202 Taha Heroism in Literature a Semiotic Model

Databases selected: Multiple databases...

Full Text (9275 words)

Heroism in Literature: A Semiotic ModelIbrahim Taha. The American Journal of Semiotics. Kent: 2002. Vol. 18, Iss. 1-4; pg. 107, 21 pgs

Abstract (Summary)

The semiotic model that disregards the normative context represented by the protagonist examines how we candistinguish the three conceptions of heroism, namely hero, semi-hero, and anti-hero. What are the methodological criteriawhereby we can follow the protagonist in the text from beginning to end? To answer them, this article tries to present amodel made up of five stages/criteria which constitute a semiotic model by means of which the connection to heroismcan be determined. These are: (1) motivation, (2) will, (3) ability, (4) execution, and (5) outcome. These stages can belogically classified into three categories: 1) Pre-action (the first three stages), 2) Action (the fourth stage), 3) Post-action(the fifth stage). The model proposed here suits all types of narrative and drama and all performance and film productionarts. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Copyright Semiotic Society of America 2002

[Headnote]Abstract:The semiotic model that disregards the normative context represented by the protagonist examines how we can distinguish thethree conceptions of heroism, namely hero, semi-hero, and anti-hero. What are the methodological criteria whereby we canfollow the protagonist in the text from beginning to end? To answer them, this article tries to present a model made up of fivestages/criteria which constitute a semiotic model by means of which the connection to heroism can be determined. These are:(1) motivation, (2) will, (3) ability, (4) execution, and (5) outcome. These stages can be logically classified into three categories:1) Pre-action (the first three stages), 2) Action (the fourth stage), 3) Post-action (the fifth stage). The model proposed here suitsall types of narrative and drama and all performance and film production arts.

I. Introduction: Realistic, Semiotic, and Actant Models

The accumulating studies on the central (main/major) character in literature can be categorized by three differentapproaches, the realistic, the semiotic, and the actant. According to the first, the character acquires an independentposition in the text detached from the events in which it is involved, and therefore it should be viewed at a certain distancefrom the context in which it appears. This approach, represented by Bradley, treats the character as an imitation of humanbeings and it can replace a real character ( 1965). In such an atmosphere it may have been convenient for Ferrara to referto the character as the center of the text, and all events exist because of it (1974: 252). According to the semioticapproach the characters exist only as part of the images in which they are inserted and the events which set them inmotion. Any attempt to draw them out of their context and analyze them as if they were real people is inherently mistaken.Weinsheimer nicely referred to the character "as segments of a closed text" and as "patterns of recurrence, motifs whichare continually recontextualized in other motifs" ( 1979:195). The formalist-structural conception of the character cangenerally fit in well in this approach. The basis of that conception of the character is that the character in literature is anactant or a participant, not a flesh and blood creature. The character should be discussed according to what it does in thetext, not according to what it is (Chatman 1972: 57). French structuralism, dealing with the character in terms of an actantmodel, attributes to it a secondary status in the text, it being an outcome of the plot (59). The actant model based onPropp's model does not precisely suit modern literature. Therefore, Chatman believes that regarding the character it isvital to combine the question "What happens?" with the question "Whom does it happen to?" (78).

It is commonly thought that the central character in the text exists in"its own right and for its own sake" while the secondarycharacter serves as a means and its existence in the text is contingent on a more principal textual component (Ewen1993: 196). This centrality of the character is perhaps a function of several textual criteria, such as the following.

1. Numerous secondary characters exist-as is usually the case in novels, whose secondary character or marginalityhighlights the existence of the protagonist on the principle of ranking from the most marginal to the least marginal and thecentral. This ranking process is based on a pair of aesthetic opposites, not evaluative opposites such as superiority andinferiority. The object acquires particular emphasis when presented in parallel with its opposite. The superiority of the maincharacter should not be interpreted as textual priority. Textual priority is a neutral concept in the evaluative sense, whichmay be both positive and negative. Likewise, the marginality or the inferiority of the marginal character does not constitutea statement of evaluative judgment. In aesthetic, evaluative terms this marginality does not lower the need for the marginalcharacter in the text. This is especially true for the central character. In the case of a single character in the text-as

Document View - ProQuest http://proquest.umi.com.monstera.cc.columbia.edu:2048/pqdweb?inde...

1 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

Desiderio NavarroCopyright

Desiderio NavarroCentro Criterios

sometimes occurs in the short story or the very short story-the character derives its centrality from its being the only one inthe text.

2. The more detailed, varied, and focused the characterization of the protagonist, the closer this character comes to thecore of the text and the farther from the margins. The ample verbosity that accompanies this character throughout the text,its rich spiritual life, its detailed external description, the highlighting of the close and distant circles around it, its variedexposure, its deeds, its speech, its complex relationship with other characters, its behavior in various situations, and itshandling by the narrator and the hidden author, no matter what kind of handling this is-all these emphasize the presence ofthe character in the text and contribute to its central position.

3. This detailed characterization positions the central character to gain the reader's special attention. The special interestthe reader shows in a specific character of the text is an indication of the central and high status attained by this character.The interest of the reader in the central character can turn in various directions.

4. For this centrality to acquire a more practical character the author provides it with all the data required for it to act "initself and for its own sake". These data allow the development of the fabula in some direction towards the climax or theanti-climax and towards some kind of ending.

If we accept this definition according to which the central character exists in its own right and for its own sake, thischaracter will naturally develop a will and ambitions of its own and will set some kind of aims to be accomplished. Theactivity involved in the accomplishing process makes it a dynamic character-as stated by Tomashevsky-and itscharacteristics can go through various transformations of refinement, updating, and some sort of change throughout thetext (1965: 89).

