As I watched The Dark Knight last night, I began to develop a deeper understanding of his purpose. The Joker is a physical manifestation of rebellion against the customs and restrictions of society. From his (and my own) perspective, society never allows true psychological freedom. He is the most audacious, selfish, and insane of anti-traditionalists using makeup, theatrics, and violence to substantiate and develop fear in his cause. Batman of course is his total opposite, an elemental organism protecting the ideals and perceptions of society's masses hence his moniker: The Dark Knight.
"The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules" (The Joker). The Joker is attempting to convey his logic. Society's ongoing cycle of rigid tradition and desensitization oppresses the ambitions of all human beings, forcing them into a life that was not meant for them. In a way, society brings the vitality of life to inadequacy. On the other side, we have Batman who protects that tradition, protects civilization, and the interests of society. Now I must ask you, The Joker's violent and sinister antics withstanding, is his premise totally wrong? Personally, it is not. However, his primitive handling of the situation could not be tolerated. He chose death and destruction to gain power. Batman continuously fought against his rage. Is Batman protecting society's physical life, or their ideologies and idiosyncrasies as well? Is he correct in doing so? Of course, his valiance saves many as it should. Society's physical life deserves protecting, but does it's perception and ideology deserve the same?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment