[ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice

[Anne Corwin]

PJ Manney <pjmanney at gmail.com> wrote:
But that's it.  Risk taking.  Which can lead to a possible bad end.
Simply, the chances they take to succeed or fail involves the
potential for sacrificing something.  Not necessarily their lives, but
something worthwhile enough that they and we don't want them to
sacrifice if they don't have to.  Sacrifice doesn't have to always
involve life-or-death situations -- in fact, they rarely do in
stories! -- but as I said before, the stakes must be worthwhile and
meaningful, commensurate with the story involved, to engage the
audience.  (For example, in a romantic comedy, we're usually not
worried about the hero losing his life.  We're worried about the hero
losing the girl, sacrificing his self-respect, etc.  Those are worthy
stakes commensurate with the story.)

PJ
I have no argument with any of this -- I literally took the "self-sacrifice" thing to mean "sacrifice of a person's very life" in the initial context of the question, but you're right in pointing out that it isn't always life that's at risk.  (To me I say, "Duh!")

If Max was really referring to a hero who literally risks *nothing* important to him or her, but still manages heroism, then my first thought would be a kind of Zen-type character who has no "attachments" and therefore does not feel that any outcome represents a personal loss, even if others might consider particular outcomes very distressing.  But I don't know if many readers would be able to relate to such a character.

- Anne

       
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080306/57f984c5/attachment.html>