A Thesis

entitled

Satire and Sympathy in

by

Alaina Simon

as palÿial fulfillment of the requirements for

the Bachelor of Arts Degree

with Honors

in

English

Thesis Director:

Professor Reising

Honors Advisor:

Dr. Melissa Valiska Gregory

The University of Toledo

DECEMBER 2012 Abstract

American Psycho by was originally dismissed as flippant and

distasteful because critics focused on the novel's excessive violence, misogyny, and

shallow characters. The book remains controversial to this day, though later critics have shed light on the novel as a satirical representation of Wall Street in the late 1980s. In this thesis, I explore the ways in which Ellis satirizes Patrick Bateman and his society through dialogue, physical behavior, and relationships with each other. I argue that

Patrick is essentially a victim of the possessive, technologically obsessed, patriarchal culture, ignored by others despite his cries for attention. In addition, I analyze specific passages in order to determine whether or not the novel can provoke sympathy for Patrick from the reader. Ultimately, I assert that American Psycho is a satire that attempts to expand traditional boundaries by including sympathy.

ii Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Russell Reising and Melissa Gregory for their extensive help in the drafting, revisions, and overall creation of this thesis. Without their guidance, this project would not have been possible. I would also like to thank my parents and loving boyfriend for their continuous suppolÿ and words of encouragement throughout the semester and all of my schooling.

iii Table of Contents

Abstract ...... ii

,., Acloaowledgments ...... 111

Table of Contents ...... iv

Introduction ...... 1

Patrick as a Representative Character ...... 5

Culture of Cruelty ...... 15

Unhappiness ...... 22

Conclusion ...... 30

Works Cited ...... 34

Works Consulted ...... 35

iv Introduction

Bret Easton Ellis's American Psycho has been a subject of controversy ever since

excerpts from the novel were released in Spy and Time magazine months before its

publication in 1991. Both snippets from the novel depicted main character Patrick

Bateman torturing female victims in explicit detail. Due to the backlash American Psycho received almost immediately after excerpts were out, publishing company Simon &

Shuster decided not to print the book, which was ultimately published by Random House instead (Mack 19). When Amertcan Psycho hit the shelves in April of 1991, it was dismissed by critics for its misogyny, extreme violence, and what was thought to be a lack of depth and characterization. An opinion article in The Tech by Bill Jackson notes that Patrick kills males much quicker and less painfully than females, briefly summarizing gory examples from the novel in the simplest terms: "page 217: Bethany, nail gun, scissors, dead; page 290: Elizabeth and Christie, butcher knife, two dead" (4).

Jackson goes on to say that although the book has "literary merits" (4) and elements of black comedy, it falls short of being a great book because the shocking details inside only amount to a weak point about late 1980s culture.

The violent passages, particularly against women, are what caused the Los

Angeles chapter of the National Organization foÿ Women to stage a boycott against

Random House, calling American Psycho a "how-to novel on the and dismemberment of women" (qtd. in Freccero 50). Other critics included Todd Stiles who wrote the Spy article before publication, saw violence in the novel as a poor attempt at 2 shock value. Stiles claimed that because Ellis "couldn't write the same book for a third

time" (43), referencing Ellis's earlier works Less Than Zero and Rules of Attraction which

both deal with careless college kids, that he instead had to create a book so disturbing it

would garner attention.

After the uproars concerning misogyny and excessive violence began to fade,

American Psycho was analyzed from a different view, "as a satire on the coke-fuelled hedonistic money culture.., of the Reagan-Thatcher years" (Tighe 105). Rather than isolating and dismissing violence and misogyny, these elements were now looked at as literary plot devices used to create the bigger picture of the novel, which Ellis said to be

"alienation, pain, America, the overall tone of the culture" (qtd. in Tighe 104). American

Pyscho's violent passages are now often read as echoing both the Gothic tradition as well as the postmodern.

American Psycho is commonly read as an exaggeration of Gothic conventions.

Helyer states that Patrick Bateman is "highly stereotyped," and the "predicted nature of his appearance" (728) as a young, rich, and masculine Wall Street executive follows the typical characterization pattern in Gothic style. The horrifying ways in which Patrick , murders, and dismembers the bodies of his female victims is another exaggeration of a typical Gothic device. Throughout the novel, Patrick describes in great detail how he saws, rips, and even chews offpieces of the female body and, as Russel

Potter remarks -- "from its inception, the Gothic has posited and reproduced a legion of partial, disjointed, or decomposed body parts, which by their very existence accuse the waking world of a fundamental illegitimacy" (Potter 14).

