21st Century's New Satan Part 5

 Why Now?: The Joker Rises

                We have discussed the importance of the Joker through the years, we have analyzed his level of insanity, the literary history of evil to which he belongs to and the question now is, why has returned with such a vengeance? It seems that fictional psychologist Dr. Adams understands best why the Joker has walked into the spotlight once again in our post-9/11 world. She tells us in the comic Arkham Asylum that the Joker may possesses a sort of “super-sanity...a brilliant modification of human perception, more suited to urban life at the end of the twentieth century.” (qtd. in Smith 198) It is interesting that this character would make this remark because it captures what the goal of the Joker is in Nolan's film, to present us the people, the audience, with this modified perception of humanity he possesses so that we too can respond to the way society actually is. The Joker is responding to an already fractured postmodern world, but which attempts to make sense of evil and morality with old and outdated paradigms that are no longer relevant.

                Since the turn of the century, western culture has struggled to find a new way to understand good and evil, but for American's the world become even more fractured after 9/11. As Don DeLillo states in his essay “In the Ruins of the Future,” Americans “[had] to take the shock and horror as it [was],” and what is more we wanted then and now “to understand what this day [had] done to us.” (39) Nolan's Joker is a direct response to these events mirroring the chaotic and sudden destruction that rained down upon us on 9/11. This incarnation of the Joker works on two distinct levels in the film. On one level the Joker

with his terrorist mayhem mirrors the attacks on 9/11, but seeing the struggle between him and Batman and obtaining a more or less satisfactory resolution serves as a catharsis for our souls. However, what is more significant is what the Joker is doing on the deeper level of the meta-fiction, because although on the surface he obviously represents evil, he is also pointing to the evil and corruption within our society and governmental system that could allow men like him and Batman to thrive. The Batman and the Joker are both products of a broken system, but Batman lives to restore balance. In the film Harvey Dent will reinforce this idea by stating that it was the people of Gotham, “who stood by and let scum take control of [their] city” (The Dark Knight) who are responsible for Batman's birth. In a sense Dent is making the claim that dire situations call for dire measures thus justifying the existence of Batman in a time when the system fails to accomplish its goals, in their case to stop crime. Gotham seems to be aware of the fact that the Batman is outside of their system of justice, but no one seems to pay much attention to the fact until the Joker appears. The Joker realizes these things and wants to make the people of Gotham realize what hypocrites they are. As Charles K. Bellinger asserts in his essay “The Joker is Satan,” the Joker is “revealing that 'law abiding society' is a mystification; human culture is a lynch mob riding the bucking bronco of chaotic violence.” The Joker through his “super sanity” is able to make an analysis we would otherwise ignore and in doing so points to the true Gotham, and to the world we Americans now inhabit. This is a world where we began a war not on a definitive stance, but on the concepts of “evil” and “terrorism,” where Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse was justified for the sake of “justice,” a world that had a warped sense of morality.

                Nietzsche would argue however, that this is not something new or surprising and that actually our morality is not just warped, but that “the rational distinctions that uphold our cultural paradigms of good and evil are decidedly irrational in their false distinctions.” (Heit 180) The Joker seems to be viewing the world from this Nietzschean perspective. This can be seen in his remark in regards to morality: “Their morals, their code...it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be.” (The Dark Knight) 

The Joker captures the essence of what occurred to American after it was attacked. Although there had been a code, a line that we did not cross, this line seemed to vanish when we were at our worst, turning our military into torturers and turning the general public into frightened prejudiced people. We were indeed only as good as the world allowed us to be, because the measure of goodness we followed depended heavily on our feeling of security and safety within our own country. After this was suddenly pulled from under us, the government's code changed, the code of the people changed. The Joker illustrates through his attempts to ensue anarchy in Gotham that our moral system is not constant, that it is ever changing and arbitrary and therefore flawed. He tells us that “[the] only sensible way to live in this world is without rules,” not simply because he represents chaos and disorder, but because realizes that our rules, our society crumbles under pressure and it is true in general of the citizens of Gotham. When the Joker threatens to blow up a hospital unless Mr. Reese is killed so that he may not reveal Batman's true identity, a mob takes over the building where Mr. Reese has been giving his interview and is a shot at by a regular citizen of the city. It is true Batman, as the Joker remarks, is incorruptible and he must be, not only for the sake of his fictitious world, but for ours as well. He is our emblem of hope, and like the Joker, he is the only constant figure in the film because he is an ideal, the ideal of goodness which stands opposite the Joker's ideal of chaos. Nevertheless, the Batman is only a rhetorical device meant to leave the audience with some hope at the end of the film. The Joker however, persists in our minds because despite the fact that he has lost the fight for Gotham's soul with Batman, we have witnessed all the corruption and the lies which the citizens of Gotham were spared. We were subjected to our own reflection through the Joker's taunts and jeers, and he has done his work on us. The Joker thrives in our post-9/11 world because he is the reflexive force we lack and which we need to try and fix our broken moral code.

                We must return again to the comparison between the Joker and Mephistopheles in Faust. They are incarnations of the same concept, a necessary evil which must persist in our world so that we may reflect upon our own mistakes and the darkness that dwells within us. So that we may understand that the evil in the heart of one man is more powerful than we realize. Most importantly though, to provide us with hope so that we can “believe that our private demons can be defeated...” (Miller 17)

(Originally written December 13, 2012 for Literary Responses to Evil Graduate English Seminar with Professor Clark at California State University, Northridge)

Works Cited

Bellinger, Charles K. “The Joker is Satan, and So are We: Girard and The Dark Knight.” Journal of Religion and Film 13.1 (Apr. 2009) n. pag. Web. 26 Nov. 2012. 

 Carmichael, Stephanie. “Dark Knight, White Knight, and the Knight of Anarchy.” Durand and Leigh 54 – 69.

 The Dark Knight. Dir. Christopher Nolan. Perf. Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Michael Kane, Maggie Gyllenhaal, and Gary Oldman. Warner Bros. Pictures, 2008.

“Diagnostic Statistical Manuel IV: Sociopathology” The Many Faces of Evil. Ed. Amelie Oskenberg Rorty. New York: Routledge. 2001. Print.  
 