2. Hero, Anti-hero, and Semi-hero

Even with these conditions, we are still far from determining the central character's position in the realm of heroism. Thisstatement establishes a definite correlation between the centrality of the character and heroism. Namely, a character thatneeds to be in a certain position in the realm of heroism must first and foremost be a central character, or more exactly,must be the central character of the text.

The heroism presented in a text is commonly divided into two opposites: that of the hero and that of the anti-hero. Almostall researchers define the hero as the central character with a set of lofty characteristics and endowed with will andstamina, sometimes superhuman, which allow it to represent successfully the accepted values of society. As a result itwins the support and sympathy of the addressee. One of the noble missions of the classical hero is to destroy evil, topursue peace and justice (Prince 1987: 40). He serves the best interests of society devotedly, and even in his death heserves the purpose of renewal and reincarnation (Horst and Daemmrich 1987: 136-137). The hero's commitment to thevalues of society is even higher than the value he places on his own life (Welsh 1992: 147). In addition to the classicaldefinition of the hero as a leader or as a potential leader, a gentleman, and a social ideal who behaves according to theacceptable norms of society (O'Faolain 1971: 3-44), there is also the definition of the hero as a collective creature, whichexists for the sake of the collective, develops individual wishes and aspirations, and determines his own fate, such aswinning the heart of the woman he loves (Welsh 1992: 27). The classical definition of the hero includes three centralfeatures: the positive dimension including the conceptions and values that the hero represents, either collective orindividual; his ability to succeed in the mission which was either imposed on him or undertaken by himself; and theidentification he is able to inspire in the reader. This has long been the prevailing approach to the definition of the hero inliterature, in movies, and in other performance arts. However, this classical approach has undergone varioustransformations, to the point of the hero's losing his "super-human" status and becoming a banal and ordinary character.The classical hero has experienced a major transformation in modern literature, particularly that of the twentieth century.Some of the well known symptoms of the disintegration of classical heroism include introversion of the main character,individualization, alienation, hopelessness (i.e., anti-heroism), curtailment of the identifying marks of the major character, tothe point of preventing it from having "a name" or changing names into signs, adjectives, and letters; and the apportioningof heroism among various characters (the division of heroism among four characters in Milan Kundera's novel TheUnbearable Lightness of Being evinces the disintegration of the one and only, the omnipotent classical hero.1

All these transitions or transformations were made from the top down (Jauss 1974: 283). In other words, we are dealingwith a profound and significant deterioration in the status of the classical hero. Modern literature relinquishes the hero forthe sake of the simple and ordinary man. Docherty speaks about "a breach" in the position of the classical hero and atransition to an anonymous character without even a first name.2

This breach led to a new conception of the hero. Here is a hero who differs in almost every respect from the classicalconception. This is what Prince calls "the unheroic hero" ( 1987:6), the so-called anti-hero. The prefix "and" should beunderstood as"non" or "the opposite of", not as antagonism. The antagonist in the text, who is meant to frustrate the heroor to place obstacles in his path, is not called anti-hero as this might mislead people. This is the "antagonist" or'oppositecharacter". The anti-hero is not the antagonist in our discussion but the protagonist, just like the earlier hero. Regarding theaesthetic status in the text the anti-hero's status equals the hero's status. However, the anti-hero differs from the hero onone significant and principal point. This is his failure to accomplish the mission he undertakes, quite regardless of the typeand essence of the mission. Perhaps on account of this failure the anti-hero disappoints the reader, as stated by H. R.Jauss (1974: 314). Still, some kind of emotional involvement with him is entirely possible. The anti-hero is deemed a


2 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

character that cannot adapt to society and its values, which are presented negatively in the text. The anti-hero tries tocombat these values in his own way, using the resources available to him-evidently without success. The comparison ofthe anti-hero with the hero regarding the attitude toward society and its values is apparently inaccurate and needs asignificant explanation. If the hero represents society, where does the friction between him and society (which isrepresented in the text by various textual factors such as a character, conceptions, habits and values, historicalphenomena, etc.) eventually occur, a friction which ultimately leads to the complexity of the plot? The hero representspositive values, as these are perceived by society, and fights negative values. In the same vein, we may claim that theanti-hero also represents positive values, as he perceives them, and attacks what he considers negative values. Thisdistinction between the hero and the anti-hero is made in terms of extra-textual evaluative judgement and not by aestheticliterary means. Accordingly, in both cases, of the hero and the anti-hero, the protagonists struggle is against some kind offlawed values according to his own view, whether he represents society or himself. A second point to be considered is theemotional or perceptual involvement of the addressee with the protagonist. If, as stated, such involvement is possible withthe anti-hero as well as the hero this criterion is irrelevant for showing up the main aesthetic differences between them. Inaddition, is this involvement stable, measured, and certain? Can we speak about uniform and unique identification of alladdressees with a certain character in the text? The only criterion separating the hero from the anti-hero is success orfailure in attaining the objectives set by the text.

However, the concepts of success and failure are not objective, fixed, or absolute. They are inherently endowed with thepotential of being discussed in subjective and relative terms. What may be considered by one of the addresses anachievement or a success in a mission may be considered by others a partial or a relative success. These two concepts-success and failure-thus seem to constitute two extremes connected by a sequence of various possibilities. If successand failure are the only aesthetic criterion to distinguish the hero and the anti-hero, the statement that these two conceptsare subjective and relative opens the way to a third conception, between the hero and the anti-hero. I call it the"semi-hero".The prefix "semi", in our case, need not have the meaning of a "half"-even if such an option exists-but of "partiality", sincethe semi-hero may approach either of the two extremes of hero and anti-hero. The semi-hero can be closer to the herothan to the anti-hero, or vice-versa, depending on his success or failure. A protagonist whose success in attaining the goalof the text is doubtful or partial, or whose success is not final, that is, it allows for further complexity, is closer to thedefinition of semi-hero than of hero or anti-hero. While the anti-hero is a new concept-as against the concept of theclassical hero, which appeared following the industrial revolution and gained further impetus after World War I and WorldWar II, the conception of the semi-hero was reinforced under the influence of the new realism, namely in the era ofawakening from the immediate effect of World War II. The conception of the semi-hero is a realistic reaction to twoextreme conceptions of hero and anti-hero, which depict human beings in two contrasting colors, black and white.Literature in the post-modern era portrays characters in various and complex hues. The character in current literature isless intense and rebellious and less extremist. It is much more complex and realistic.3 The concept of the semi-heroconfirms the phenomenon of the reinforcement of the individual versus the collective (society), and the literature of thetwentieth century has abundant examples of this kind.

