American mythology loves nothing more than the reluctant hero: the man -- it is usually a man -- whose natural talents have destined him for more than obliging obscurity. George Washington, we are told, was a leader who would have preferred to have been a farmer. Thomas Jefferson, a writer. Martin Luther King, Jr., a preacher. These men were roused from lives of perfunctory achievement, our legends have it, not because they chose their own exceptionalism, but because we, the people, chose it for them. We -- seeing greatness in them that they were too humble to observe themselves -- conferred on them uncommon paths. Historical circumstance became its own call of duty, and the logic of democracy proved itself through the answer.

在美式神話中, 主角通常是那些不知不覺中成為的英雄: 一般而言,他就是一個人, 因稟賦異常, 注定此生不能默默無聞。華盛頓原本更愿意當農民,而不是領導國家; 杰弗遜, 曾立志要成為一名作家; 而馬丁路德只是一名牧師.據說是公眾要求他們不能敷衍塞責，埋沒才華; 是我們要求這些偉人必須要振作起來，追求卓越。我們選擇了他們，是因為我們看到他們的偉大，---盡管他們謙虛地認為自己并不出眾— 是我們把他們推上了不尋常的人生道路。換言之，歷史境遇和民主體制造就了這些英雄。

Neil Armstrong was a hero of this stripe: constitutionally humble, circumstantially noble. Nearly every obituary written for him this weekend has made a point of emphasizing his sense of privacy, his sense of humility, his sense of the ironic ordinary. Armstrong's famous line, maybe or maybe not so humanly flubbed, neatly captures the narrative: One small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind. And yet every aspect of Armstrong's life -- a life remembered for one act of bravery but distinguished ultimately by the bravery of banality -- made clear: On that day in 1969, he acted on our behalf, out of a sense of mission that was communal rather than personal. The reluctant hero is also the self-sacrificing hero. The reluctant hero is the charitable hero.

阿姆斯特朗就這種類型的英雄，個性謙卑的他響應時代的號召，成為人類的英雄。本周末，幾乎只要是他的訃告，都會提到：阿姆斯特朗深居簡出、為人謙虛，以至于讓他的平凡變得具有諷刺意味。 他的著名格言，傳神地概括了他的壯舉，他可能和所有人一樣犯錯：我的一小步代表了人類的一大步。人類將銘記他的勇敢，但因為他如此毫無顧忌地承認自己的平庸，讓他此生并不平凡。1969年的某一天，他代表整個人類完成的使命。不情愿的英雄同時還具有勇于犧牲的精神，仁慈寬厚。