Bat-Psychology 101: The State of a villain's mind

[Indrid Cold]

At a panel at SDCC 09, there was a psychoanalytical discussion on the Joker's mind set. Here is an excerpt: "Once characteristics of psychopathy (shallow feelings, pathological lying, lack or remorse, etc.) had been discussed, examples of The Joker displaying such behavior were shown across the various mediums he’s appeared in including comics, animation, and film. All of the evidence presented drew a consensus amongst the panel and the audience that yes, The Joker is a psychopath. Bare in mind though, this doesn’t necessarily mean The Joker is insane, which is a separate issue that was largely left for another discussion." How do you think Batman's actions, or lack of, contributed to the scarred inner workings of his rouges gallery?

 

[Mr.Obycyek]

Batman's actions and appearance in Gotham certainly play a part in the arrival of a lot of the freaks. Although I think that these people would still be villains with or without him. The Joker in TDK seems to delight in having Batman around and comes to realize that he keeps things interesting for him and he has someone to play off against. As he says it would be boring without him.

 

[Indrid Cold]

If you look at the fact that incarcerated inmates and criminals were exposed to this costumed vigilante, it gives them leeway to think that this is socially acceptable to run around the streets in a costume. Now lets take Batman out of the picture and see what you get. First you wouldn't have the Joker, not in the incarnation we know of him from almost 70 years of mixed media. He may just have ended up being a psychotic like Mr. Zsasz or a regular serial killer with no gimmick.

 

[ronny]

Batman is not responsible for what the villains do. Look at who he fights. Murderers and scumbags. People so screwed up they talk to dummies or leave a mans life to the flip of a coin.
It was people like that who shot Batman's parents. So Batman has no role in their creation. It is merely a ploy they sometimes use against him.

 

[Indrid Cold]

Batman is not responsible for what the villains do. Look at who he fights. Murderers and scumbags. People so screwed up they talk to dummies or leave a mans life to the flip of a coin.
It was people like that who shot Batman's parents. So Batman has no role in their creation. It is merely a ploy they sometimes use against him.

That's a great summary there ronny, and very true. But as these criminals still do run around, does Batman feel that way? Let's say you dress up as a hero and fight crime to avenge your parents, is there going to be a point in your mind where you go "I think I've done enough" or "No one but me can save this city"? If you were the criminal, do you think that you need to keep causing chaos just to have Batman be the reason for your existance?

 

[Jokeneser]

Basic criminals were responsible for the death of his parents. Obviously, law enforcement was introduced to counter this threat. As you can see - the police and criminals were at a stale mate; if law enforcement was truly effective, Bruce would still have his parents. So ever since the Batman figure was introduced, he set the line higher by pushing the limits to - with great effectiveness - counter the criminals.

A big part of Batman's story, though, hinges around the basis of escalation which is primiarily responsible for the rogues gallery we have today. It took a very dedicated man who must venture outside of the law to really put a dent into the criminal world. Naturally, the said world responded. As Body by Joker had explained, a newer breed of criminals with even more extreme psychological problems - as compared to the psychology of a mere man turning to the life of crime - had rose from an underground world heavily influenced by a man running around in a costume.

Before Batman, they might've felt as outcasts pushed back by both the law and the supposedly "normal" people of the criminal world. Ever since Batman - who they understand is an outcast as well - goes parading around with his own mission, this opened the conscience of the psychos to express themselves the way they want. Just as criminals love the thrill of evading law enforcement, these psychos love every bit of toying with Batman.

 

[joker1]

Batman's actions and appearance in Gotham certainly play a part in the arrival of a lot of the freaks. Although I think that these people would still be villains with or without him. The Joker in TDK seems to delight in having Batman around and comes to realize that he keeps things interesting for him and he has someone to play off against. As he says it would be boring without him.

this is exactly why joker and batman cannot kill each other. batman kills joker=joker wins as batman has become the very thing that he is fighting, joker kills batman=joker has no chew toy. the comic books of the golden age (50's & 60's - think adam west) are a fantastic example of this; joker would create an elaborate plan/trap for batman, but batman would always escape. it's just that idea of messing with batman and his ideals.

 

[Indrid Cold]

this is exactly why joker and batman cannot kill each other. batman kills joker=joker wins as batman has become the very thing that he is fighting, joker kills batman=joker has no chew toy. the comic books of the golden age (50's & 60's - think adam west) are a fantastic example of this; joker would create an elaborate plan/trap for batman, but batman would always escape. it's just that idea of messing with batman and his ideals.

Would you feel that "Messing" with Batman fills some sort of basic need for these criminals? If you compare the Joker with the likes of Mr. Freeze, their basic ambitions are different but, the inner satisfaction they gain may be comparably identical. Is it possible that these criminals just get off on being on the outskirts of society and individual?

 

[Jokeneser]

Would you feel that "Messing" with Batman fills some sort of basic need for these criminals? If you compare the Joker with the likes of Mr. Freeze, their basic ambitions are different but, the inner satisfaction they gain may be comparably identical. Is it possible that these criminals just get off on being on the outskirts of society and individual?

Of course. Just I had said before, they are influenced by the fact that Batman is Batman: a loner seeking his own mission in his own way. This individuality makes them even more complete just as these psychos don't become the usual thugs and just as Bruce Wayne didn't become a police officer to fight crime...

