Discussion of Bret Easton Ellis' American Psycho: February 5-12, 2008.

So far, my readings of American Psycho have directly related to my study of Sigmund Freud who developed psychoanalytic theories based on the idea that human drive was originated from sex and aggression. In Freud's theories, he proposes three attributes to the human personality

Id- The Id is completely driven by the pleasure principle...For example, the Id is the "little devil" who sits on your shoulder and urges you to do the wrong thing!

Ego- Ego is decision making driven by reality and societal norms, this part of your personality is more focused on making rational decisions.

Superego- The superego is driven by upholding societal morals and boundaries...contrastingly to the Id the superego is the "little angel" sitting on your shoulder urging you to do the right thing.

Freud also theorizes that we have intense sexual and aggressive tendencies that are suppressed in our unconscious that are satisfied when the Id wins in internal struggle.

I cannot think of a better example of internal struggle based upon sex and aggression than Patrick Bateman. The entire novel focuses on his intense sexual desires coming across into his conscious level of awareness. In a sense, the desires of his Id are satisfied by murder and intense sexual endeavors. Perhaps we all have these desires in our unconscious? Is Patrick Bateman a reflection of all humans’ sexual and aggressive nature that has been suppressed by society? Is the inappropriateness of Patrick Bateman defined by society, or what we truly feel? Does it scare anyone that there might be a little Patrick Bateman in all of us?

In response to the other question: "Is the inapropriateness of Patrick Bateman defined by society, or what we truly feel?"

I have to ask another question: Can we ever be "outside" of society, could we know what we truly feel?

In fact it seems our feelings are the bouncing off of and bouncing back from others in society. I find this question truly interesting and frustratingly puzzling.

In response to the repeated theme of the Patty Winters Show, I believe that this show is merely a figment of Patrick’s imagination. These shows being repeated to allow the reader some insight into Patrick’s thoughts, distorted thinking and his character.

The topics of the Patty Winter’s Show are at first simple, and mundane: “The Patty Winters Show this morning was about Perfumes and Lipsticks and Makeups.” (93)

The topics of the Patty Winters Show,however seem to increase in violence as the novel progresses and Patrick begins to become more violent. For instance on page 347, Patricks says, “but on The Patty Winters Show this morning there was an nterview with a man who set his daughter on fire while she was giving birth.” (347)

In her essay " 'Right Here in Nowheres': American Psycho and Violence's Critique", Mandel posits that "American Psycho's critique of violence offers violence as critique, confronting sadism with masochism, discourse with practice, literal with literary, word with violent world" (18). With this in mind I wondered about the types of violence this style of writing allowed Ellis to critique? Noticable to me was Bateman's interest in TV and movies, in watching it, in recognizing it in reality, "Just words, and like in a movie, but one that has been transcribed improperly, most of it overlaps" (Ellis, 395), and its appearance in his life, " 'Well, you look just like a movie star.' He waves a limp wrist..." (Ellis, 165). I am interested in how Ellis's critique (seeping of TV and movies into reality) of violence (an institution of TV and movies) offers violence as critique? Shall we turn and look at ourselves and acknowledge how such an institution is seeping into our own lives? or if by making the film Mary Harron took Ellis's project one step further? or, did Mary Harron's film defeat the entire purpose of Ellis's project because it did not/could not include the articulation of excess in the same way the text does?

This text reminded me of Windows on the World in its structure and the blurring of reality. The structure of small chapters with titles gives the reader a good idea of what is coming next, just as Windows on the World shows the minute at which each chapter takes place. It is also unclear in this novel as to what is real and what is imagined in Patrick's head. Near the end of the novel, the narrator even changes from first to second person.

What I found most disturbing about this novel is that it is jam-packed with media--magazines, movies, and newspapers. Patrick lives his life by this same media that infiltrates my own life. The juxtaposition of Whitney Houston and murder is eerie. When I read the chapter about Whitney Houston, I remembered an article I read a while back about Osama Bin Laden's obsession with the singer.

