What Makes Them Snap?

First, I would like to say that the comic book The Killing Joke was refreshing. This was the first book that we have read where the mother figure was not ultimately responsible for the “creation” of the psychopath (except maybe Misery—I can’t quite remember). In every other book, the traumatic event that served as the trigger for the killer was some sort of abuse from the mother or the mother figure (the grandmother, in the case of Red Dragon). It was refreshing to have a killer who wasn’t molested or abused by his mother.

Another aspect of The Killing Joke that I thought was really interesting was the paralleling of Batman and the Joker. Most of us know the event that acted as the trigger for Bruce Wayne’s invention of Batman—the murder of his parents. The Killing Joke parallels that event in the Joker, with his conversion coming in the wake of the death of his wife and child. I really enjoyed this aspect of the book because I thought it spoke to the whole issue of the serial killer/psychopath. I can’t remember if we have mentioned it specifically in this class or not, but in my research on serial killers over the years, one question is always raised. Many people suffer from abuse as a child—some truly horrific abuse—but not all of them become killers. So, what is different about someone like Jeffrey Dahmer or Ted Bundy that makes them snap? In the book, it says, “All it takes is one really bad day,” but I don’t think that’s true. Batman and the Joker suffered the same kinds of trauma. So, why did one become a hero and the other a villain? The book doesn’t give us the answer, but I don’t think it needs to. I think raising the question is enough.

I was also really intrigued by the end section. I wonder—was that in the original version of the comic? I read the introduction and the section by the artist, and I got the feeling that it was not a part of the original. I wonder why they included it later. I liked the section, mostly because I think it brings this question of “what makes someone a killer?” into sharp relief. The man at the end is a true psychopath (or maybe sociopath—I have trouble keeping them straight at times). His lack of motivation and alternative morality (he must do something truly bad to be able to “choose” to be good), his utter remorselessness, and his complete lack of empathy seem to suggest that the authors are, in fact, giving us an answer to that earlier question: what is “wrong” with or “different” about those who become killers. This section seems to suggest that it is more than just a matter of trauma, there is something inherently different in the thinking and reasoning of a killer. They see the world differently. They experience the world differently. Maybe the book is offering us a bit of relief. After telling us that we are all “just one bad day” away from being a psychopath, this section seems to be telling us that maybe we don’t need to worry. Maybe there is something more to the make up of the killer.