August 29, 2008
The Dark Blight
What the new Batman movie says, and doesn’t say, about the origins of evil.
by Skye Jethani
Na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, Batman!
I've been meaning to write a post about The Dark Knight for weeks, but between family vacations and working on the fall issue of Leadership, I've been swamped. I'm a big fan of superhero movies, and this summer I've seen a bunch - Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, and the latest installment of Christopher Nolan's fantastic Batman series, The Dark Knight. My companion to most of these comic book movies is a psychiatrist from my church who has a penchant for professional wrestling and shares my follicle failings. (I highly recommend watching fantasy movies with a psychiatrist - it's more fun than applying Freudian dream analysis to nursery rhymes.)
I feel no need to add my accolades for The Dark Knight to those already swirling around the web. (Check out Todd Hertz's review at CTMovies.com.) Instead, I want to discuss an interesting storytelling element of the film that may help explain one of the more mysterious elements of the Bible - emphasis on the word may. (Let's not take a movie too seriously or read overly spiritual themes into it. That only spoils an otherwise good the film and risks diminishing our faith.)
Batman's nemesis in The Dark Knight is the Joker, played by the late great Heath Ledger. Unlike earlier film depictions of the Clown Prince of Crime, Ledger's Joker has no back-story, no origin, no narrative arc. In The Dark Knight, we never discover what would drive a man to dye his hair green, paint his face white, smear a ghastly smile across his cheeks and murder people for the sheer fun of it.
In Tim Burton's 1989 Batman, the Joker, played by Jack Nicholson, is a mob boss who falls into a vat of chemicals that bleaches his skin, gives him a permanent grin, and loosens a few screws in his head. Nicholson's Joker is the product of an accident. This knowledge humanizes the character, and despite his evil behavior the audience retains some degree of pity for the villain.
Not so in The Dark Knight. Director Christopher Nolan says he intentionally avoided giving the Joker any back-story in his movie. "He's got no story arc," says Nolan, "he's just a force of nature tearing through [the film]." Co-writer David Goyer says there is no need for an origin for the Joker because, "He just is. He's more interesting without it."
Nolan says a back-story for the Joker "would reduce the character. It's more frightening because, in a sense, there is no mystery there.... He is exactly what he presents himself to be; which is an anarchist." Nolan describes the Joker as a "mad dog" - a description carried into the film when the Joker describes himself as a dog chasing cars - he wouldn't know what to do if he caught one.
How does this relate to the Bible? Well, Scripture is largely silent regarding the origins of the enemy and evil - the blight of sin that marks our world. We know how humanity rebelled against God and fell into sin through the deception of the serpent in the garden - but where did the serpent come from? If God created a perfect creation and declared all things "good," how and when did evil appear on the scene?
Yes, I know Jesus says he saw Satan fall from heaven (Luke 10:18), but even he offers no real back-story, no explanation. I am also aware of the apocryphal writings that try to explain the evil one's narrative arc and the popularity of such ideas with pop-evangelical fiction. But none of that changes the fact that scripture largely ignores the question - where did evil come from? Instead, the thrust of the Bible is focused on what God has done about it.
I wonder if the lack of a back-story for evil in the Bible is related to Nolan and Goyer's rationale for ignoring the Joker's back-story? Without an explanation or origin, God is emphasizing the utter meaninglessness and anarchy of evil. It cannot be understood; it cannot be rationalized. To do otherwise would be to legitimize its place in his creation or to create sympathy for an enemy that deserves none.
I recall sitting in a theology class in seminary where we debated the origins of evil. How could Adam and Eve even be tempted? After all, they were created in the image of God and completely pure. How did the serpent come to be in the garden? Why would God allow that?
After spending too much time debating these fruitless thoughts (which is the seminarian's specialty), my professor finally interrupted with his wisdom. "Never ask a question the text doesn't want to answer," he said. He was correct, of course. They are brilliant words I try to remember with each sermon I write.
Before The Dark Knight's premiere, comic book movie fanboys were all over the internet criticizing Nolan's decision to not include a back-story for the Joker. They wanted the film to be faithful to the comics. They wanted their questions about Batman's antagonist answered and expounded. Nolan refused because he had a higher goal than answering fanboys' questions - he wanted to tell a great story.
