Calling All Sidekicks

 

Some of the most well-known characters in superhero comics are, believe it or not, the sidekicks. The difference between a superhero and a sidekick isn’t usually how much either of them actually does when it comes to fighting crime, or even their powers. but typically revolves more around the age and personality of the character. The best example would be Robin (Or the many different Robins as there were multiple when the previous Robin would die off) sidekick to Batman. Of course, many people might not know that there were several different Robins: Either because the previous Robin “died”, or because the story was in a different version or “universe”. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_(comics) )
Of course, characters rarely stay dead in comics. The usually tend to miraculously make a reappearance or will return in one of the many multi-verses. Comic books and their writers enjoy tugging at your heart-strings. This is why many people never know the true storylines of comic book characters, there are multiple outcomes.

The sad truth is that no one pays much attention to the sidekicks and how much they truly do for their "heroes". Everyone could say that Bruce Wayne is Batman, the legendary Dark Knight, but most people you would ask couldn’t name Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, Tim Drake, Stephanie Brown, Damian Wayne, or even Carrie Kelley as any of the Robins. Sidekicks are the most underrated aspects of these storylines and are not given credit for the hundreds of times they’ll save the superhero. Sidekicks are there to save their heroes after an entrapment, they help to find out the evil plans of their enemies. Sidekicks break away from their heroes because they are given minimal credit for the work they've done.

Call Your Allies: Don’t Work Alone

 

        “Everyone must work together and fight back. If we all fight, we can’t lose. Good will always win. We need more help.” How many times have we heard about the importance of ‘teamwork’ when it comes to movies with good versus evil: protagonist versus antagonist? Anyone who has ever seen a superhero movie will understand exactly what I am about to say. SUPERHEROS- DO- NOT- CALL- FOR- HELP! THERE- IS- NO- OUTSOURCING- FOR- BACKUP!

          I cannot adequately describe how irritated I get when I am watching any sort of popular franchised Hollywood portrayal of some cliché superhero that needs to save the earth and decides he can handle everything on his own. Don’t get me wrong, I love everything there is to love about the realm of imagination that is in any sort of association with superheroes, supervillains, and the like, but there are many pet peeves I have about the logic behind the stories. Okay, yes, I realize how idiotic the necessity for logic sounds in this context, but hear me out for just a few minutes. “You want logic? You probably shouldn’t be this interested in superheroes. They are made up people with superpowers, of course there is no logic.” Well, I understand that the entire parameter of the superhero world is fictional, but my problem is when there are major gaping holes in the storylines.

          You’re going to tell me that New York City can be literally destroyed and burned to the ground every other day and there are still people who don’t know superheroes exist? That there are no news reports or any investigations going on in order to be able to explain why a street of skyscrapers just collapsed into smoke? Furthermore, I would like to know how much the taxes and the budgeting for infrastructure would be for the citizens in the area because they have to be paying tons of money in repairs.

          A lot of DC and Marvel characters will be in the same area, but don’t cross each other. As a random example to emphasis my point; if Captain America and Spiderman are both going to be in the same vicinity fighting crime, why do they never cross paths? Not once!

          The sucky hiding of “secret identities” is always a dilemma to me. It’s one of those things that is stuck in the back of my mind. A prime example would be Clark Kent, A. K. A., Superman. He literally goes from a suit and glasses to tights and a cape… HE DOESN’T EVEN WEAR A MASK! Now, not only does this fact bother me within itself, but the fact Lois Lane actually slept with Superman and had a child with him NOT KNOWING IT WAS CLARK! First off, she is really stupid to not realize that her coworker was the superhero she had a child with. Second, she clearly did not know him well enough to do so if she can’t even recognize him. But, I digress.

          The woman above is Carrie Kelley, a female Robin from The Dark Knight Returns. Do you see the green glasses she is wearing? Those aren’t part of her costume. SHE WEARS THEM ALL OF THE TIME! SHE IS LITERALLY ALWAYS WEARING THOSE GLASSES AND, YET, NO ONE KNOWS WHO SHE IS?!