I read this novel in one day on Saturday. In that day I became physically sick. The book made me cry. I went to dinner and I couldn't look at people without seeing violence. I don't appreciate this. It doesn't seem necessary to me that Bret Easton Ellis describes the murder and sex scenes in such detail. I get it. Our society can create a monster like Patrick. There are novels that make the same point without making me read passages that will haunt me forever. I know others have argued this until they are blue in the face, but I will do that same. By writing this novel, Ellis is perpetuating this insensitivity that our society has toward violence. I feel corrupted having read this novel because it seems cyclical to me--eating dinner, having sex, murdering, cannibalism, working out, repeat. That's all that happens in this novel. Nothing seems to progress, which is probably the point. Ellis makes his point in bad taste. I wouldn't have minded reading this novel if it had been a true story because then I would feel like I had learned about some REAL flaw that we need to fix about our society. But this isn't true. It's violence for the sake of violence.

I agree with what you said about the lack of progression in the novel the repetitive aspect of it, however I thought that reading Mandel's ideas about the way the text works to affect us is quite interesting. Her conclusions about the way in which the text is working provides a way of reading which becomes more experiential than observational, which I think does in fact help to save this novel from a first-readings criticism.

I can agree to a certain extent that the graphic nature of the novel was gratuitous. I also burned through the book fairly quickly, and because of this constant reading (I read mostly at night), it often resulted in some disturbing, twisted dreams. I tend to dream vividly, so I can sympathize with the idea that it was too much. However, I think that was the very point. Everything about Pat Bateman and his "friends" is gratuitous: they're dining, clothes, drug habits, and specifically Bateman's obsession with music, brand names, and, well, brutal and torturous murder.

What stood out the most for me, along with the Les Mis and Patty Winters Show references, was Bethany's situation. It is apparent that Bateman is a control freak, who thrives on domination over people through heinous acts. Bethany, I felt, drove this point home. She seems like someone who knew him before he graduated from Harvard, a point he hints was before he may have lost all empathy with his fellow man. More importantly, she was something he truly valued, since he says that there was "a point somewhere when I wanted to show her everything beautiful in the world" (241) and SHE had dumped HIM. She suddenly appears, looking stunningly beautiful, and of course she is with someone that Bateman not only despises but thinks is a homosexual. This enrages him so much, he not only decides to murder her, but uses a nail gun, literally nailing her down.

One more point before I go for too long. Someone else mentioned the constant mistaking of people in the novel. No one seems to know exactly who they're talking to. Toward the end, it is even suggested that Paul Owen is actually alive, but the reader can never be sure because it could just be another mistake. Bateman is essentially insulted to his face (because the guy thinks Bateman is someone else) calling Bateman spineless and basically a loser. Bateman keeps referring to himself as attractive, but I agree that it could just be his imagination. Maybe some of the murders are an illusion cooked up by his mind in order to make himself feel even more powerful in a world that views him as maybe attractive, but useless (he never actually "works" now does he?).

As sick and deranged as the content was, I closed it feeling like Ellis made his point in the most graphic way possible, because otherwise, much like the characters in the book, we just wouldn't notice.

Throughout the text of American Psycho, there are several repeating themes that occur. Some of them include:

Les Miserables

Returning Video Tapes

The Patty Winters Show

There are a lot more but I was wondering what the class thought the significance of these metaphors were?

The only one I feel to have a strong handle on is "returning video tapes." I saw this as to mean that Patrick had engaged in murder. Anytime Patrick mentions returning video tapes, it seems to be a metaphor for murder. I was just wondering if anyone else had metaphors from the text they would like to share, or if they could shed more light on the metaphors I have listed?

I found two other reoccurring themes throughout the novel that puzzled me:

The first is when Bateman vocally expresses his intentions and desires to kill right in front of the people he is conversing with, often interrupting the other person’s conversation. However, the other people never seem to hear or acknowledge what he says. I don't think the author ever says "I (Bateman) was thinking..." it is always "I (Bateman) said..." However, it must have been in his head, agreed?
Example: Bateman’s conversation over lunch with Christopher Armstrong on page 141, 2nd paragraph: “My life is a living hell….”

The second is that the business men and women never recognize each other and are constantly misidentifying each other. I think Ellis does this to further illustrate just how superficial and distant these wealthy people are from one another, never taking the time to truly get to know or care about each other.

