So this is where I'm at after distilling the info:
- what it means to be a "feminine antihero". how does this effect the choices the person makes? are the motives the same as a supposed "masculine" antihero? does gender even matter?
- and running off the end of the last one... does gender facilitate a substantiated difference or is this clinical error that tries to divide the two? how is the actuality of it really hybridized? can it even be hybridized?
- how has the antihero changed? this may not be something i explore time wise in the work but maybe display the end result of the evolution. characters that were once seen as symbols of perfect justice have been recharacterized as the antihero. why?
- to be a true "hero", does one have to be Superman with a vision of utopia? does realistic perspective place someone at the antihero level? is it possible for the world to one day become a utopia and if it's not true, is it still a worthy goal? if one has the realist perspective that society is mostly bad, then what is the point in pursuing justice when all efforts will be meaningless long term and on a larger scale?
- does inability to see "right" and "wrong" make one an antihero?
- is the antihero really any worse than regular citizens when they have their own selfish motives? on an individual basis, do not most people have more concern for their self than anyone else? why judge the antihero based on this criteria if the person judging is already in the same scenario?
No comments:
Post a Comment