This dissertation examines anti-heroes and their struggle as unsung heroes. It begins by discussing the author's lifelong interest in villains and antagonists. The introduction provides context on why villains can make stories more engaging. The literature review examines how the anti-hero has emerged prominently in entertainment in recent years. Anti-heroes often make morally questionable choices and challenge societal norms. Key research questions are presented regarding whether anti-heroes always need heroes as opponents and how they are understood through their narrative construction. The discussion analyzes prominent anti-heroes like Tony Montana from Scarface and Walter White from Breaking Bad.

1. DISSERTATION
ANTI HEROES-THE STRUGGLE OF UNSUNG HEROES

2. INTRODUCTION
• THE ORIGIN OF THIS DISSERTATION IS ROOTED IN MY LOVE OF VILLAINS. EVEN FROM
EARLY CHILDHOOD WHEN I WOULD WATCH PROFESSIONAL WRESTLING ON
TELEVISION, I FOUND MYSELF TRULY ENJOYING THE PERFORMANCES OF THE “HEELS”
(THE BAD GUYS) MUCH MORE THAN THE “BABYFACES” (THE GOOD GUYS). IN FILMS I
OFTEN FIND MYSELF MORE ENGAGED WITH THE ANTAGONIST RATHER THAN THE
HEROIC PROTAGONIST. IF ONE WERE TOLD TO THINK OF THE STAR WARS FILM
SERIES AND THEN ASKED TO NAME THE FIRST THING THAT POPS INTO HIS OR HER
HEAD, CHANCES ARE THE ANSWER WOULD BE THE EVIL DARTH VADER RATHER THAN
THE HEROIC LUKE SKYWALKER. GREAT VILLAINS, TO PARAPHRASE AN OLD
DRAMATIC WRITING ADAGE, ARE WHAT MAKE GREAT HEROES. THEY CREATE THE
CONFLICT THAT THE HERO MUST OVERCOME IN ORDER TO WIN THE DAY, RESCUE
THE PRINCESS, SAVE THE GALAXY.

3. LITERATURE REVIEW
• THE ANTI-HERO CHARACTER HAS RECENTLY EMERGED AS A PROMINENT FIGURE IN
ENTERTAINMENT. THE ANTI-HERO IS, AS IT SOUNDS, THE OPPOSITE OF A HEROIC
FIGURE. ANTI-HEROES OFTEN MAKE MORALLY QUESTIONABLE CHOICES, FALL PREY
TO HUMAN TEMPTATIONS, AND USUALLY CHALLENGE THE BOUNDARIES OF
AUTHORITY WITHIN SOCIETY. IN "RISE OF THE ANTI-HERO," JONATHAN MICHAEL
CLEARLY DEFINES THIS FIGURE: THE 'ANTI-HERO' (ALSO KNOWN AS THE FLAWED
HERO) IS A COMMON CHARACTER ARCHETYPE FOR THE ANTAGONIST THAT HAS
BEEN AROUND SINCE THE COMEDIES AND TRAGEDIES OF GREEK THEATER. UNLIKE
THE TRADITIONAL HERO WHO IS MORALLY UPRIGHT AND STEADFAST, THE ANTI-
HERO USUALLY HAS A FLAWED MORAL CHARACTER. MICHAEL REVEALS THAT ANTI-
HEROES ARE NOT ONLY FLAWED, BUT THEY ARE WILLING TO CROSS LINES, OR CAUSE
PHYSICAL HARM TO ANOTHER PERSON, IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE A DESIRED GOAL.

4. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
• THIS AUDIENCE IDENTIFICATION FUNCTIONS DIFFERENTLY FOR THE ANTI-HERO THAN IT DOES
FOR HE TRADITIONAL HERO. WHEREAS THE TRADITIONAL HERO OFTEN EMBODIES VIRTUES WE
ASPIRE TO, THE ANTI-HERO EMBODIES WHAT WE ARE, WITH ALL THE FAULTS AND VICES THAT
COME PART AND PARCEL WITH EVERYDAY LIVING. IF WE TAKE THE TYPICAL MORAL
CONUNDRUM “WOULD YOU STEAL A LOAF OF BREAD TO FEED A STARVING CHILD?” THE HERO
MAY GO EITHER WAY DEPENDING UPON THE CURRENT MORAL CLIMATE. DOES ADHERENCE TO
THE LAW AND ESTABLISHED SOCIAL ORDER OUTWEIGH THE SUFFERING OF THOSE IN NEED?
THE HERO’S PATH IS CLEARLY DEFINED BY SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS TO CONFORM TO A VISION
OF BLACK-AND-WHITE MORALITY, OF CLEAR CUT GOOD AND EVIL, WHICH IS WHERE THE
HERO FINDS STRENGTH THROUGH THE DEFENSE OF ESTABLISHED VIRTUE. THE ANTI-HERO,
RATHER THAN IMMEDIATELY CHOOSING A PREDETERMINED PATH, MAY SIMPLY ASK, “WHAT’S
THIS KID GOING TO DO FOR ME?” IT IS IN THE ABILITY TO QUESTION THE NATURE OF SOCIETY
THAT THE ANTI-HERO FINDS HIS POWER, AND THOUGH THE MOTIVATIONS OF THE
CHARACTER ARE MORE OFTEN THAN NOT ENTIRELY SELFISH, THE QUESTIONS HAVE BROADER
IMPLICATIONS FOR EVERYDAY LIFE.

5. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
• THE TERM “ANTI-HERO” IS OFTEN FOUND TO BE NEBULOUS AND FLEETING IN
DEFINITION, CHANGING OVER TIME, ITS MEANING AND APPLICATION
REFLECTIVE AND REACTIVE TO CONTEMPORARY SOCIAL PRACTICES. THE TERM
SEEMS TO DESCRIBE THE CHARACTER EXACTLY HOW ONE WOULD THINK; A
CHARACTER WHO IS THE OPPOSITE OF “HEROIC,” IN WHATEVER FORM THAT
MAY TAKE FOR A PARTICULAR TIME AND PLACE. IF WE ONLY SCRATCH THE
SURFACE OF THIS CHARACTER TYPE, THE ANTIHERO IS A CHARACTER THAT
REJECTS TRADITIONAL MODES OF HEROIC SELFLESSNESS IN FAVOR OF VERY
UNHEROIC SELFISHNESS. TO PUT ANOTHER WAY, THE SIMPLEST DEFINITION OF
AN ANTI-HERO IS A “BAD” HERO.

6. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
• 1.DO ANTIHEROES ALWAYS NEED HEROES AS OPPONENTS?
• 2.IN BEING CALLED AN ANTIHERO, IS IT MERELY A MATTER OF NEGATING THE
HEROIC?
• 3.ARE THEY LIKE HEROES IN THAT THEY DISTURB ORDER, TRANSGRESSING NORMS
AND BEHAVING COMPETITIVELY?
• 4.ARE THEY FIGURES THAT ARE PRIMARILY UNDERSTOOD AND FORMED THROUGH
THEIR RECEPTION, I.E., THROUGH THEIR NARRATIVE AND MEDIAL CONSTRUCTION
AND PROMULGATION?
• 5.DO THEY REQUIRE A FOLLOWING OR EVEN A COMMUNITY OF ADMIRERS?
• 6. WHERE ARE THOSE ELEMENTS CONSTITUTIVE FOR HEROES MODIFIED AND WHERE
DO SPECIFICALLY ANTIHEROIC HABITUS PATTERNS DEVELOP?

7. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
• IT WILL BE ARGUED THAT THE DEFAULT STANCE OF THE UN-HERO IS ON THE SIDE
OF THE NEGATIVE, THE QUESTIONER, THE INSURGENT WHO SEEKS TO TOPPLE THE
HEGEMONY AND REPLACE IT WITH A NEW SET OF VALUES WHICH ARE DERIVED FROM
EXPERIENCE RATHER THAN HAND-ME-DOWN WISDOM. AS WITH THE ANTI-HERO,
THE UN-HERO LIVES IN THE REAL WORLD. HIS BATTLE IS NOT WITH TITANS,
MONSTERS, MAD-GENIUSES OR CONQUERING ARMIES, BUT RATHER WITH THE REAL
SOCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH HAVE REJECTED HIM. IN OTHER WORDS, FOR THE
UN-HERO, THE ANTAGONISTIC ENEMY IS NOT SIMPLY MORALITY, BUT ULTIMATELY
REALITY; THE STATUS QUO THAT BOTH HE AND WE (THE AUDIENCE) EXIST IN DAY
TO DAY. IT IS IN OUR REALITY THAT THE UN-HERO FINDS HIMSELF SITUATED,
BATTLING AGAINST THE SAME FORCES WHICH SEEK TO OPPRESS BOTH THE
FICTIONAL HE AND THE VERY REAL US.

8. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
• . THEY ARE IN THE GREY AREA OR GREY ZONE AND THAT IS WHAT MAKES THEM
ANTI-HEROES. ANTI-HEROES ARE THE TYPE OF GANGSTER-LIKE GHETTO-LIKE
FRIEND WHO GETS INTO FIGHTS THAT YOU WOULD BE CLOSE FRIENDS WITH OR
THAT ONE LONELY KID WHO GETS IN TROUBLE AND IS SEEN AS A BAD PERSON
WHILE HAVING ANOTHER GOOD SIDE THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO SHOW MORE
TO THE PEOPLE WHO WON’T GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO BE THAT TYPE OF GOOD
PERSON. KIND OF LIKE WHAT MOST ANTI-HEROES ARE PUT IN THROUGH THE
SITUATIONS. ANTI-HEROES ARE THE TYPE OF PEOPLE WE WOULD HONOR THAT
OTHERS WOULDN’T NORMALLY HONOR.

9. DISCUSSION
• BREAKING BAD
• OFTEN THE TERM “ANTI-HERO,” AS IT RELATES TO TRADITIONAL DRAMATIC
INTERPRETATIONS, IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONCEPTS OF “BAD” OR “AMORAL.”
TWO OF THE MOST WELL-KNOW POPULARITY-HEROES, AL PACINO’S TITULAR TONY
“SCARFACE” MONTANA AND BREAKING BAD ‘CHEMISTRY-TEACHER-TURNED-DRUG-
KINGPIN WALTER WHITE (PLAYED BY BRIAN CRANSTON), ARE PRIME EXAMPLES OF
THIS TYPE. BOTH BEGIN AS OUTSIDERS OF MEAGER MEANS AND, THROUGH A
CEASELESS ONSLAUGHT OF DESPICABLE AND AMORAL ACTS, ACHIEVE GREAT
POWER. WE AS THE AUDIENCE ENJOY WATCHING THESE CHARACTERS TIME AND TIME
AGAIN BEAT THE SYSTEM AS THEY AMASS MORE WEALTH AND AUTHORITY, AND WE
GLEEFULLY FOLLOW ALONG AS THEY COMMIT MORE AND MORE HEINOUS ACTS WITH
EACH PASSING MOMENT OR EPISODE

10. CONCLUSION
• THE POSITION AS OUTSIDER OFFERS A DEFENSE FOR THE ANTI-HERO SHOULD
THINGS GO AWAY. IF WHAT THE ANTI-HERO CONCLUDES IS FOUND TO BE
UNTRUE OR ENTIRELY UNSAVORY BY THE AUDIENCE, THE ACTIONS OF THE
CHARACTER CAN SIMPLY BE WRITTEN OFF AS A JOKE, A LOW-BROW ATTEMPT
TO RILE THE MASSES IN WHICH, AFTER A THOROUGH REBUKE BY THE VICEROYS
OF SOCIAL AUTHORITY, THE ANTI-HERO (AND, BY EXTENSION, THE CREATOR OF
THE ANTI-HERO) RETURNS TO HIS NATURAL STATE OF OUTSIDER, REJECTED
ONCE AGAIN. SOCIAL MORALITY IS UPHELD, AND THE WORLD MOVES ON.