These findings on American Psycho as a Gothic novel have helped to legitimize 3 the novel among scholars. But the Gothic is not the only literary tradition scholars now

see at work in the novel. Descriptions included in Bateman's tortm'ing are also true to the terror typical in postmodern writing. At first, reading passages where Patrick is killing,

dissecting, and dismembering women can incite feelings of disgust and make the reader uncomfortable. These violent descriptions become so gory and so out of line that by the end of the book, they are hardly believable and hit a point of ridiculousness that the reader cannot help laughing at. Though his descriptions are gross and often too detailed, there comes a point where we have to ask: what is the point of being so excessive, so exaggerated? It seems that Patrick is slipping further and further out of touch with his sanity, and we begin to question whether or not this is all actually happening, or if Patrick has become so deranged that he has been imagining the murders all along. I believe that

Ellis's intention behind this is to incite and bring out emotion in the reader, just as Patrick does to his victims in the book. In this sense Ellis continually blurs the line between horror and comedy in order to cause the reader to shift between being disgusted and amused by Patrick's actions.

Although the analyses of American Psycho as a contemporary Gothic novel and a postmodem experiment explain its detailed violence, they do not account for an element within the novel that I argue is thematically central; the sympathy it invites for its main character. On one hand, American Psycho appears to be a ruthless black comedy that cautions its readers against vapid materialism in society. On the other hand, the novel contains a host of surprising, sometimes offhanded moments that suggestively portray the murderous Patrick Bateman in a more sympathetic light. Despite the fact that Patrick is egotistical, narcissistic, and psychopathic, his failure to understand himself and the world 4 around him suggests that he is also a victim of society. In this paper, I will argue that

Ellis not only uses satire inAmerican Psycho, but that he also creates a portrait of Patrick as a victim which suggests that we are not as different from Patrick as we believe ourselves to be.

I argue that Ellis's depiction of Patrick as a victim occurs in three ways. First,

Patrick is portrayed as a representation of his society that deliberately draws connections between Patrick and his readers rather than ta'eating him as a freakish anomaly. Secondly, he depicts the culture in which Patrick lives as extremely cruel and unsympathetic in the same way that he is to everyone else. Finally, Ellis repeatedly shows ways in which

Patrick is personally unhappy, a sad and lonely human being who does not even recognize the level of his own isolation. These various modes of representing the novel's main character, so often seen as profoundly unsympathetic, implicitly invite the reader to sympathize with him. Ultimately, I suggest that it is the novel's sympathy for Patrick that may help to account for its initial reception even more than its violence. Patrick as a Representative Character

Ellis uses both satire and sympathy to present Patrick as a character who represents his entire society. Patrick is a representative character because he looks physically identical to every other man within the yuppie culture that surrounds him.

Throughout the novel, Patrick spends his time describing other characters based on their designer clothing rather than their unique personal features. Because characters are defined by their near-identical outfits instead of the things that set them apart from each other, everyone is constantly being mistaken for someone else.

To the reader, Patrick's unexplained urges to kill and torture victims make him seem like a psychopath unlike anyone else in the book, but the behavior of other characters in the culture which Patrick lives suggests that maybe everyone is just as heartless as he is. Thus, instead of being an anomaly, Patrick is representative of everyone else. In addition, Tim Price's disappearance for the majority of the novel that is never explained when Patrick asks him where he has been suggests that all characters may have secrets kept hidden as well. If this is true, Patrick's erratic behavior also becomes representative of the entire society, further defining him as an allegorical symbol.

In American Psycho, Ellis creates a society in which characters are essentially substitutable for one another. Patrick describes characters not by their physical features but by their clothing, making the idea of personal identity obsolete. Even their own names, the only thing that gives characters any sense of individuality, are buried under the designer names of their clothing. All the men are dressed in expensive suits and ties

with minimal detailing, while the women wear blouses and pencil skirts. At times, the

women are even dressed in more masculine outfits like pant-suits in order to make all

characters' conformity androgynous. So not only do males get confused for other males and females for other females, but everyone and anyone can easily be mistaken for

someone else. In the opening chapter when Courtney and Evelyn are first introduced, they are described as wearing the same exact outfit, "a Krizia cream silk blouse, a Iÿ'izia rust tweed skirt, and silk-satin d'Orsay pumps" (Ellis 8). The notation of their matching appearance so early on sets the stage for interchangeability in the rest of the novel, which is continually reinforced through Patrick's detailed descriptions of every outfit he sees.

