Never meet your hero!

Nadeem F Paracha in The Dawn

The German writer J Wolfgang Goethe once quipped, “Blessed is the nation that doesn’t need heroes.” As if to expand upon Goethe’s words, the British philosopher Herbert Spencer wrote, “Hero-worship is strongest where there is least regard for human freedom.”

There is every likelihood that Goethe was viewing societies as collectives, in which self-interest was the primary motivation but where the creation and worship of ‘heroes’ are acts to make people feel virtuous.

Heroes can’t become heroes without an audience. A segment of the society exhibits an individual and explains his or her actions or traits as ‘heroic’. If these receive enough applause, a hero is created. But then no one is really interested in knowing the actual person who has been turned into a hero. Only his mythologised sides are to be viewed.

The mythologising is done to quench a yearning in society — a yearning that cannot be fulfilled because it might be too impractical, utopian, irrational and, therefore, against self-interest. So, the mythologised individual becomes an alter ego of a society conscious of its inherent flaws. Great effort is thus invested in hiding the actual from the gaze of society, so that only the mythologised can be viewed.

One often comes across videos on social media of common everyday people doing virtuous deeds, such as helping an old person cross a busy road, or helping an animal. The helping hands in this regard are exhibited as ‘heroes’, even though they might not even be aware that they are being filmed.

What if they weren’t? What if they remain unaware about the applause that their ‘viral video’ has attracted? Will they stop being helpful without having an audience? They certainly won’t be hailed as heroes. They are often exhibited as heroes by those who want to use them to signal their own appreciative attitude towards ‘goodness’.

This is a harmless ploy. But since self-interest is rampant in almost every society, this can push some people to mould themselves as heroes. There have been cases in which men and women have actually staged certain ‘heroic’ acts, filmed them, and then put them out for all to view. The purpose is to generate praise and accolades for themselves and, when possible, even monetary gains.

But it is also possible that they truly want to be seen as heroes in an unheroic age, despite displaying forged heroism. Then there are those who are so smitten by the romanticised notions of a ‘heroic age’ that they actually plunge into real-life scenarios to quench their intense yearning to be seen as heroes.

For example, a person who voluntarily sticks his neck out for a cause that may lead to his arrest. He knows this. But he also knows that there will be many on social and electronic media who will begin to portray him as a hero. But the applauders often do this to signal their own disposition towards a ‘heroic’ cause.

We apparently live in an unheroic age — an age that philosophers such as Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche or, for that matter, Muhammad Iqbal, detested. Each had their own understanding of a bygone heroic age.

To Nietzsche, the heroic age existed in some pre-modern period in history, when the Germanic people were fearless. To Iqbal, the heroic age was when early Muslims were powered by an unadulterated faith and passion to conquer the world. There are multiple periods in time that are referred to as ‘heroic ages’, depending on one’s favourite ideology or professed faith.

The yearning for heroes and the penchant for creating them to be revered — so that societies can feel better about themselves — is as old as when the first major civilisations began to appear, thousands of years ago. So when they spoke of heroic ages, what period of history were they reminiscing about — the Stone Age?

Humans are naturally pragmatic. From hunter-gatherers, we became scavenger-survivalists. The image may be off-putting but the latter actually requires one to be more rational, clever and pragmatic. This is how we have survived and progressed.

That ancient yearning for a heroic age has remained, though. An age that never was — an age that was always an imagined one. That’s why we even mythologise known histories, because the actual in this regard can be awkward to deal with. But it is possible to unfold.

America’s ‘founding fathers’ were revered for over two centuries as untainted heroes, until some historians decided to demystify them by exploring their lives outside their mythologised imaginings. Many of these heroes turned out to be slave-owners and not very pleasant people.

Mahatma Gandhi, revered as a symbol of tolerance, turned out to also be a man who disliked black South Africans. The founder of Pakistan MA Jinnah is mythologised as a man who supposedly strived to create an ‘Islamic state’, yet the fact is that he was a declared liberal and loved his wine. Martin Luther King Jr, the revered black rights activist, was also a prolific philanderer.

When freed from mythology, the heroes become human — still important men and women, but with various flaws. This is when they become real and more relatable. They become ‘anti-heroes.’

