entertain me book snob 🙂


        Liked by 2 people

      • Xavier, young adult and post-apocalypse seem to overlap a lot. Maybe it’s lack of creativity on the part of hacky authors looking to make a quick buck on the fact that they think kids don’t deserve good writing, but I think it’s that AND the desire to sew seeds of despair.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Misery fiction just gets old, and old fast. Apparently characters you can root for who aren’t dirty is “simplistic” to these miserable heathens running things. But again, it’s PSYCHOLOGICAL PROJECTION. These awful people think everybody else is awful because THEY are awful. They can’t conceive of altruism or goodness on the part of others because they themselves can’t conceive acting that way.

        And we all have to suffer for it.

        Liked by 1 person

    • – You are spot-on that “realism” has been redefined. It’s not that the world has changed, just the perception that the powers that be want to push. Very insightful comment.

      – I actually liked Lord of the Flies. I saw it as a commentary on the fragility of civilization. And it represented A possibility, not necessarily THE only one.

      – No kidding that the actual real-life story had a happy ending partly due to the boys seeking God’s help. That might be the most powerful part of that story.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Alexander,

        Coman is far, far superior in highlighting the fragility of civilization. But noooo, we had to read an utterly repulsive book by a real lowfife scum. Golding was a auditioning for a concentration cam/gulag/lagolai commandant.

        By and large with few exceptions, I really hated most of the English books
        This in contrast to French class where were were reading Simenon’s le chien jaune (the yellow dog) for heaven’s sake! And thank goodness for the French comic books (BDs)

        Yeah the overlap between young adult and post apocalypse dystopias is deliberate. It’s done on purpose to strip kids of any notion of the good, true and beautiful. It’s a humilation ritual to rob them of the astounding literature we have by minions of the death cult.

        It’s their entry level jobs so they can fail onwards and upwards

        They’re serial killers progressively trained to kill and dismember Western canon and culture as gruesomely as possible, display the carnage and wear the skinsuit to demand respect.


        Liked by 3 people

      • Conan does indeed do a better job of explaining that, but I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss all other English literature. There is plenty of fantastic, inspired stuff. And let’s not forget that a HUGE amount of the bad ideas now infecting American culture came from Europe, mostly France, Germany, Russia, and Austria, in addition to England.


    • Absolutely yes. Realism has been received by modern Academia as “a story doesn’t need to have a meaning because life hasn’t any”. I read an essay at a “writing course” in my university that basically said this but with fancier words.
      And then they wonder why people don’t read

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s