Approaches to Heroism in the MCU

[kerravonsen]

We've got a bunch of heroes here, the Avengers, but they don't all see heroism in the same way.

Steve Rogers:

Why: To die for a righteous cause.

"You're not the guy to make the sacrifice play, to lay down on a wire and let the other guy crawl over you."

I was originally going to say "self-sacrifice" but that is too broad a phrase for what Steve considers heroism. Steve's idea of heroism emphasises physical courage, fighting the Bad Guys. It doesn't include self-sacrificing actions which are humble or supporting or behind-the-lines. Why do I say that? Because Steve lied multiple times to try to enlist as a soldier. Nothing else would do!

He'd probably agree with this: "I regret that I have but one life to lose for my country."

Selling war bonds would have been very frustrating for him, I think.

Guilt: paralyses, therefore it is a hindrance and should be ignored.

"This job... we try to save as many people as we can. Sometimes that doesn't mean everybody. But if we can't find a way to live with that, next time... maybe nobody gets saved."

This is Steve's coping mechanism, to ignore any guilt he may feel, because he has to keep going, to slog on, to complete the mission, to fight the war. Which is fair enough in the middle of a war, when he has a chain of command and orders to follow. But retaining this habit when he no longer has a chain of command (or no longer trusts it), that turns a coping mechanism into something dysfunctional. Why? Because ignoring all guilt means ignoring the true guilt along with the false guilt. And he doesn't have anybody around him that he is required to listen to, someone willing and able to give him a reality check. Which means that Steve is in the habit of ignoring when something is actually his fault; of not remembering when something is his fault. Which means that Steve has the mindset that he is never at fault, it is always somebody else's fault. This is a subconscious reaction that Steve isn't aware of. If he was aware of it, he would probably be appalled.

Related to this, though I'm not sure if it is a cause or an effect, is that if Steve is avoiding being reflective about what he has done, then he's not likely to learn from his mistakes, either.

Methods: When working with a team, you need to make plans. In the thick of battle, improvise.

Steve: Stark, we need a plan of attack.
Tony: I have a plan: attack!

This is another reason why Tony and Steve don't get along. Tony really does not play well with others; not because of his ego, but simply because he is so used to working alone, that he doesn't even think about what the others may do.

Right and Wrong: is absolute. There is no room for compromise.

"There's only one God, ma'am. And I'm pretty sure he doesn't dress like that."

"When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree besides the river of truth, and tell the whole world-- --No, you move."

"We may not be perfect, but the safest hands are still our own."

During WWII, Steve trusted the chain of command. After the fall of SHIELD, Steve no longer trusted authority.

Tony Stark:

Why: Making amends for his negligence. Fixing his mistakes.

"I saw young Americans killed by the very weapons I created to defend them and protect them, and I saw that I had become part of a system that is comfortable with zero accountability."

Guilt: Is a spur, a motivation to improve things, to do better next time. It should never be ignored.

"There is nothing else. There's no art opening. There's no benefit. There's nothing to sign. There's no decisions to be made. There's the next mission and nothing else. There's nothing except this."

"I shouldn't be alive, unless it was for a reason. I'm not crazy, Pepper. I just finally know what I have to do; and I know in my heart, that it's right."

Tony has this cycle: make mistakes, fix mistakes, learn from his mistakes. There is always room for improvement; he is never content with the status-quo.

Tony tends to feel guilt not only for things he has done, but for things he's omitted doing. This is understandable, considering that he hadn't cared what his weapons were doing, and seeing his own weapons being used to kill the people he thought he was protecting, that's a devastating wake-up call, what he sees as unforgivable negligence. This gets problematic when Tony's sins-of-omission list gets longer and more unrealistic. Tony tends to blame himself for things that he had no control over and could not have anticipated. Yet he isn't paralysed by this; it spurs him to work longer and harder. Because he has internalised the criticism of his father, that Tony is "never good enough".

