Talk:Antihero/Archive 2

Willy Loman
Willy Loman is most certainly an anti-hero (the modern pop-interpretation of the anti-hero as a "dark hero" not withstanding). To make that point, here's a bit from The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright © 2003, Columbia University Press:
 * Literary characters that can be considered anti-heroes are: Leopold Bloom in James Joyce's novel Ulysses (1922), Willy Loman in Arthur Miller's play Death of a Salesman (1949), the bombardier Yossarian in Joseph Heller's novel Catch-22 (1961), and the protagonists of many of Philip Roth's and Kurt Vonnegut's novels.

I'm starting to think that the right way to deal with this page is to nuke the examples. I know, I know, but stay with me a second. The actual content of this page is a mess, and only recently did I add a small amount of the historical context for the term. Why would that be? Well, for the most part people come to this page and see examples. They then want to add their favorites rather than doing actual research. If, rather than breaking down categories of anti-hero (and honestly, our categories are on shakey ground as O.R. in the first place), we were to make the article more about the development of the term over the course of the history of western literary criticism; contrasts with non-western literary devices; and two or three VERY historical examples, then we might actually have a shot at making this the kind of article that people benefit from reading. Just my $0.02, but think it over. Meanwhile, yes, Willy Loman is an anti-hero. -Harmil 23:21, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, just as long as we don't get List of Anti-heroes cropping up in a seperate article again, I would love to see this article actually become encylopedic. CaveatLector 00:00, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Speaking as somebody who only came upon the article today, I would agree. - DavidWBrooks 01:00, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't personally have anything against a list of anti-heroes in another article (there's a List of super heroes, List of super villains, List of villains and List of fictional apes, after all), but that's a side-point. The key thing is that it seems we have consensus on deleting the list of examples, and expanding the article. I'll do some research over the coming weekend and see what I can come up with for the history of the concept and try to build a framework for the expanded article. Once I have that, I'll be able to reasonably start on such edits. I don't think it's worth deleting the examples until we have some meat to replace them with.


 * Ultimately, there will always be some form of exmaples in this article (it would be hard to cite sources without them), but I'm thinking that they should be inline, and based on the development of the anti-hero in literature not the latest re-hash of the originals (e.g. "In 1949 Arthur Miller further expanded the archetype to include the utter failure with his play, Death of a Salesman. His Willy Loman is the American theater's 'most tortured antihero ... stand-in for the bottomless terror of American life, the fear of being branded a failure.' as The Washington Post described him. ") Then it becomes a history with some footnotes, rather than a cast of characters, which should attract far fewer "oh, what about my favorite" type edits. -Harmil 04:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * For the list issue, check out the articles AfD archive: Articles_for_deletion/List_of_anti-heroes. Basically, it was deleted for the same reason why the examples on this page threaten to overflow.  Naming somebody an anti-hero is a lot more subjective than listing them a hero or a villain or a super hero, etc.  I like your idea, however, of adding two or three small examples and making the article focus more on how the anti-hero functions within the literary tradition. CaveatLector 06:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I never got to it last weekend (buying a house), but I'll get back to it ASAP. -Harmil 19:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The Assassin / Spy
I thought I would float this one before putting it on the page. The spy/assassin was once considered contemptuously, even by the people whose side he/she was on. For example, Mata Hari from World War I. It has only been since the introduction of James Bond by Ian Flemming in the mid 20th century that the assassin/spy has gained any respectability. Even so, the spy/assassin remains outside "respectable society." Good examples (forgoing Bond, who is a bit too mainstream) would be the Jackal from Day of the Jackal and The Bride from Kill Bill. Thoughts anyone? 155.84.57.253 16:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I would add a note to a paragraph toward the beginning. Something like:


 * One archetypical character, the assassin or spy, has changed in literature during the course of the 20th century form a villain to the subject of the sub-genre of spy fiction. Some spies and assassins are still villainous, while others are heroic. Some few fall into the middle as one of the established archetypes of anti-hero.


 * The key here is that assassins and spies aren't an archetype of anti-hero, they are instead members of professions that pre-dispose them to one of the other archetypes based on their characterization. -Harmil 17:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

In Sun Tzu's book, the art of war, which predates Christ, it argued that spies and assassins were to be reasted with respect for the work they do, and the fact that their work can stop many battles from ever taking place. In that respect spies and assassins may be considered an established type of hero. In Europian culture spies and assassins were considered villians, so it not established there as a type of hero.