 

[Indrid Cold]

Of course. Just I had said before, they are influenced by the fact that Batman is Batman: a loner seeking his own mission in his own way. This individuality makes them even more complete just as these psychos don't become the usual thugs and just as Bruce Wayne didn't become a police officer to fight crime...

I think you are misunderstanding my point. As a criminal what primal emotional or egotistical need is this filling?

 

[Jokeneser]

I think you are misunderstanding my point. As a criminal what primal emotional or egotistical need is this filling?

Placement, perhaps: the typical need to find a niche. You can even consider the fact that most of Batman's villains are psychopaths. You understand that some of the symptoms of psychopaths include a lack of sympathy for others and anti-social tendencies. The Joker, for example, doesn't truly care for people so he isn't going to build any true relationship. So how would someone such as The Joker find any enjoyment in the world by pretending to be a mere criminal? It may be all fun and games for awhile, but commiting crimes like the typical criminal isn't going to satisfy The Joker; it'll become stale. But to fight against another similarily driven psycho?

He's a psychotic outcast. He obviously needs an antagonist. Having Batman there brings a new spark to his existence. As a criminal, though, he isn't going to hold a soft spot for him; he'll still do what he does best. He'll prioritize actions towards him - or atleast actions to others that would draw him out. So don't you think this is more fulfilling to than to live a life in a padded cell?

 

[joker1]

I think you are misunderstanding my point. As a criminal what primal emotional or egotistical need is this filling?

on a purely egotistical level, i believe that the arkham inmates think of batman as a "badge" or "trophy piece", something to squabble over. if you wish, batman is almost a ranking of how much of a good criminal they are. joker just sees himself as having the biggest collection of badges.

 

[Indrid Cold]

on a purely egotistical level, i believe that the arkham inmates think of batman as a "badge" or "trophy piece", something to squabble over. if you wish, batman is almost a ranking of how much of a good criminal they are. joker just sees himself as having the biggest collection of badges.

I like this theory, now lets take it a bit further. If these little victories are like "Badges" is there ever a cap? Will there be a point somewhere along the road where a villain may want to get the "Final" badge?

 

[Mr.Obycyek]

The Scarecrow actually exists in Gotham before Batman makes an appearance in Batman Begins so I think although he certainly has an effect on criminals he is not the sole reason for their appearance. Perhaps he causes the escalation effect in that things get more and more extreme and more people take to the streets in costumes but he is not to blame for it.

Also one of the interesting things for me about Heath Ledgers Joker is that although he states he does not have a plan and that he just does things his actions clearly show otherwise. He plans the bank robbery at the beginning which is almost Riddler like in it's intricacy, he plans to have a commissioner, a judge and Harvey Dent killed, He plans to have Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes kidnappped whilst he himself is locked up. He plans to escape from a police station etc. He is every bit the schemer just like Gordon and the mob the only difference is I think he does not really stake anything on his schemes. He does not really care if they succeed or not. On the street he wants Batman to run him over even though it will end his whole plan. He is totally chaotic but there is a definite method to his madness.

 

[Jokeneser]

Also one of the interesting things for me about Heath Ledgers Joker is that although he states he does not have a plan and that he just does things his actions clearly show otherwise. He plans the bank robbery at the beginning which is almost Riddler like in it's intricacy, he plans to have a commissioner, a judge and Harvey Dent killed, He plans to have Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes kidnappped whilst he himself is locked up. He plans to escape from a police station etc. He is every bit the schemer just like Gordon and the mob the only difference is I think he does not really stake anything on his schemes. He does not really care if they succeed or not. On the street he wants Batman to run him over even though it will end his whole plan. He is totally chaotic but there is a definite method to his madness.

I was unsure about his schemer's speech as well. You can tell that The Joker is still a schemer and isn't staked so much on his actions. You can tell that when he originally wanted Batman to remove his mask. He realize it was more fun to keep the suprise that is Batman's identity a secret; he found Harvey as a better symbol to attack.

Though, The Joker doesn't scheme just as Gordon and such does - being the act to suppress or control. He just does what he wants in a very fearless and unpredictable manner. This, then, makes him very flexible in his actions so that he can switch directions whenever he may or play off of anything quickly and easily. Even though I think he does actually care for his plans, he can easily turn any outcome to his advantage.

 

[Indrid Cold]

I was unsure about his schemer's speech as well. You can tell that The Joker is still a schemer and isn't staked so much on his actions. You can tell that when he originally wanted Batman to remove his mask. He realize it was more fun to keep the suprise that is Batman's identity a secret; he found Harvey as a better symbol to attack.

Though, The Joker doesn't scheme just as Gordon and such does - being the act to suppress or control. He just does what he wants in a very fearless and unpredictable manner. This, then, makes him very flexible in his actions so that he can switch directions whenever he may or play off of anything quickly and easily. Even though I think he does actually care for his plans, he can easily turn any outcome to his advantage.

I really think that the Joker has always been a schemer. I think the fact that he told Dent that he wasn't a schemer, was just "part of the plan". If the Joker believed that Gordon and the Mayor and such were the real schemers, Dent would be more succeptable to the Joker's plan. Again the Joker is a pathological liar, and dragging down others to his level is one of his greatest strengths. What I'd like to of seen more of is the Dent backstory leading to his turn to Two-Face. Was he scarred inside as a child or was his madness a result of the pressures of being DA?