Are We Sure Indiana Jones Was Actually a Hero?

Good, bad... I'm the guy with the whip.

Paramount Pictures

Quick programming note: I’ll be appearing on

Ben Ulansey

and

Walter Rhein

’s show tomorrow at 2 PM EST. It will be streamed live on Substack. You’ll probably get a notification. If you can’t catch it live, I’ll drop a replay link in a future post. Topics will include a pop culture potpourri and probably some writing stuff.

---

I recently rewatched Raiders of the Lost Ark for the first time in maybe 10 years and I was struck by the realization that Indiana Jones is not actually a hero. I’m not referring to how the movie would resolve the same way whether or not Indy is involved (i.e. the Ark liquidating Nazi faces). I’m talking more elemental hero stuff, the kind Joseph Campbell or the Foo Fighters wrote about.

The only heroic thing Indy does in this movie is punch Nazis. Which, historically, has been the correct response, and wouldn’t feel all that remarkable if not for our present day troubles with its resurgence. It does make me wonder how modern fascists watch Raiders—do they see themselves as Indiana Jones, which should trigger cognitive dissonance on the order of realizing Timothy Olyphant and Josh Duhamel are two different people? Or do they sympathize with the villains? I’m not sure which is worse.

But apart from the frequent Nazi abuse—including the delightful scene where he runs one over with a truck—Indiana Jones is actually not great? As a character, he’s obviously one of the best. But as someone who purports to be a hero, or at least is positioned as such? Dude is questionable at best. We just couldn’t see it for the Harrison Ford of it all, and the blatant heroism of John Williams’ score.

Let’s consider the facts.

1. He teaches archeology at a college. 95% of his students are female, and are only there to eye-fuck him. Not his fault he looks like peak Harrison Ford. However…

2. He had an affair with Marion Ravenwood when she was 15. That’s not the half of it—while storyboarding Raiders, George Lucas originally wanted her to be 11! “He could have known this little girl when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven.” George Lucas’ weird sexual proclivities—hello, Howard the Duck—are a subject for another time. But regardless of how we got there, Indy apparently has a thing for younger girls, or at least a willingness to swim in the kiddie pool. It’s gross. And also recasts the classroom scene in a different light. Though, to be fair, Indy seems a bit clueless about the attention he’s getting from his students. (Or maybe they’re too old for him?) Moving on…

3. He moonlights as a grave robber. Or do you prefer tomb mercenary? Either way, his side hustle involves traveling the world, unearthing treasures, and bringing them back to the light civilization, for which he’s paid a nice little commission. I’m not going to make a judgement call about stealing cultural artifacts from booby-trapped ruins (where nobody will ever see them) to display in museums where they can be appreciated, in part because movies about raiding tombs are delightful. Just pointing out the facts.

4. When given the choice, he picks the Ark over Marion.

It’s actually this last point that made me sit back and go, “hold up—is Indiana Jones actually a hero?” It’s a brilliant little moment shaped entirely by the character. It’s great writing.

In case you forgot or just like my style of narration, here’s how it goes down: Marion is in the evil clutches of the French archeologist Belloq, who will later torture her with food and wine and beautiful dresses. Just dastardly stuff. Before that happens, Indy finds her tied up in Belloq’s tent. He starts to untie her—as we’d expect, since his name is on the movie poster and also because they once shagged, although knowing George Lucas, this was probably initially proposed as an S&M scene (George: “the ropes are sorta snake-like, you see, which adds an element of danger to their lovemaking”). Indy stops freeing Marion because he realizes an alarm will go up if she escapes.

So he very heroically re-gags Marion and leaves to find the Ark. Sorry, babe—duty calls.

He offers a lame promise to come back “after,” which sounds exactly like me telling my wife I’m coming to bed after the next game, when in fact I’ll be playing Xbox for another hour. I know, she knows, but social conventions dictate you at least make the token offering. That’s what Indy does here. He makes a promise he can’t keep. He probably doesn’t even realize what he’s saying because he’s thinking about discovering treasures while a mystical score adds weight and gravitas.

He puts the Ark before Marion. I’m generally empathetic to adventure for adventure’s sake, but it’s not a great look. Unless you want to believe he’s doing this solely to prevent the Nazis from getting the Ark. It’s not true, but it’s probably what he tells himself. This is proven later in the film, when he threatens to destroy the Ark with a rocket, but is only bluffing. It was never about keeping it out of the hands of the Nazis—it was about getting the Ark in his hands. A subtle difference, but a huge one.

Indy has no idea what will happen to Marion while he’s off playing in the world’s biggest sandbox. She could die, or be forced to screen The Rise of Skywalker. Indy has to know he’s gambling with her life by leaving her in Belloq’s tent. He does it anyway. Not to bring up George Lucas’s perv-city again, but I don’t think Indy ever really loved Marion. Not when she was 15. And not now. She was just another adventure. (Indiana Jones and the Great Panty Raid?)

It’s an ugly look, one I always missed because I was swept up in the adventure. How can you not be? I wanted to find the Ark, too. As fabled artifacts lost to time go, the Ark of the Covenant is probably the greatest. Shrouded in mystery and history. Who wouldn’t want to find it? (Just don’t open it!)

Choosing the Ark over Marion is an incredible character moment. Indy makes the unconventional choice because it’s what a lifelong scholar and artifact-hunter would do. It may make him less heroic, but it’s honest. And if we’re honest with ourselves, taken for what it is, the scene peels away some of Indy’s swashbuckling charm. He’s really only heroic because he’s opposed to the Nazis. It wasn’t much to go on in the 80s, but it was still somehow enough. Today? It’s the only fight worth having.

In light of this, I started wondering if Indiana Jones was actually an antihero.

I know, I know—it’s crazy. Hear me out.

An antihero is broadly defined as someone “conspicuously lacking in heroic qualities.” How does Indiana Jones fair on that scale?

✅ Sleeps with a girl when she’s 11 15-years-old.

✅ Collects a bounty for artifacts taken from other countries.

✅ Abandons a woman to Nazis so he can go treasure hunting.

Seems to be pretty lacking in heroic qualities, no?

Calling Indiana Jones an antihero still feels a bit wrong, I think because that definition is missing something crucial. An antihero is self-motivated and morally ambiguous. Their morals, such as they are, are motivated almost completely based on what’s good or bad for them.

Deadpool is an antihero. Frank Castle (e.g. the Punisher) is an antihero. So is John Wick. And Tyrion Lannister. And Din Djarin (though Lucasfilm has slowly but steadily pushed him out of the gray area). Han Solo—there’s a familiar face—also an antihero, at least for the first 2/3 of the original trilogy.

Indiana Jones doesn’t seem to have much in common with such characters. He genuinely seems more heroic, but that’s the adventure talking. If you look at it objectively, Indy isn’t a capital ‘h’ hero. He’s just a guy trying to make his way in the world. He’s selfish, and flawed. That’s why he’s such a great character.

That, and all the Nazis he punches.