I guess the matter rests in WHY and HOW they spy and assassinate. It their motives reasonably traditional, then I reacon they should be accepted as a type of hero.

It all depends on the motive and how they go about it. If they assassinate a tyrant and his main supporter because they are Evil, then the killer may be considered Good. If they did it because they disliked his beard, then they may be an antihero. If they did it after forcing them at gun point to dress up in ladies underwear and and dance while recording it on comera, just for the sake of doing so, then they are an Antihero!

Since they were considered a normal type of hero in one main type of culture, does that mean they can't be generally defined as antiheroes in general? I would like to know. Corrupt one 02:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Pronouns
As per my talk page, please see http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002748.html for comments and references from a well-known and respected linguist on this issue. 'They' has been a form of gender neutral pronoun since Shakespeare. CaveatLector 20:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, though you really shouldn't have to provide citation for something like that. ;) -Harmil 20:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Where's Shadow the Hedgehog?!
I'm a fan of Shadow the Hedgehog. So, I checked the "Shadow the Hedgehog" article on this website. One of the suggestions under "Related Topics" or whatever it is was "Anti-hero". I checked it out as well--but I didn't see Shadow anywhere on the freakin' page! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?! Shadow is an obvious example of an anti-hero! Why doesn't somebody get rid of Homer Simpson (How he got there, I don't know) and replace him with Shadow? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.75.211.113 (talk • contribs).


 * This page is about the concept of an anti-hero, not a list of all anti-heroes in fiction. -Harmil 19:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Feel free to start that page though! Because Wikipedia does not have enough random lists. :) List of anti-heroes in fiction jengod 19:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Please don't. Such a list was already deleted for very good reasons. See Articles_for_deletion/List_of_anti-heroes. CaveatLector 19:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Which will spawn List of animal anti-heroes in fiction, which will lead to List of cartoon animal anti-heroes in fiction, which will create List of cartoon animal anti-heroes with lots of spines in fiction, which will generate List of cartoon animal anti-heroes with lots of spines and names related to visual effects produced by light in fiction, where Shadow the Hedgehog will reign supreme. - DavidWBrooks 19:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Ignoring the fact he is an animated animal, the criteria to decide if he is or is NOT an antihero is to look at his characteristics from a non physical point of view. Also, a semi conventional type of superhero in this day and age is the Speedster, this may rule him out as an antihero. If he IF considered to be unconventional enough to be considered an antihero, he might be listed as an example of an antihero a fair number of people would be familiar with. Corrupt one 03:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

About Batman
Some clarifications would be nice. I mean, it is clear that Batman fits the descripcion of his category, but in the context of comics heroes, the term anti-hero wouldn't fit. I realize this article is talking about a more broad context, but if editors are to use Batman as an example there should be some clarifications. Usually, in comics context only the likes of Spawn, Venom, Catwoman, or maybe the X-men or the Hulk are considered anti-heroes.

Batman has gone anti-hero on some ocations, like the Dark Knight Returns or the 90s movies, but never on the regular continuity of his stories. And what is said about his first storyes back in the 40's is in the above section, is also taken out of context. Back then killing the bad guy was the right thing to do, there was no Comics Code Authority, mobsters got along with way to much stuff and the States was in war. The police wasn't after him, and Gordon was always supporting him. Besides, Batman left behing the guns before his creator, Bob Kane, left and way before the 60s show.

In short, what I'm asking for is a clarification stating that batman is not seen as an anti-hero in comics. You can confirm this with the editors on Batman page. Thanks.--T-man... &quot;&quot;worst vandal ever&quot;&quot; 23:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Would somebody be kind enough to answer me already?!! I'm serious about doing corrections. --T-man... &quot;&quot;worst vandal ever&quot;&quot; 06:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, T-Man. I'm not an expert on the literary terminology, but based on this entry I think that the argument would be that any vigilante — that is, anyone who pursues justice by extralegal means — is a type of antihero, regardless of other aspects of their character.  Batman is arguably the most famous vigilante of all, and so is a good example to illustrate the concept.  Does that help? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, actually I get that regardless he isn't outlaw, he is a vigilante, and vigilantes are anti-heroes. My only point is that in comics context, anti-hero is usually used for outlaws, the kind of vigilantes that not only take down the bad guy, but also punishes or kills them. You know the Punisher-Spawn-Azrael type. That's why nobody acepted the anti-hero categorization on the Batman page. I guess my objection is that both pages should be coherent with each other. Maybe, that comic notion of who is an anti-hero I'm talking about was wrong all along. But I don't like contradictions on the wikipedia. What are your thoughts on that matter?--T-man... &quot;&quot;worst vandal ever&quot;&quot; 19:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You oversimplify the discussion the Batman page concerning this subject. The question of Batman as an anti-hero is seen as up in the air on that end (for some odd reason).  Considering that the definition of an anti-hero.  Anti-heroes are STILL HEROES.  They still do heroic things, they just use methods and have personalities which are not associate with your common everyday 'hero'.  Achilles, for instance, CANNOT be considered an anti-hero, because he fits the cultural paradigms required of a 'hero' within his culture.  Batman, however, is an anti-hero not only because he is a vigilante, but also for his personality and focus on constant revenge.  I'm not quite sure where you are getting this idea of a 'comic notion of an anti-hero' from.  Being a 'dick' DOES make you an anti-hero because our culture conceives of 'heroes' as 'nice guys.'  This entire discussion might be moot later, because I still think that THIS page needs edits in order to make it more literary and academic, in which case the examples might be dropped, in which case Batman would not be included and that discussion could be moved to the Batman page. CaveatLectorTalk 21:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, yeah. Sorry to say this, but you wrote a lot of stuff I don't disagree with. I only care for the point about what is an anti-hero from comics perspective against the overall lyterature perspective. On the Batman page, the case was over, I've seen that happen with other issues. Sometimes a discussion doesn't end with the people involved saying 'agreed', but the issue is over because most people favor one point of view. And really, it beats me, but Batman is perfect as a vigilante anti-hero example but when you talk comics almost only the 'grim 80s' type of hero fits as an anti-hero. Like it or not batman is a fine example, the article isn't talking only about literature, movies and comics count as well, try erasing it if you want, I won't stop you, but I'm betting people are not going to let you or agree with you. Just my opinion, nothing more of course.--T-man... &quot;&quot;worst vandal ever&quot;&quot; 01:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Uh, and acording to the article you are wrong, anti-hero is not necessarely a hero, the article states that ocationally a villain can be an anti-hero.
 * But you are right about one thing, it is quite incomplete, anti-heroes date probabbly from Renacentism. Medieval literature heroes were all about crusades and saving dames and the king being almost saints, but Don Quijote and Shakespare works start setting a lot of good examples of heroes that go against that. While Don Quijote de la Mancha tries to be as good as the medival standard, he performs his "dutties" as good as Goofy or Donald would, Cervantes is clearly mocking that standard and making the Hidalgo the opposite of it.--T-man... &quot;&quot;worst vandal ever&quot;&quot; 01:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * 1. You poorly describe the Medieval romance heroes. They are not 'all about crusades and saving dames and etc'.  Sir Gawain for instance is far more complex.  Cervantes' work is specifically a mock-epic (or a mock-romance) that attempts to parody the style in general. 2.  when speaking of 'literature', I talk about anything that is a 'text'.  In THAT sense, comics and films ARE 'literature'.  Besides that point, comic books are really just graphic novels.  Hence they should be treated to the same standards as any other literary work, and if you are going to define a hero-type, it has to apply across the board.  3. As for villains being anti-heroes, you seem to be missing the semantics.  'Hero' and 'Villain' are not diametrically opposed outside of simplistic fiction.  Some of the greatest 'villains' in literature (Javert, for example) are actually very noble people, and some characters who used to be villainous (say, Venom) might become 'heroes' in the sense that they fight crime, do heroic actions, or are the protagonist of a story.  The point stands.  Just because Batman does 'noble things' does NOT preclude him from the label of 'anti-hero'.  I would not press this point so much if I didn't feel as though he is actually quite a good example and, if examples are to be included, should certainly be there. CaveatLectorTalk 23:22, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Mmmph! I say "tomato", you say "tomahto, you poorly described it". At least that's how I felt it. What's your problem? nobody is fighting.

