Did the definition/vision of the hero in literature change from Ancient Greek perceptions of a hero to the views of a hero in the Rennaisance? In reading literature, sometimes I unconciously ‘connect’ two characters from different stories, but then I come to the realization that the two stories may have been written 1000 years apart, with very separate attitudes and tones.
Are some heroes timeless? Or does our view of a hero in literature constantly change to suit the influences around us?
Interesting question.
Had a Shakespeare discussion the other day that started in the typical way–which is your favorite play, which is your favorite character, which would you boink, etc.
The upshot was a realization that none (I say none, but will entertain suggestions otherwise) of Shakespeare’s leads is a perfectly likeable romantic hero/ine. The leads are mostly heroes in the Greek sense–they’ve got that tragic flaw thing going on. This of course helps to make them all so human and not typically pleasant.
(The lust interests for the ladies tended to Hal/Edmund, both attracting through thoroughgoing intelligent evil–or at least amorality.)
This is in contrast to, for instance, the older Arthur legends, where some flaws were there but you still got overall good/admirable characters as heroes, suitable for romantic idolization.
So, yeah, I think that at least one (a really big one) Renaissance author did adopt the classical hero concept.