And then I was thinking about madness, and the Joker. From the first minute of the Dark Knight, it was infuriating that they're sketched him as a man capable of apparently random acts of violence, a 'mad man'. Like a friend put it, his madness is in fact, like that of a writer. Poetic, random, breaking rules and running wild.. an Iago. Evil that exists for 'anti-social' acts alone. But such a person would rather be diagnosed with a personality disorder and not Schizophrenia. But Christopher Nolan obviously has got it confused. Or he's deliberately picked the worst of the depictions of mental illness and made a collage out of it. The flicking tongue and the scarred and painted face is just funny.
Anyway, the sad part is that for most people, he is just an extreme form of madness. While in fact, most schizophrenics never commit violence unless threatened. And thanks to these guys, the real schizophrenics get some more stigma, and possibly increased risk of violence themselves. That apart, the other schizophrenics who're depicted to be vulnerable to suggestion to be a part of more organized crime, is probably true. If you go by all the accounts of mentally ill suicide bombers in Iraq.
will sign off with a note that, however underhanded the technique to tickle the viewers' brain, it worked.. And the movie is quite brilliantly amusing. The earlier Jokers were probably just not worthy of comment. :) And then, a sad good bye to Heath Ledger. And no, he probably wasn't insane, but just got high on too much coke.
Osho
2 comments:
to me the character of the "joker" is one that was wonderfully concieved (i'm also probably biases since it was heath ledger playing him!). he invokes the ugly, attractive, tragic, pathetic, comic and frightening all at once. at one level he partakes the qualities of a brute, but is really distinguished from other brutes in so many ways-by by having understanding without moral reason; and by not having the instincts that pertain to mere animals. still, the joker is in some respects a nobel being; he is a "man" in the sense- has courage to own up to what he creates- takes responsibility in that sense and face it in the face. he is never vulgar;he never falls into the prosaic and lowly familiarity of the mob; he is a poetical being in his way; in fact he speaks the best lines and it's always close to verse.he is more honest than the rest in the movie- his mind is convoluted -he is honest to himself and the rest.is he then more human than the apparently human? and he's tragic and funny- i was reminded of shaw's " when something's funny search it for a hidden truth"! he is perhaps a personification of passions being dangerous- but for all that he does his "unstable mind" is more insightful than the supposed central figure's (who is so full of himself!). the joker is really the analyst/therapist for the stone faced bat man! thats my take on the joker and i like him for his honesty to himself :)
he's not a schizophrenic- aspd??? my heart's not in it though !!!
as for your comment on heath leadger i agree he wasn't crack but died doing it!and what a pity.
watch the knight's tale- i absoultely flipped for the man in that!
PS: read the dived self? gives an interesting view into schiz
think some crazy bangalorian got "inspired" watching the dark knight?!! bad joke i know- could'nt help it :(
Post a Comment