A conclusive view of the three concepts of heroism-the hero, the anti-hero, and the semi-hero-brings up two points theyhave in common: their centrality in the text (the equal aesthetic status of all of them), and their ability to stimulate emotionaland conceptual involvement by the reader. They are separated by their respective success or failure in attaining theobjective in the text. The discussion above, set in diachronic and synchronie terms, does not provide a detailed responseto a highly important question: how can we distinguish these three conceptions of heroism? What are the methodologicalcriteria whereby we can follow the protagonist in the text from beginning to end? The index of success or failure accordingto which the place of the protagonist in various conceptions of heroism can be determined is very general, and demands aprofound understanding of other questions. To answer them, this article tries to present a semiotic model made up of fivestages/criteria.

3.The Five-stage Model

The five-stage model refers to the character of the text both as an individual or a collective being and as an actant. On theone hand, the model deals with the activity of the protagonist from its first stages to the end, and on the other this activity isa function of personality characteristics. That is, the model does not deal with the activity itself, its type and significance,but with its performance and its consequences for the protagonist himself. The model reinforces the conception ofChatman and Rimmon-Kenan who try to reach a compromise between the two extremist conceptions of the charactertheory. The proposed model aspires to be methodical, institutionalized, and practical in order to contribute to thosereconciliation attempts. Our intention is to propose a semiotic model that disregards the normative context represented bythe protagonist, so that the protagonist who represents negative norms can definitely be a hero based on this model. Bycontrast, the protagonist who represents positive norms can definitely be an anti-hero. Based on the five-stage model thehero has no priority over the anti-hero or the semi-hero. The three of them are aesthetically equal. This equality is grantedto them through disregard of the normative component of heroism.

The main character of the text-by being "person-like" or a construct "partially modeled on the reader's conception ofpeople" (Rimmon-Kenan 1983: 33)-develops individual and collective aspirations and wishes in the linguistic network ofthe text, and tries to base them by means of some kind of description of the motives which justify their existence and oftheir vitality and necessity on the individual and the collective level. By means of the five-stage model we must examinenumerous questions related to the essence of the main character, its wishes and aspirations, and its ability to act towardsthe fulfillment of its objectives and aspirations in the text, the obstacles occurring in its way, the needs arising in the


3 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

fulfillment process, and the consequence of this process. All these questions, which refer to the essence of theprotagonist of the text, may be classified into five stages, which constitute a semiotic model by means of which theconnection to heroism can be determined. These are (1) motivation, (2) will, (3) ability, (4) execution, and (5) outcome.These stages can be logically classified into three categories:

1. Pre-action (the first three stages)

2. Action (the fourth stage)

3. Post-action (the fifth stage).4

The division into categories is based on the principle of causality. This principle assures the transition of the protagonistfrom the first category to the two other categories. The five-stage model, with its three categories, is based on theassumption that any narrative or dramatic text there is a condition of absence. Such a condition means a flaw or a lack ofperfection that the protagonist cannot accept, and therefore he perceives himself compelled to complete it and amend it.This absence can be manifested in the inner conflict taking place within the person, a clash of norms and perceptionswithin the protagonist himself, a clash between him and society and its different values, and so on. The condition ofabsence and the attempt to alter it-these have always been the basics of literature. However, the difference betweenvarious genres lies in the design of reality and in the ways of coping with it.

3.1. Motivation

This stage deals with various personal and collective data, which make the protagonist vulnerable to conflict when facedwith a condition of absence. Motivation, according to Docherty, is a function of a certain type of desire which may be eitherpositive or negative (Docherty 1983: 224). Leo Bersani believes that "Desire is an activity within a lack; it is an appetitestimulated by an absence" (1976: 10). The connection between desire, which expresses a condition of absence, and theneed to act is strong and apparently inevitable, at least in literature. The inner drive of a person to act in such a situation isa strong need for self-fulfillment. This need does not let someone comply with a situation of imperfection, as claimed bythe Gestalt philosophy. "Self actualization is the creative trend of human nature", Hall and Lindzey claim (1967: 304). Thefeeling of absence, void, and the need to fill that void, as those two researchers believe, motivates self-actualization. Eachperson experiences this feeling, and therefore he tries, each in his own way, to fulfil his wish and thus put an end to desire,or as phrased by Docherty, "Every person desires the end of desiring" (1983: 228). The motivation stage, which indicatesa condition of pre-action, does not demand to obtain a direct representation, which is inclusive and detailed in the text. Themotivation of the protagonist to act can on the one hand be represented in an indirect way of transparent and vague hintsand signs provided by the protagonist himself or any other character in the text or by the narrator. They may appear in theright context or be delivered by the way in some other context of the text. On the other hand, motivation can be manifestedin the text by means of straightforward statements from any character of the text. Moreover the location of this stage-motivation-does not have to be in the opening of the text. Situations occur in which the reader/addressee becomes awareof the protagonist's motivation only in retrospect, before the act or after it. In short, motivation may be scattered all overthe text from beginning to end. However, this stage helps the reader better to understand the actions of the protagonistand helps her evaluate more accurately the outcome of this action (Sternberg 1978: 246-248). In many cases it isextremely difficult to examine the final outcome of the action and evaluate it without understanding the'Veal" motivesunderlying this action. Those motives can definitely differ from the stated intentions of the protagonist.5 Any "mistake" inidentifying the real intentions of the protagonist might lead to a terrible mistake in evaluating the final result, as we shall seelater, in the decisive stage of the five-stage model. The real intentions are those that design the final objective that theprotagonist strives to achieve.

