I think within my family, it is a way to generate more cohesion. It may also be a way to create place within a given space. Keep in mind that the Philippines was colonized a number of times, by a number of groups. I think that the collective memory of the larger group would influence the collective memory of a family group, which may come in the form of a diminished sense of worth. By creating the ‘hero’ the worth is re-established, a particular place in a given space is created.
Though,I do think that the hero myth can be used as a way to justify atrocities. Which is observable in many nation-states.
Okaaayyyy… Bring on the philosophical discussion. hehehe.
So then, what purpose does the “hero” serve? Is a “hero”, within the context of collective memory, used as justification for a gene pool? For example, we use our family “hero” as an unconcious source of pride which we use as our own justification for further distribution of our genetic material? Or, ???
Yes, it makes sense, especially when it relates to immigrant families. Perhaps, another way to maintain ties with the homeland. Yeah, I can’t think of very many families with generations of Canadianess, who have very many hero stories. There is a lot of heroes in military history, though.
After post-confederation, Canada seems to lack such historical stories. Although, when you look at Israel they have several hero stories, which ties into their national identity.
That’s an interesting observation. A further abstraction to that observation that I can see would be that the relavance (or significance) of the Hero figure is a much more prominent feature of a collective memory for families who’s recent ancestors were immersed in a rich culture. For example, a family who’s roots lie in the *new* western world would have a much less prominant “Hero”.