The "Hero" narrative

There's something that bugs me just a wee little bit in society, and how sometimes people (especially people in the teaching field) are portrayed. I call it the "Hero Narrative" - it's sort of like the Jaimie Escalante story, where someone comes in, does minor miracles, and is lauded.

And that's great and all, and I suppose we need people who can come in and turn bad situations around, but the problem is that this idea of a Hero Narrative has seeped into the collective consciousness in such a way, that it seems like that there are some people who think if you're not being majorly heroic on a regular basis, there's something wrong with you.

This is especially true in college teaching, and it frustrates me. I get a lot of good students. Engaged students who know why they're in college. They come back and thank me for the preparation I gave them, whether they go on to grad school or get a career straight out of college. And that makes me happy, and as I've said before, I tend to figure that the good, hardworking students are sometimes the best critics of professors, because they expect a lot from us.

The problem is, the mentality in, shall we say, other areas of the academy is this: "Oh, ANYONE can be interesting to an ENGAGED student. The real challenge is for you to motivate the unmotivated." The implication being that if you're not taking the C and D students and turning them around to the point where they're becoming, I don't know, neurosurgeons or something, you might as well pack it up and go home. Because you're not a "Hero."

I was also a bit put off by the "Wonking Class Heroes" (dear God, how twee) in the Miller-McCune publication (This is some magazine, kind of like Utne Reader but with a more science focus, that I get sent to me - I didn't subscribe to it and it's apparently free. I don't really read it because sometimes some of the articles give me a bit of a Smug-We're-Your-Betters vibe. I could be misreading that, I don't know). But anyway: the people who go out and lobby for stuff, or start foundations, or whatever.

And what bugs me is for every visible face that gets to be a Wonking Class Hero, there are probably fifteen hundred behind-the-scenes folks who do most of the work.

The problem I have with the Hero Narrative is this: people who do solid work, who aren't superstars, but who work hard and who care about what they do, they're treated like chopped liver. I also suspect in some cases the "Heroes" chosen are the more photogenic or "interesting" (in the sense of: how many diversity checkboxes can you mark off with this one person) than some other folks.

Or maybe I'm just being cynical because I've seen a few cases where a very public face of a group was essentially a figurehead who either did little work and took lots of credit, or was actually sufficiently incompetent that the other people in the organization MADE the person the public figurehead, because they figured that was where they could do the least damage.

Actually, it seems strange to me that the Hero Narrative exists alongside the other narrative that you seem to hear from the media - slack off, relax, don't worry about your obligations, because someone else will step in and bail you out when you screw up. I suppose they're counting on the Heroes to bail the people who don't behave responsibly out.

I don't know, though. I work pretty hard. I try to do my best. But there are people who seem to act at times like I'm not doing enough - like my life doesn't matter - because I'm not, I don't know, out discovering a cure for cancer or something. Not all of us can be Heroes, but that doesn't mean those of us who aren't are Floppers.