The protagonists objective, which motivates him into action, may be lofty or banal; it may stem from the wish to make theworld a better place or the desire to have casual sex with his neighbor, without developing any normative evaluation ofthose objectives. The objective may either be individual and private, or collective, representing some common wish. Thisstage of the model calls for evaluation of that aspect of the protagonist which drives him toward his goal and destination.This aspect may be the world, history, the society in which he lives, or his family, or it may represent only the protagonisthimself. The goal may change in accordance with the nature of this particular aspect. It may be easy to reach, simple,acceptable, vital, convincing, and justified-or the opposite. Anyway, the reader finds it difficult to define the goal of theprotagonist without knowing his concealed intentions and impulses.

3.2. Will

This stage acts as an index for examining the principal readiness of the protagonist to shift from the motivation stage tolater stages. The will is a vital factor in following the protagonist on his way to one of three variations of heroism. Motivationcan make the protagonist wish to move to the action stage. However, cases exist in which motivation cannot stir theprotagonist and prepare him for later stages-due to its not being sufficient, convincing, well-based, and the like. Theconnection between the first and the second stage is not self-evident or as simple as it appears. In other cases themotivation is sufficiently convincing and established, yet the protagonist is not ripe, for various reasons, to translate thismotivation into action. The delay in the transition from the motivation stage to the will stage can depend on external factorsunrelated to the personality of the protagonist. On the one hand, they may be a consequence of a rational consideration bythe protagonist, namely an interesting and serious review from which he concludes that it is worth delaying this transition.Yet motivation, however justified and convincing it may be, is not sufficient for advancing to the next stage. The extra-


4 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

personal factors may be greater and stronger than the protagonist. In such a case an external struggle between him andother factors may take place which may arouse certain expectations in the reader. This struggle contributes to thedramatic dimension of the complication. The clash between the protagonist and other characters or other views in the textwhich constitute a real threat can delay or benumb the protagonist's will, and then a condition of silent struggle or a blindalley ensues. The continuation of this struggle and its intensification must lead to a change or to some kind ofbreakthrough, whether for the benefit of the protagonist or of his rival. Such a complication increases the need foradditional characters in the text. On the other hand, the delay in the transition from the first to the second stage may be theresult of a weak personal character and of indifference, as will be specified in the next stage. A protagonist with a basictendency to be in a state of permanent action often does not need any motives or pretexts to act. Motivation in such acase can be minimal or concealed. True, in both cases there is a tendency towards a psychoanalytical analysis of theprotagonist, which does not always help in the analysis of the character in the text.

While at the first stage we saw that a condition of absence led the character to develop aspirations and wishes, at thisstage of will the attempt of the protagonist to reach the execution stage, also a later one, is a function of personalityfactors and of exogenous factors, as noted. In both stages the exogenous factors constitute a major part of all the data, orat least a space that cannot be ignored. That is the condition of absence, discussed in the first stage, referring either tothe protagonist or to his exogenous environment, a datum which precedes the protagonist himself and which is evenimposed on him. This obviously differs from one text to the next. In the second stage the protagonist's wish is not alwaysunder his own control. This distinction can help the reader better to understand the protagonist's dynamic, which will allowher a glimpse into his inner and outer worlds. It can also help her to build up her expectations from the protagonist. Apowerful desire developed in the protagonist to contend with a certain condition of absence, regardless of the essence ofthis situation and other exogenous factors, is indeed an indicator of his strength. Perhaps the protagonists will or the lackof will is meant to mislead the reader and cause a breach in her system of expectations.

So far we have dealt with the connection between the protagonist's motivation and his wish for support and continuation. Itis as if the will must support motivation and carry it forward. Any delay in the transition to the second stage is merelytechnical and results from various considerations. The question is whether an opposition between the two stages ispossible. Can the protagonist's will run counter to his inner motives and his real urge? The answer is positive.6 In this typeof situation the complication of the text lies within the protagonist himself; he becomes his own foe. The inner adversityusually leads to a complication, which may be devoid of action but can still be tempestuous, reflecting a crisis of identity ora deep mental crisis. In such a situation the need for additional characters decreases.

The discussion of the second stage reveals the confusion between it and the first stage. I have frequently referred to willas if it were some kind of motivation. If so, we may ask what is the point of devoting a separate stage to will. Thedifference between motivation and will-according to their purpose in the five-stage model-is that between what the selfneeds, or feels it needs, and what the self wants, or what it is compelled to want. As noted, the character may need acertain thing but want something else.7 This distinction may help the reader to learn the protagonist's personality muchbetter. The potential difference between what is wanted and what is needed makes a significant statement about theprotagonists character and about his conditions and different circumstances.

3.3. Ability

The protagonist must be able to make the transition from the first two stages to the fourth stage-the execution. If at anearlier stage we dealt with the willingness to shift to later stages, at this stage we are concerned with the actual ability toperform this shift. Motivation and will are not sufficient for performing a certain action. Docherty indicates the importance ofmotivation as a certain type of desire in order to move to a certain condition of mobility (1983: 217-243). However, if theprotagonist is not equipped with the ability to reach a state of motivation to reach the destination he has set himself, hemay encounter tremendous difficulties which might lead to total failure. This ability may involve physical power and fitness,the ability to withstand pressure, mental strength, the proper age, authority, knowledge, connections with the right people,the ability to survive, creative thinking, persuasiveness, planning skills, and so on, in accordance with his purpose in thetext. These characteristics are not required just for lofty purposes; they may also be vital for various purposes such as abank robbery. Not only the type of ability has to match the purpose but also the level of such ability. These twoindicators-the type of ability and its level-are the factors that determine, to a great extent, the final result of theprotagonist's actions in the text.