Durand, Kevin K., and Mary K. Leigh, eds. Riddle Me This, Batman! Essays on the Universe of the Dark Knight. Jefferson: McFarland, 2011. Print.

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang. Faust: Parts One and Two. Trans. Philip Wayne. Chicago: Penguin, 1993. Print

Gray, Peter. Psychology. 5^th ed. New York: Worth, 2007. Print. 
 

Heit, Jamey. “No Laughing Matter: The Joker as a Nietzschean Critique of Morality.” Vader, Voldemort and Other Villains: Essays on Evil in Popular Media. Ed. Jamey Heit. Jefferson: McFarland, 2011. 175 – 188. Print.

Hiddleston, Tom. “Superheroes Movies Like Avengers Assemble Should Not Be Scorned.” Film Blog. The Guardian, 19 Apr. 2012. Web. 4 December 2012.

Johnson, Jeffrey K. Super-History: Comic Book Superheroes and American Society. Jefferson: McFarland, 2012. Print. 
 

Langley, Travis. Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight. Hoboken: Wiley & Sons, 2012. Print. 
 

“Mental Illness.” Oxford English Dictionary. 3^rd ed. 2001. OED Online. Oxford University Press. Web. 4 December 2012.

Miller, Frank. The Dark Knight Returns. New York: DC Comics, 2002. Print.

Milton, John. Paradise Lost. London: Norton, 1993. Print 
 

Moore, Alan and Brian Bolland. Batman: The Killing Joke. New York: DC Comics, 2008. Print.

Moseley, Daniel. “The Joker's Comedy of Existence.” Super villains and Philosophy. Ed. Ben Dyer. Chicago: Open Court, 2009. 127-136. Print.

Smith, Michael. “'And Doesn't All the World Love a Clown?' Finding the Joker and the Representation of His Evil.” Durand and Leigh 187 – 200.

Wallace, Daniel. The Joker: A Visual History of the Clown Prince of Crime. New York: DC Comics, 2011. Print.

 

21st Century's New Satan Part 4

 Why the Joker is Not Insane

              The Joker has been often been labeled by critics and fans alike as a psychopath, sociopath, or even as a schizophrenic in an attempt to explain his character. However, we were never meant to receive an explanation as to why the Joker is the way he is. The co-creator of the Joker, Jerry Robinson, tells us that when he first thought him up along with Bill Finger he “never intended to give a reason for his appearance” because they thought “that it takes away some of the essential mystery.” (qt. in Langley 152-153) The creators of the Joker understood that the Joker could become a symbol of evil but that to do that he needed to maintain a certain sense of mystery, that he had to appear as a type of boogie man. Despite receiving an origin story the Joker's mind remains an enigma nonetheless and attempts to label him as mad are simple attempts to try and explain the fears and anxieties that arise from his presence. However, is there any possibility that the Joker's actions could be explained with a diagnosis of psychopathic behavior or something else? Or The Joker's madness pure unexplainable evil?

               Furthermore, the Joker's fall into the chemical vat could be argued as having shaped his mental state. It could be argued that perhaps it was the trauma of being horribly disfigured that caused him to turn into a psychopath but “[knowing] he had a specific mental illness might engender our sympathy.” (Langley 152) In trying to explain what lies behind his creepy smile and maniac laughter, we are attempting to humanize him, but the Joker defies any attempts to turn him into a sympathetic figure. In The Killing Joke Alan Moore expands further the Joker's origin story and provides us with a tragic story of loss, but the Joker himself undermines any feelings of empathy the audience might feel by causing extreme emotional and physical harm to two key main characters, Commissioner Gordon and his daughter Barbara, also known as Batgirl. Moore presents the Joker as a failed comedian who lives in poverty with a pregnant wife and who must turn to crime to be able to provide for her and the child. The Joker, who's name might be Jack, agrees to help some thugs steal from a playing card company which is adjacent to a chemical factory where he used to work. During his conversation with the thugs two policemen inform Jack that his pregnant wife has died in accident, but is forced to go on with the thug's plan irregardless of it and it is then when he suffers his own accident.

 Although we might be motivated to feel for the Joker's past and see his point about what happens to a man when he has a bad day he does several things throughout the text to frustrate our attempts to find goodness, or humanity in him. One key example of this occurs in the very beginning of the comic book where he shoots Barbara Gordon, Batgirl. He causes her paralysis forever changing his role in the narrative signifying the way in which “[his] menace had become meta-fictional.” (Wallace 108) However, his actions are not the only things that keep us at a distance from him, but the fact that he admits to being a liar. The Joker admits to us that when he remembers his experiences he “sometimes [remembers] it one way, sometimes another” and that “if [he is] going to have past, [he prefers] it to be multiple choice!” (Moore 41) The Joker does not want our sympathy, he does not need it, and in providing us with confusion and uncertainty as to his origin he negates whatever chance at sympathy Moore's story might have provided for him. This idea is explored as well in Nolan's The Dark Knight where the Joker first invites us into his world, to know more about him, by inciting us to ask how he obtained his scars. Yet, throughout the film he will change the story of how it was he came to have the scars denying us the possibility of ever having a real glimpse into his mind or past. As Stephanie Carmichael suggest in her essay “Dark Knight, White Knight, and the King of Anarchy,” that in defying order, definition and origin the Joker is embracing the ideal of anarchy and thus is able to become a legend. It is not just anarchy and chaos that the Joker is embracing as Carmichael argues however, it is the very essence of evil which he is taking in as part of his being. It is not an issue of psychopathy, maniac depression, or schizophrenia, which keeps the Joker from granting us access into his mind, but an understanding that in constantly changing his origin story he moves beyond the texts he inhabits by allowing his legend to grow beyond himself. As stated previously, in a sense the Joker invites his audience to engage with him by asking, “Do you wanna know how I got these scars?” He offers us lies, but he also offers us possibility so that we may continue to ponder on his actions. It raises questions as to whether we can trust anything this man says and puts in question his madness. Is there any certainty that he had an accident at all or that he suffered a horrible experience that resulted in his scaring? Or was he simply born this way? We will never know and he does not wish us to know because as it has been said previously he is a postmodern figure who has the understanding that he resides within a fractured world without a center. The Joker's accident should not be accepted as a means to comprehend his motivation, or supposed madness, but rather it should be viewed as what distinguishes him from being just a bad person or even a sick person, and into being something much more terrifying. An organic sort of evil that flows and changes as the situation requires in order to mirror the anxieties of his audience at any one time. 

               Moreover, although many of his actions could be seen as arising from madness the Joker defies diagnosis because “[his] behavior doesn't neatly fit any specific mental illness.” (Langley 152) We must consider the metal illnesses that the Joker could possibly suffer from and we must distinguish between mental illness and insanity. Mental illness is defined as: “a condition which causes serious abnormality in a person's thinking or behavior, esp. one requiring special care or treatment.” (“Mental illness”) In other words a mental illness can be classified as a disease that affects the mind of a person and which needs either medication or the help of a physician. Some such diseases that the Joker could suffer from are psychopathy, schizophrenia, or maniac depression caused by some sort of trauma as discussed previously. However, there are other terms that are thrown around as well like insanity, but insanity is not a sickness rather it is “a legal standard, not a medical classification or psychiatric diagnosis, one that excuses individual responsibility for committing criminal offenses on the grounds that those who lack rational awareness of what they're doing need treatment, not punishment.” (Langley 132) This term is a combination of both the psychology and the legal terminology that that attempts to create order and classify different types of crimes, but it does not delve into the more complex issues of motivation and reason. 

               Let us then examine the medical, rather the bureaucratic aspects of the Joker's mental issues. The Joker's personality appears to resemble the characteristics of psychopathy, also known as antisocial personality disorder the most out of any other illness. The Diagnostic Statistical Manuel IV tells us that this disorder is marked by “pervasive patterns of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continue into adulthood.” (qtd. in Rorty 332) From the history of the Joker we are unable to determine if he had any of these symptoms from his childhood because we know nothing of his childhood or his teenage years. We cannot prove with certainty that

   the Joker enjoyed inflicting pain to others or torturing others at a young age. The DSM declares that in order to be able to make a diagnosis of psychopathy the individual must have presented these symptoms before the age of fifteen. Even though we do not possess any knowledge about the Joker's youth, if we are to consider Alan Moore's origin tale then we must declare that the Joker is not a psychopath as his madness occurred well past the age of fifteen. We must not however, disregard the fact that the Joker does possess certain characteristics of a psychopath. These individuals are described as “contemptuous of the feelings, rights, and sufferings of others,” “[displaying] ...superficial charm,” they are also “deceitful and manipulative,” and can be “aggressive and may repeatedly get into physical fights or commit acts of physical assault.” (qrd. in Rorty 332-333) The Joker has exhibited many of these characteristics for example the he is often shown as feeling no sympathy whenever he inflicts harm upon other human beings. There are many examples of this in The Dark Knight such as when the Joker kills his own henchmen, or when he murders one of the mob leaders, Gambol, and forces his men to fight each other to the death in order to gain a place in the Joker's ranks. In these scene specifically the Joker uses the phrase “try-outs” to describe the situation, minimizing not only the death of their previous leader, but also the importance of the lives of these men. The Joker also has no issue with using people who are actually mentally ill. We discover this through a remark made by Batman to Harvey Dent about a man they have just caught who had been working for the Joker, “He's a paranoid schizophrenic, a former patient at Arkham. The kind of mind the Joker attracts.” (The Dark Knight) Actions such as these demonstrate the Joker's lack of empathy, for the suffering of others both mental and physical as he does not hesitate in gaining leverage through the exploitation of these people. The Joker is also capable of being charming as well as manipulative as seen in Batman: The Animated Series where he utilizes this ability to turn his therapist, Dr. Harleen Quinzel, into his accomplice. In the series the Joker “charms her with a wink, tempts her with his secrets, earns her sympathy with lies about his father, and wins her heart by making her laugh.” (Langley 146) Lastly, his desire to engage in aggressive behavior and physical fights cannot be disputed as it has always been he who has initiated the aggression between him and Batman, even though he will often claims otherwise. 

               So then the question is if the Joker is not a psychopath, can we then call him a schizophrenic? Many have suggested that perhaps the Joker could be a schizophrenic because he seems to have a warped concept of the world, but he does not reflect many of the key symptoms of the disease. The DSM states that schizophrenics must exhibit “disorganized thought and speech, delusions, hallucinations, grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior.” (qtd. in Gray 609) The Joker may seem disorganized and erratic but not in a way that it hinders his ability to carry out elaborate plans. It has been mentioned previously in this essay that upon his first appearance in the comics he executed a plan that outsmarted both the police and the world's greatest detective, Batman himself. More recently in The Dark Knight he will similarly attempt to destroy Gotham while all the while attempting to teach its inhabitants about human nature and the falseness of their societal structures. The Joker also does not experience hallucinations or delusions. One of the most common hallucinations that schizophrenics suffer are “auditory, usually the hearing of voices.” (Gray 610) Despite the fact that the Joker views the world through a different lens than most people he will claim that he is just “differently sane” (qtd. in Langley 153) and although this statement is not entirely convincing he has never made a claim to carry out his deeds because voices in his head have ordered him to. In fact although his rationale

 is not entirely acceptable he will occasionally make coherent arguments, following as mentioned before the pattern of the psychopath more closely than that of the schizophrenic. It seems that Nolan understood that the Joker should be differentiated from people who are mad as in his film he presented several examples of actual madness with which he may be contrasted against. A minor example is during the the scene in the MCU where one the Joker's henchman begs to taken out of his cell because he feels strong stomach aches. The thug exclaims, "The boss said he would make the voices go away. He said he would go inside and replace them with bright lights. Like Christmas." (The Dark Knight) The Joker surrounds himself with mentally ill people because they are easy to manipulate for him, but is not one of them. There is a clear distance between his thoughts and their clear madness. A more important example in the film is Harvey Dent's mental breakdown and the way in which the Joker manipulates him to serve his purposes. Harvey has proven to be throughout the whole film a sane individual and it is not until the Joker puts him through a horrible experience that he turns insane. We witness the birth of Harvey's madness, we can also sympathy and understand his pain. The Joker, however simply sprang out of nowhere. We this concept repeated over and over again in The Dark Knight. When the mob leaders hold a meeting to discuss the Joker and their missing money, Maroni dismisses the Joker by affirming that “[he's] not the problem – he's a nobody.” (The Dark Knight) And indeed later on in the movie Commissioner Gordon will reaffirm that indeed the Joker is a nobody because he has no traceable identity. Gordon remarks that there is no record of the Joker, no prints, no DNA that links back to him. Even his possessions will not provide us with any hints because his clothing is custom and he carries in his pockets nothing “but knives and lint.” (The Dark Knight) Yet, Maroni does wrong in dismissing the importance of the Joker's anonymity and sees it as hindrance. For the Joker this mystery, is power, it keeps the audience at a distance and we are not able to sympathize like we do with Dent, it keeps us frightened. It is for this reason that Nolan never makes it clear in his film whether the Joker suffers a mental illness and rather opts for an representation of unexplainable evil by denying the Joker a stable identity and infirmity. 