Answers to all of our questions about the origin of evil are not found in the Scriptures, which means that God, the Writer and Director of this cosmic drama, did not deem them necessary for the story he wanted to tell. Are we satisfied with that, or must we continue to contrive answers for ourselves? My guess is that Christians would find themselves in less trouble theologically, culturally, and politically if we stuck with the questions God has chosen to answer, and immersed ourselves in the story he has chosen to tell.
Skye Jethani is the managing editor of Leadership and a teaching pastor at Blanchard Alliance Church in Wheaton, Illinois
Posted by UrL Scaramanga on August 29, 2008
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1492
Comments
So... you're using Batman to side with Bultmann? ;)
Intriguing...
Posted by: Bill at August 28, 2008
Nice, thought provoking post. One additional comment to add to your "seminarian's specialty" line, don't forget that the question of the origin of evil has lent itself to some unwieldy theological words like supralapsarianism, infralapsarianism, sublapsarianism, Amyraldism, and Molinism. Whew!
Posted by: Todd Burus at August 29, 2008
Seems to me that we tend to be on one extreme or the other on the question of evil. Either we want evil all spelled out - personified, story lined, detailed, and nearly deified. Or, we want to say that evil has no objective reality, but rather is just the shadow side of our own nature.
Nolan and Ledger's Joker is one of the few genuinely frightening characters I have seen in a movie. Chaos and anarchy are much scarier than guns or chainsaws.
Posted by: Drew Hill at August 29, 2008
Excellent point! And I would simply add that rather than focus on the origins of evil, Nolan spends most of his time focusing on how we should deal with it. Do the ends justify the means? And what role does suffering and sacrifice play? And are we willing to become hated, even reviled for the sake of the good of others?
These themes carry theological freight to be sure. And rather than debate them in a classroom or sanctuary, I am convinced that the church would be well-served to seek practical ways of meeting senseless evil with the unconditional love of Jesus Christ.
Posted by: Doug Resler at August 29, 2008
You are one of the church's best provocateurs, Skye. Thanks. Lemme riposte.
While I appreciate your sem prof's warning, how do we know if the text doesn't want to answer our questions, or if we just haven't dug deep enough?
Yes, pursuing some questions can sure lead us astray. But other times, maybe the questions aren't the problem, it's that our assumptions about the ways the text is to be handled are way off.
I think about this a lot when I read see how the NT writers interpret the OT, or when I study typology and "Christ in the OT," or when I read how the Desert Fathers interpreted the Bible, or try to read any prophetic or apocalyptic books. I realize my brain just isn't trained to think that way.
Just because I'm not capable of understanding God's answer to my questions right now doesn't mean there isn't an answer ...
Posted by: Jarrod at August 29, 2008
Like Todd and Drew, I found this version of the Joker very frightening...and very representative of Evil (with a capital E!). Of great interest was watching the reaction of both Batman and Harvey Dent (Two-face) to this evil...do the ends justify the means?
Reminds me of the wonderful Ethics discussions from Seminary...
Posted by: Leo at August 29, 2008
Skye,
Once again, it's an honor to claim to know you! Excellent article.
Thanks for putting to pen many of my jumbled and random thoughts.
I for one, am so glad he wanted to tell a good story, because in doing so, he told a great one.
Posted by: Dave Robinson at August 29, 2008
"Listen to this: To disobey God was to initiate evil. Evil is not the presence of something. Evil is the absence of righteousness. You can't create evil, because evil doesn't exist as a created entity. It doesn't exist as a created reality. Evil is a negative. Evil is the absence of perfection. It's the absence of holiness. It's the absence of goodness. It's the absence of righteousness. Evil became a reality only when creatures chose to disobey. Evil came into existence initially then in the fall of angels. And then next, in the fall of Adam and Eve.
Just put it this way in your mind. Evil is not a created thing. Evil is not a substance. Evil is not an entity. Evil is not a being. Evil is not a force. Evil is not some floating spirit. Evil is a lack of moral perfection. God created absolute perfection. Wherever a lack of that exists, sin exists. And that cannot exist in the nature of God or in anything that God makes. Evil comes into existence when God's creatures fall short of the standard of moral perfection.
I don't usually quote John MacArthur, jr., because of "some" of his other...um...more...hmm, "interesting" thoughts...well, yeah, anyway, I find that this is so far, the best explanation outside of the Bible about evil.