          As frustrating as all of these downfalls of the superhero world are, I could forget it. I forgive all of it; the lack of creativity when hiding their identities, destroyed cities, all of it. What I can’t forgive is the fact that none of the superheroes contact each other. My first realization of this was when I saw the newest Captain America movie, The Winter Soldier. Keep in mind that there had just been a new Avengers movie not too long before, so clearly, they are all friends. In the new Captain America movie, Steve Rogers (A. K. A. Captain America) Is basically trying to keep some strange super soldier from blowing up the city, yet, he never called any other Avengers for help except for the most human of all, Black Widow. My first instinct would have been to call Tony Stark/ Iron Man considering he is a genius with technology and you’re trying to deactivate a bomb, but maybe that’s just me.

The Dying out of the Dire Wolf

 

          There had been a controversy over whether or not the dire wolf actually existed, based mostly on the fact that the dire wolf often appears in stories of mythology (Such and Game of Thrones. I mean..If you haven’t seen that show.. Do it. Now. Do it!)

The dire wolf (Canis dirus "fearsome dog") is an extinct and very carnivorous mammal. The closest that could be measured of its size is that it is roughly the size of the extant gray wolf, but with a heavier build. These beautiful and once extremely powerful wolves were said to have gone extinct over 10,000 years ago. The dire wolf averaged to be about 5 feet in length and weighed between 110 and 174 pounds. Dire wolves are in the same carnivorous grouping as the smaller gray wolves and coyotes. Though, their bites are believed to be about 129% more force than a modern gray wolf. They often fed on larger prey and megafauna which is made quite clear by their strong bite and their body size. They did tend to travel in packs as most wolves do, but they did not specialize in their hunting. They fed on whatever was abundant to them and kept them fed. An interesting difference in the wolves is that the wolves in the older pits show much more breaking of their teeth. Scientists are unsure of whether it is the diet of the previous wolves or the age of the previous wolves that affected this. Whether the dire wolf actually originated in North America or South America is a majorly controversial topic. Most paleontologists would tend to lean toward North America because of the potential for progenitors and the number of sightings in North America to South America is 136 to 3. It is believed this wolf originated in North America and Central America and later migrated to South America. Dire wolves are actually domesticated and used as pets in the first season of Game of Thrones. They are believed to be extinct and, therefore, considered a myth as there are not supposed to be any left. The wolves, at least in the show, domesticated quite well for the children of Winterfell and became very beloved pets. One of them actually protected the young boy who had found him when he was nearly murdered. Another protected the daughter of Ned Stark and was slaughtered for biting Prince Joffrey. Now, how accurately the wolves were portrayed in the show is unknown, but the creatures were quite large in size, hopefully putting into perspective the measurements of these wolves.

The Rage of the Berserkers

 

berserk

[ber-surk, -zurk] /bərˈsɜrk, -ˈzɜrk/ Spell Syllables

·         Synonyms

·         Examples

·         Word Origin

adjective

1.

violently or destructively frenzied; wild; crazed; deranged:

He suddenly went berserk.

noun

2.

(sometimes initial capital letter) Scandinavian Legend.. Also, berserker. an ancient Norse warrior who fought with frenzied rage in battle, possibly induced by eating hallucinogenic mushrooms.

 

Synonyms

1. violent, mad, maniacal, rabid, demented, lunatic.

 

Word Origin and History for berserk Expand

adj.

1844, from berserk (n.) "Norse warrior," by 1835, an alternative form of berserker (1822), a word which was introduced by Sir Walter Scott, from Old Norse berserkr (n.) "raging warrior of superhuman strength;" probably from *ber- "bear" + serkr "shirt," thus literally "a warrior clothed in bearskin." Thus not from Old Norse berr "bare, naked."

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/berserk?s=t

 

          Let me reinstate a fact that you will already know if you read the Dictionary definitions above. Berserkers were Norse warriors.

Norse

[nawrs] /nɔrs/ Spell Syllables

·         Examples

·         Word Origin

adjective

1.

of or relating to ancient Scandinavia, its inhabitants, or their language.

2.

Norwegian (def 1).

noun

3.

(used with a plural verb) the Norwegians, especially the ancient Norwegians.

4.

(used with a plural verb) the Northmen or ancient Scandinavians generally.