Combining Steve's tendency to blame other people with Tony's tendency to blame himself, and you can see why Tony is sucked into the role of the scapegoat so often.

Methods: Do what works. Be pragmatic. Improvise. Do it yourself, because nobody else will do it as well as you can.

"I think I would just cut the wire."

Tony is brilliant and impatient, he doesn't want to wait for people to catch up to his thought processes. This is another aspect of why he doesn't play well with others; not because he's a narcissist, but because he's a racehorse in the midst of pack mules.

Right and Wrong: Some things are absolute, others are not. Everyone has an agenda; negotiate the best deal you can.

I think this is one reason he signed the Accords; not just that he agreed with them in principle, but so that he could be in a position to negotiate a "better deal"; that is, to remove the obnoxious and human-rights-destroying provisions which Ross had put in. Just a theory, but it makes sense to me.

Bruce Banner:

Why: He isn't a hero, he's a monster.

Guilt: is a crushing burden which can never be escaped.

Methods: HULK SMASH!

Right and Wrong: First, do no harm.

Thor:

Why: For glory, and to protect the weak.

Guilt: is for evildoers. Heroes are always righteous.

At least, I haven't really noticed Thor feeling much guilt about his actions; regret, yes, but not guilt. (Not until much later on, at least.)

But it's clear enough that Thor has a tendency to blame others, and make scapegoats. Which is not good for Loki, nor for Tony (see above).

Methods: Only honourable brute force and frontal assaults. Stealth is for cowards.

Right and Wrong: ?

I'm not sure exactly what Thor's moral framework is.

Natasha Romanov:

Why: To balance the red in her ledger.

Guilt: must be compartmentalised, for the sake of the mission.

Methods: Any means necessary. Nothing is unthinkable.

Natasha is the only person I've ever seen who has the ability to weaponize vulnerability.

Right and Wrong: Work for someone who has a better grasp of right and wrong than you do, and hope for the best.

Clint Barton:

I don't actually know enough about what motivates him, really.

---

And a couple more, because they are interesting.

Peter Parker:

Why: With great power comes great responsibility.

"When you can do the things that I can, but you don't, and then the bad things happen, they happen because of you."

Guilt: is a great motivator. (see quote above)

No wonder Peter and Tony get on so well -- not only are they Science Bros, they both have the same attitude towards guilt and heroism; that they have great power, and thus are responsible for any failures or inaction on their part. The complete opposite to Steve Rogers, really.

Methods: Protect the innocent, capture the bad guys. Don't kill anybody. Don't let anyone die.

Right and Wrong: are obvious, aren't they?

Loki:

Why: To protect the handful of people he loves.

Guilt: is for other people. (Except when you let your mother die, in which case, it is an eternal burden which will burn forever.)

Methods: Never be straightforward when you can have a cunning plan instead.

Right and Wrong: are illusions, fostered by those who have the most power.

---

This analysis of the characters has a lot of interesting implications. But the thing I'm most pleased about is that I think I've finally got a handle on Steve Rogers. At least to a degree. But hey, what do you all think? Am I mistaken about all this? Can anyone fill in the gaps in what I know? PLEASE chime in! (Don't let me think I am all alone in Space with a Chitauri army in front of me...)

Comments

[selenak]

Just a few observations, in the spirit of discussion.

Re: Thor: he does come across as feeling guilt in the first movie of his own trilogy to me. In the last two Avenger movies, it’s his main motivator, along with the desire for vengeance, of course. As for scapegoating, surely that’s Loki’s speciality? Loki’s utter refusal to accept responsibility for just about anything he ever does strikes me as a key character trait which doesn’t change -with the arguable exception of the later part of Dark World as well as the end of Ragnarök. It’s always someone else’s fault. (A minor but typical example is their dialogue in Avengers when Loki rewrites the ending of Thor - where he let go - into Thor throwing him from the bridge.)

