Romanticising Psychopathy

Why has mental illness become a sexy trait? 

Tall, painfully handsome and overwhelmingly charming. These are the words most fans of the movie Scream, directed by the iconic Wes Craven, would use to describe the character Billy Loomis. I know that I personally was attracted to him, even more so when I grew suspicious of him. But why? 

A psychopath is defined as a person suffering from a chronic mental disorder, which includes abnormal or violent social behaviour. So why, oh why, has this mental illness become, well, a fetish? 

I think the representation of psychopathy in media is definitely a factor. Unfortunately, the main idea of a psychopath in media is a "crazy" person who goes on killing sprees, seduces other people and lies to the police. While yes, these traits are commonly found in psychopaths, what people fail to realise is how fond we have grown of the good old fashioned psychopath. 

For me, the first film psychopath that I found beautifully evil was Mickey Knox, from Natural Born Killers, played by Woody Harrelson. I knew that the film was based on a true story and that it was essentially there to discuss the promotion of violence in media and yet I decided to focus on the allure of Woody Harrelson's character. Strange, considering he was a truly horrible human being. 

Psychopaths are usually portrayed as hunks with floppy hair and piercing eyes and are mostly always male. However, in Basic Instinct, the gorgeous Sharon Stone played Catherine Trammel, a crime novelist who used her sexuality to get away with murder. 

The next character to be listed, is one of my favourite fictional characters of all time - Kevin Khatchadourian - portrayed in the movie by the wonderful Ezra Miller in the movie based on the book by Lionel Shriver, We Need To Talk About Kevin. The wonderful thing about this character is that he is so complex and ambiguous, in the sense that we know his personality was likely shaped by his mother's negligence. But, it stirs up again the question of nature versus nurture. 

The common denominator between Billy, Mickey, Catherine and Kevin is that they were all portrayed by very attractive people. It is often easier for the human psyche to like someone, when they are conventionally attractive. 

The romanticising of psychopathy is caused by the fact that psychopaths are beautiful, they are charming, they are sexy, they are, well, perfect - except for the fact that they do not feel human emotion. 

It is a flaw in our human character that we overlook people's misdeeds because of what they look like but even I admit, that "bad boys" in movies are always better, in my opinion. Whether it's my favourite character of all time, Darth Vader or the less obvious Lex Luther, bad is always better. 

Psychopaths' detachment from life, reality and love is refreshingly attractive when portrayed by a good looking actor. We make psychopaths out to be wonderful creations because they make us lust over them. And that is a human fault, beauty has always driven us to do very questionable things. 

I suppose, in conclusion, that mental illness has become a desirable trait because well, all of our favourite movie characters suffer from at least one form of mental illness. It's easier to romanticise sadness when Cassie from Skins suffers from depression. Because she is relatable to the population, so her mental illness is relatable.

Now, do not get me wrong, dear readers, I am not saying "mental illness should not be taken seriously". I believe mental illness is a serious topic that needs to be    normalised and discussed, free from stigma. And that stigma remains there when people on Instagram romanticise the Joker's psychological problems as it invalidates the real victims of mental illness. 

So, next time, you watch Scream, ask yourself, "why do I like Billy?". Your answer may surprise you. 

-Mila Brkic

The Art of Saying No - A Realist's POV

I like to think that in the 21st century, we have grown as a species, meaning that we have found our own truths and assets and have decided to use them throughout our lives. Unfortunately that is not the case, as many people, in this day and age, are still terrified of the prospect of saying "no" to somebody.

As a staunch feminist, I know how the word "no" is sadly not taken very seriously by many people. Whether it be saying no to a creep asking you out or simply not consenting to sleep with someone. A friend of mine, commented a while ago that it's about how the person says no. I was very annoyed with that obviously ignorant statement. I wasted no time in telling him what was wrong with his statement. A firm "no" is exactly what it is. A "no". Meaning, that is not happening, I don't want this, I didn't say that etc... The age old belief of "playing hard to get" is in actual fact, somebody who is not interested in pursuing a relationship with you. Rejection can be tough, of course but dealing with that rejection in a misogynistic, chauvinistic way is wrong and honestly, disgusting.

I love making people happy and it breaks my heart knowing that I've disappointed someone. However, I began thinking about what saying "yes" did for me. Too often, after I've said yes, have I felt exhausted and taken advantage of. For example, someone asking me to do their essay for them because they were very tired or someone asking me to use my lunch break to track down their missing iPad. I'm not saying, "don't be kind". Believe me, having an open heart that gives more than it receives is still an ideal I long to have and an asset I believe I do have. My advice is to be smart when saying "yes".

I came across a quote in a book I was reading, that said something along the lines of "sacrifice is living love". Why? Why is love only deemed acceptable if we practically die showing it? Why is it that love needs to be exhausting and challenging in order to be seems as true? Is it not possible for people to be happy whilst still expressing their love? Writers and artists alike have always reiterated the idea that "love is suffering". Why? Is saying no to a loved one bad? Is it a shameful thing to do? Once again, I'm not saying, "don't be kind". I'm saying, "think about why you are saying yes".


There is a fine line between selfishness and self-preservation. Most of us do not succeed in never crossing into either terrains. Being human means making mistakes. Being human also means learning from them. So my advice to you is, give at your heart's content but don't forget about yourself in the process.


-Mila Brkic

Why Harry Potter Mirrors The United States Right Now

As a liberal, I was shocked at the news that Donald Trump was to become the new United States President. Both realistically & romantically, I was surprised. Realitistically, following every disgusting thing that Donald Trump has said and his sexual assault allegations - I assumed that common sense would prevail and even the most uneducated of people would realize that this man did not belong in the US government. Romantically, I believed America was a progressive place where tolerance and freedom reigned, not bigoted egotistical monsters.

