Andrew Davis
Professor Benander
Topics in Literature
16 September 2012
Does Society want Heroes like Gilgamesh and Enkidu?
A modern American audience prefers a Campbell hero over a Jungian hero because of the predictability of Jungian archetypal hero. The Epic of Gilgamesh, translation by Stephen Mitchell, seems to follow the hero’s journey and has its main character fashioned after a Campbell hero. Since the Epic of Gilgamesh does what Campbell said heroic tales should do, it would make sense that the Epic of Gilgamesh should have a good hero for a modern American audience. However, neither Gilgamesh nor Enkidu are suitable heroes for a modern American audience because of Gilgamesh’s immaturity to be a hero and Enkidu’s obsolete heroic character; coincidentally the two of them would work very well.
To back up the thesis, establishing what a modern American audience wants is necessary. According to IMDb, a renowned website for giving information on many movies and series, some of the top seven highest grossing movies were The Dark Knight, The Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises, Star Wars, and Shrek 2. Some reoccurring characteristics of the heroes in these movies are unexpected, double minded, and Unique Heroes. The heroes in these movies all save either the world or a large part of their society from certain doom. The American audience does not want a predictable Jungian hero who is strong, noble, undefeatable, and flawless. They want someone who struggles with decisions yet makes the right one in the end even though they may have caused lots of problems for themselves and others before they complete their journey. Despite the ignoring of the Jungian perspective, in the end the hero rescues the maiden. Fortunately, for the American audience, writers do not always follow a certain outline, so the hero can be unpredictable and keep the audience on the edge of its seat.
It is quite simple to explain why Enkidu is not very suitable for an American audience because he is a very static character. Enkidu is very much a Jungian hero because he is noble, incredibly strong, and is self sufficient. Enkidu is not unique as a hero because his power is just his extraordinary strength; this is the most basic of all “superpowers.” He is not double minded in his heroic feats because nowhere in the poem does Enkidu decides to do something for fame, instead he does it for a noble cause. For example, he goes to Gilgamesh to free the people from his dictatorship, he goes with Gilgamesh to fight Humbaba because he feared Gilgamesh would die if he did not aid him and lead him to the Cedars, and he was the first to attack the Bull of Heaven because it was destroying Uruk.
Since Enkidu is very noble and has super strength he is an expected hero. The really big problem with Enkidu is his inability to be the one that actually wins the battle. Gilgamesh beats him in the fracas they have, and Gilgamesh is the one who does all the killing. Enkidu’s characteristics make him obsolete because they are only what children prefer and he is not complex enough to make him interesting enough to be a good hero for a modern audience.
Gilgamesh is not a good choice for an American audience because he is not what this audience would consider a hero. Gilgamesh would be a good candidate if the Epic produced more evidence that Gilgamesh finished the hero’s journey, but it does not. The problem with Gilgamesh is that he does not change his ways. In the hero’s journey, the hero is supposed to be changed by reaching his “Ultimate Boon,” but Gilgamesh does not. In the end of the story we do not find out if Gilgamesh can change his ways and be the hero that an American audience would want him to be. In the end Gilgamesh says “I have gained no benefit for myself…” then they go to Uruk and Gilgamesh describes the city. Many may think Gilgamesh changes because he describes the city instead of talking about his misery, but the epic does not say. Humbaba’s wish had a very good chance of coming true when he cursed Gilgamesh and said “I curse you both. Because you have done this, may Enkidu die, may he die in great pain, may Gilgamesh be inconsolable, may his merciless heart be crushed with grief.” The curse came true for Enkidu and it may have come true for Gilgamesh.
Since the epic is not clear whether or not Gilgamesh changed, and there is evidence supporting both sides, Gilgamesh’s personality must remain consistent with the rest of the story. An American audience does not want a hero who starts out arrogant, stays arrogant, and only does things for himself. In the eyes of many audience members, a character like this would be considered a villain. Not only is Gilgamesh not a hero, but also he, like Enkidu, is not unique or double minded. He is an unexpected hero and he does possess the capability to save the world, but the facts do not lie and scream that he is not a hero. Although Gilgamesh is a better Campbell hero than Enkidu, there is no evidence of him changing and being a hero for others, which is what the audience wants.
There is a solution to this problem, but it calls for a slight bending of the rules. Both Gilgamesh and Enkidu are not good heroes of an American audience separate, but they are a good choice for a hero if they are together. The Dark Knight movies have two in the top seven highest grossing movies, and one of the big reasons is the batman character. This batman is not like the Batmen of the past. He has two completely separate personalities, Bruce Wayne being a dynamic handsome billionaire, who likes to get into a little trouble because of his ego once in a while, and the Dark Knight, who stands for justice and is static. He is unique to other heroes because he does not possess any real super powers. He is an unexpected hero because his alter personality is so deceiving that it would be impossible to guess his true identity. Finally, predictable like most movies, he saves Gotham.
If Gilgamesh and Enkidu were a either a team or fused together, they would mirror the Dark Knight and be a great hero for an American audience. As in the epic, Gilgamesh and Enkidu are balanced when they are with each other. They were able to save Uruk. They would certainly be a double minded hero, Enkidu being the noble half and Gilgamesh being the arrogant half. They would also be quite a unique pair because of such a difference in personalities, which would also make them an unexpected hero. Together, Gilgamesh and Enkidu possess some of the greatest qualities for a hero directed towards a modern American audience.
Evidence shows that America would not want either Gilgamesh or Enkidu as a hero. They do not possess all the right qualities to keep an American audience on the edge of their seat wondering what will happen next. Enkidu is far too childish for the American audience in his predictable ways. Gilgamesh does not have enough evidence to prove that he changed and became less self centered, a quality an American audience hates without any noble actions. However since they are so different, the two of them would make a great hero if they both had an equal part to play. To have a great hero for an American audience, that hero must be original yet the plot must lead the hero to victory.
Work Cited
“All Time Box Office: USA.” IMDb. 2012. Web. 14 Sept 2012.
English Comp 2 