Scan barcode
papidoc's review against another edition
4.0
Thought provoking, and short, examination of the etymological development of the word "hero." Child isn't a linguist (though he says his daughter is, and references her frequently), he is a novelist. So, he brings a novelists imagination and suppositional ability to exploring the possibilities. I am not a linguist either, so I have no idea whether what he describes is rigorous (though I suspect not), but it is thought-provoking, entertaining, and an interesting read.
endpaper's review against another edition
2.0
Hmmm....This was interesting but uneven.
Interlaced with some surprising discussions of the Aquatic Ape Theory and others, Child seems to rely to much on old (almost Victorian) information about the competitive nature of man (when will this ever die?), a misunderstanding of anthropology and its teachings, and outright falsehoods about brain size and intelligence (guess he hasn't read much on neural density). I enjoyed it but these problems hurt his credibility and got me wondering what else he might have gotten incorrect or partially correct. I did, however, learn the interesting origin of the word rival, so there's that.
Read but with a heavy grain of salt and fact checking ...
Interlaced with some surprising discussions of the Aquatic Ape Theory and others, Child seems to rely to much on old (almost Victorian) information about the competitive nature of man (when will this ever die?), a misunderstanding of anthropology and its teachings, and outright falsehoods about brain size and intelligence (guess he hasn't read much on neural density). I enjoyed it but these problems hurt his credibility and got me wondering what else he might have gotten incorrect or partially correct. I did, however, learn the interesting origin of the word rival, so there's that.
Read but with a heavy grain of salt and fact checking ...
knitswithbeer's review against another edition
4.0
Fascinating.
One irritation; American narrator. True his most successful 'hero' is American but the author isn't and listening to discussion of his British heritage in an American accent irks.
Do not misunderstand me; I do not refer to this as a Little Britain xenophobic issue. Just a discordant note on the ear.
One irritation; American narrator. True his most successful 'hero' is American but the author isn't and listening to discussion of his British heritage in an American accent irks.
Do not misunderstand me; I do not refer to this as a Little Britain xenophobic issue. Just a discordant note on the ear.
jwsg's review against another edition
2.0
In The Hero, Lee Child explores how this concept of "the hero" came about in.
In terms of pluses, The Hero is a short read. You learn interesting facts on the origins of words. Like how German chemist Felix Hoffman was trying to synthesise codeine but instead created a drug that was twice as strong as morphine and contrary to what Hoffman claimed, exceedingly addictive. He named this drug heroine. Or how 'barbarian' is a Greek word meaning a savage, in the sense that they could not speak Greek. "To the Greeks, all such people could manage was baa-baa-baa, like sheep. Hence barbarian". Or how 'lapis' means stone in Latin. Hence a dilapidated building is one from which stones have been removed or taken out. By definition, a wooden house or a brick house cannot be dilapidated as "they were never lapidated to begin with".
In terms of minuses, notwithstanding this being a short book, it feels like Child does an awful lot of padding. A quarter of the way through the book, Child has told us about the discovery of heroine (after telling us about morphine, opium and poppies), barbarians, dilapidated buildings, his daughter Ruth being a brilliant linguist and the discovery of the remains of Lucy, an ancient species that predated homo sapiens. But there's no sense how any of this relates to The Hero, really.
Basically, Child just wants to tell us: a long, long time ago, humans gained the ability to communicate via language. All that stuff about Lucy is a very long set up for his conceit of using generations of women to convey how far back something had happened. So instead of saying x hundred years ago or x thousand years ago, Child says "about 10,000 women ago". So 10,000 women ago, people started using language. The previous 390,000 women before that could not.
Anyway, so people started using language. At some point - people started telling stories. Initially, stories may have served just to meet the needs of the storyteller and the listener. But the shift towards agrarian communities (vs nomadic hunter-gatherers) led to stories being used by the elite as tools for manipulation and persuasion. So we start to see a schism between how the term "hero" is used by the establishment for political purposes (e.g. equating soldiers with heroes to pre-empt and cut off any debate on the military) vs popular use, where it refers to the main character in a popular book.
The padding is made even more painful by how speculatively Child writes. "Perhaps she…", "I suppose they", "no doubt", "probably….probably….probably", "there may have been", "must have". I suppose Child was attempting to write a work of non-fiction and makes statements of fact where these can be borne out by archeological evidence. But for everything else, when people used language, how they used language, when people started telling stories - Child can only speculate. Fair enough but it's awkward to read.
