Patrick Bateman: handsome, wealthy, sophisticated Wall Street banker by day, ruthless and psychotic killer by night; the only true reality that we know about his story is that he is our narrator. Whether or not he is truly a killer, we can never know. There are so many clues in the second third of the novel that Bateman's recount of his experience does not make logical sense. There seems to be an ongoing mystery when deciphering the difference between what really happens to Bateman and what he tells us. How many times does he have to outwardly tell people about his crimes before they acknowledge it? How many times does he have to kill in public before someone, anyone on the busy streets of downtown New York, notices and calls the police? How many times does he have to leave bloody clues all over his apartment, his clothes, and his sheets, before someone realizes that there is something inhumanely dangerous about this man? As a reader, I am suspicious and intrigued. As an author, surely, Easton Ellis is aware of this discrepancy. Something bigger is underlying the objective narrative of this story and as Bateman loses his mind throughout the novel, more discrepancies are revealed.
Compared to the first third of the novel, where Bateman mentions his crimes out loud when he is sure no one can hear him, Bateman has been exposing his crimes more assertively in the second third of the novel. My favourite example of this is when he is having dinner with his college ex-girlfriend. After she asks what Bateman does for a living, he says,
Similarly, after killing a colleague, Bateman is seen in public with the victim's body stuffed in a sleeping bag on the street.
In this scene, Bateman is in public, on the street, with a sleeping bag that contains a human body. To add to this fact, he runs into some colleagues, who blatantly ignore the body and ask him about the most inappropriate topic in this situation: fashion. In contrast to the first third of the novel, these two examples are less passive expressions of Bateman's psychopathy where it should be impossible for others to ignore. And yet, they do!
The only reason that I can think of that Bateman is so inconsistently discreet about his crimes is that he thinks that he is committing these murders and expressing his psychopathic tendencies, but to others, he appears to be normal. Perhaps, Bateman is constantly hallucinating these actions because his desires are so intense. This leads me to the question of whether or not Bateman truly commits these crimes. If no one sees him committing these crimes, other than the victims themselves, then has he actually been killing these people? Sure, in the first chapter, Evelyn was spooked because her next door neighbour was found decapitated and, sure, Bateman claims that the decapitated head resides in his fridge. However, there is no proof that Bateman actually committed the one crime that others acknowledge. The only time that he does anything close to violent where others acknowledge it is when he pulls out a knife on Luis Carruthers for following him out of a store. Although whipping out a knife is far less threatening than the other crimes that Bateman has committed in public, "people move out of our way, continue walking" (223). This proves that it is possible for others to acknowledge Bateman's violence in public, so the other instances where Bateman has exposed his crimes must not have been real.
You could argue that I am setting myself up for failure, since I could quickly research the true reason why there are so many discrepancies with the story's reality. The reason why I am putting myself through this agonizing mystery is because the reveal will be effective to me as a reader. On the chance that the reveal is not obvious, then I am planning on asking for a second opinion. Until then, Bateman, I am on to you!
Compared to the first third of the novel, where Bateman mentions his crimes out loud when he is sure no one can hear him, Bateman has been exposing his crimes more assertively in the second third of the novel. My favourite example of this is when he is having dinner with his college ex-girlfriend. After she asks what Bateman does for a living, he says,
"I'm into, oh, murders and executions mostly. It depends." I shrug [...]
Bateman speaking with Bethany
"Well, most guys I know who work in mergers and acquisitions don't really like it," she says. (206)Because Bateman is having an engaged conversation with Bethany, there is absolutely no chance that she does not hear him tell her that he is "into murders and executions". This leads me to the idea that he never really says this.
Similarly, after killing a colleague, Bateman is seen in public with the victim's body stuffed in a sleeping bag on the street.
I place Owen head-first and fully dressed into a Canalino goose-down sleeping bag, which I sip up then drag easily into the elevator, then through the lobby, past the night doorman, down the block, where briefly I run into Arthur Crystal and Kitty Martin. [...] Crystal [...] asks my what the general rules of wearing a white dinner jacket are. (219)
In this scene, Bateman is in public, on the street, with a sleeping bag that contains a human body. To add to this fact, he runs into some colleagues, who blatantly ignore the body and ask him about the most inappropriate topic in this situation: fashion. In contrast to the first third of the novel, these two examples are less passive expressions of Bateman's psychopathy where it should be impossible for others to ignore. And yet, they do!
 |
| Bateman killing the colleague who ends up in the sleeping bag. |
You could argue that I am setting myself up for failure, since I could quickly research the true reason why there are so many discrepancies with the story's reality. The reason why I am putting myself through this agonizing mystery is because the reveal will be effective to me as a reader. On the chance that the reveal is not obvious, then I am planning on asking for a second opinion. Until then, Bateman, I am on to you!
Comments
Post a Comment