I'm coming straight from Cervantes words, I think there might be the slightes posibility that he kinda sort of knows a little more about the topic. Quijote without his goofyness would be a complete hero; and the models he was following was the one fron hundreds of medieval books the hidalgo read. He said what they would say, and their ideals and motifs were the exact same, the diference is that Quijote was in the wrong era and he wasn't skilled. Little weaknesses that make characters complex don't make them necesarely anti-heroes either. Noa got drunk, David had quite some mojo, Abraham fail to trust God once and Moises was kinda moody for my taste, but they wouldn't be pictured as anti-heros. Even Jesus seemed a little cranky in St. John's version. Imperfections are not enough to make a character an anti-hero, that's just character development. Ok, I'm just babbling, THE THING IS your #1 comment is just about ofending me, my point was to determine wether the anti-heros are a XX century thing or not, and you completely missed it. Instead you just write unnecesary criticism. We also clearly agree on including comics, why do you kept writing in such antagonic way? I also think Batman is fine listed there, but some explanation should be done. My proposal was explaining the concept from comics perspective. If you don't buy it try sticking the anti-hero category in batman's article. Batman editors would eat alive the person sticking it, they can be very anal about it sometimes. And please, let's agree to keep this respectful. Not because I say so, but because it's the right thing to do and nevermind if I'm not perfect we deserve to treat each other with respect. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by T-man, the Wise Scarecrow (talk • contribs).


 * My comments were neither disrespectful nor insulting to you personally. I was discussing your comments, and did not make any ad hominum attacks.  To say that you poorly described something is not to insult you, but to evaluate what you said.  I appologize if it seemed offensive to you, but it results from projection on your part.  My comment was not about offending you, but about how I feel as though your reading on this topic is misguided. (Nor was I claiming that Don Quijote is not an anti-hero.  He's one of the perfect examples.)  Drawing a line at the creation of the anti-hero as a literary concept is perfectly sound (I myself have done so in previous comments concerning how reidiculous it was to include Achilles on the List of Anti-Hereos page whose deletion I spearheaded).  In fact, I would love it if we could get some verifiable sources on it so that we might make the article more detailed.  However, I do not quite see how you have shown that the definition of an anti-hero is different in comics, or should even be considered different from one form of literature to another.  The concept of the anti-hero DOES change from era to era (because the concept of a 'hero' does), but I still don't see where your argument comes from (or, for that matter, what point you're trying to make).  CaveatLectorTalk 18:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

If he is a vigilante, does that mean he is a traditional type of hero? What I mean is that ALL the definitions I have come across have stated that an antihero can't be a conventional type of hero, and a vigilante appears to be a type that has become more conventional. Corrupt one 00:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

User 68.171.24.168
Please discuss your disagreement with the current version HERE and do not just simply revert back to the Punisher example. CaveatLectorTalk 18:24, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Your vigilante examples I'm Still bitching about Batman
I think they are both wrong: within superhero context Batman is not conceived or viewed as an anti-hero, and Dirty Harry migth be an anti-hero, but not a vigilante. Harry broke the law before quitting, but on a trial he wouldn't be acused of being a vigilante. That last one is just wrong by definition, if you enforce law either you do it as an oficer or you are a vigilante. It sounds fear to say Callahan is an anti-hero, but he doesnt qualify as a vigilante. Batman is kinda the opossite, he choosed to fight crime as a vigilante, but he doesn't take the law in his own hands. He is very observant of the law; so much that Police actually uses his servises all the time.

Probbably all superheros but Captain America are anti-heros according to the concept this article manages. But lets take, comics as a genre. Within this genre, only the vigilantes that commit murder, amputation or abuse villains are called anti-heros. Speciphically: Punisher, Spawn, Wolverine (sometimes), Hulk (too destructive), the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turttles, Lobo, Azrael, Etrigan, the Suicide Squad/Task Force X, Hitman, Deadpool, Catwoman, Venom, Rorschaw, the Comedian, V, Elektra.

Batman belongs to the comic "genre" (actually is the 9th. art, but for the sake of keeping this focused, let's stick with "genre"), and that genre uses different standards for its characters.

If this page doesn't respect the vision of the authors, it might as well include all heroes in Disney movies, they always kill the villains. That's Disney idea of heroism. Kill the bad guy, save the day, get the hot princess and go to sleep, just like in medieval times. The 7 Dwarfs might quilify as an angry mob killing an elder woman and yet they are not antiheros. That's because, if you see the movie they are not portraid as such.

This article in a contradictory way frames the antihero as a concept that started being used the last century and exposes Robin Hood, don Quijote and others as good examples. Achiles was rejected as an anti-hero because greeks didn't intended him to look as one. Well neither did Bob Kane when he created Batman. Remember: it was the 40s then. Beating the crap out of bad guys or even kill them was the right thing to do.

But that's a Batman that is not even remembered nowdays. If you think about the cannonical present-days Batman, he still isn't intended as an anti-hero, just a very practical and functional superhero.

