American Psycho (1991)

Cons: It's as uncomfortably outdated as anything else from the time period, if not more so. The book is a little long for as little action as it has. There are too many interchangeable yuppie characters with no personalities to keep them all straight, though I don't doubt that them being interchangeable yuppies with no personalities was the point.

Pros: Bateman is one of the strongest first-person voices I've ever read. Similarly to the movie, breaking up the darkness with long monologues about '80s music is very entertaining and unique. Bateman's neurotic nitpicking made me think of this as a gory Seinfeld. The constant one-sentence descriptions of the same things sprinkled throughout reminded me A LOT of my old days with Palahniuk. ( )

An analysis of the chapter, Killing Child at Zoo

As the American society has entered the state of postmodernity, materialism and consumerism has come to play a larger and larger role in all our lives. And the devastating effects of consumerism are immense, as the novel, American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis, 1991, serves to testify. In the chapter, Killing Child at Zoo, Ellis displays two examples of what consumerism can cause: The monetization of as something as natural and pure as wildlife and the extreme loss of identity that can turn people into serial killers.

Through the setting, Ellis shows us consumerism is even capable of contaminating the most natural of things, wildlife, through the institution of trapping and breeding animals, the zoo. This quote describes well how the consumerism has poisoned the wild creatures in the zoo: “The zoo seems empty, devoid of life. The polar bears look stained and drugged. A crocodile floats morosely in an oily makeshift pond. The puffins stare sadly from their glass cage. Toucans have beaks as sharp as knives.” (p. 2, l. 10) The human inventions, drugs, oil, glass and knives are being forced upon the wildlife. Another quote that even more vividly expresses this point is this: “COINS CAN KILL - IF SWALLOWED, COINS CAN LODGE IN AN ANIMAL’S STOMACH AND CAUSE ULCERS, INFECTIONS AND DEATH.” (p. 2, l. 16) An ingenious metaphor that tells us that on top of indirectly causing great animal suffering and death, the very cornerstone upon which consumerism flourishes, money, also quite literally can kill. Ellis provides us with plenty other examples of the unnaturalness of the zoo too: The surrounding skyscrapers and tall buildings being ever visible from inside the zoo. The fact that fake penguin sounds are being played on speakers, and them later smashing against their glass cage in panic after the murder.

Throughout the entire book a very great emphasis is placed on material possessions, to the point where one’s identity is simply the sum of what one owns. At one point Ellis even spends two full pages listing everything Bateman has in his apartment. Almost every time Bateman meets someone, their attire is comprehensively described, and their body and color carefully evaluated. This obsession with appearance becomes shockingly apparent, when he just after the murder judges the panicking mothers look. A more subtle example of the extreme focus on material objects is this: “The Patty Winters Show this morning was about a boy who fell in love with a box of soap.” (p. 1, l. 10) This boy could be a metaphor for Bateman, who very rarely experiences any interest in his fellow companions, let alone love for them, but shows an intense interest in and affection for his Armani jacket, Interplak tooth polisher and Duntech Sovereign 2001 speakers. And what is the first thing he does after committing a murder? He buys a book and a soap bar just for the sake of buying it. Patrick Bateman has been entirely consumed by consumerism.

He consumes out of fear of falling behind - not living up to the ideal - not fitting into the prestigious bubble of yuppie-culture. “Unable to maintain a credible public persona, I find myself roaming in the zoo […]” (p. 1, l. 12) Here his other side takes over, Bateman’s real identity, the serial killer. Following the stream of endless consumption has not brought him happiness, only a loss of identity, which has led him to create another one. The serial killer’s happiness seems to be directly tied to the amount of suffering he can cause, a sort of reverse hedonistic utilitarianism. Two examples of this: “It’s not the seals I hate - it’s the audience’s enjoyment of them that bothers me.” (p. 2, l. 20) and “Though I am satisfied at first by my actions, I’m suddenly jolted with a mournful despair at how useless, how extraordinarily painless, it is to take a child’s life. […] It’s so much worse (and more pleasurable) taking a life of someone […] whose death will upset far more people whose capacity for grief is limitless than a child’s would, perhaps ruin many more lives than just the meaningless, puny death of this boy.” (p. 3, l. 41)

Through setting, metaphors and character, Bret Easton Ellis, paints a horrid picture of a society of endless consumption, where the natural joys have been contaminated and the individuality and identity lost. Patrick Bateman’s answer to this problem is to simply steal happiness from others, by creating another identity, the serial killer, which is in turn only possible in this society, where everything is taken at face value. ( )

disturbing and yet also really boring.. I feel like I'm missing something as it didn't really live up to expectations and didn't really make a lot of sense to me ( )

I first read this book in Spring of 2013 and was horrified/piqued by the content. I was so piqued that I wrote my first dissertation chapter on it. I've spent the last year and a half trying to get an article published, and the new focus I'm taking meant a re-read with fresh eyes.

Holy shitsnacks. This book is so relevant 26 years later. It's like Bret Easton Ellis saw a fragile thread of masculinity, tied up in consumerism, racism, misogyny, and violence, and explored it to its logical end. He sets up the pathological character of Patrick Bateman, explores his darkest homicidal psychopathic tendencies, and then implies that he is interchangeable with every other kind of yuppie like him. It's a dark commentary on humanity, and one that I did not fully understand until 2016.

And now I do.

The spectre of Donald Trump hangs over the text, and I firmly believe that this is no accident. When I first read the text, I skimmed over his name, because it was 2013, and he was just the mercurial and overly tanned old man on The Apprentice. Much has changed between that first reading and this one, and this is where I hope to mine my article. I must give enormous credit to a student in my Fall 2016 Comp 1 class, because she read American Psycho for her book project and mentioned Trump's presence in the novel. X, I thank you for reigniting my scholarly curiosity. Now it's off to write the article! ( )

Een vurig pleidooi voor authenticiteit en vrijheid
Wit van Bret Easton Ellis, de memoir van de bestsellerauteur van American Psycho, is een kritiek op de ernstige tekortkomingen van onze huidige e-gedomineerde maatschappij. Al sinds zijn debuutroman Minder dan niks, die hem dertig jaar geleden onmiddellijk naar het centrum van de aandacht katapulteerde, worstelt Bret Easton Ellis met zijn bekendheid die hem evenveel fans als vijanden opleverde.
In recente jaren heeft hij zijn kritiek op de maatschappij geuit via social media als Twitter en zijn podcast-serie. Wit verbindt hij zijn kritische inzichten aan zijn leven vanaf zijn jeugd en zijn werk. Ellis bekritiseert onze huidige e-gedreven maatschappij van zelfcensuur, pleit vurig voor een leven gewijd aan authenticiteit en voor vrijheid van meningsuiting in de juiste betekenis van het woord. Uiteindelijk gaat het niet om de glinsterende, gladde bovenlaag, maar juist om de verborgen ongepolijste waarheid die eronder ligt.
Bret Easton Ellis (1964) heeft zes romans en een verhalenbundel op zijn naam staan. Zijn werk is in meer dan dertig landen verschenen. Hij woont momenteel in Los Angeles.