Ability does not have to be something fixed, clear, and predetermined. It is a function of the necessity and urgency of theobjective as well as the conditions and difficulties in the way of the protagonist. If the aim is very urgent the protagonist iscompelled to concentrate his all in order to accelerate the process of performance and fulfillment. If the opposite is thecase, he can scatter the means which are operated for the purpose of fulfillment throughout the text in smaller doses.Moreover, external conditions also have an important role regarding the type and level of ability required for achieving thepurpose. These are conditions over which the protagonist has no control, or more exactly, conditions existing in their ownright, independent of the protagonist himself. They may be various types of difficulties the antagonist places on theprotagonist's way, as described in the following stage. According to the antagonist's type of activity, the protagonist shoulduse his common sense and increase or decrease efforts accordingly. I purposely employ here concepts from the field ofwarfare to stress that objectives are not easily attained, so we need the present stage to examine the measure of heroismattained by the protagonist at the end of the fulfillment process. True, help from some external factors is needed topromote and accelerate the process of fulfillment, but still the protagonist must take part in it. The measure of heroism is a


5 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

function of the type and the level of ability operated by the protagonist on his way to achieving heroism. A hero whooperates a limited, temporary, and local type of ability on his way to heroism is completely different from one whoactivates great, holistic, and varied abilities. I lead the discussion in this direction to stress again that on the principal levelin both cases the heroes are based on the five-stage model. If they attain the goal the heroism of both is complete andequal in aesthetic terms. He who has attained his goal easily and he who has invested tremendous efforts, he who hasreceived all possible help from outside and he who has struggled alone-both are awarded the title of hero equally.

The type and the level of ability used by the protagonist in the process of fulfillment of the objective constitute animportant test of personality used by the reader in her final evaluation of the protagonist. Certain abilities are known to beborn in the course of time, while others are acquired due to various subjective and objective reasons. Both types ofabilities have serious significance for the character of the protagonist, but at this stage we shall focus those resulting froma given exogenous condition. At issue here is the protagonist's talent for developing immediate abilities to manage acertain type of situation in which he is involved. If the protagonist is endowed with this quality, it indicates the final outcomeof the process of doing. Such an indication can affect the readers system of expectations. Among the reader'sconsiderations for her final evaluation of the protagonist and his deeds we may mention the protagonist's talent forretrieving abilities or for improvising them in the given situation and place. In addition to his talent for operating abilities wemust also inquire into the protagonist's decision to apply certain abilities but not others, and particularly into to the nature ofthese abilities (readiness and expectations or improvisation and creativity). The protagonists talent for creativity in usinghis abilities is considered one of the signs of heroism that is finally determined only in the last stage of the five-stagemodel.

3.4. Execution

We now come to the stage of action itself. It concerns the process of fulfillment, the methods which translate the abilitiesdiscussed at the previous stage into the language of action, the changes and the transformations occurring in thisprocess, the concomitant difficulties, and the means of coping with them. Chatman stresses the importance of action forthe characterization of the character:"it is ONLY the actions of the character, what he does, that serves to characterizehim" (1972: 59).

The action of the protagonist can appear in the text in two main forms: inner activity and outer activity. Inner activity ismental, including thoughts, introspection, dreams, planning, observation, memories, confessions, and the like. All can bemanifested in various types of monologues (Cohn 1978). The inner activity of the protagonist is a function of a largenumber of subjective and objective data. This activity fully depends on the objective that the protagonist tries to achieve.Certain aims are known to require such activity, while others demand outer/extrinsic activities. Continuous and profoundintrinsic activity requires suitable extrinsic conditions. Outer activity-involving the activation of various body systems-callsfor suitable external conditions. However, in practice it is difficult to distinguish these two types of activity. Outer activitydemands some sort of previous inner activity, and presumably a concentrated inner activity finally leads to some kind ofouter activity. This causation is first and foremost a function of the type of objective, and any flaw in it might impair theprotagonist's ability to achieve his goal at the end of the text.

Whether this activity is mostly inner, outer, or some combination, six main indices for the success of the protagonist'sactivity can be listed, and they may be classified into two categories. The first contains the type, level, and sequence ofthe acts, while the second contains the place, time, and external conditions. A protagonist able to choose the right typeand level of acts that are meant to lead him to the end of this process and to the achievement of his aim, and also able topersevere in them, can successfully move half way to his goal. To continue on to the final destination, he must be ablechoose the right time and place for acting. But this is scarcely enough. To complete the way to his goal he must overcomeall external obstacles. These may be represented by a certain antagonist, by society, habits and perceptions, naturaldisaster, destiny, misfortune, a sudden illness, loss of ability to execute the mission, the aim itself becoming hidden, andso on. All these types may conveniently be combined in one phrase, "antagonist activity". This antagonist activity is vital forthe continuation of the protagonists activity. Yet it is difficult to argue that the antagonist is the first and most importantfactor in the creation of the first spark of protagonist activity. Only after the protagonist decides to act does the antagonistcome in, and this intensifies the protagonist's activity, as described at in the previous stage. In certain genres, many of theobstacles in the literary text or in action movies are meant to enhance the impression of the hero's heroism in thereader's/spectator's eyes. The bigger the obstacles, the more the protagonist becomes a super-human hero, a kind ofsuperman. Generally, this kind of classical divine heroism conceals a different type of reality. It is as if the role of literatureand art is to embellish ugly reality. I doubt if this is the real and true purpose of art in general, and of literature in particular.

