?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Random Musings
Warning: PG 
29th-Apr-2010 02:16 pm
Warning: PG


Photobucket


Twin Souls
Comments 
(Deleted comment)
29th-Apr-2010 09:37 pm (UTC)
Oh yes, he is, isn't he? =)
29th-Apr-2010 10:59 pm (UTC)
Avon makes a good "Big Damn Hero"
Nice pair of Avons in the lower picture.
29th-Apr-2010 11:12 pm (UTC)
Avon makes a good "Big Damn Hero"
Yes, very...
30th-Apr-2010 06:10 am (UTC)
Though I prefer him more in the role of anti-hero (who despite himself, then turns into a hero anyway...).
Nice job!
30th-Apr-2010 06:53 am (UTC)
True. Though there are many 'flavours' of antiheroes. Batman, and many of our comic heroes are considered antiheroes.

The antihero I prefer, and the way I've always seen Avon, is a sharp edged, pragmatic hero. A Sam Spade-like character who is clearly a hero, but doesn't speak like one, is very cynical and doesn't suffer fools.

Edited at 2010-04-30 06:55 am (UTC)
30th-Apr-2010 07:05 am (UTC)
Although...Blake also falls into the category of antihero. With what he does and his lack of morality, he cannot be considered a traditional white-hat hero either.

A white-hat hero, has problems lying to their friends, does not go around committing mass murder, doesn't consider it all right to work with mob bosses and drug lords and cause the suffering and deaths of multitudes because winning is the only thing important to him, nor do they go around committing vigilante acts and summarily executing people without any proof, all of which Blake does.
30th-Apr-2010 11:59 am (UTC)
In regard to Blake, you give new meaning to the word anti-hero....
30th-Apr-2010 05:33 pm (UTC)
It's not a new definition. Nor is it my personal definition. It is well within the definition of an antihero by people who are much more learned about literary antiheroes than I am.

There is the narrow, usually limited popular definition of an antihero which is reflected a lot in science fiction. And Avon definitely falls in that category.

Blake has a lot of the characteristics of the traditional hero and so many view him as one. But then, so does Avon, though not as many. But it is the other things that Blake does and characteristics he shows that a traditional hero would never do and which definitely fall in the category of things an antihero would do, that make him an antihero.

A true archetypical hero is a white-hat, perfectly moral character with no flaws at all and who would never ever compromise his values no matter what.

These are not my definitions.

The idea of the antihero is one who is 'grittier', more realistic, and is in many ways against the 'whiter-than-snow' hero of tradition who would die before he would lie to anyone or betray their trust, least of all to his friends. All of which Blake does repeatedly.

Blake can in no definition of the word be considered without some deep flaws. The fact that he considers any act, including mass murder of innocents, becoming a drug dealer who will be responsible for the harming of countless others, and being a vigilante as perfectly justified, tears him out of any list of true archetypical heroes.

The fact that he considers winning more important than keeping moral value and not hurting innocents, and that the end justifies any means, makes him an antihero, even more than Avon.

In fact, other than for some surface, behavioral things in which Avon is more of an antihero than Blake (and these are the things which most people seem to harp on when saying Avon is an antihero), actually Blake has far more deeply disturbing character flaws which fall within the antihero definition than Avon does.
3rd-May-2010 06:03 am (UTC)
Another type of anti-hero is a character who constantly moves from one disappointment in their lives to the next, without end, with only occasional and fleeting successes. But they persist and even attain a form of heroic success by steadfastly never giving-up or changing their goals. These characters often keep a deep-seated optimism that one day, they will succeed. But in the end they still meet the ultimate fate of a traditional villain, failure.
= Blake
3rd-May-2010 06:16 am (UTC)
Yes, that is one aspect of Blake which meets the anti-hero critieria.

All of his character flaws, of which there are far more than Avon, plus all the immoral things he does, also qualify him to be on more of the villainous end of the anti-hero spectrum as well.
3rd-May-2010 07:06 am (UTC)
That's what makes him also interesting, though.
3rd-May-2010 08:05 am (UTC)
It's a personal like and dislike ;) And I respect that you like Blake.

