In the epic Gilgamesh, both Gilgamesh and Enkidu are heroes. However there are two different types of heroes, and they both resemble one of these. Gilgamesh fits the Campbellian hero, whereas Enkidu fits the Jungian hero archetype. Even though they are both heroes in their own way, I believe that Gilgamesh as the Campbellian hero is best suited for an American audience. There are several reasons for this interest in Gilgamesh.
At the start of the epic, Gilgamesh is focused solely on his own personal gain, as well as being extremely egotistical. I think the main reason he might appeal to a modern American audience is because of the way he is described. Gilgamesh is an extremely handsome and strong man, he is brave, and he is very impressed at his own abilities. A Campbellian hero, such as Gilgamesh, rescues themselves through their own journey. Gilgamesh fights Humbaba simply because he believes that he can kill him. He has the help of his brother Enkidu, who also could be considered as his supernatural aid. Enkidu advises Gilgamesh and fights at his side on his journey to kill Humbaba.
Gilgamesh must go through trials of life in order to become a true hero. He endures the battle against Humbaba with the help of his brother, as well as enduring the death of his brother and best friend, Enkidu. Utnapishtim acted as Gilgamesh’s wise elder. After the death of his brother Utnapishtim helped him realize that Enkidu will always live on. Gilgamesh realizes that it is time to accept that he has lost his brother and that it is time to continue on with life. His life trials are another reason that modern Americans would enjoy Gilgamesh as a hero compared to Enkidu.
The trials Gilgamesh must face may be relatable to the modern American readers. He goes through difficult life situations which mold him into the hero he becomes at the end of the epic. This is something readers may appreciate and relate with. Gilgamesh not only faces extremely hard situations in the beginning of the epic, but he also has to live with the death and loss of his best friend and brother. This loss and heartache is definitely something that can be relatable to an audience of modern Americans. Enkidu can also be relatable, but he is not as interesting to an audience.
A Jungian hero archetype expects the hero to be a rescuer, a champion, as well as being a static character. Enkidu fits this archetype perfectly. In the novel you see Enkidu as a rescuer because he assists as well as protects Gilgamesh in several events that they face together. A champion, in this context, is a hero that will fight for something or someone else. Enkidu is selfless in that he fights for Gilgamesh’s benefit. He is completely satisfied in rescuing and fighting for his brother. Enkidu is also an extremely static character.
Enkidu, being a static character, may be somewhat boring to an audience. He doesn’t change into a hero or go through any drastic life events that change his character. His character is already complete near the beginning of the story. He is not an uninteresting character, however, he falls behind Gilgamesh. Enkidu is also described as a handsome and strong man. Even though he is described this way, he tends to be less important than Gilgamesh. He is also there for fight with Humbaba, but he acts more as an encouragement for Gilgamesh as he kills the monster. This may be one of the main reasons Gilgamesh would entertain a modern American audience more than Enkidu would.
robbselit 