The assignment of the protagonist in the text depends on two factors: the objective and the type of obstacles. The type,size, and placement of obstacles in the text require the right kind of preparation by the protagonist. Only after heovercomes these obstacles can he reach to final objective. I mention these six indices to stress that the good intention,proper abilities, and perseverance of the protagonist, and his choosing the right time and place for the activity, are notenough for him to attain the status of hero. This point is detailed below.

3.5.The Outcome

The fifth stage in the five-stage model proposed here is the most decisive in establishing the status of the protagonist indifferent variations of heroism. The outcome constitutes the third category, the post-action, as noted earlier. Only at theend do we see the outcome of the action, with everything involved in it. A serious investment in choosing the objective, in


6 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

choosing the ability and conditions, and tenacious handling of various obstacles must lead to a happy end. Any otheroutcome draws the protagonist farther from the status of hero. Only the full achievement of the objective, which theprotagonist has striven so hard to achieve, entitles him to the status of hero. Partial success entitles him only to the statusof semi-hero, and total failure leads to the status of anti-hero, with no connection whatsoever to the type of objective, to itssignificance, and to the effort invested in the process of doing. The ending is the last station of the five-stage model, andit includes all the data of the text in one form or another.

Francis Dunn notes the importance of the ending in establishing the status of the protagonist. He believes that heroism ismeasured according to the ending of the text. The way in which the protagonist chooses to end his life in the text is vitalfor the formation of his heroism (Roberts, Dunn, and Fowler 1997:99). Hence, a certain type of activity should beassessed not according to intentions but to the final outcome, not only because the ending is the most emphasized partthat remains in memory (Booth 1993: 2) but primarily because of its concise character. In our context we can pinpoint fourtypes of endings which may affect the status of the protagonist in the text: a closed ending of success, a closed ending offailure, a closed ending of partial success/partial failure, and an open ending. The first type provides positive answers, inthe aesthetic respect, to all the questions presented in the text. The second provides negative answers. This appears as atotal failure of the protagonist in performing his mission. The third type also provides clear and well defined answers,some of which indicate success and others failure. The fourth type indicates a condition whose ending is ambiguous,undefined, and not finalized. If there is a potential for interpretative activity at the end of the text, the decision concerningthe protagonist's status is in the reader's hands in accordance with the degree of clarity or unclarity of the ending. In sucha case two different possible ways of interpretation exist which are opposite and paradoxical. The protagonist may beperceived by some readers as hero and by other as anti-hero or semi-hero. This is probably the nature of art in general-tobe evasive and wear various masks simultaneously. The question of openness of the ending and its effect on the statusof the protagonist, namely different variations of heroism, brings to mind an additional factor-the addressee. Dochertybelieves that the readers status in the issue of literary characterization is stronger in modern literature than in classicalliterature (1983:42) because often the ending remains open and does not satisfy everything the reader needs. A hero issomeone able to make some kind of identification with the addressee (Tomashevsky 1965: 89; Welsh 1992: 36). Itseems that the ending is the decisive point linking the protagonist to the addressee. At this point the addressee issupposed to connect to the protagonist in accordance with the final outcome of this process.

The final outcome may be natural, predictable, and convincing, or it may be forced, surprising, and unconvincing. Thefive-stage model has no difficulty with the first part of the assumption. As for the second, there is some problem thatrequires explanation. If the final outcome is forced, whether for the sake of the protagonist or not, namely if the author haschanged the direction in which the events occurred, in such a case doubts arise as to the true status of the protagonist'sheroism. An instance is a case in which the protagonist must fail, if judged by our extra-textual experience and in light ofthe odds and data presented by the text, yet the author decides otherwise. Can we still view such a protagonist as a hero?The answer is simply yes. First, the text is the decisive factor, not our own experience in the extra-textual reality, since insuch reality nothing of this sort happens. A person whose actions and whose conditions lead him to failure mustundoubtedly fail. In literature and in art in general lies and deception are allowed. As noted, the five-stage model does notview the character in literature and in art as a flesh-and-blood being. As a person-like or artistic creature, the character inthe text has its own conditions. Yet we might refer to the protagonist as fake, since the author has faked the ending of thetext in his favor. But even a fake hero is still a hero in the context of literature and art in general, comedy in particular. Theending of comedy is some kind of agreement between the author and the reader/viewer and is not necessarily anoutcome of the events presented in the text (Jagendorf 1984:12). In such a case the faking of the text is the result of aclear clash between the needs of the genre, the needs of the reader/beholder, and the conditions of the protagonist andthe text.

4. Conclusion

As semiotic interpreters, we cannot avoid referring to all textual data in terms of signs. We relate to the protagonist as awhole system of various signs. In the long and complex process of following the protagonist, the reader employs varioustextual data and disciplines. The aim is to help the reader/beholder reach a position in which she can better understand thegeneral textual meaning. Not by chance have I referred to the five stages in the model in terms of criteria and indices fordefinition and evaluation. The semiotic character of the model does not refer to the text and to the protagonist as a closedstatement. On the contrary, the proposed model opens the text to the participation of two additional factors, namely thereader/beholder and the historical context. Their participation is allowed by their being important partners in the search forthe maximum quantity of textual signs and turning them into the overall meaning.

