> Jack Sparrow is an anti-heroical subversion of the classical swashbuckler
> archetype.
>
> In nostalgic/romantic storytelling, a swashbuckler has been traditionally
> a goody-goody merry adventurer, most often from the romantic period of
> 16th-17th century European baroque and the golden era of piracy (the three
> musqueteers being the quintessential example), although it can go much
> farther in the past (Robin Hood being another excellent example, whose
> stories are often dated to something like the 13th or 14th century)

This has always bothered me: How come the three musketeers are /never/ 
seen holding muskets? What is /that/ about??

Robin Hood is a set of tales which have morphed between many things over 
the course of history. The "original" Robin Hood was quite different 
from the fable we know today. It's changed with the times, depending on 
what type of story audiences enjoy hearing. (I suppose the same can be 
said of just about any really old story.)

> Unlike the typical swashbuckler, this is a *flawed* character. He commits
> crimes, he is selfish and does things for personal gain, not to help others
> (unless he is emotionally invested, eg. from a romantic perspective), yet
> he usually ends up being the unwitting hero of the story who defeats the
> actual villains.
>
> There's much more depth to this character, and the writers have a much richer
> variety of hijinks at their disposal for this character because he is not
> limited to the boundaries of what's good, ethical and lawful.

Sometimes a character starts out as an actual villain with an honest 
streak - perhaps one he didn't even know he had - and by the end of the 
story he changes sides.

But that's not what happens in this particular tale. In the beginning, 
Jack is a pirate. At the end, he's still a pirate. And yet, we love him 
for it.

It's not so much that he beat the Evil Authorities. Really, the Royal 
Navy comes across as pretty righteous. And they aren't even IN the film 
all that much. This is mostly a battle of Jack verses Barbosa. And Jack 
wins. So, ultimately, it all comes back to which pirate is the good guy.

Another thing: I really /hate/ this idea that every character has to be 
"flawed" in some way or the audience can't like them. Was Bambi a flawed 
character? Did the audience like Bambi? Did little children cry when his 
mother was shot? OK, now go watch Bambi II. (Yes, this film exists. No, 
it isn't any good at all.) In order to make it "relevant" and 
"accessible" to today's youth, they had to make it all so that Bambi's 
father has difficulty relating to him, and that's the drama to be 
resolved over the course of the film. Yuck!

While I'm here... It seems there are two types of villain too. Some of 
them are just monsters. Purest evil. The kind that nobody could possibly 
like. But it seems that all the /best/ villains are at least partially 
likeable. Perhaps you understand what drove them to do it. Or maybe 
they're just charismatic, even hypnotic. But the best ones all have 
something about them...

...I really suck at writing, BTW.

Post a reply to this message