In terms of pluses, The Hero is a short read. You learn interesting facts on the origins of words. Like how German chemist Felix Hoffman was trying to synthesise codeine but instead created a drug that was twice as strong as morphine and contrary to what Hoffman claimed, exceedingly addictive. He named this drug heroine. Or how 'barbarian' is a Greek word meaning a savage, in the sense that they could not speak Greek. "To the Greeks, all such people could manage was baa-baa-baa, like sheep. Hence barbarian". Or how 'lapis' means stone in Latin. Hence a dilapidated building is one from which stones have been removed or taken out. By definition, a wooden house or a brick house cannot be dilapidated as "they were never lapidated to begin with".
In terms of minuses, notwithstanding this being a short book, it feels like Child does an awful lot of padding. A quarter of the way through the book, Child has told us about the discovery of heroine (after telling us about morphine, opium and poppies), barbarians, dilapidated buildings, his daughter Ruth being a brilliant linguist and the discovery of the remains of Lucy, an ancient species that predated homo sapiens. But there's no sense how any of this relates to The Hero, really.
Basically, Child just wants to tell us: a long, long time ago, humans gained the ability to communicate via language. All that stuff about Lucy is a very long set up for his conceit of using generations of women to convey how far back something had happened. So instead of saying x hundred years ago or x thousand years ago, Child says "about 10,000 women ago". So 10,000 women ago, people started using language. The previous 390,000 women before that could not.
Anyway, so people started using language. At some point - people started telling stories. Initially, stories may have served just to meet the needs of the storyteller and the listener. But the shift towards agrarian communities (vs nomadic hunter-gatherers) led to stories being used by the elite as tools for manipulation and persuasion. So we start to see a schism between how the term "hero" is used by the establishment for political purposes (e.g. equating soldiers with heroes to pre-empt and cut off any debate on the military) vs popular use, where it refers to the main character in a popular book.
The padding is made even more painful by how speculatively Child writes. "Perhaps she…", "I suppose they", "no doubt", "probably….probably….probably", "there may have been", "must have". I suppose Child was attempting to write a work of non-fiction and makes statements of fact where these can be borne out by archeological evidence. But for everything else, when people used language, how they used language, when people started telling stories - Child can only speculate. Fair enough but it's awkward to read.
smitchy's review against another edition
4.0
This little essay is best selling thriller writer Lee Child's first venture into non-fiction and it explores the whole concept of what a "Hero" really is and why we need them.
Beginning, strangely, with opium poppies and delving into human evolution, Child looks deep into the human need for stories, where language comes from and fiction's place in making us the dominant creatures on this planet. Is the ability to imagine and tell stories what got us through the ice age that killed off the Neanderthals? Is the archetype Hero a constant or must he or she also evolve as the world and ideas change?
Don't read this expecting a short insight into Jack Reacher - you will be disappointed. this is about the concept of a "hero" in imagination, fiction, and reality (especially political reality).
I found this a very entertaining read and I'm sure anyone with an interest in writing will gain new insights by reading Child's ideas.
Beginning, strangely, with opium poppies and delving into human evolution, Child looks deep into the human need for stories, where language comes from and fiction's place in making us the dominant creatures on this planet. Is the ability to imagine and tell stories what got us through the ice age that killed off the Neanderthals? Is the archetype Hero a constant or must he or she also evolve as the world and ideas change?
Don't read this expecting a short insight into Jack Reacher - you will be disappointed. this is about the concept of a "hero" in imagination, fiction, and reality (especially political reality).
I found this a very entertaining read and I'm sure anyone with an interest in writing will gain new insights by reading Child's ideas.
cgcang's review against another edition
4.0
This book is an hour long small talk about anthropology, the role of fiction in human evolution and why we make up fictional heroes and like the ones that others make up. It is exactly as advertised. If you're an avid Lee Child reader and if you like watching his talks or seminars, you're already familiar with the style in which The Hero is written. And if you like listening to Lee Child talk, you'll like this book.
conman12's review against another edition
informative
reflective
fast-paced
3.0
This is a long personal essay. I enjoyed parts of it!
aiyaivy's review against another edition
3.0
I thought it was interesting how he looked into how and why humans crafted stories and heroes. Short and a lot of food for thought.
rumbledethumps's review against another edition
4.0
Great, short little book, from the author of the Jack Reacher books. A kind of meandering essay about the idea of what a hero is and how the idea has evolved (literally) with humanity and storytelling.
Worth reading, if for no other reason than this line: "There are only two real people in fiction - the storyteller and the listener."
Worth reading, if for no other reason than this line: "There are only two real people in fiction - the storyteller and the listener."