The central importance of the five-stage model lies in its ability to focus the research on the protagonist. This focusingacquires the qualities of institutionalization, and any such institutionalization acquires a methodological-scientific character.The five stages of the model constitute criteria or indices which can be used based on the data of the text itself in order tofollow the protagonist from a condition of pre-action to a condition of action and finally to a condition of post-action. Thesethree states are exploited here to organize the logical array of the five stages of the model. The growing amount ofresearch on heroism in literature, in the cinema, and in performance arts stresses two criteria for establishing the status ofthe protagonist as the hero in the text: his centrality and the lofty normative context which allows the addressee to identifywith him, as mentioned above. The proposed model confirms the first criterion, and at just the same time also fullydislodges the second. Values and norms presented by the protagonist-whether he is a hero, an anti-hero, or asemi-hero-are irrelevant to our discussion. A hero can be a robber or dreadful murderer who succeeds in his mission; an


7 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

anti-hero can be a perfect idealist who entirely fails in his mission; and a semi-hero, of course, can be both. Evaluativejudgement causes confusion and misunderstanding by use of a series of unexplained and unconvincing terms in heroismsuch as "a failed hero", "a victim hero", "positive hero", "negative hero", and so on. There is a semantic, logical, andsubstantial contradiction between the terms "hero" and "failed/victim". I wonder, how can a failed character be a hero?Terms such as "positive" and "negative" are only adjectives, with nothing to do with the substantial and real sense ofheroism. One of the major advantages of the proposed five-stage model, for the definition of heroism, is to replace thecriterion of evaluative judgement by an aesthetic and a methodological criterion.

The five-stage model has two additional advantages: its ability to be inclusive and adequate for various art forms, and itsability to bridge the gaps between extreme approaches in the study of character in literature and art. The model proposedhere suits all types of narrative and drama and all performance and film production arts. Accordingly, I have madeextensive use of the term text as an open concept to include all these types of arts, and for the same reason I have madeextensive use ofthejakobsonian term addressee to include all readers and beholders. The ability of the five-stage modelto bridge the gaps in the study of character is manifested in the extension of the stages of this model to variouscategories and domains. Whether the character is a function of various events or otherwise, namely whether the characteris needed in the text only as the performer of action or whether the events exist in the text only thanks to the character-ineither case we are not dealing with the disconnection between the two components character-action. The five-stagemodel demonstrates the conciliatory approach by attributing great importance to the unique and personal characteristicsof the protagonist, to the system of intentions and wills and their effect on the activity and its direction, as can be seen inthe first three stages of the model classified as pre-action. It attributes the same kind of importance to the actions of thecharacter and to various outcomes for the status of this character in the text, unrelated with personal data, with theintentions and wills of the character, as can be seen in the two last stages, which were categorized as action andpost-action. Only a model that acquires a semiotic character allows reference to the protagonist as a large sign that actsas the focus of an entire system of various omens. Finally, only such a model can serve for the synthesis of variousapproaches to the study of characterization in literature particularly and in art in general.

The first three stages of the five-stage model, classified as pre-action, mainly deal with various personal conditions of theprotagonist which are required in order to perform a certain type of action, assuming that actions don't just happen bythemselves. They require three preconditions-motivation, will, and ability-related to one another logically. The will is afunction of motivation, namely the existence of a certain will depends on the existence of motivation. Likewise, no will cantranslate motivation into action without the proper ability. The three preconditions demand dealing with the personal innerfacet of the protagonist, which is not easy and is sometimes even extremely difficult. The difficulty may be the outcome ofa lack of textual data which allow entry into the inner world of the protagonist. After all, we are not dealing with a real-lifecharacter, but with an art product which is only person-like. Therefore it is not always possible to reconstruct with precisionthe personality of the character based only on a linguistic or a visual work of art. If we refer to the first three stages aspreconditions of pre-action, then the fourth stage deals with action itself, in a process placed by certain researchers ofcharacterization theory at the center of their activity, disregarding other preconditions. The importance of this stage stemsfrom its being a continuous process that spreads over a large part of the text, and also from the possibility that thepreconditions are insufficient. The last stage, the outcome stage, indicates a state of a summative product whetherpositive, negative, or open-one that does not extend over a large portion of the text. In the proposed model, the fifth stageis the most decisive; it is the only one that shows the extent of success/failure of the protagonist in his mission. This is thefactor that determines the placement of the protagonist in different variations of heroism.

[Footnote]Notes1. Frye speaks of five transformations of the hero in the history of literature based on the following scale: God----> demigod----->leader-----> average man--------> ironic man (1957: 42-43). H. R. Jauss writes in detail about three central transformations,stating: "The historiographic schema of idealistic aesthetics as also of archetypal criticism, was a kind of scale which determinedthe range of the concept of character, from the incarnation of a god through the aristocratic hero down to the average man ofeveryday reality" (1974: 283). Jauss further divides these three transformations into five types of heroes and discusses varioustypes of readers' identifications with those types: the ceremonial hero, the perfect hero, the imperfect hero, the suffering hero(the hard-pressed hero), and the missing hero (the anti-hero) (296-317).2. See Docherty 1983: 30-31. Numerous factors led to this significant change in the course of history. Various researchersindicate the beginning of the twentieth century and the aftermath of World War I as the time when the hero underwent the mostsignificant transformation. However, Ralph Fox believes that the dying of the classical hero had already started in thenineteenth-century novel owing to the weakening of the position of realism in literature and art (1937: Chapter 8, 'Death of theHero').3. In answer to the question: "Is the 'hero' or character, the captor of the imaginary dead?" Cixous answers unambiguously: "No,he is just brought out of his blinding ignorance; he is unmasked: Which does not mean revealed! But rather denounced, returnedto his reality as simulacrum, brought back to the mask as mask. He is given up then to the complexity of his subjectivity, to hismultiplicity, to his off-center position, to his permanent escapade: like the author, he disappears only to be multiplied, attains theself only to be in the same instant, differentiated into a trans-subjective effervescence (Cixous 1974: 387).4. The logic behind the division of the five-stage model into three major categories is similar to the logic on which ClaudeBremond based his division of the story-fabula into three logical stages: possibility (or potential), process, and outcome. In thefirst stage he defines the purpose; in the second stage (the process) two situations are possible (taking steps or not takingsteps). In the third stage (the outcome) two situations are possible: success or failure, namely attaining the objective or missing it(Rimmon-Kenan 1983: 22-28).


