The Great Criminal
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
SEK compelled me to respond to The Dark Knight. I don’t have much new to say on the topic–I really enjoyed the movie, particularly Heath Ledger’s performance as the Joker, but found the Two-Face part a bit contrived and unsatisfying.
I would like to make a remark, however, about the theoretical importance of the Joker, who is a startling illustration of the link between the “great criminal” and the sovereign. [Note: SPOILER ALERT!!! Including an unexpected spoiler of The Wire that I should've mentioned before!] For instance, the Joker is frequently in situations where he is surrounded by violent criminals hostile to his goals (such as they are). Why don’t they simply kill him? I believe the answer is more than the perception that he might just be crazy enough to take out Batman: his joyous criminality gives him a kind of sovereignty. For the same reason, it becomes believable that he could have a horde of faithful yet unseen followers willing to set up bombs in hospitals, boats, etc. — the very insanity of his plot simultaneously places him above the law and compels obedience, at least in certain types of people.
Doesn’t everyone pale into insignificance compared to the Joker? The good Harvey Dent and the evil Two-Face are both pathetic compared to him — even Batman is. One also cannot help but note that the Joker does not die at the end, and I believe there is an inner necessity to this that goes beyond Batman’s personal code. Ledger’s performance is obviously a big part of this effect, but I would argue that Ledger succeeds precisely insofar as he injects a criminal sovereignty into the role.
[A semi-related note -- the notion of the great criminal as sovereign also helps to explain one of the great mysteries from season 1 of The Wire: Why did Omar wait so long to take his shot after drawing Avon out? The answer is simple: even Omar is not immune to the sovereign aura of the king, which Avon is in his world. If Omar were a truly great criminal, he would've been able to pull it off, just as the Joker has no trepidation about killing the mayor. Instead, Omar is merely Batman, and the fact that the Batman of the new franchise can only meet Omar's pathetic end is what will almost certainly make the inevitable third installment a failure -- because a summer blockbuster can't do what The Wire can.]
Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 2:26 pm
I’ve not yet seen The Dark Knight — hopefully this weekend — but your parenthetical about Omar made me think of his declaration in season one (to, I think, Wee Bey), “You come at the king, you best not miss.” What I think season five makes explicit is that Omar’s reign of terror, his claim to sovereignty, was purely illusory — or, at best, mythical. It’s not that all such myths or illusions have to be dispelled … but, in a nihilistic world, clearly that of Batman & the Wire, there is little room left for them.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Stringer Bell is also relevant here: he ultimately isn’t in control because he isn’t as immersed in “the game” as Avon is. Think of when Avon gets arrested in the raid in season 3 — he laughs!
Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 2:58 pm
As seen in season five Avon’s level of control, and indeed his immersion in “the game,” didn’t cease when he was imprisoned (or w/ the collapse of his empire on the streets). He delivered the Greeks to Marlo. And presumably was no worse for wear in prison than he was during season two.
Friday, July 25, 2008 at 5:09 pm
[...] 25, 2008 in history and current events by SEK Having failed in my attempt to compel Adam to discuss The Dark Knight in terms of Schmidt, Benjamin, or Agamben [...]
Saturday, July 26, 2008 at 11:46 am
See, you needed to give a heads up that there was the spoiler also applied to The Wire. Not cool.
Saturday, July 26, 2008 at 11:59 am
Sorry. I’ve changed it.
Saturday, July 26, 2008 at 12:07 pm
That’s fine. I still don’t know exactly what…
Saturday, July 26, 2008 at 12:16 pm
What Adam is not referring to is the heartbreaking revelation that Omar’s love for Honey Nut Cheerios does not in fact lower his cholesterol, and he becomes the butt of many jokes for his trust in commercials. I still cringe when I think of that heartbreaking scene.
Sunday, August 10, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Two interesting notes re: this: 1) Plato’s comments that the great criminal is the result of an imperfect political structure, i.e., the great criminal was potentially a great philosopher but corrupted by the imperefect society. 2) Kierkegaard based his early philosophical speculation on several charcater types, one of whom was the Master Thief. For Kierkegaard, this charcter type represents a kind of martyr.
On this concept, Sara Jandrup writes:
3) The common late Romantic religious conception (picked up and modified by Dostoevsky) that the great sinner often becomes the great saint. Berdyaev paraphrases Dostoevsky’s idea on this as being the idea that “if evil exists, God exists.”
Sunday, August 10, 2008 at 5:13 pm
“Three remarks….” Dja think?