               Lastly, could the claim be made that the Joker suffers perhaps from a combination of maniac depression and psychosis due to his accident? Langley tells us that people who suffer from psychosis are like schizophrenics also prone to have “lost touch with the real world as indicated by gross reality distortions,” (101) but as we have already established the Joker does not suffer from hallucinations. However, he is prone to feeling melancholy, but there is a caveat to this as well. As Langley explains bipolar individuals who suffer from maniac depression “alternate between depression and...mania in cycles due to brain chemistry,” the Joker however does so “in response to specific circumstances.” (153-154) This careful analysis of the psychology behind the Joker is not meant to excuse his person, or explain his motivation for committing his crimes, but the opposite. It is meant to show that the Joker is not a sick man, that even if he presents the symptoms of various mental illness he does not personify them fully. Also it is meant to dispel the idea that the Joker is simply a madman who runs around causing harm to others without purpose and to present him rather as the intelligent mastermind that he is. The Joker is indeed an amalgamation of the illnesses that have been mentioned here, and perhaps more, but he has been developed in this way over time in order to represent the futility of science in trying to explain the complexity behind man's darker side. Without having to make an argument for himself the Joker succeeds in escaping a diagnosis as well as in proving that our system, or terminology fails to capture his true nature, the nature of unexplainable evil. Like Langley points out these terms, these categories of madness are simply “attempts to pathologize a non-psychological term: evil.” (Langley 101)

                In order to be evil the Joker has had to maintain a hold on our fears. the general anxieties we feel as a society have changed and evolved but the Joker's understanding of our psyche has not. We may not understand him fully, but he understands us and our fear of madness and the unknown far better than we and it is for this reason that he maintains the mask of madness. Jason Todd, the second Robin, explains this best in Batman #649 when he tells the Joker: “You're not nearly as crazy as you'd like us all to believe. Or even as crazy as you'd like to believe. It just makes it easier to justify every sick, monstrous thing you've ever done when you play the part of the mad clown.” (qtd. In Langley 153) In part Jason's statement is true, playing the part of a mad clown makes the Joker's job easier, but not in the way that he implies. Jason is really insinuating that this charade of madness is self-imposed and that it serves as a defense mechanism for the Joker, but it is not exactly so. The Joker as a character employs the illusion of madness to allow his audiences to have something to hold on to because otherwise we would lose any kind of framework with which to analyze him through. That is to say without the paradigm of Batman who represents order

 and sanity, we would not be able to distinguish what the Joker stands for. The Joker has a conscious recognition that “evil cannot be excused – otherwise, it is not evil; it is human, and so, we might forgive it” and “[if] it is forgive, it can be forgotten.” (Smith 198) As stated previously, the Joker does not want to be excused, he does not wish for our sympathy, and least of all does he want to be forgotten. Therefore, in a way the Joker begrudgingly plays along with our need of binaries to define the world in order to subsist. This can also be seen in the failure of the seventies comic The Joker, which was a spinoff dedicated solely to the Clown Prince of Crime. The comic failed because the Joker never fought Batman and instead fought against other villains that were part of Batman's rogue gallery. As Wallace points out in these comics the Joker's “rampages weren't 'evil vs. good,' but rather a more palatable scenario in which the Joker's brand of villainy won out over a competing...expression of the same.” (177) The paradigm of order vs. chaos, of good vs. evil was lost in these comics and the Joker cannot work without these concepts. Even though he himself fights against these binaries he risks losing his place in our world if he were to escape them. Only by showing us the darkest depths of the darkness within man can he accomplish his true purpose, to flip the mirror back at us so that we may learn that this evil works insidiously within us as well.

21st Century's New Satan Part 3

The Literary Roots of Evil

               As presented in the first part of this essay the Joker has gone through many transformations and changes during his career, but he has done so in a way that he has reflected the issues of the respective zeitgeist. Like other literary figures of evil before him the Joker has showcased a protean ability that is rarely possessed by other comic book characters maintaining him as one of the most recognizable figures of evil in popular culture. It can argued that one of the characteristics of evil and its representatives is their ability to change and inhabit new spheres of society as empires rise and fall. These changes can be liken to alterations which can be found in different representations of Satan in literary history such as in John Milton and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's works. On the one hand Milton portrays a Satan who has just fallen and who still does not quite understand or embrace his purpose in this new world which he has been physically thrown into. Satan proposes to his fellow demons a new purpose for them  in the hierarchy

 of this world, “interrupt [God's] joy/ In our confusion, and our joy upraise/ In his disturbance.” (II.371-73) Much in the same way as Milton's Satan, the Joker's first appearance in the forties is marked by the sole purpose of causing mayhem and destruction. However, Goethe's Mephistopheles appears to his audience as a more mature and evolved rendition of Satan who embraces his job as tormentor of the human race. Mephistopheles declares to us, “Gone is the spook that filled the North with awe,/ Out-moded are the horns, and tail and claw.../And so, like many fashionable lads, I falsify my calves by using pads.” (1.6, 2497-2502) In these lines Mephistopheles is pointing to the way in which he has had to lose the horns and tail that had once been his signature and emblem to replace it with new more fashionable and relevant symbols of the time. This version of Satan is no longer trying to struggle against the omnipotence of God and instead seems to have fully embrace his calling as a chaotic entity and is rather more concerned with persisting in the human world as our own personal monster and torturer. Similarly, the Joker, in his later stages, has gained a wider consciousness of what his role in literature and society really is. As Smith points out in his essay, “if Satan – who came from nowhere and whose origin and motivation defy explanation – has gone from this world...someone must take on the Devil's responsibilities,” (199) and this figure is the Joker.