Only honourable brute force and frontal assaults. Stealth is for cowards

? The entire plan against EcclestonElf in Dark World is based on Loki pretending to change sides (which Thor did know about). For that matter, the entire escape from Asgard with Jane and Loki involved deception (since Odin at this point wouldn’t listen to anyone). And both Dark World and Ragnarök showcase that Thor by now can anticipate when Loki will try to backstab or deceive him and when not (with two obvious exceptions, not realising Loki faked his death in “Dark World” and assuming Loki wasn’t really there at the end of “Ragnarök”.). Outguessing Loki on a regular basis doesn’t happen without wrapping your mind around stealth, either.

As for brute force and frontal assault being the only honorable thing, that’s not even true for the first movie, the big action climax of which involved Thor - aware that he’s not superpowered at this point whereas his friends are - first taking the unglorious but direly needed role of trying to get the towns people out of harm’s way while Sif & Co. take on the Destroyer, and then, once he figured out what the robot is about, offering his own life so no one else is harmed. Which brings me to:

Right and wrong: prioritizing saving people over victory, pride or glory is a red thread through all three movies. In the first, it’s part of the ethical lesson he learns. In the second, he applies it. God knows these movies aren’t masterpieces of writing, but the “saving your people takes priority over heroic last stands” message is pretty solid in all three. Along with “take responsibility for your actions” (not just re: Thor himself - Hela revealing Asgard’s backstory by destroying the paint over is less than subtle in this regard) and “change if you ever want to get out of vicious circles”. (Which Loki finally manages in “Ragnarök”; Thor got there a few movies earlier.)

Combining Steve's tendency to blame other people with Tony's tendency to blame himself, and you can see why Tony is sucked into the role of the scapegoat so often.

I think that’s fanon, honestly. Tony is my favourite among the original MCU line up, and Steve I can take or leave, but one reason why I’ve stopped reading MCU fiction is that I find the constantly self flagelating version of Tony nearly unrecognizable. It reminds me of the general tendency to woobify morally ambigous characters and take all the ambiguity out of them which I first saw when I was in Highlander fandom, and it’s never stopped bewildering me since, because part of what makes the characters so interesting to me is that yes, they do screw up, they are at fault (not for everything, but definitely for some things), they have something to make up for.

As for “Steve’s tendency to blame other people” - whom, specifically, does he blame for something he himself is responsible for? BTW: I was on Tony’s side in “Civil War”, not least because being your own sole oversight is really a terrible idea for people in their position. But I don’t recall Steve blaming “other people” for his own deeds. The quote you give is I think something he says to Wanda. Now one of my pet peeves with the MCU writing is that Wanda keeps getting blamed for something that hadn’t been her intention - Lagos - instead for something that absolutely was her intention and fault - Johannesburg, one movie earlier. (In my ideal MCU world, Wanda would have gotten a scene with Bruce dealing with this.) Steve giving her that speech being a case in point. This said, Steve’s attitude towards both Maximoff twins in “Ultron” (from his comments to Maria Hill after she described them onwards to trying to win them over, eventually successfully) and his friendship with Natasha (whose past he’s aware of) throughout rather belies the idea of him seeing good and evil as absolutes with no room for compromise. A man with the black and white world view that fanon Steve has would have seen both the Maximoffs and Natasha as monsters from the get go.

Methods: HULK SMASH

Yes, but far from exclusively. During his time on the run pre “Avengers”, Bruce evidently keeps trying to do altruistic jobs, to help people small-scale scientically. (I.e. medically, because in movie and tv world, all science is the same science, sigh.) Then after befriending Tony he goes back into large scale scientific research, up to and including Tony’s “let’s be mad scientists” Ultron idea, which he signs on to, twice. (Proving the Bruce Banner who experimented on gamma radiation to begin with isn’t dead.). And after the two years of being solely the Hulk and being legitimately terrified about this once he’s back to being Bruce, he eventually ends up finding a way to do both, be a scientist and the Hulk. Where I’m going with this: he clearly is a bundle of motivations and impulses as well as methods.