Unburdened by false humility, postmodern trauma activists claim to have understood for the first time what drives all of human suffering
Trauma DispatchTrauma news you can't get anywhere else. |
|
|
CATEGORY: POPULAR CULTURE  written by Michael S. Scheeringa Read time: 2.9 minutes Two people can look at the same artwork and come to different opinions. Many have hailed writer and director Todd Phillip’s Joker as a visionary commentary on society that tapped into a profound zeitgeist. Others are less positive, and believe that its sympathetic portrayal of violence was misguided and could trigger more mass shootings. So, what really is the message of the film? Movie Summary The movie follows the origin story of how Arthur Fleck became the Joker. We are led to believe that Fleck suffered childhood trauma and this abuse helped to create the emaciated monster that he became as the Joker. Furthermore, he completely forgot his history of child abuse until he stole his hospital record and then all the memories came back to him. Fleck’s path to become the murderous Joker was also facilitated by a string of other misfortunes, including being bullied, fired from his job, and government defunding social programs he depended on for psychotherapy and psychiatric medications. The movie culminates in a riot in the streets inspired by the Joker’s violence meant to symbolize a counterculture rebellion against the rich. The movie inspired real-life individuals at various types of protests around the world to invoke the Joker, turned a spot in New York city where the Joker danced into a tourist spot, and it became the highest-grossing R-rated film of all time.
Todd Phillips (right) may be best known for a string of so-called gross out comedies including Road Trip (2000), Old School (2003), Borat (2006), and the three Hangover movies (2009, 2011, and 2013). Analysis Almost nothing about abuse, trauma, or posttraumatic stress disorder in the film was accurate. This origin story rests on the premise of two modern theories of trauma activists. The first theory is that trauma can create criminals, including mass killers. The second theory is that trauma memories can be totally repressed while having strong power over our behaviors. Both theories are discredited, yet many people insist they are true, seemingly unaware of the evidence to the contrary. The driving plot narrative is a causal theory of human nature. The reason Fleck became a broken man and then was pushed beyond his limits to become a murderer is that he was a member of the underclass, oppressed by the wealthy through their corruptions of society. It’s another parcel of the progressive leftist reframing of human nature: individuals can’t just be born bad. There must be a societal reason killers become killers. Mixed into the story is an overly simplistic beckoning for government intervention into the personal sphere; his plight could have been prevented if we had just invested more in social services. As Ann Hornaday wrote in the Washington Post, “Joker is a flagrantly seedy movie, one that constantly evokes the garbage, vermin and social apathy that New York was known for at its worst. Welcome to Gotham City, where the weak are killed and eaten.” This creates the context for an amped-up version of the wealthy stepping on the throats of the poor as the cause of their problems. In the debate of nurture versus nature as driving forces of human nature, Fleck is the victim of nurture. If not for bad life experiences, he could have reached a higher level of self-actualization. To make the point comic-bookish obvious, we see his smothered nobility blossom when he dances gracefully in a bathroom to express something noble, we’re not sure what, after his first kill.
Fleck is therefore not an unempathic deviant that can be written off to genes. He’s Locke’s blank slate and Rousseau’s noble savage; with different life experiences, he could have become anything. Fleck embodies the belief that trauma can change your essential character, which is a compelling narrative but has no basis in science.
Finally, the riot at the end of the movie seems straight out of the Communist Manifesto: Marx believed that capitalism smothers the possibility of self-actualization, leaving workers permanently stunted and alienated; eventually the proletariat rises up in a revolution to wrest the levers of production from the wealthy. Why Was This Made? I can make a good guess at the political beliefs of Phoenix, but I don’t know the politics of Phillips. When controversy arose about the film’s use of violence as a means of individual and group protest, Phillips seemed genuinely surprised. When addressing this at the Venice Film Festival, Phillips said, “It’s certainly not a political film,” which caused some laughter in the press room [1]. Taking Phillips at his word, as incredible as that seems, it appears possible that Phillips truly believes the portrayal of human nature in his film is just common sense and he has no deeper reflections or doubts about his beliefs, and that may be a fair assessment of much that comes out of Hollywood that can influence our popular culture. References [1] Nancy Tartaglione (August 31, 2019). ‘Joker’s Joaquin Phoenix & Todd Phillips On Creating DC Character Study & Finding That Laugh – Venice. Deadline. (This is a revised version of a blog post by the author from 2020 at www.psychologytoday.com.) Like Trauma Dispatch? You can subscribe to our email notices of new posts on this page. Comments are closed.
|