                Just like Satan sported horns and a tail as symbols which made him a recognizable symbol of evil, so has the Joker always been identified by his green hair, white skin and red lips. As stated before the original creators never meant to explain why he looks the way he does, but nevertheless an origin for his facial complexion was provided later on. In Detective Comics #168 it would be discovered that he had been a small time crook who had fallen accidentally into a chemical vat. The explanation is not very logical however, and does not make very much sense, but it provides some depth into the Joker while still maintaining some of the mystery. A comparison can be drawn again between the Joker and Milton's Satan as they were both found themselves in a rebellious and marginal state before their fall but not necessarily one of evil. Satan can be accused of being “bad” because he rebelled against the hierarchy that God established in heaven but he was not yet evil, it was not until he completed his temptation of Adam and Eve that Satan finally crossed the threshold into malignity. The Joker in the same way found himself rebelling against social norms by stealing as a crook, he was “bad” and not yet a killer, but it was not until he emerged from the vat of chemicals that the Joker crossed the line into evil and became a mass murder. 
Smith also regards the Joker's fall as being of importance and remarks that often throughout the comics the Joker will repeat this pattern of falling over and over again. Smith argues that his rise and fall represent the immortal evil that the Joker is suppose to embody and draws out a comparison with both Milton's Satan and with Dante Aliguieri's Inferno. Smith states, “we find that the seventh circle of hell is reserved for murders, and it its a lake where 'those who do injury to others violently, boil'” (191) However, he disregards the way in which with this same rising and falling the Joker embodies over and over Satan's journey from Hell and into Eden, into evil. This represents the persistence of the evil the Joker represents because he will re-emerge continuously throughout his history to unleash evil. He cannot be destroyed and he will return in a new shape, with a new plan to wreak havoc.

                The Joker's origin is something that has aided his status as a satanic/mythical figure. Like with many myths that have been passed down through history many of the details of his origin have become muddied and changed through time. There is no prologue, no introduction to show us that the Joker is in cahoots with Batman, or God, to teach us these lessons about goodness and morality like in Faust or in Job. It is more his persistence in later texts to prove that the world is full of insanity and chaos that gives us a hint that the Joker has transcended into a meta-fictional world where he understands and embraces his status as the symbol of evil of our age. The transitions that the Joker has undergone throughout the years have been necessary to bring forth the image of the Joker that we have today. He is both a postmodern figure adequate to represent evil in this post-9/11 world we inhabit. It is for this reason that this modern Joker, which Frank Miller and Alan Moore started to develop in the mid eighties, cannot be possibly accused of being insane and arising from an inherent chaotic nature.

 

21st Century's New Satan Part 2

A Little History

               It is important to discuss the history of the Joker and how he came to be the symbol in popular culture that he has evolved into over the past seventy years. In order to understand his rise we must not forget that his past, present and future are inextricably connected to the birth of the Batman and his development. Both the Joker and the Batman made their first appearance in Batman #1 in 1940. The Joker from this very issue seemed to be responding to the sense of justice and order that Batman was suppose to represent. At his inception the Joker possessed all the qualities which are now found in more modern depictions of him such as “the mirthless grin..the absence of remorse while racking up a gruesome tally of kills” and “[his] appetite for mayhem.” (Wallace 24, 25) The Joker was not meant to be a funny trickster; portrayed as having a sense of humor and an affinity for theatrics, his main concern when he was first introduced was destruction and chaos. This character is a response to the new secular evils which prevailed at this time. Society lacked confidence in their old religious symbols of evil to explain the greediness and inexplicable malignity of man, causing them to search for new symbols to fill the void that Satan had left behind. 
 

               The evils that plagued Americans in the forties were social evils that had arisen from the Great Depression and the devil would simply not suffice any longer as an explanation for these ills. A new mythology had to be created that was more in tune with the times and this arose within popular culture, in pulp novels and within comic books. Batman seemed to be a response to the troubles of the Great Depression and was presented as an illustration “of the common person helping herself or himself.” (Johnson 21) It only makes sense that his greatest nemesis was also a human being, devoid of super powers, and who could represent the unfairness and violence of the time that arose not from curses or monsters, but from within other people. The character of the Joker seemed to be modeled more after a typical gangster or thug in his sharp purple zoot-suit than a fantastic super villain. His first scheme, although somewhat intricate and complex, involved the murder of a wealthy citizen of Gotham and the robbery of a diamond, actions which hardly seemed too far fetched. This mundane aspect to the Joker's crimes is in itself a reflection of the concerns of the time, although somewhat theatrical, his crimes did not involve anything massive and out of this world. His crimes were grounded on earth, they had nothing to do with the heavenly, but rather they proposed that evil was also found on earth and not in a place beyond it. One interesting way to view the type of struggle of good and evil that the Joker and Batman depicted during this time, as suggested by Jeffrey Johnson in his book Super History, is to “replace Bruce Wayne with the average 1930's American citizen and substitute the criminal that killed...[his] parents for economic and social forces that robbed many Americans of their former lives.” (24) What Johnson is touching on with this analogy is the feeling of helplessness that Americans felt during the Great Depression and argues that it is mirrored in the face of the young Bruce Wayne, who although still wealthy, has lost the security and stability his parents had provided. Batman can then be said to represent the Americans of the forties who struggled to reestablish the security and stability lost during the Great Depression and who now had to battle the new issues brought upon by the chaos of World War II. It can be argued that the Joker, as Batman's arch-nemesis and opposite, represented the constant chaos that Americans had to labor against during the forties. At the same time the Joker could also be seen as a response to the growing question of the origin of evil within man himself. The forties were a time when evil began to rise in the form of Hitler and the Nazi Party bringing the question of evil to the forefront of everyone's mind. Michael Smith suggests in his essay “And Doesn't All the World Love a Clown?” that the Joker's inexplicable birth and evil came at a time when the events of World War II appeared as senseless acts of violence and evil. Smith asks us to consider that “the Joker emerged full bloom in the 1940's a time when millions were being subjected to unspeakable deprivation and degradation when millions died horribly –all victims of a highly organized, bureaucratic, industrial system of death...none of it made any sense, really.” (Smith 197) To the people who were being slaughtered, to the people who heard the rumors, none of it made sense to them. Hitler was a monster, who had seemingly sprung up out of nowhere and who in a few years had managed to spread his evil far and wide. The Joker seemed to emerge much in the same way in Gotham as Hitler did in Europe. The Joker seems to represent the battle that humanity was fighting during the forties in attempts to reconcile the injustice, unfairness, and evil nature that resided within man. People were being forced to recognize that a “tiny silly human could matter so much – and how easily so very much could happen.” (Smith 198) 
 

