Girard is a revelation

This article explores The Wall Street Journal’s attempt to make a political connection between TDK and George W. http://blog.beliefnet.com/godspolitics/2008/07/the-dark-knight-a-tribute-to-g.html Thought it interesting that he made a scapegoat connection as well…

Much of my reply will be informed by a review of Batman Begins I posted at the beginning of ‘07. You can read it at: http://www.teleios.us/weblogs/ntbott/139

I am making the provocative claim that Christopher Nolan understands Batman’s actions at the end of the film as an intentional submitting to the scapegoat process outlined above. Such actions place Batman squarely within the vicious cycle of human violence, signaling the ultimate failure of Bruce Wayne’s flawed strategy.

I must admit that it was disconcerting when others saw in Batman’s final actions heroic, even Christ-like acts of substitution on behalf of humanity. This interpretation was disconcerting not from a lack of material that could be construed in such a way; rather, it was disconcerting because such an interpretation had not even entered my mine. Great shades of Jeremiah 19:5-6, where the Lord articulates his view of child sacrifice to Israel swept over me! “They have built shrines to Baal, to put their children to the fire as burnt offerings to Baal - which I never commanded, never decreed, and which never [even] came into My mind.”

Given these two divergent interpretations of Batman, the one casting him as distinct from the violent origins of humanity, the other as fully submerged within its grip, I would like to offer some supporting evidence for my interpretation. To begin, Girard makes clear that the actions of one willingly submissive to the scapegoat mechanism and one unwilling to take part in its violence are virtually indistinguishable. Both easily become scapegoats for a hysterical mob. For the former, as Girard puts it, “the spontaneous act of will is the same as the irresistible hypnotic power of the example” (The Scapegoat, 64). For the latter, the rejection of violence exposes the violent origins of every facet of human life, origins the mob will take great pains in suppressing, even death.

Enter Batman. At the end of the movie Commissioner Gordon and Batman are huddled over Harvey Dent’s corpse, Dent’s disfigured side the only one visible. Gordon is ready to tell the truth to the public. Dent had become a homicidal maniac and Batman stopped him. But this will not do for Batman. Remember, for Batman Dent is the hope for the humanity of Gotham, a symbol of humanity’s underlying virtue. Batman was originally dawned with this intent. “People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy. I can’t do that as Bruce Wayne. As a man…I’m flesh and blood, I can be ignored, destroyed. But as a symbol…As a symbol, I can be incorruptible. I can be everlasting.” Earlier in the movie it had appeared as if Bruce Wayne’s dramatic example had paid off, as Dent fought violence through the non-violence of the courtroom. (I see the courtroom as the non-violent option and Rachel as the true hero of the movie, whose steadfast refusal to take part in violence whilst remaining utterly opposed to it through her belief and commitment in justice as embodied through the law.)

By the end of the movie, however, the sun has set on Bruce Wayne’s strategy. Harvey Dent, the representative of Gotham City, has become an agent of chaos himself, leaving justice to the flip of a coin. Batman cannot accept the failure of his strategy. A failure he was prepared to accept just days prior. Only one option remains. The violence and chaos of human social order that the Joker so effortlessly exposed must be covered up. But how? With the hysteria of the city verging on social upheaval only a victim will bring catharsis. Rather than exposing the heart of darkness within Harvey Dent, Bruce Wayne surrenders himself to the inevitable outcome of his terrifying (and everlasting?) symbol, the Dark Knight. Humans like Bruce Wayne who willingly submit themselves as scapegoats in order to suppress the dark origins of human society inevitably attain a mythical, even quasi-divine status. Such a decision, however, comes at a high cost: their true humanity is willingly sacrificed upon the altar of false humanity. There’s no going back. There is no dawn that follows this dark knight.

Not THAT silly;) I think you did a fairly stellar job. I should be getting your book recommend in the mail via amazon.com any day now. I’m looking forward to reading it…

On “mimetic rivalry’: “But he also explains that two rivals, supposedly different in every sense, through their intense rivalry generate a fundamental likeness as they are consumed by their rage against each other and eventually become beings with one main characteristic: the desire to defeat the other.” I thought this was best epitomized when the Joker tells Batman “you complete me.” I laughed at this line, but perhaps that quip was a more profound commentary that reveals the dualistic nature of this “mimetic rivalry.”