Greeks din't view Achiles as an anti-hero, just as people in the comic "genre" media don't see Batman as an antihero. And comic "genre" is the media where Batman matters the most and has his origin. Don't buy my argument? Fine, try to stick the anti-hero category in the Batman article and you will see my point. Experts will never agree with the way this article use Batman.--T-man, the wise 08:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry :P. I did't know there were other Dirty Harry movies besides the first. heheh--T-man, the wise 08:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Where did the creators of this article got the stereotypes from? I think we should specify where this terms come from. It seems a little mede up without any mantion of the source of these terms.--T-man, the wise 09:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, second verse same as the first. Firstly, your comment about comic book heroes basically illustrates that the comic book is a genre which, by its nature, welcomes the use of the anti-hero as a trope.  Secondly, you have not (despite being asked several times) given references that refer to the term "anti-hero" being used differently within the context of the comic book genre).


 * Respecting the "vision" of the author not only falls under the Intentional Fallacy but also fails to realize that author is dead.


 * Merely killing a villain or enemy also has never been postulated as a criterion for anti-heroism.


 * This article does NOT say that the anti-hero was an idea created in the last century, considering that the history section includes a reference to the Victorian period and to William Shakespeare.


 * The Greeks did not "intend" anything with Achilles, he's part of an oral tradition. One could argue about what Homer intended with Achilles, but since his (Achilles') actions line up with the Greek conception of a Hero, that says little (i.e. it doesn't matter what Homer intended or not).  (Have you checked the hero page?) The Greeks are a unique culture.  If you wanted to make an argument that American culture does not view Batman's methods as anti-heroic, I feel your argument would be much stronger.  However, you point to some sort of "comic book world" here, which I am generally confused about.  Who draws the lines between these worlds (all things are Texts after all)? Who has shown how the classification of a cultural literary trope somehow means something different within THIS particular genre?  Can we have some citation?


 * I could possibly see a study of the evolution of a character like Batman showing how conceptions of the hero (and therefore, the anti-hero) have changed in recent times. It would definitely be an interesting article, though it would span at least 3 different Wiki sections.


 * As for the stereotypes themselves, I'm not quite sure I agree with their inclusion, but people wanted to illustrate the meaning of the anti-hero while still listing examples. This is a lot better than the list that was on here before.


 * I am, btw, adding an anti-hero section to Batman in the near future. CaveatLectorTalk 23:13, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, I want to clarify that I'm really enjoying this discussion, and all the new knoledge I'm getting from it. Thanks, man. I'm just questioning things in order to get them right, regardless which one of us is actually right (although my money is on myself, heheh).

You're right, the intention of the author is pointless. I now realize it thanks to you. Nevermind that, a hero in the 40s could kill and nobody questioned him. Just like the prince in Disney movies would kill the wicth as if it were moral behavior or the right thing to do.

Let's forget about Kane, Sprang or Burton. Talking about nowdays post-Crisis, post Batman Begins and B:TAS-Batman is the smart, practical, functional detective operating as a vigilante, aiding the police force and rescuing GC people as he sweared. He hates guns and the people who use them.

The Zorro is almost as famous, and fits better the vigilante type. That's because he is an OUTLAW vigilante. The zorro is a hero because he brakes the law and fights evil oficers while Batman is a hero because he aides the law where the police comes short. Actually, I'm starting to fail seeing Batman as an anti-hero even on the terms of this article. Robin Hood also qualifies as a better example.

Wolverine is also almost as famous and he is a massive killer. Recently, after he freed himself from the control Hydra had over him, he killed about 800 mobsters according to Nick Fury. And he still managed to become an Avenger! Ultimate Hulk, caused massive destriction whith losts of victims in New York in order to create a Showdown of the Ultimates. The TMT Turttles killed Shredder on the first issue. Do I even have to explain why popular HELL Spawn or kinda popular Punisher are better examples according to the concept of anti-hero in this page? After all those examples, you still think Batman is an anti-hero? He still hasn't kill, abuse, or mutilated a thing yet. The only thing he does not so right is the same Superman and about 90% do: not being an oficialy authorized crime-fighter. Uh, and also being cranky and kinda rude.

Greek miths, as well as all the acient tradition that eventually generated fairy tales, did intended their characters to be portraid certain ways to teach moral lessons. Achiles, Edipus and many others are heroes because the concept of hero was then measured according tho the amount of enemies and the size of the obstackes they overcame, but they had defects ant that was the point of their stories. They were arrogant, so karma or whatevah punished them. And yet geeks venerated them.