5.

the Norwegian language, especially in its older forms.

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/norse?s=t

 

Most recollections of these “Berserkers” in the Old Norse literature have described their behavior as uncontrollable, trance-like fury, violence, and unstoppable rage.  The English word “Berserk” was actually derived and based off of the Berserkers as a way to compare a person to the instability of the Berserkers. Many historians who have studied the Berserkers, or at least know of them, believe that berserkers worked themselves into a rage before battle. Basically, these warriors were like our high school football players, working themselves up into a fury with their pre-game locker room pep talk. Of course, like any immoral athlete, there are easier ways to get pumped up. Many historians also believe that the Berserkers ate drugged food or did mushrooms.

I'll ask of the berserks, you tasters of blood,

Those intrepid heroes, how are they treated,
Those who wade out into battle?
Wolf-skinned they are called. In battle
They bear bloody shields.
Red with blood are their spears when they come to fight.
They form a closed group.
The prince in his wisdom puts trust in such men
Who hack through enemy shields.

Haraldskvæði- Composed by: Thórbiörn Hornklofi

 

Well, I don’t know about you, but the idea of a large and almost psychotically deranged Scandinavian man, hopped up on mushrooms, trying to brutally murder me sounds absolutely petrifying. I have only seen one portrayal of the Berserker warriors in my life and it was the first time I had ever heard of them, which was actually quite recently. I saw the Berserkers being a key weapon and ally for the main antagonist, were-jaguar, Kate Argent, in season 4 of Teen Wolf which is the show that dictates my life. One key difference I noticed between the two ideas of a Berserker is the clear cut differences in the portrayed personality of the warriors. While the original warrior Berserkers are described as “violent, uncontrollable, and enraged”, Jeff Davis’ representation was the exact opposite. Of course, they were still much stronger than any protagonist could hope for, but they were more than controlled, not of their own will, nonetheless. They almost seemed like servants to Kate Argent and seemed much less human than they originally were.

 

If a soldier survives the berserk state, it imparts emotional deadness and vulnerability to explosive rage to his psychology and permanent hyperarousal to his physiology — hallmarks of post-traumatic stress disorder in combat veterans. My clinical experience with Vietnam combat veterans prompts me to place the berserk state at the heart of their most severe psychological and psychophysiological injuries.

Jonathan Shay

This fury, which was called berserkergang, occurred not only in the heat of battle, but also during laborious work. Men who were thus seized performed things which otherwise seemed impossible for human power. This condition is said to have begun with shivering, chattering of the teeth, and chill in the body, and then the face swelled and changed its colour. With this was connected a great hot-headedness, which at last gave over into a great rage, under which they howled as wild animals, bit the edge of their shields, and cut down everything they met without discriminating between friend or foe. When this condition ceased, a great dulling of the mind and feebleness followed, which could last for one or several days.

Hilda Ellis-Davidson

The Basilisk: King of Serpents

 

          Though I chose the title because it just sounded awesome, it holds truth. “Basilisk” derives from the Greek word “Basilískos” meaning "little king”. A basilisk is basically like the Medusa of reptiles. It is a legendary creature believed to kill with a simple glance.

            "There is the same power also in the serpent called the basilisk. It is produced in the province of Cyrene, being not more than twelve fingers in length. It has a white spot on the head, strongly resembling a sort of a diadem. When it hisses, all the other serpents fly from it: and it does not advance its body, like the others, by a succession of folds, but moves along upright and erect upon the middle. It destroys all shrubs, not only by its contact, but those even that it has breathed upon; it burns up all the grass, too, and breaks the stones, so tremendous is its noxious influence. It was formerly a general belief that if a man on horseback killed one of these animals with a spear, the poison would run up the weapon and kill, not only the rider, but the horse, as well. To this dreadful monster the crow of a rooster is fatal, a thing that has been tried with success, for kings have often desired to see its body when killed; so true is it that it has pleased Nature that there should be nothing without its antidote. The animal is thrown into the hole of the basilisk, which is easily known from the soil around it being infected. The weasel destroys the basilisk by its odour, but dies itself in this struggle of nature against its own self."

