Reagan's Greco-Roman View Of Heroism

As president, Ronald Reagan sought to usher in an era of renewed American patriotism. This goal is evident in his first inaugural address, as Reagan cultivates national pride by citing three types of American heroes: The American citizen, the American President, and the American soldier. He extols each group, listing the attributes that he believes make them heroic. In describing these heroic characteristics, Reagan both draws from the classical understanding of a hero and clashes with it.
Reagan largely conflicts with the Greco-Roman view of heroism in describing the first group that he declares heroes, the American citizenry. With a dismissive head-shake, Reagan states that “those who say that we're in a time when there are not heroes, they just don't know where to look.” For Reagan, heroes are not exceptional, but abundant. They can be found “going in and out of factory gates,” “produc[ing] enough food to feed all of us,” “creat[ing] new jobs,” or paying “taxes [that] support the government.” Reagan’s description of heroism is communitarian: American citizens are heroes, because they provide for others.

Reagan’s communitarian definition of heroism is in conflict with the classical understanding of the term.

In the Greco-Roman tradition, individualism characterized by the paradoxical conflict of a hero seeking immortality as a mortal is a critical aspect of heroism. To achieve immortality, the hero attempts to shroud himself in kleos (glory) so he will be remembered by others beyond his death. In Book 11 of the Odyssey, Odysseus clarifies that he values kleos above all else, telling deceased Achilles that there never was a man “more blest” than him, since “we ranked you with immortals” (11.536-38). The Greco-Roman hero is an individualist, reaping the benefits of his own work in the form of kleos. Accordingly, Reagan’s view that providing for others makes one a hero is in conflict with the classical understanding of

heroism.
Reagan goes on to say that the heroic American citizen possesses a patriotism that is “quiet, but deep.” With this statement, Reagan comments on the ancient division between public and private virtue, implying that private virtue is a sufficient condition to heroism. In Book 16 of the Odyssey, the swineherd Eumaios is an exemplar of private virtue due to his trustworthiness and hospitality. Telémakhos tells Eumaios that he “wanted to see you first” (16.41), trusting him above all others. Eumaios warmly welcomes him, offering “trenchers of good meat” (16.59). Homer extols Eumaios through apostrophe, valuing his private virtue. However, Eumaios is not the hero of the Odyssey; the beneficiaries of his kindness are. In the Greco-Roman tradition, private virtue is a necessary condition to heroism, but not a sufficient one. In order to be a hero, one must combine both virtuous traits, as Odysseus does. Reagan’s view that merely private virtue merits the label of a hero clashes with Homeric views of heroism.
The next type of hero that Reagan describes is the American President. Surveying his surroundings, Reagan mentions the “monuments to heroism” in his view, dedicated to Presidents Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln. Reagan describes Washington as the “father of our country,” invoking the ancient heroic ideal of paternity. Reagan refers to these paternal figures with deference, stating that they are “the giants on whose shoulders we stand.” In the context of Reagan’s speech, the father-son relationship is nonliteral. He implores the figurative son, America, to respect the example of its paternal Presidents.
In the classical tradition, following one’s father is crucial to achieving success. In book six of the Aeneid, Virgil describes how Aeneas “in duty bound [to his father], went inland to the heights where overshadowing Apollo dwells” (6.13-14). Aeneas’s strict execution of his father’s will allows him to achieve the greater goal of founding a new nation. Similarly, in the Odyssey, Telémakhos’s bond with his father allows him to achieve a greater goal. Upon Odysseus’s return to Ithaka, Athena declares to the father and son that “you together will bring doom on the suitors” (16.199). Individually, Telémakhos is unable to accomplish this feat, but he succeeds when he is empowered by his father’s presence. In both classical texts, deference to paternity optimizes results. Thus, Reagan’s appeal for America to respect its heroic fathers evokes classical themes.
Respect for paternal will constitutes just one element of the classical understanding of heroic piety. More generally, classical piety requires the hero to maintain a proper approach to all elements of the human experience. A crucial element of this pious approach is a respect for the will of divinity. For instance, in Book 6 of the Aeneid, Aeneas and his crew respect divine will, following its path despite the loss of a crew member. “Even as they wept” for his death, “they turned to carry out the orders of the Sibyl” (6.180-81). Reagan evokes this aspect of piety in his speech as well. Before his mention of paternity, he states that “I believe God intended for us to be free.” By assigning an interest to God, Reagan is able to implore Americans to a follow a divine path. It is fitting with the classical understanding of heroism that Reagan believes the heroic entity of America should follow the path blazed by divinity and its fathers.
The final “kind of hero” that Reagan recognizes is the American soldier. He begins his description with another invocation of divinity, describing the “crosses or Stars of David” that adorn the tombstones at Arlington National Cemetery. This mention of divinity reintroduces the concept of piety before Reagan transitions to another aspect of the term, duty. In the ancient tradition, heroes must subordinate their immediate personal desires in order to fulfill a larger obligation. In Book 4 of the Aeneid, “duty-bound Aeneas” must suppress his “desire to calm and comfort” Dido, leaving his love and instead taking “the course heaven gave him” (4.394-99). Aeneas does not act according to his own will, but subordinates his desires in recognition of a larger goal.
Reagan invokes this concept of subordinating personal will in his description of the heroism of American soldiers. He specifically cites a diary written by Martin Treptow. Treptow writes that “I will work, I will save, I will sacrifice, I will endure, I will fight cheerfully and do my utmost” in order to help America win World War I. Like Aeneas, Treptow weighs personal desire against larger duty and decides on the side of larger duty. In making this heroic decision, Treptow earns kleos, as Reagan extols him beyond death on a national stage. Treptow, then, embodies multiple characteristics of a classical hero.
Intentionally or not, Reagan borrows from the classical tradition in his description of heroes in his first inaugural address. He evokes ancient heroic themes of piety, paternity, individualism, divinity, and virtue in his descriptions, both in accordance with and in opposition to their classical connotations. Reagan’s goal in using the term is to stir a renewed national pride by characterizing America as an inherently heroic country. Reagan’s version of heroism is distinct from its classical understanding in the Western tradition. For Reagan, heroism is measured in terms of contributions to others. Thus, heroism is inextricably linked to patriotism, as contributions to America allow one to earn the label of hero. Reagan uses the term for his own benefit, stoking the flames of nationalism.