But for me, personally, Avon with his flaws, is infinitely fascinating.

And personally, Blake's flaws make me sick. I cannot in any conscience like or think positively of anyone who regularly commits acts of mass murder on the pretext that it is justified. Or to think that murder of innocents (men, women, children, babies) is perfectly all right in order to prove himself right, no matter how good intentioned he thinks he is. It just makes him arrogant to think that his 'righteousness' allows him to play god with other people's lives and that's sickening to me, not admirable.

Every tyrant and dictator out there has the same thought processes to justify their actions. They all think they are justified. Just because someone thinks they have 'good' intentions, doesn't make them good. These people do not recognize an objective morality. They think they can define morality to suit themselves. That makes them, and Blake, immoral. Because anyone can subjectively define any act completely justified, even acts of unconscienable mass murder.

The problem with that is, where does it stop? It doesn't because he thinks he is above any objective morality. He defines morality to be anything he wants. Which is fine as long as we agree with his actions but what happens when he crosses the line? Which he will inevitably do because he has no limits that curb what he is unwilling to do other than personal whim.

Just like Blake in the final episode. Deva blasts him for his decisions, accusing him of playing stupid games that will get people killed. I just love it, even at the very end, Blake has more of his own people who see him for what he really is, and its not admirable.

And Blake refuses to listen, he demands that Deva indulge his silly games. Ok, sorry...we're talking about people, innocent people, getting killed here...not indulging in flavours of ice cream. But this is the extent of Blake's morality. He has none other than what he feels like.

To me, who flies, or at least used to fly, regularly for business, it is the actions of self-righteous fanatics like Blake who are responsible for me being afraid to fly or if heaven-forbid some bastard fanatic decided to blow up my plane because he was on some crusade where he didn't feel he had a choice, it would be because of people like Blake.

To me, his are not likeable or interesting character flaws. They're despicable. No one has the right to play god with someone else's life. Go ahead and commit noble suicide if you want. If he had done that I would probably like Blake. But he doesn't. He crosses lines that usually only villains are capable of or heroes who are so deeply flawed that they usually end up with a bad end, or they ride off into the sunset without anything, because it seems most writers recognize that not giving these people bad ends would not be a good idea.

Have you ever watched the Watchmen? In the end, the heroes, the real heroes, realize that their friend has betrayed them and committed an heinous act for the sake of a 'good' intention. But in the perspective of the movie, he is clearly the villain, despite his so-called good intentions doing good. And one of his friends is so sickened by it that he goes and kills himself because he cannot stand what this so-called friend and hero has done.

It really amazes me to think that a show that caters to kids would be so irresponsible as to hold up what Blake does as the actions of a hero. Is it really responsible to have kids think that the ends justifies the means, regardless of how immoral it is? If I had kids, I would never let them watch Blakes 7 without some very strong moral guidance.
3rd-May-2010 09:28 am (UTC)
No one has the right to play god with someone else's life.
Isn't that what all (great) leaders do to some extend (esp in wartime)? And what we, the followers allow them to do?

Avon and the others had opportunities enough to 'rid' themselves of Blake. He made it very easy for them after Gan's death (Trial). Maybe the rest of the crew are equally to blame by letting themselves be led by Blake?

Your Blake resembles a psychopath (who make great leaders and business men I heard, because of their lack of conscience and a Blake like that would have been even more interesting), but I can name several instances where he showed that he cared and was subject to remorse and was able to admit failure(Star One). To me Blake was just a man, severely blinded by idealism, revenge and the hope that he could make a difference, who just happened to stumble upon the best cards dealt to him ever: Liberator and his crew/Avon.

Came across an interesting book: http://www.flipkart.com/book/great-leaders-tyrants-arnold-blumberg/0313287511
Might change your view on Blake as a leader? (I haven't read it, btw)
30th-Apr-2010 06:26 pm (UTC)
Hmm, looking at lists of antiheroes on several sites that give definitions, and some lists even include Dr. Who. Which I don't quite agree with but I understand why they would say that. He does do some things that antiheroes do. But the Doctor is still more moral than Blake ever was.
This page was loaded Nov 24th 2017, 8:28 pm GMT.