I'll give this some more thought...may even write a blog post about it...hmmm....thinking.
Posted by: sheerahkahn at August 29, 2008
The strangest creatures on earth are humans who deviate from the norm for no reason, who abuse, maim, kill, and seem to lack a conscience. We dig for answers, we pick apart their brains, we even dissect them after they die only to find out they are identical to those who are normal.
These are the scariest [people] of all--the true sociopath, the true psychopath. Why? Because they are in the minority. Because we always wonder if we could suddenly snap and become this Joker without the back story, without reason.
The unknown is scarier than the known. That's why we sleep with our lights on.
But G-d would never allow this to happen to me, a loving xtian... right? Not to my family... not in our Body of Christ...
Right?
Posted by: Sara at August 29, 2008
I'm with Jarrod, and with Rowan Williams (Jeffrey McCurry's provocative paper, "Toward a Poetics of Theological Creativity: Rowan Williams Reads Augustine's De Doctrine After Derrida"). Scripture is multi-valent, we apply NT Wright's "fifth act" analogy to hermeneutics also. While the text may not answer all questions, it answers many we have not yet asked. For Derrida, a text is always a promise ... deferred presence ... we won't exhaust Scripture because we can't exhaust the Almighty.
Posted by: len at August 29, 2008
I checked to see if the number of na's in your Batman song was divisible by 8. It was. :-)
Posted by: Steve Mooradian at August 30, 2008
i guess steve and i suffer from the same ocd impulses - i did the same thing.
having already admitted to being a david cassidy fan, y'all probably won't let me back on the board here if i tell you i used to dress up as batman when i was 4-5 years old, with a towel for a cape, my batman t-shirt, my sister's leotards, and wearing my underwear on the outside.
i'm sure i've lost what little street cred i had left here with that revelation...
there are times my mind takes a real 'naturalist' view of humanity - how at the core we are still just an evolved animal enjoying a brief run at the top of the food chain, waiting for the next challenger in this eternal king-of-the-hill game to come and knock us off our perch. i noticed y'day watching college football that EA was doing heavy game advertising - and, i tell ya, these games scare me in how they try to be brutal and funny at the same time. i used to say i liked the friday the 13th series of movies because they were funnier than scary, but perhaps i was just proving that the filmmaker had accomplished his real goal. laughing and enjoying interesting ways to kill people is not a good mindset on which to build a civilization, one might think.
last night i went to wal-mart, and here's another confession: i wondered when i looked at a lot of folks there if we were members of the same species. yeah, i say that to be somewhat funny, but you let your mind wonder ten-to-twenty thousand years in the future, and does it make sense to believe a shining city on the hill is our destination? or are we destined to have an armaggedon on our own if one doesn't come form the hand of God?
maybe we've just been playing dress-up all these years to the amusement of the rest of the monkeys...
mike rucker
fairburn, georgia, usa
Posted by: mike rucker at August 31, 2008
Something else Joker said to Batman, which I started to present as a Senior High Sunday School teacher a few years back when the first Spiderman came out, is the whole "we need each other" line. Like Batman (Spiderman) is less himself without Joker (Green Goblin).
Does good require evil? Does light require darkness? It's a common thought--one a friend just expressed to me moments ago around a campfire when referring to the seasons of the midwest. Something doesn't ring true to me about that...or perhaps just too uncomfortable?
I happen to believe good is good and defies comparison. I like the "evil as absence" idea above. I agree that "Evil" cannot exist of it's own accord...
Great post! Great thoughts!
Posted by: Bil_ at August 31, 2008
Great timing... I finally saw this in an IMAX theater last night. Incredible movie.
(and for Nolan fans... how about the title card coming at the end? a subtle homage to Memento?)
To those who say the Joker has no back-story, there is some backstory implied in the "why so serious" bit that he shares with both Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal) and one of the mob bosses earlier in the movie.
Nevertheless, that's nitpicking... and of course, there's no guarantee that he didn't just make that story up just to do something interesting whilst holding a knife in someone's mouth.
Posted by: Jelani Greenidge at September 2, 2008
Have to say. I also love love LOVE superhero movies!
Posted by: LK at September 3, 2008
One of the best Christian responses to the movie I've read! Incredible.
Posted by: adam at September 3, 2008