               Furthermore, when peace finally began to settle the Joker had become more interested in making pranks than mass murder. There were many reasons for this change in the characters of Batman and the Joker, ironically the fact that they had acquired mainstream popularity would cause DC publishing to “[dial] back the sex and violence” and “to push the pulp roots under the rug” in order to make the comics more palatable to children. (Wallace 171) At the same time, America was entering another shift in its society which now “expected conformity to the supposed homogenized culture and individualism or self-expression that fell outside acceptable limits was punished with ostracism.” (Johnson 72) Therefore, there was no longer any room for men with green hair, white skin and bright red lips, as he was the epitome of individualism and self-expression that was outside the norms of society. Comic book writers and the public were being limited by society and the government on how to act, live and think. This can be seen in way in which in 1954 the Comics Code Authority would “[ban] gore and innuendo” from comic books as “a response to the hysterical hyperbole of the industry's chief critic, Dr. Frederick Wertham.” (Wallace 171) Ideas began to float around which accused comics of perverting the young minds of its readers and DC was forced to tone things down yet again. Wertham expressed a concern in the images that superheroes were portraying to children. He accused “Superman for promoting fascism, Wonder Woman for engaging in sadomasochism, and Batman for encouraging homosexuality.” (Johnson 80) With these new restrictions on society and comic books the Joker's true evil nature would be locked up and put away so that he could become “a figure of fun” who with his “clownish stunts [amuse] a Gotham populace that kept score of the rivalry he shared with Batman.” (171) The change was apt for an America which was trying to regain some sense of peace and calm and which was enjoying a new found affluence after the war. America lost interest in comic books as a medium for serious discussion of crime and evil. Comics had become mere childish entertainment. The Joker would disappear for a couple of years but would enjoy mild success in comics again with a push from the Batman television show which debuted in 1966 but it would be short lived. As the DC editor Julius Schwartz states, “when the show faded so did the comic books” and once again DC was left with trying to find a way to sell Batman to the masses. (Wallace 173)

               It was in the early seventies when the Joker rose again from the ashes and returned to his murderous roots. In 1973 Denny O'Neil in “The Joker's Five-Way Revenge” had the Joker kill off five of his henchmen gruesomely and pointlessly, a pattern which would continue from then on. Again the Joker's appearance seemed to have hailed from destruction, death and war as his resurgence followed the outbreak of the Vietnam War. What also propelled this change was the growing popularity of comics among a now older and more mature demographic. As Wallace states, the Joker returned in such a manner because “in an era of antiwar protests” they “needed to reestablish their relevance as both an artistic and a storytelling medium.” (173) Once again America looked for a new field upon which a discourse of evil could be explored and although the seed was planted by O'Neil in the seventies it would not be until the eighties that Frank Miller would start up this discussion. In the wake of the Vietnam War and the Cold War vigilantism, evil and justice became more pertinent than ever and America 

began to examine the actions of its government with more scrutiny. These ideas could best be seen in Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns where “Batman's war on crime has as a backdrop 1980's-style Cold War brinksmanship between a not-at-all veiled President Ronald Regan and the still extant Soviet Union.” (Bundrick 26) Miller's Dark Knight fights against what he sees as the corruption of the government in direct response to the questionable actions of the American government during the previous twenty years. While on the other hand Miller's Joker responds to the proliferation of the media and the access America had gained to visions of violence, mirroring the television coverage that the Vietnam war enjoyed unlike any other war before it. The Joker in Miller's graphic novel appears on a popular late night show as a guest brought on by a psychologist who is trying to prove that the Joker suffers from what he calls, “Batman Psychosis” and that it has been Batman who has been responsible for the Joker's madness all along. Nevertheless, his theories never receive a chance to be proven as the Joker promptly executes him, the host, and the members of the audience on public television. No longer were the evils of murder and war rendered motionless and distant through newspapers and pictures, they now were executed before our own eyes turning us all into willing witness. Frank Miller would not do this alone, Alan Moore would also join in to this discourse of evil in 1986 with his own rendition of the Joker in The Killing Joke where he would explore the possibilities of madness arising from one bad day or one traumatic experience alone and would also put into question whether the Joker is truly evil or not. These are similar themes to the ones Christopher Nolan would later explore in his Batman Trilogy, and more specifically in The Dark Knight.

21st Century's New Satan Part 1

The Joker: 21^st Century's New Satan? Or Harmless Clown?

              The Joker has become one of the most recognizable villains in comic book history over the past seventy years, but he has recently gained wider recognition in popular culture through Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight. Nolan has made the Joker relevant in the eyes of the masses and in the context of the post-9/11 world which we now inhabit. Super heroes and their myths “offer a shared, faithless, modern mythology, through which [truths about our world] can be explored.” (Hiddleston) However, this is not something new. Since the Joker's arrival on scene his struggle with Batman has become ground upon which society's insecurities and fears can be explored. The character of the Joker has been explored and developed by many different authors but most have agreed on the image of a murderous psychopath who kills with a flair of theatricality and seemingly without purpose. The Joker encompasses the anxieties of the origin of evil in modern times where science seeks to explain the motivations behind it through psychology and sociology by trying to pin the label of psychopath on him. There has always been the question of whether the Joker is pure evil or if he is truly mad. This essay seeks to explore the possibility behind the Joker's madness and to try to and prove that he is not insane, but that he is a chaotic force that has come down upon us as Satan once did with the purpose of illuminating humanity to its fractured world. It will seek to establish this through the Joker's long history as well as specifics texts that are more relevant to current times such as Nolan's film. It will further seek to prove that the Joker can be seen as something like a Satan figure in modern times. The character of Satan has been presented as a trickster, a bringer of chaos in earlier renditions such as in Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's Faust, but has also been presented as a calculating being in John Milton's Paradise Lost. The Joker is an mixture of these and other Satanic figures that have come before him and although he is devoid of the religious baggage of his predecessors he still carries some of the magical mystery that they possessed. 