Pliny the Elder: Natural History

           

The basilisk is called "king" because it is said to have some sort of crown-shape on its head. This is one reason that many believe the Basilisk was actually just an abstract recollection of a cobra. Cobras can also stay in an upright position. The king cobra has a crown-like symbol on its head. A few species of spitting cobras can incapacitate anyone by spitting venom, which would explain the deadly reputation of a basilisk. As if that weren’t enough, cobras most often spit the venom into the eyes of its victims. Frankly, I feel as if that is really just over the top.

 

The Moon That Makes Us Howl

 

Lunar Cycle.

Animal Behavior.

Unexplainable Phenomena.

There are countless beliefs and myths about the infamous “werewolf” or the belief in lycanthrope. While the idea of muscular twenty year old men running around shirtless and protecting their teen girlfriends from equally attractive, mysterious, and elusive vampires is much more intriguing, the moon doesn’t just turn humans to wolves. Though, we don’t have to become feral beasts to behave like one.

          I have always had an interest in what is known as the “Lunar Effect”. The term lunar effect is basically the belief that there is an actual correlation between the different stages of the Earth's lunar cycle (The phases of the moon) and behavior in animals (Yes, animals. This includes humans as we are all a bunch of mammals). The odd behavior that seems to occur on certain phases of the moon’s cycle have yet to be explained, though the lunar effects have been studied for quite some time now.

The lunar effect is in no way a new topic of discussion. It has been around and observed for quite a while. By the late 1980s, there were at least 20 published studies on the purported lunar-birthrate connection. Of course, some myths of the lunar cycle are purely coincidence. For example, with fertility rates, it has a lot to do with the menstrual cycle. The typical cycle revolves on a twenty-eight day period, just as the moon does.  There is also said to be an increase in reproduction and an unexplainable blood loss. Surgeons used to refuse to operate because they said that, on the full moon, more people died from lack of blood clotting. Even those with mental disorders show signs of being affected. They have been said to grow more aggressive and violent on full moons. The only mental disorder that showed sign of correlation was with schizophrenic. The problem with these studies is, all recent studies have seemed to prove them wrong. There is no known correlation between them.

Of course, the whole idea of people going crazy on the full moon is quite humorous. The word “Lunatic” is actually derived from the Latin word “Luna” which means moon. Perhaps there is more truth to these myths than modern people care to believe.

http://www.universetoday.com/112861/why-do-people-go-crazy-during-a-full-moon/

There are some who believe that the moon creates an actual spiritual affect. All astrological frequencies actually affect a person’s behavior. http://www.spiritualresearchfoundation.org/spiritualresearch/spiritualscience/spiritualeffectofmoon_on_man

All objects including stars, planets and satellite bodies emit frequencies. These “frequencies” affect humans on a subtle and physical level. The frequencies that are emitted by the moon affect different frequencies in the mind of human beings. ‘Mind’ refers to the feelings, emotions and desires etc. The mind is split into two parts; the conscious mind and the sub-conscious mind. The conscious mind are things that we as humans choose to do of our own accord, while the sub-conscious mind is best described as the part of the mind that controls out nature and, basically, determines a person’s personality.

          In my personal opinion, I believe there is most definitely a possibility that the lunar cycle affects our behaviour. Think about this for a moment. Animals. When there is a natural disaster or something out of place happening, they change their behaviour, don’t they? What causes them to behave this way to something that most humans wouldn’t see coming? Their instincts. Why should astrological changes be any different to those on earth? Only so much of your mind is made up of conscious behaviour. Humans, as a species, are all more intuitive than most would usually believe.

Muggles, Mudbloods, and Wizards of Magic

 

In the well-known Harry Potter series, there are several different blood types a being of witchcraft or wizardry may be: Pureblood, Half-blood, and Muggle-born. Like a family’s name or wealth may affect their status in society, a person’s blood type works in virtually the same way. Although, it is quite evident that a witch or wizards blood-type often may correspond with their wealth such as the Malfoys.

          Pureblood wizards are from a long line of magic beings and are often the oldest families of all. There are the poorer and more morally respectable families like the Weasleys, and there are the wealthy, greedy, conniving, corrupt families like the Malfoys. The Malfoys like to flaunt their blood line in the face of others as if it somehow makes them better.

