This article reviews an investigation into the case of Stanley Girch (aka Girėnas) and Stephen William Darius as (multi)transfigured and transforming heroes and seeks to examine a two-fold assumption that has emerged in heroism science, namely that people create heroes mostly for the better and that learning from the past can help assess which heroes are needed. We argue that it may be beneficial to shift the focus of the analysis and follow the reverse course of a hero’s journey, tracing the impact, evolution and origin of the heroic status ascribed to the historical figures, whether individual or collective. Presuming that heroic status follows contextualization of actions, the developmental phases, techniques, and authorship of hero-making can be revealed through a reverse analysis of multi-layered contexts. The findings have led to the unsettling conclusion that the making of historical heroes hardly served the greater good and was quite removed from what was thought necessary. The same contradiction, however, may give an impulse for further development of heroism science as it prompts a broad-based, interdisciplinary assessment of the effectiveness of hero-making in the past, its present influence and projections for the future.
Sviderskyte, Gražina Kristina
"For Whose Greater Good? The Case of Hero-Making: Girch and Darius,"
Heroism Science: Vol. 4:
1, Article 5.
Available at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/heroism-science/vol4/iss1/5