 His inexplicably white skin, red lips and green hair do not in the least resemble any of the antiquated characteristics of Satan, but they serve the same purpose: to make him distinctive and monstrous. Although the Joker may not transform physically into poodles or snakes to reach his victims he has obtained an uncanny ability to survive death throughout his history in order to reinforce his mythological status. The Joker's appearance is part of what makes him mystical and mysterious as well. This need to define the nature of the Joker has arisen from a desire to know the reasons behind his actions. Nevertheless, there is no why, no explanation, because the Joker is a reincarnation of Satan and evil which we stubbornly attempt to dissect and explain through science. If the Joker has returned again in our post-9/11 world it is because despite our scientific discoveries and technological advances we still struggle with the darkness that resides within man. The Joker is not simply a mad clown with issues, he is beyond explanation, beyond definition, he is the new Satan that plays and preys upon the fear we possess of the darkness within.

Webcomics Part 5

Webcomics: The Proliferation of Geek Culture and Web 2.0

                With the growth and development of webcomics this rejection for artistic exploration and critique became more apparent, in great part because the fan-culture became the center stage. Webcomics in a way reinforced the ideas of escapism because they were comics that focused on the lives of these geeks who immersed themselves in fantasy. One example of this occurrence is the webcomic Penny Arcade, whose main characters were not only geeks, but alter egos of their creators who were also geeks. (Holkins) These types of comics elated the escapist behavior of fan-culture, and in fact created a new way to live vicariously through these heroes because they were more like themselves. Furthermore, what allowed for the expansion of webcomics into a more mainstream audience was the fact that the word geek had undergone a change in the last couple of decades, and after the fan-culture had developed and erupted into mainstream pop culture the term geek changed. The word geek was in a sense appropriated by the geeks and turned into a badge of pride that decreed them as experts of their own fantasy worlds and who were also at the forefront of the technological movement, but who were nevertheless only amateurs. Henry Jenkins notes that “[t]he concept of the active audience, so controversial two decades ago, is now taken for granted by everyone...” (1) This change in our culture that Jenkins is pointing to suggests that our lives are so full of interaction now thanks to the internet that many of us do not realize that in a sense we have become part of this geek movement, or at least the spirit of the amateur, who is able to participate in discussions of things that without the internet he would not have been able to discuss with others before. This new found approval of fan-culture, or geek culture, allowed for the acceptance of escapism into the mainstream. While in its beginnings comics provided a mild distraction from the mundane, the webcomics of today have exploded into a culture that prizes an almost complete withdrawal from reality and society. The internet has facilitated this in several ways, one as previously mentioned is the fact that it allowed for a wider spread of fan-culture. However, more importantly the accessibility of the internet and advances in technology have paradoxically opened up the world of fan-culture but also allowed for a more secluded, and ego-centric form of enjoying one's fantasies.

                With the growth of the web 2.0, the ability to join online communities has been facilitated even more more. However, advances in technology have also begun to create a society which is all about the individual, where the rest of the world only works as background to their own fantasy. Maasik and Solomon point out that the web of today allows us “to control exactly what information we present to others while online” and “offers us the freedom – even a fantasy of freedom – to be whatever we want to be with others.” (426) This is particularly apparent in webcomics as it allows for the creators to make versions of themselves who they wish they could be and construct the lives they picked out for them. (Holkins) These comics creators are working in the spirit of the “You” culture of the internet because these comics are all about them and their interests. Although many comics creators claim that their readers contribute and can engage in discussion with them, nothing much separates these webcomics from something like a personal blog where the owner discusses their particular opinions on popular culture.
Webcomics creator Danielle Corsetto claims that “'[p]art of the reason...that [they have] become successful is that [they] put a lot of [their] personality directly into the strip...[p]eople want to know a lot about the personal lives of the people who are creating the comic strips...” (qtd. in Elmasry) Webcomics creators seem to be trying to formulate an environment that is inviting for the readers, constructing the illusion that the readers are also part of the community of webcomics. In a certain sense however, this is not far from the truth, but truly there is no real community as each individual is living out their fantasies on their own sites. In a sense this touches upon one of American culture's biggest paradoxes which is how the idea of the “self-reliant individualist” is allowed to run side by side with the “conformist.” (Maasik and Solomon 484) For webcomic creators the idea of community seems to be quite important, but this does not change the fact that the underlying story is all about them. This demonstrates the way in which the internet has fabricated the illusion of individualism by democratizing art, allowing everyone to have a voice, while simultaneously allowing everyone to speak at once. Everyone believes they are being heard individually but in reality they are all heard as a buzz that is vaguely in unison, but nevertheless out of tune. 

                Webcomics are basically representations of someone else's fantasy, which are allowing others to live vicariously through them. They create a dream within a dream, and demonstrate the way in which the internet has perpetuated the desire of the masses to live outside of reality by enveloping them within multiple levels of fantasy. This results in creating the illusion of freedom, while webcomic creators and their fellow fans and co-creators, believe they have been given the key to freedom to be free thinking individuals, in reality they have lost sight of the fact that in being caught up in the latest pop idol drama, or the newest big video game hit, they have lost their freedom to think and criticize analytically the important social and political events that enfold around them.

(Originally Written on December 13, 2011 for Pop Culture English Seminar with Professor Solomon at California State University, Northridge)

Works Cited

Jenkis, Henry. “Convergence Culture.” Sings of Life in the U.S.A. : Readings on Popular Culture for   Writers. 6^thed. Ed. Sonia Maasik and Jack Solomon. Boston: Bedford/St. Matin's 2009. 432 - 445. Print.

