We Can't All Be Heroes
A Reflection on “Chapter 1: A Practical Guide” from The Writer’s Journey by Christopher Vogler
We are all born a blank slate with the potential to become whoever we want to be and achieve the loftiest of aspirations. True, our ancestor's lives were stories written before us; they are part of our "library" and may even present obstacles on our journey, but when it comes down to it, we hold power, we have a choice. Each day of our lives is a chance to flip the page, change the script, change our story. But do we all strive to improve, grow, become better humans than in the days written before? For those of us that do, we can find inspiration from and relate to the Hero's Journey. There are those among us who choose to remain stagnant, deny the challenge of becoming better, or believe they are their own hero and do not need anyone. Although these people are the outliers, they exist, and their life story does not conform to the Hero's Journey's structure.
In The Writer's Journey, Christopher Vogler states that the pattern of the Hero's Journey is universal, occurring in every culture, every time, and that it is as infinitely varied as the human race itself but in its basic form remains constant. He argues that the ideas expressed in Joseph Campbell's book, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, can be used as a "tool kit" to construct a story to meet almost any situation, diagnose the problems of almost any ailing plot line, and make the corrections to bring it to its peak performance–leaving you with a story that is dramatic, entertaining, and psychologically true. In summary, Vogler believes the Hero's Journey is universal. I beg to differ.
"Infinitely varied yet constant." Just think about that phrase for a moment. The Hero's Journey is a method for constructing stories. A method is "a particular form of procedure for accomplishing or approaching something, especially a systematic or established one." So, I do not see how something can be infinitely varied yet constant.
Merriam Webster defines universal as "including or covering all or a whole collectively or distributively without limit or exception, existent or operative everywhere or under all conditions." Humans are emotionally and psychologically complex creatures. When referring to humankind, is anything truly universal? Vogler's argument is that stories built on the Hero's Journey model have an appeal that can be felt by everyone because they well up from a universal source in the shared unconsciousness and reflect universal concerns. My ex-fiancé is a narcissist and compulsive liar. One of my ex-boyfriends suffers from paranoid schizophrenia. My choice in men is a topic for another time. For now, I'm going to focus on the psychological experience of these two men. They live in alternate realities. The lies they tell themselves are not lies in their minds; they are the truth. They are their own hero's. For this reason, they don't wake up every day, striving to grow, change, and improve. Can they relate to the Hero's Journey? Do they find stories based on the Hero's Journey structure to be inspiring, motivating, relatable? No.
When it comes to the rest of us, I agree with Vogler's beliefs about the Hero's Journey; that the stories embedded in mythology and identified in Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces be applied to understanding almost any human problem and that they are a great key to life as well as an instrument for dealing more effectively with a mass audience. I concur. Where my view differs is in seeing the Hero's Journey as universal.
Vogler writes that "the hero's story is always a journey and stories built on the Hero's Journey deal with the childlike universal questions: Who am I? Where did I come from? Where will I go when I die? What is good and what is evil? What must I do about it? What will tomorrow be like? Where did yesterday go? Is there anybody else out there? We retell the hero myth in our own way, which is why the hero has a thousand faces." This makes sense to me, but I wouldn't consider these questions "childlike." I know plenty of adults who ask themselves these questions.
I am my own worst enemy. The majority of battles I've faced throughout my life have been internal. When Vogler writes that many stories take the hero on an inward journey–one of the mind, the heart, the spirit–and that it's these emotional journeys that hook an audience and make a story worth watching, I wholeheartedly agree and understand. The sentence that followed is where I got lost. "The way stations of the Hero's Journey emerge naturally even when the writer is unaware of them." How do the way stations "emerge naturally?" It's not that I disagree with this statement, I just wish Vogler had explained how this "emergence" happens.
Don't misinterpret my thoughts on the first chapter of The Writer's Journey as distaste for the Hero's Journey. I love the Hero's Journey and also enjoyed reading Christopher Vogler's thoughts on it. But the hero's journey is not 100% universal. Humankind consists of an infinite array of psychological and emotional personalities, many of whom are capable of becoming "heroes." These people aren't afraid to be wrong, to be vulnerable. They exude grit, are adaptable, resilient, and are open to and capable of change and growth. They live the Hero's Journey.
Quotes
“With these tools, you can construct a story to meet almost any situation, a story that is dramatic, entertaining, and psychologically true. With this equipment you can diagnose the problems of almost any ailing plot line, and make the corrections to bring it to its peak performance.”
“The pattern of the Hero's Journey is universal, occurring in every culture, every time. It is as infinitely varied as the human race itself but in its basic form remains constant."
“The ideas embedded in mythology and identified in The Hero with a Thousand Faces can be applied to understanding almost any human problem."
“The way stations of the Hero's Journey emerge naturally even when the writer is unaware of them."