8 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

5. Psychologists and psychoanalysts usually differentiate "impulse" and "intentions", noting that a significant difference may existbetween the real impulses which operate behind some kind of activity and the stated intentions. Good intentions do not assure aproper outcome and they may conceal inverse impulses. The final outcome of our deeds presumably suits the purpose for whichthe action has been performed (Jung 1964: 15).6. Psychologists and psychoanalysts discussed the existence of conflicts among various wishes within the person himself. Oneof the clearest signs of this is the conflict between the id and the super-ego and defense mechanisms activated in such cases(Freud 1961).7. In psychoanalytical terms we could say that motivation (need) is closer to the id and will is closer to the ego and thesuper-ego. The source of confusion seems to lie in that part of the discussion referred to as the three psychic institutions. Formore details on these institutions (Freud 1961: 5-41).

[Reference]ReferencesBERSANI, Leo.1976. A Future for Astyanax (Boston: Little, Brown).BOOTH, Alison, ed.,1993. Famous Last Words: Changes in Gender and Narrative Closure (Charlottesville and London: University of Virginia).BRADLEY, A. C.1965. Shakespearean Tragedy (London: Macmillan).CHATMAN, Seymour.1972. "On the Formalist-Structuralist Theory of Character,"Journal of Literary Semantics, 1, 57-79.CIXOUS, Hlne.1974. "The Character of Character'," New Literary History, 5:2, 383-402.COHN, Dorrit.1978. Transparent Minds: Narrative Modes for Presenting Consciousness in Fiction (Princeton NJ.: Princeton University Press).DOCHERTY, Thomas.1983. Reading (Absent) Character: Towards A Theory of Characterization in Fiction (Oxford: Clarendon Press).EWEN, Josef.1993. Character in Narrative (Tel Aviv: Sifri'at Po'alim), (Hebrew).FERRARA, Fernando.1974. "Theory and Model for the Structural Analysis of Fiction" New Literary History, 5, 245-268.FOX, Ralph.1937. The Novel and the People (London, 1937), chapter 8, "Death of the Hero".FREUD, Anna.1961. The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense (London: Hogarth Press).FRYE, Northrop.1957. Anatomy of Criticism (Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press).HALL, Calvin S., and Gardner LINDZEY.1967. Theories of Personality, 19 edition, (New York: J. Wiley & Sons, Inc.).HORST, S., and Ingrid DAEMMRICH.1987. Themes and Motifs-A Handbook (Tubingen: Francke).JAGENDORF, Zvi.1984. The Happy End of Comedy: Jonson, Molire, and Shakespeare (Newark: University of Delaware Press, London andToronto: Associated University Press).JAUSS, Hans Robert.1974. "Levels of Identification of Hero and Audience," New Literary History, V: 2, 283-317.JUNG, Carl Gustav.1964. The Development of Personality (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul).O'FAOLAIN, Scan.1971. The Vanishing Hero: Studies in Novelists of the Twenties (Freeport, N.Y.: Books for Libraries Press).PRINCE, Gerald.1987. A Dictionary of Narratology (Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press).RIMMON-KENAN, Shlomith.1983. Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics (London and New York: Routledge).ROBERTS, Deborah, Francis DUNN, and Don FOWLER, eds.,1997. Classical Closure: Reading the End in Greek and Latin Literature (Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press).STERNBERG, Meir.1978. Expositional Modes and Temporal Ordering in Fiction (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press)TOMASHEVSKY, Boris.1965. "Thematics," in Russian Formalist Criticism, ed. Paul A. Olson, trans. Lee T. Lemon and Marion J. Reis (Lincoln andLondon: University of Nebraska Press).WEINSHEIMER, Joel.1979. "Theory of Character: Emma," Poetics Today, 1:1-2, 185-211.WELSH, Alexander.1992. The Hero of the Waverley Novels: With New Essays on Scott (Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press).

[Author Affiliation]IbrahimTaha University of Haifa


9 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

[Author Affiliation]IBRAHIM TAHA (b. 1960 September 2). Academic Status: Senior lecturer in Arabic Language and Literature at Haifa University,Israel. Mail Address: Dept. of Arabic Language and Literature, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. E-mail: . Educational Background: Ph.D. in comparative literature from the Hebrew university of Jerusalem, 1994.His principal research interests are modern Arabic literature, semiotics and theory of literature, and comparative literature.

Indexing (document details)

Subjects: Semiotics, Novels, Short stories, Heroism & heroes, Literary criticism

Author(s): Ibrahim Taha

Author Affiliation: IbrahimTaha University of Haifa

IBRAHIM TAHA (b. 1960 September 2). Academic Status: Senior lecturer in Arabic Language andLiterature at Haifa University, Israel. Mail Address: Dept. of Arabic Language and Literature,University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. E-mail: . EducationalBackground: Ph.D. in comparative literature from the Hebrew university of Jerusalem, 1994. Hisprincipal research interests are modern Arabic literature, semiotics and theory of literature, andcomparative literature.

Document types: Commentary

Document features: References

Publication title: The American Journal of Semiotics. Kent: 2002. Vol. 18, Iss. 1-4; pg. 107, 21 pgs

Source type: Periodical

ISSN: 02777126

ProQuest document ID: 1077837771

Text Word Count 9275

Document URL: http://proquest.umi.com.monstera.cc.columbia.edu:2048/pqdweb?did=1077837771&sid=13&Fmt=3&c lientId=15403&RQT=309&VName=PQD

Copyright 2009 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved.

Columbia University Libraries


10 of 10 12/07/2009 12:31 p.m.

Documents

202 Taha Heroism in Literature a Semiotic Model