          Half-bloods are those who are born of one magic parent and one human parent. The status of half-bloods can really go either way, depending on who they are talking to. If they were to talk to someone like the Malfoys, it may present a problem for them, but if they were to speak to most common wizards, they are viewed no different than any pureblood.

          Muggle-borns are the most mistreated and disrespected of all blood lines. Muggle-borns are the witches and wizards that are born of two humans. It is unknown really how they are born with magic when their parents weren’t (though, I believe it is because of distant ancestry). Another term for muggle-born wizards is “mudblood”. Mudblood is a very derogatory term and is viewed as extremely offensive. They are called that, typically by purebloods, because their blood is viewed as “filthy” and is considered bad blood.

          What I want to know is, why is it only muggle-born wizards that are viewed as having diluted blood? Wouldn’t half-bloods be considered the same? Muggle-born wizards have two muggle parents and just happen to have magic. Half-bloods technically have the “diluted” blood because they are a combination of muggle and wizard blood. I believe that the judgmental and extremely pretentious. There should be no reason they are considered better than anyone else. You either have magic or you don’t, it shouldn’t matter to what degree or ancestry.  

Harry Potter and the Seven Horcruxes

 

        Harry Potter: the “Young wizard.” “The chosen one.” “The boy who lived.” Yes, we have all heard about Harry Potter and we all love the stories. The entire series is… So creative and unique that it is hard to put into words. There are so many concepts that no one else has really thought of. J. K. Rowling made up vocabulary and concepts that can be recognized around the world. We all followed Harry though out his life and, most importantly, his journey to find and destroy every last horcrux keeping Voldemort alive; ever remnant of his malicious and broken off soul.

          In Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, one thing we were not told at the end of the movie is that Tom Riddle’s diary that was so often referenced throughout the movie is actually a horcrux. A horcrux is used to create a sense of immortality. When someone kills another, a piece of their soul is literally broken and ripped from the rest, dismembering your soul. Evil wizards would then put those torn off pieces of souls into another object so that they could never truly die.

          At the end of the movie, Harry used the fang of a basilisk to stab the diary and, inadvertently, destroys one of the horcruxes. A few moments prior, Harry himself had been bitten by the same basilisk he had taken the fang from. Harry is later discovered to be the final horcrux of Voldemort. My question is, why would the fang destroy the horcrux of the diary but not Harry?

          I have a few theories about why the bite of the infamous basilisk might not have worked on Harry in this particular scenario. One theory is that the destruction of the horcrux, when in a living being, is only destroyed when that person is completely dead, which seems like an obvious answer. My second theory is that the destruction of the horcrux is not instantaneous. The phoenix had come to the chamber of secrets and had healed Harry after the venom of the basilisk had begun to spread through his body. In theory, a phoenix like the one from the movie can heal and repair any sickness, injury, or ailment. Perhaps, when Harry was starting to die from the bite, that could have also been his body started to destroy the horcrux as he himself died, but being healed had halted the process of destroying the horcrux.

Aphrodite: Goddess of Love

 

Aphrodite is a well-known Greek goddess. She is goddess of love, desire, pleasure, and procreation; see a common theme? Her overwhelming beauty sparked quite a tension among the Olympians. It was feared that the beauty of Aphrodite and the desire that many had for the goddess would create a mass rivalry to try and take her for themselves. It was believed that said rivalry would create a war among the gods. In an attempt to rid them of this predicament, Zeus married Aphrodite off to Hephaestus. Hephaestus is described and “ugly” and “deformed”.

The characteristics used to describe someone like Aphrodite are not hard to infer. She was a beautiful, worldly-desired goddess who was forced to marry one of the most “hideous” of all the gods. She is described as being extremely vain or highly focused on her own vanity, ill-tempered, and quite sensitive on occasion in terms of her reaction to being “insulted”; though she was said to often imply insults where no insult was intended. She was quite obviously very displeased with her forced marriage (A marriage that Hephaestus was overjoyed about. I mean, the man even forged her beautiful jewelry and presents to try and compensate for his lack of beauty in comparison to hers. She could have been a bit more grateful; he was a sweetheart to her. She sort of seemed a bit like a spoiled brat).

