So yesterday during class I mentioned the possibility of Albanov being an ironic hero. I figured I should make a second blog post to house that thought here. Do we consider Albanov a hero because he survived? He should be commended for being one out of a pair of people to survive the expedition. Or, he should be reviled for being one of the lucky few members to make it out alive. If we interpret it as happenstance, it makes Albanov an unlikely and ironic hero. It wasn't because of merit that he survived, but through sheer happenstance and luck. This is also supported by his atypical hero characteristics. Albanov reprimands the group and is quick to call them lazy or order them around. He also seems very aloof and not too strongly connected to any of them, a farcry from the camaraderie of past protagonists we've had. That said, is Albanov a traditional hero or an unlike hero?
I spoke in class about how I view heroes as externally defined. In other words you are only a hero if people look up to you as a hero. I don't think that his lack of relationships per say makes him an anti-hero, but I do think admiring someone who makes hardly any emotional connections is unlikely. If we alternatively think of heroes like superheros, their heroic acts always involve saying people or entire towns, fighting evil. Albanov certainly does not fill either of these things either, as though he does aid the other men in reaching home, he doesn't seem to really care about their outcome.
ReplyDelete