Maasik, Sonia and Jack Solomon, eds. Signs of Life in the U.S.A. : Readings on Popular Culture for Writers. 6^thed. Boston: Bedford/St. Matin's 2009. 426 - 430, 484 - 485. Print.

Jenkins, Henry. Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers. New York: New York University Press 2006. Print.

Keen, Andrew. The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet is Killing Our Culture. New York: Doubleday, 2007. Print.

Guigar, Kellett, Kurtz and Kris Straub. How to Make Webcomics. Berkeley: Image Comics, Inc., 2008. Print.

McCloud, Scott. Understanding Comics. New York: Harper Perennial, 1994. Print.

Sabir, Roger. Comics, Comix, & Graphic Novels: A History of Comic Art. London: Phaidon Press Limited, 1996. Print.

Ryce, Walter. “Notes from the Underground.” The Reference Shelf: Graphic Novels and Comic Books. 82.5 (2010): 27-35. Print.

Fenty, Houp, and Laurie Taylor. “Webcomics: The Influence and Continuation of the Comix Revolution.” ImageTexT: Interdisciplinary Comics Studies 1.2 (2004): n. pag. Web. 10 Oct. 2011.

Dotinga, Randy. “Webcomics Attract Spit, Fans.” Wired 18 Jul. 2005. Web 10 Oct. 2011

Baker, Chris. “The Dorks Behind Penny Arcade, and Obscure Webcomic Turned Vidgame Empire.” Wired 21 Aug. 2007. n. pag. Web. 12 Oct. 2011

Elmasry, Faiza. “Sidestepping Newspapers, Comics Go Online.” Voice of America 12 Sep. 2011. n. pag. Web. 12 Oct. 2011

Holkins, Jerry. “Tycho/Jerry.” Penny Arcade Blog 13 Nov. 2009. n. pag. Web. 20 Dec. 2011.

Kurtz, Scott R. “Missed.” PvP10 Oct. 2011. n. pag. Web. 10 Oct. 2011

Watson, Joel. “Leeloo Dallas Multipass.” Hijinks Ensue 8 Aug. 2007. n. pag. Web. 25 Nov. 2011.

Lange, Chris. “bad bad girl gaga.” Capitol Hillbillies 12 Mar. 2010. n. pag. Web. 8 Dec. 2011.

Webcomics Part 4

Comics: The Rise of Geek Culture

                This could further be seen in the fact that the artistic ambitions of the underground would become overshadowed by the rise of what we would now called geek or fan culture in the early eighties. The word “geek” during this time was still considered derisive, and was meant to describe the extremely devoted fans of comic books, science fiction, and technology that immersed themselves in the fictional worlds of comic books. This devotion emerged from the fact that companies like Marvel made their comics specifically to be collected, and fans would create their own massive collections. (Sabir157) A culture soon began to spring up based around this idea of accumulation and soon “marts,”¹and “cons”²began to be organized in order to sell and trade not only comics, but their own fan created magazines called “fanzines,” which discussed and shared knowledge on the subject. The growth of this fan movement along with the need for a new market for comics³, resulted in making the “fan market” into not just another “parallel outlet of little commercial importance” but in making it “the new mainstream.” (Sabir 157) This kind of background is important to keep in mind for two reasons. The first is that it explains the shift in the target audience and shows the way in which it progressed back into an adult market, but continuing to retain those youthful elements that made them so popular in the first place. The second is that it reveals the start of a fan culture that would later expand to create its own empire based on these comics.

                The basic formula in comics was still there, caped, or costumed super hero with nearly inexplicable super powers, but with a new change. The new generation of superheroes were supposedly given psychological depth, and became a sort of mixture between the childhood fantasy world, and the sexually explicit, gritty world, of the underground comix. Some examples of this type of work can been in comics like Alan Moore's Watchmen, and Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. These works reshaped the idea of the superhero into one that was meant to be dark and serious, but despite this, and the sex appeal, these comics would still remain inherently fantastical, overshadowing the fact that these new reworkings were trying to comment on society. These graphic novels possessed some kind of social commentary thinly veiled behind their superhero stories, but this was misinterpreted by the fan-base as just a new convention whose realism only worked in making their fantasies more believable, and brought them closer to their world. This attempt to make comics appear more mature to the fan culture would not change anything and comics would continue to be viewed as merely play things that were part of the fan's playground. Fans took to discussing the fantasy world of Batman and the X-Men as if they were real, and even at times would rewrite already established story lines to their own liking and publish them in their fanzines. (Sabir 158) In a sense the fan culture began to control comics, but not in a creative and revolutionary way that would contribute to the development of comics as an art form, and in fact in quite the opposite direction.

                By giving shape to the idea of “Geek Culture,” this fan movement only allowed for the perpetuation of the myth of comics as childish entertainment, only suitable for kids and awkward nerds, who spends their time collecting limited edition comic books. This image of the fan would place them “as marginal to the operations of our culture” and would also result in them being “ridiculed in the media,” as well as becoming “shrouded with social stigma,” which would only help to stifle the literary aspirations of comic creators. (Jenkins 1) Therefore, while the artists themselves did not avoid political and social commentary in their work, the American fans and mainstream was not willing to accept it as a viable way for social commentary because it would shatter their fantasy worlds. The rejection within the fan-base can be seen in the way they took up arms not to explore the serious topics that their favorite comic books might bring up, but to recreate their favorite character's costume to wear at a “con.” Thus, the history of comics presents how there has always been a resistance to dealing with the political in the comics meant for the masses. First, it was social hierarchies which made this distinction, in an attempt to avoid social unrest, but later it would be the masses who would come to prefer and seek fantasy worlds over the harsh reality of the world. The new comics that were making it out to the mainstream preserved the essentially childish element of escapism that they had had as works meant predominately for children, and placed themselves at odds with the thought provoking work of graphic novel artists. Thus it can be seen how American culture not only stepped away from the concept of comics as an art form, but also from any social-political commentary that these might offer opting to view them as secondary aspects of comics, and favoring the fantastical elements.

1Markets

2Conventions

3“The old newsagent market was declining at an alarming rate, but at the same time a more specialized network of 'fan' shops began taking off.” (Sabir 157)