In reaction to her distaste for both her marriage and her “inadequate” husband, Aphrodite had many affairs. She really wasn’t particular about who she would sleep around with in any way, shape, or form. Whether she had affairs with a wide range of men because she actually had some interest in them or because it was a sort of rebellion against both Zeus and Hephaestus is still in question. She had affairs with gods (particularly Ares: God of war with whom she was most often sighted or paired with in mythology), mortals, even Adonis who was sort of like her surrogate or adoptive son after she found him as a child. Granted, she was a girl who was used to being constantly desired and given what she wanted. She wasn’t exactly given the fair end of the bargain by being “betrothed” to a god who most found inadequate, but she could have held higher standards for herself. Aphrodite is not any different than most gods. Many gods; Apollo, Zeus, Ares, Poseidon, they had countless children because of all of their affairs. What I find strange about her situation is the fact that Hephaestus plays such a major role in her mythology. A similar occurrence can be said of Persephone. With major male, Olympian gods, they tend to have “consorts” as opposed to concretely evident partners or wives. Persephone and Aphrodite were both forced into marriage that they didn’t want, simply because of their beauty. The difference was, Persephone always went back to her husband (Of course, he hadn’t given her much of a choice), Aphrodite seemed as if she were more married to Ares than she ever seemed to be with Hephaestus.

Overall, Aphrodite isn’t exactly one of my favorite of the Greek goddesses. I like her and the whole idea of love and everything that she represents, but I honestly believe that some of her traits make it harder to enjoy her character or sympathize for her. Aphrodite seemed to be a truly conceited, selfish, and bitter person who would use men to show a sign of rebellion and anger at the life choices she had been forced into.

 

Daemon vs. Demon

 

Daemons are benign spirits of nature They are said to be beings of the same nature as both mortals and gods. Damons are considered to be similar to ghosts, spirit guides, and forces of nature or even the gods.

A demon is a supernatural creature that is common is Christianity or other religions. They are malevolent and usually quite evil, causing pain and suffering for others (minions or beings of hell).

 

Daemons and demons are terms that are often used interchangeably. Though this is not exactly incorrect, it is not accurate either. While “demons” and “daemons” are similar in their mythology, daemons are Greek mythology based and demons are religiously based. Daemons are not based off of the negative and aggressively violent connotation that demons are.

Thanatos: Daemon of Death

 

          Thanatos was the daemon (Not to be confused with ‘demon’) of death. He was often confused with Hades only because of the fact that Hades was often believed to be death itself.

"And there the children of dark Night have their dwellings, Sleep and Death, awful gods. The glowing Sun never looks upon them with his beams, neither as he goes up into heaven, nor as he comes down from heaven. And the former of them roams peacefully over the earth and the sea's broad back and is kindly to men; but the other has a heart of iron, and his spirit within him is pitiless as bronze: whomsoever of men he has once seized he holds fast: and he is hateful even to the deathless gods."

                                                                             Greek Poet Hesiod: Theogony

 

          Thanatos wasn’t the only family member who had a negative connotation. It seemed to be a family trait among his siblings. A few of his siblings were Geras (Old Age), Moros (Doom) Oizys (Suffering), Apate (Deception), Momus (Blame), Eris (Strife), Nemesis (Retribution) and even Charon (Boatman of the Underworld). Thanatos is described as being quite merciless. He was loathed by, and very hateful toward any mortals and the immortal gods.

 

"To Thanatos, Fumigation from Manna.

 Hear me, O Death, whose empire unconfin'd

 extends to mortal tribes of ev'ry kind.

 On thee, the portion of our time depends,

 whose absence lengthens life, whose presence ends.

 

 Thy sleep perpetual bursts the vivid folds

 by which the soul, attracting body holds :

 common to all, of ev'ry sex and age,

 for nought escapes thy all-destructive rage.

 

 Not youth itself thy clemency can gain,

 vigorous and strong, by thee untimely slain.

 In thee the end of nature’s works is known,

 in thee all judgment is absolved alone.