You're right this article does not frame the anti-hero concept according to context, it just describes its characteristics. I'm getting confused here. Why was Achiles out of list, again? He has all the features of an anti-hero, and he is out of the picture only because greeks idolazed him? Their concept of hero is actually our concept of a jerk or an anti-hero. (I guess nobody updated Bush about that, heheh). What they used to call hero is what we nowdays consider degeneated mass murderers... or politicians, sometimes. Our idea of heros is Firemen or even good parents. Greeks would have called them servants and wouldn't pay them any attention. So I think Achiles IS and an anti-hero even though greeks called that a hero.

I'm afraid I'm going to owe you that source to back what I said about anti-heros from comic genre perspective. Try Googling it. I just know that from years of reading Comics, mainly DC and mainly Batman (actually, 14 years and an average of 15 comics book issues per mont + internet + all superhero movies and toons + wizzard, honest. And yet I do realize even you might turn out to be even more familiar with comics than me).

Btw, good luck with your anti-hero section on batman, you are gonna need it. Most editors wont agree with you, and there is this jerk that likes to believe he owns the Batman article that just won't aloud changes like that even for 30 seconds. so be my gest... Actually, let's make this interesting: wanna bet? --T-man, the wise 13:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I am also enjoying the discussion. Wouldn't be here otherwise :). In any case, the reason why Batman was first used in this article is because he's much more iconic than those other characters, even really popular ones like Wolverine.  One does not have to kill to be an anti-hero.  Traditional, a hero (especially the comic book hero) has been the 'knight in shining armor' (or, rather, the knight in colorful spandex) type, the guy like Superman who is an iconic, 'all american', 'mild-mannered' guy.  Batman inverts this hero type.  He is a vigilante whose inner psychology is rather twisted and who's methods are certainly questionable at times.  It should be noted that another character killing more people does not make Batman NOT an anti-hero.  It makes the other character a murderer.  I'll say it again: Killing is not a requirement.  Traditional heroes kill all the time.


 * Also, your characterization of Greek myth is, I'm sorry, wrong. Greek myths were not (just) moral fables. (In fact, there's very little moralizing in them).  They also do not have any sort of conscious drive, so they cannot 'intend' anything.  Once again, as the hero article says (my edits, btw) a Greek Hero originally was little more than a soldier in the Trojan war, and became a moniker for somebody set apart from the rest of humanity by some trait of geneology (having decended from a god) or by some pivotal act.  It wasn't about killing a bunch of people or overcoming an obstacle.  Also, the Greeks did not believe in 'kharma'.  Heroes were generally not 'punished' for their pride, unless this pride managed to directly anger a god (Pentheus).  What happens to Oedipus happens because it was fated to happen, not beause he's being punished. Achilles was a hero because he was strong, he was the song of Thetis, and he fought in the Trojan war.  Remember: the term 'anti-hero' is not something that one culture can impose on another culture's icons.  That is, WE cannot say 'Oh, Achilles is forever and always an anti-hero because he doesn't meet OUR standards of a hero.'  If, say, a character that resembled Achilles were to pop up within a modern context, that would probably make him anti-heroic.


 * You're right that heroes today are becoming more grounded in reality. In fact, I believe that the very idea of the hero is dying (a result of post-modernism, probably).  However, this article talks about characters that a historically anti-heroes...and Batman does fit that catagory quite iconically.  CaveatLectorTalk 15:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Not that anyone needs reminding, but you can't just say Batman is or isn't an anti-hero. This is an encyclopeida, and original research isn't allowed.  You need to cite sources and use those as your arguments.  There's plenty of sources which describe Batman as an antihero, and for me it would be nice to see this article lean on more references too, it only offers two and doesn't really cite them. Hiding Talk 19:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Some separate points: Batman is not an if the ends justifies the means type of character as he has very dear ideals. He won't kill his enemies nor does he use guns, so there are definitely lines he won't cross. Also, Batman is not exactly so un-American, Bruce Wayne is handsome, rich businessman who contributes greatly to charity. I imagine we all don't fit that mold but it is something many Americans would like to be. Also, I think heroic qualities have to be seen in the light of the audiences culture. A lot of things acceptable then aren't acceptable now and vice versa.--Thaler5 19:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If we are using the definition, "a protagonist or notable figure who is conspicuously lacking in heroic qualities," Batman doesn't fit the definition. He's not Superman and not the nicest guy, but he is very much heroic.  In the context of target audiences' culture, Batman possesses many of heroic attributes.  He is in no shortage of courage and has essentially sacrificed his whole life for the welfare of other's.  His psyche is screwed-up and he helps because of his need, but I imagine every hero has some sense of duty he/she feels a need to fulfill.