Heroism In Sir Gawain And The Green Knight

947 Words4 Pages
In Sir Gawain and The Green Knight the debate is if Sir Gawain matches my definition of Heroism, after reading I have decided that he does not. There is a difference between being a hero and being honorable. A hero is honorable but an honorable person is not a hero. To be honorable one must contain integrity, in Sir Gawain’s case he displays chivalry, being a knight it is a part of his code. One might say he displays heroism by stepping up to accept the Green Knights challenge in the place of king Arthurs, this act is also displayed as courageous, a prerequisite to heroism. The problem with this is his obligation to the king, to his chivalrous code invalidates this. By having an obligation to make this act, the act of heroism is not pure. His obligation to the throne is not heroic, it is expected of him. This is not exactly…show more content…
Gawain to some readers, if they have the idea of commitment in their mind already, may see Gawain as a committed man. I could even give in a little bit to that, but if you break down his commitment to find the reasoning behind it, you see loyalty. Loyalty to his king, loyalty to his own oath he has sworn to his knighthood. Up until the end where the Green Knight is chopping at his neck. This is a very pure profession of his loyalty. I know I would not let somebody go chopping away at my head if it was not for a good reason, Gawain’s Loyalty and obligation to the throne was reason enough for him. Sir Gawain, though an honorable man, who possess great characteristics such as loyalty, an honorable code and an above par chivalry code. Since I see courage as an action rather than a characteristic, Gawain never makes that action. I also do not confuse his loyalty and obligation for an act of commitment. He is a integrity violator, he flinches at death making him not a coward, but human. As good of a man as he is, he never performs the act of
Open Document