 No suppliant arts thy dreadful rage control,

 no vows revoke the purpose of thy soul.

 O blessed power, regard my ardent prayer,

 

and human life to age abundant spare.

Orphic Hymn

 

Given the cruel and sort of sadistic nature that usually characterizes Thanatos, I can definitely see where the negative connotations towards Hades derived. Thanatos is not typically a physical embodiment in most Greek mythology, he is most commonly just mentioned on various occasions. As he is not a usual physical figure, it is understandable why most people haven’t heard of him. If people haven’t heard of him, it would explain why so many people see Hades as death as opposed to its coordinated Daemon.

Hades: God of the Underworld

 

Hades is one of the most infamous and well-known names in all of Greek Mythology. He is the eldest son of Cronos and Rhea when speaking of the chronological order they were birthed by Rhea. (Sometimes, people will account by the order in which they were regurgitated by Cronos, in which case, he would be the youngest of his siblings as he was the first to be eaten.) Hades is one of the big three, along with his brothers; Zeus and Poseidon. He is the king of the Underworld, and God of the dead. Hades was married to the Greek goddess, Persephone, though not of her own accord. He abducted Persephone and forced her into marriage by tricking her into eating while in the Underworld after her abduction, which would compel her to have to return for a certain period of time every year.

          There are several portrayals of what Hades was said to be like, though, two are the most common. Many accounts would say that Hades was cruel and, well, downright evil. The typical reasoning behind the negative connotation of Hades being “evil” would be the usual discomfort with the mention of death. Any man who rules the world of death where souls mourn for eternity would have to be some kind of sadist, right? That is not necessarily true. Some myths and fables claim Hades was envious of his brothers and bitter of his banishment to the Underworld. He believed it unfair that he would have to spend eternity in the Underworld, babysitting the whining souls of the deceased. While these assumptions are logical given Hades’ situation and could very well be true, he was also described as a very passive God.

          Hades was considered to be, what can only be described as, altruistic in mythology. Hades wasn’t necessarily “evil” (Though he had quite a short temper, much like his brothers). He was actually considered to be quite passive and sort of…mellow for the most part. He was in the Underworld as more of an overseer to make sure everything stayed balanced and there was no sparking of chaos.

Though Hades was the sole ruler of the Underworld, he was assisted by a few subjects. Obviously, Hades had complete and utter control over these assistants. Hades forbade his subjects to leave his realm and would become absolutely furious when anyone even attempted to escape. He was also very hostile whenever someone tried to steal the souls from his realm. You could say that Hades was quite possessive over his souls. Anyone who ever tried to cheat him or death would find themselves in a very dangerous situation.

Hades was very much feared by living people. When his “cults” would restrain from ever using his name. People tended to use euphemisms to divert their fears. Basically, Hades is a lot like Voldemort, A.K.A. “He who shall not be named.” Saying Hades’ name aloud was kind of a no-no.  When they made sacrifices to him, they would avert their faces.

 

Hades rarely left the Underworld. Hades was not, in all actuality, an evil God. He was often considered to be stern, cruel, and unpitying, but that could be said of many other Gods. Hades was so much more feared and hated because people associated him with Death. Though he contained the souls in the Underworld once they had perished, he himself was not death. He was often associated with death itself, as the cause, but the daemon of death was actually Thanatos.

 

          When imagining the Underworld, it is often seen as a dark and gloomy place filled with despair and the shrieking and moaning of mourning souls. What is often forgotten is, the Underworld isn’t like Hell where everyone there is meant to be punished: It is not that every single perished soul is sent to a purgatory for all of eternity. There were different sections of the Underworld for different people of different purposes.

          In cinematic portrayals of Hades such as; Hercules and Percy Jackson: Lightening Thief, Hades is portrayed as the more common bitter and spiteful, even greedy God. It seems that modern movies and literary works have the “evil” Hades while classic Greek Mythology wasn’t typically set that way. I believe that Hades is most commonly portrayed that way in modern times because it makes things more interesting. There is no need for a mellow and mundane ruler of the Underworld. Stories need an antagonist to make them interesting, and who better to create problems than the God of the dead?