I didn’t think it was supposed to be clear, either. Re: sacrificing Ando — It could happen, but then Hiro would be one step closer to Future Hiro, and I think they’d be shooting themselves in the foot PR-wise if they took Hiro down that road, imo.

Thanks for the alternate link.

Try this link to the Au Co page at Wiki.
I agree, there’s a broader meaning to the Kensei/dragon fable which applies to other character arcs. What I was speculating on, though, is how it applies to Hiro, and what his Kobayashi Maru predicament will be. If he doesn’t sacrifice himself (and based on present previews and spoilers, it doesn’t look like he will), what is his sacrifice going to be?

Just my spec, and it could be that it won’t even be a predicament he’ll face until next season, but I wasn’t sure how we were intended to interpret it: has Hiro realized he’ll need to be heartless to slay Sylar, or that he’ll need to sacrifice the person he cares about the most (i.e. Ando) to save the world? That’s sort of the point I was trying to make in the review; I didn’t think it was clear either way. But then, maybe it wasn’t supposed to be.

To use a Star Trek parallel. The Kensei & The Dragon scenario is the Heroes equivalent of the Kobiashi Maru Test. The moral is that to be a Hero, every day becomes the Kobiashi Maru Test. The difference between ST and Heroes is that Heroes uses characters like Petrelli, Linderman, and Bennet to demonstrate how grey, or indeed black, the test of character truly can be.

Also, kudos to the writers for weaving related elements from Asian mythology…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/¬u_C?

And just as an aside, I think it’s totally cool that Bennet uses the word ruckus. It adds yet another retro layer.