As of late, I have been expanding my reading horizons and delving into the science fiction side of literature. I find it to be a great escape from the looming mass of procrastination that hangs over my shoulders day and night. As stressed as I am, it's ironic that I have reading time in the midst of pending assignments, but I've never been the type to lay myself out over things like that; so instead I pat the looming mass on its head and kindly tell it to bugger off.

I've become quite fascinated with the “call to adventure” or “hero” trope in literature, as it is often prevalent in many franchises you see in the media. From what I've seen in movies and TV, there are two different ways this trope is approached. The first way is that in which the plot generally follows the “call to adventure” storyline; filled with quirky and comedic relief side characters that airily respond to intense situations like it’s another box checked off their to-do list. Sure, they look cool in the slow mo fight scenes and dramatic monologues, but it seems to just be a game in the end. All the “real” moments where the protagonists have actual difficulty facing the opposing force are overshadowed by the characters nonchalant attitude throughout the film and the nauseating amount of action-packed scenes that are squeezed into the movie's allotted time frame. This prevents me from leaving with a firm grasp of what the director actually wanted the audience to take out of it. Some may disagree, but most mainstream blockbuster ‘action hero’ movies follow this trend, a large example being the Marvel franchise. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with these movies, they are just targeted for audiences who like to see action, defeat, and victory in a way where there is a degree of levity to it. It is easier to leave the movie with a good feeling, because you know that the story is always designed for the ‘hero’ or ‘good guy’ to win in the end. This makes most action, sci-fi movies quite forgettable.

The second approach of this trope is more serious noted, and more than likely leaves the audience to swallow the frog in their throat and contemplate what they just saw, whether they want to or not. Media that expose rare and unfiltered circumstances and feelings are not always welcomed in Hollywood or society. Especially in America, there seems to be an underlying notion to sweep things under the rug and pretend like things are better than ok. Many major institutions are influenced this way, but i'm sure it would bore you if I named names (*coughs* the American Government *cough* *cough*). Not only does this conception affect that way we generally live, it’s prevalent within families as well. Only recently has it become good to be different, now different equates special, society is now progressing in a way where it’s frowned upon to be like everyone else. Back in the day, whenever that is for you, different was a problem, something that was hushed and hidden behind closed doors. If you were different, and not in the quirky endearing type of way that is glamorized today, but in the way where it was deemed unacceptable you had to conceal, or face the harsh ridicule that follows.

I believe that one of the only ways to progress is to become comfortable with the uncomfortable. This is why I hold a reverence for people who have gone against fears and exposed how things really are. The more we embody the opposite of perfect, the better things become.