Unfortunately, both sides of my brain were wrong. Donald Trump won the electoral votes. Essentially, the people voted for Hilary Clinton but the system voted for Donald Trump. This past week, I have been watching the Harry Potter movies again (I have read the books, please don't worry)    and that got me thinking about how everyone in Harry Potter is in essence, part of this election. Let me explain:


Donald Trump - Lord Voldemort (the definition of evil, people underestimated his power)


Melania Trump - Gilderoy Lochhart (hasn't actually done anything herself, uses other Wizards' material, plagiarizes Hermione's speech)

Mike Pence - Dolores Umbridge (seems to be a lesser evil but is in fact, just as crazy)

Republican Party - Death Eaters (honestly, need I say more?)

Hilary Clinton - Severus Snape (nobody always knows what she's against or what she's for but she essentially saves the day)

Bernie Sanders - Albus Dumbledore (has good intentions, sees the greater good, combats everything that Donald Trump/Lord Voldemort is about)

Democratic Party - Order of the Phoenix

Third Party Voters - The Malfoys (they think they contribute to the wizarding world but they've really just ruined everything)

Barack Obama - Harry Potter (spends eight years of his life improving the world only to have it torn down by Lord Voldemort)

Michelle Obama - Hermione Granger (smart, feminist, hero)

Sexism, homophobia, xenophobia & racism - Horcruxes (DT can only stay in power if these aren't destroyed)

It actually fits perfectly. Hope this clears something up for you!

-Mila

Why People Need Horror Movies

I love horror movies. I absolutely adore the cliché storylines, bad acting and gore. I love gore. From that druggie's arm being crushed by a truck in Evil Dead to Jessica Biel being repeatedly slashed at in the remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. And I consider myself to be a fairly mild-mannered human being. So what is it about horror movies that comforts me so?

Realistically speaking, my answer would be that there is some primal urge in the human psyche that longs to see suffering but because we've evolved as a society, that bloody pain can only be truly captured in films, otherwise we would all be raging, homicidal maniacs (cue, The Purge).
Romantically speaking, my answer would be fairly similar, citing the reason as a human response to social development. It is not very often that both sides of my brain agree wholeheartedly.

I watched my first horror movie when I was twelve, it was my friend's birthday sleepover and we decided to rent a scary movie to watch. Our choice was Fear Island, staring Hailey Duff as the main role. No offense to Hailey but you always know you won't be getting world-class art if you see her as the title role in a movie. It was a horrible movie, granted but it opened my eyes to this vibrant genre.

I set myself a mission - to find a horror movie that honestly scared me. I finally found one, The Conjuring 2 gave me the shivers (a possible factor could have been the fact that I watched it with my best friend Danijela who seems to make everything scarier with her existential attitude, we're a very positive bunch I know.)

The fact of the matter is, I am satisfied knowing that something has scared me. It makes me feel a lot more human and I think that's mostly the reason why people need to watch horror movies - to feel alive. I know that my reason is cliché and expected but I genuinely believe that sometimes people are too busy existing instead of living. So, next time you feel a little glum, put on an old Wes Craven classic and let all of your feelings come back - fear, irritation, etc.

"And remember, the next scream you hear may be your own!'' - The Birds,1963.

Theatrical Romanticism & Why Mankind Needs It

Theatrical Romanticism - Necessary or Superfluous?

 

As a Dramatic Arts student, I am exposed to a great deal of playwrights. The playwright that comes to mind when I begin to wonder about the Romantic Movement is, none other than, Victor Hugo. The man famously known for creating the beautiful and undeniably tear-jerking Les Miserables. Then my mind begins to challenge my association - how is Victor Hugo possibly a literary romantic when Les Miserables is desperately sad and grim?

Theatrical romanticism is defined as ''An idealistic fantasy exploring human emotion, dreams and control''. Victor Hugo's works do fit under this general definition. But why? Well, Les Miserables is riddled with emotion - hope, love, fear etc. It also provides an untarnished, unchanged view of war. It accurately documents the smaller revolutions occurring in post-revolution France. These reasons sound like realism to me, so why is Les Miserables then classified as a romantic piece?

To put it bluntly, the revolutionaries are glorified - having been portrayed as dreamers, innovators and great thinkers, readers in the modern era are left thinking that these young men were martyrs for the cause when actually their deaths did not achieve much and their beliefs of equality were hardly inclusive. Jean Valjean's unfortunate daughter Cosette is also unflinchingly annoying - not doing much and yet receiving the most out of all of the characters. Because of Victor Hugo's narrative, readers see her as a symbol of love, I see her as a symbol of entitlement. She has been romanticized, just like the Revolutionaries.

So why do we need stories like this? Why do we feel the way we do about Hugo, Goethe and Lessing? When we know that they were in some ways, liars? We need them because they shield us away from the harsh realities of the world. They give us something to believe in, something to hope for.

The realistic part of my psyche is screaming at me whilst I write this, demanding to know why I am encouraging the sale of false dreams. I am encouraging it because I believe in people and I believe in happiness. Romanticism provides happiness for people. It's that glorified album that we love, it's the Jennifer Lawrences of this world, the paintings that leave out the poverty and paint the sky that keeps the world turning. It is these seemingly false images that keep us satisfied.

The realist in me agrees that people will always need some sort of comfort. The romantic in me provides it.

- Mila Brkic, 2016.