But there is always an urgency in societies to keep the flaws hidden. The flaws can damage the emotions that are invested in revering ‘heroes’, both dead and living. The act of revering provides an opportunity to feel bigger than a scavenger-survivor, even if this requires forged memories and heavily mythologised men and women.

Therefore, hero-worship can also make one blurt out even the most absurd things to keep a popular but distorted memory of a perceived hero intact. For example, this is exactly what one populist former Pakistani prime minister did when he declared that the terrorist Osama bin Laden was a martyr.

By doing this, the former PM was signalling his own ‘heroism’ as well — that of a proud fool who saw greatness in a mass murderer to signal his own ‘greatness’ in an unheroic age.

The French philosopher Voltaire viewed this tendency as a chain that one has fallen in love with. Voltaire wrote, “It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.”

Do Not Meet Your Hero

ChatGPT

The phrase "do not meet your hero" is a cautionary expression that suggests being wary or cautious when meeting someone you admire or look up to, especially in person. The saying implies that the reality of meeting your idol or hero might not live up to the idealized image you have of them. In other words, meeting someone you admire can reveal their flaws, quirks, or qualities that don't align with your expectations. This can potentially lead to disappointment or a change in your perception of the person.

The expression can be applied in various contexts, from meeting a celebrity, a historical figure, or even a mentor in your field of interest. It's a reminder that people, regardless of their accomplishments or reputation, are still human and may have imperfections, struggles, or aspects of their personality that you weren't aware of or didn't anticipate.

For instance, if you've always looked up to a certain actor for their on-screen performances, meeting them in real life might reveal that they are quite different from the characters they portray. This difference between expectation and reality can be jarring and may lead to a sense of disillusionment.

In essence, "do not meet your hero" serves as a caution to manage your expectations when meeting someone you admire, acknowledging that they are human and not immune to flaws or discrepancies from the image you've built in your mind. While it doesn't mean you shouldn't admire or respect individuals, it encourages you to approach such encounters with a balanced perspective and an open mind.

---

Here are a few examples of individuals along with explanations of how meeting them might lead to the realization that "do not meet your hero":

1. Example: Michael Jordan - Basketball Legend

   • Admired For: His incredible basketball skills, competitiveness, and success in the NBA.
   • Discrepancy: Meeting him might reveal a highly competitive and intense personality that might come across as abrasive or overly focused on winning, which could be different from the positive image many fans have of him.

2. 
   

3. Example: J.K. Rowling - Author of the Harry Potter Series

   • Admired For: Creating a beloved and imaginative world through her writing.
   • Discrepancy: Meeting her might reveal controversial opinions she's expressed on social media, leading some fans to feel disappointed or conflicted about supporting her work.

4. 
   

5. Example: Elon Musk - Entrepreneur and CEO

   • Admired For: His innovative thinking and groundbreaking work in multiple industries.
   • Discrepancy: A personal encounter might reveal his direct and sometimes unfiltered communication style, which can be polarizing and cause fans to reevaluate their perception of his leadership.

6. 
   

7. Example: Mother Teresa - Humanitarian and Nobel Peace Prize Winner

   • Admired For: Her selfless dedication to helping the poor and marginalized.
   • Discrepancy: Some critics have raised questions about the quality of care in her charity missions and her association with political figures, leading to a more complex view of her legacy.

8. 
   

9. Example: Mahatma Gandhi - Leader of Indian Independence Movement

   • Admired For: His nonviolent resistance and role in India's struggle for independence.
   • Discrepancy: Upon closer examination, aspects of his personal life and certain statements he made raise ethical and moral concerns, causing some to reevaluate his image as an entirely saintly figure.

10. 
    

11. Example: Steve Jobs - Co-founder of Apple Inc.

    • Admired For: His innovation, design sensibilities, and contributions to the technology industry.
    • Discrepancy: Personal interactions with him were reported to be challenging due to his demanding and often confrontational communication style, which contrasts with the elegant products he helped create.

These examples underscore the concept that meeting admired individuals can reveal facets of their personalities or actions that don't align with the idealized image people have of them. This doesn't negate their achievements or contributions, but it does emphasize the complexity of human nature and the importance of understanding individuals in a more comprehensive light.