A characteristic I found striking in the novel “Windows on the World” was also found in “American Psycho”: The authors’ and main characters’ inspiration from popular culture. Frederic Beigbeder prefaces his novel with a poem by Walt Whitman, and quotes from Kurt Cobain, Tom Wolfe, and Marilyn Manson. Throughout the novel, Beigbeder and his character Carthew Yorston reference popular songs and name their favorite authors, film makers, and musicians. Similarly, Bret Easton Ellis prefaces his novel with an excerpt of Fyoder Dostoevksy’s “Notes from Underground,” a quote by Miss Manners, and song lyrics from the Talking Heads. Throughout the novel, Patrick Bateman refers to his favorite bands, which include the Talking Heads and Genesis. When I read these references, I immediately feel connected to the author and characters because of our shared knowledge and love of their favorite artists (of music, film, and novels). This very feeling of connection is what makes the novels that much more powerful and in the case of “American Psycho”, disturbing. By making their muses known to the reader, Beigbeder and Ellis expose a certain vulnerability of themselves and their characters. Yorston and Bateman have been just as inspired by popular culture as Beigbeder and Ellis, who have been just as inspired as you and I.
In the larger context of both novels, all this may not be as important as other themes and issues. However, it is certainly something that always catches my attention and curiousity.

I do not believe that Ellis indicated which George Stubb's painting was sitting in Bateman's office, however I think this one is suitable:

<http://www.ngv.vic.gov.au/collection/international/painting/s/images/ipa00111.jpg>

American Psycho is certainly very disturbing, but as disturbing as it is, I also found it to be very humorous. The things he (supposedly) says are sometimes so insane and yet no one really notices, like when he was cooing to the baby, Glenn, about how he likes to murder people (221). Did no one really notice because no one really noticed him? As attractive as he makes himself out to be, there are so many times that people mistake him for others that it’s hard to imagine him being anything but a face in the crowd. I also liked the repetition in the book with the Patty Winters Show, and exercising, and the constant conversations about proper attire, the obsession with surpassing the Smiths. Murder is the release for him, a way of escaping his dull life. He even says to Bethany that although he hates his job he works anyway because he wants to fit in (237). It’s almost like he knows that he’s never really going to fit in, and so he kills people in such a careless manner and slips comments about how he likes to kill people into everyday conversation because he wants attention. And yet, everyone either plays it off like they don’t hear him, or they really don’t because people only hear what they want to hear and no one wants to believe that someone they associate with is a serial killer.

Extremely graphic, contemporary, violent and horrific. My personal experience in reading American Psycho presented many uneasy feelings for me as a reader. This novel touched upon some of the major themes occurring in our society today of the strong influence of media on our daily actions and consumption and the social pressures that we are faced with daily, adding in extreme drama and violent acts to emphasize the severity of some of the major issues Americans face today. One chapter that I specifically recall from its extreme violence, disregard to human life and grotesque human behavior was entitled Girl (326-329). Ellis’ style of writing captures the reader’s attention so well to the point that even at the most gruesome and repulsive scenes, we aren’t able to put the book down and walk away (which I was tempted to do in this particular chapter). Patrick’s psychotic nature and obsession with sexual satisfaction and intense violence create a 21st century monster who treats humans as objects-toys for his personal satisfaction.


“But even sobs fail to arose me. I feel little gratification when I mase her, less when I knock her head against the wall four times, until she looses consciousness, leaving a small stain, hair stuck to it. “ (327)

Patrick continues in this chapter to say that it wasn’t the girl’s fault, and that all of this would have happened anyway and that he would have found her. All for his own self satisfaction. That only leads me to think outside this novel and to look at myself and the people around me. To what degree do we let our self interests get the best of us? In a culture of Greed and selfishness, capitalism and money hungry top executives, when does the desire to fulfill our selfish needs come to its pinnacle? I think that Ellis is trying to make us the readers realize how media and societal pressures are affecting each and every one of us, and how our self-indulgent society has the capacity to create a monster like Patrick. Patrick fits the mold of an average Joe on Wall Street- the Armani suits, upper west side apartment, lavish dining and all. He is actually the type of guy that many girls would look to as the “ideal guy”- money, good job, solid education, physically attractive. That, I think is the scariest part. How do we separate these monsters of society if we all look the same?


“I think a lot of snowflakes are alike…and I think a lot of people are alike too…Appearances can be deceiving…the lines separating appearance-what you see- and reality—what you don’t—become, well, blurred.” (378)