---

The difference between an individual's public image and their true reality can arise from a combination of factors, ranging from the complexities of human nature to societal expectations, media portrayal, and personal choices. Here are some key reasons for the disconnect between image and reality:

1. Selective Presentation: Public figures, celebrities, and leaders often present a curated version of themselves to the public. They highlight their positive qualities and achievements while downplaying or hiding their flaws and imperfections. This selective presentation can create an idealized image that doesn't reflect the full scope of their personality or actions.

2. 
   

3. Media Portrayal and Sensationalism: Media outlets often focus on sensational or attention-grabbing aspects of an individual's life, distorting the true picture. This can lead to a skewed perception of the individual, as media coverage tends to emphasize controversies or sensational narratives over the complexity of their character.

4. 
   

5. Social Expectations and Pressure: Public figures, particularly those in positions of power or influence, might feel pressure to conform to certain social expectations. This can lead them to adopt a façade that aligns with what society or their fans want to see, even if it doesn't reflect their true selves.

6. 
   

7. Self-Presentation and Self-Preservation: Individuals might present a certain image to protect their privacy, avoid scrutiny, or maintain control over their personal lives. This is especially true in cases where the person's actions or choices are considered private matters but might not align with their public persona.

8. 
   

9. Desire for Approval and Validation: People often strive for validation and approval from others. They might project an image that they believe will garner admiration or acceptance, even if it doesn't entirely reflect their authentic selves.

10. 
    

11. Idealization and Projection: Society has a tendency to idealize public figures, turning them into symbols of certain values or ideals. People project their own desires and expectations onto these figures, creating an image that might not align with the individual's true character.

12. 
    

13. Complexity of Human Nature: People are multifaceted beings with a range of emotions, thoughts, and behaviors. The complexities of human nature mean that individuals can have contradictions and inconsistencies that don't neatly fit into an idealized image.

14. 
    

15. Unforeseen Circumstances and Personal Challenges: Life is full of unexpected challenges, and individuals can go through personal difficulties that impact their behavior and choices. These challenges might not be immediately visible to the public, contributing to the gap between image and reality.

In essence, the disparity between image and reality stems from a combination of personal choices, societal pressures, media portrayal, and the inherent complexities of human nature. It's a reminder that individuals are multidimensional, and the public perception of them is often a simplified representation of their true selves.

---

The concepts of "do not meet your hero" and "what gets measured gets managed" may seem distinct, but they can be linked through the broader theme of managing expectations and the complexities of reality. Here's how they connect:

1. Managing Expectations: Both concepts revolve around the idea of managing expectations and acknowledging the complexities of human nature or situations. "Do not meet your hero" suggests that meeting someone you admire can lead to disappointment if their reality doesn't match your idealized perception. Similarly, "what gets measured gets managed" emphasizes that tracking and quantifying aspects of life can lead to better decision-making, but it doesn't necessarily guarantee perfection or flawless management.

2. 
   

3. Reality vs. Perception: "Do not meet your hero" addresses the gap between the perceived image of a person and their true reality. Similarly, "what gets measured gets managed" recognizes the need to understand the nuances and complexities that data might not fully capture. In both cases, reality often proves to be more intricate than the simplified version presented or measured.

4. 
   

5. Balancing Expectations and Reality: Both concepts emphasize the importance of maintaining a balanced perspective. "Do not meet your hero" encourages individuals to approach admired figures with realistic expectations, recognizing their human imperfections. "What gets measured gets managed" encourages a holistic approach to data-driven decision-making, acknowledging that quantitative metrics are only part of the equation.

6. 
   

7. Critical Thinking and Context: Both concepts highlight the value of critical thinking and contextual understanding. "Do not meet your hero" urges people to critically evaluate the idolized image in light of new information. "What gets measured gets managed" encourages critical assessment of data and its implications in various contexts.

8. 
   

9. Nuanced Application: When meeting a hero, individuals should apply critical thinking to adjust their expectations based on new information. Similarly, when managing based on measurements, a critical approach is needed to consider the broader context and qualitative aspects beyond the numbers.

10.