Because characters are practically duplicates of one another, Patrick's conformity to society furthers his case as a representative character. Like everyone else, Patrick buys the most expensive products and clothing in order to be accepted by society. As far as physical appearance, Patrick looks exactly like everyone else, shown through others constantly mistaking him for a "Hamilton" (Ellis 48) or a "Davis" (Ellis 387) throughout the novel.

Textually, the first chapter entitled "April Fools" is an overall summarization of the novel in its entirety. As Elizabeth Young points out, "in one sholÿ chapter, all the major thematic constituents of the book are carefully delineated and intertwined" (99).

After the first chapter, the novel begins to follow a pattern of repetition; Patrick rattles off the same designer brands, Patrick and friends hit up the same restaurants and clubs,

Patrick repeatedly gives into his violent urges, and so on. In this sense, the novel itself follows the motif of duplication already defined by its interchangeable characters. 7 Ellis uses Tim Price, whose voice is present in conversations at both the beginning

and end but is physically absent through the majority of the text, to create a character that

directly mirrors Patrick's thoughts. While at a nightclub named Tunnel, Tim declares that he is leaving without an indication of where or why and simply runs off into a dark tunnel. Tim is mentioned a few times throughout the novel, but does not come back until the end of the novel "for the sake of form" (Ellis 383), without a real explanation for why he vanished in the first place. Tim's strong narrative voice at beginning and end, along with his striking similarities to Patrick suggest that Tim Price acts as an "external projection of Patrick's interiority" (Soderlind 71). At the beginning, Tim complains about povelÿty and crime taldng place in New York, mentioning violent acts such as murdering homosexuals and killing children, two acts that Patrick goes on to execute in the book.

On the way up to Evelyn's apartment, Tim is grumbling about the videotapes he forgot to return, which becomes an obsession in Patrick's mind after Tim disappears.

The lack of individual personalities and the interchangeability of characters are what make Patrick the representative of his society, since he thinks of himself as a "truly vacant" (Ellis 275) individual and is also guilty of mistaking one person for another.

Patrick constantly uses phrases such as "some guy who looks exactly like" (Ellis 48) when describing other people in order to further ground the idea of conformity. These themes are also likely the reason why Patrick is able to commit murder after murder without consequence. After Patrick kills Paul Owen, he goes to Paul's apartment and changes his answering machine, noting that their voices are similar. Patrick ponders where he should say Owen is and "after a few minutes of intense debating decide(s):

London" (Ellis 218). Later on in the novel when Patrick is talking to Detective Kimball, 8 who is investigating the disappearance of Paul, Kimball mentions the answering machine message and that someone thought they had spotted Paul in London, but it was actually

someone else. The fact that Kimball does not realize the voice on the answering machine is actually the man he is talking to proves how easy it is for Patrick to represent other characters.

Indeed, during the meeting between Patrick and Kimball, it is implied that the detective has already sat down with other guys to find out more about Paul Owen and has not succeeded in receiving any valuable information because all the characters, not just

Patrick, are as vapid and indistinguishable in the same way that Patrick defines himself as vacant. This is confirmed when Van Patten is talking to Patrick about his conversation with Kimball. Van Patten tells Patrick how he told Kimball everything he knew about

Paul, how "he wore yellow and maroon ties. That he had lunch at 21 ... he didn't wear suspenders. That he stopped doing cocaine, simpatico beer" (Ellis 322). In other words, instead of describing Paul's physical features or characteristics of his personality, Van

Patten spouts off useless information concerning clothing and drug habits. Like Patrick, these characters lack individuality and are instead models of conformity; they are walking suits so obsessed with themselves that they are incapable of learning anything about one another, apart from possessions. Patrick's asserted vacancy mirrors the unconscious vacancy of the entire culture, malting him a representative rather than an anomaly.

This depiction of Patrick as interchangeable with everyone else in his culture is obvious satire, in that Ellis is holding up the conformist yuppie lifestyle of Patrick and his cohorts to ridicule. He exposes Patrick's flaws as representing a larger social problem.

These characters believe they are unique, but Ellis portrays them as mindless and utterly 9 lacking personality. Their constant need to follow the norm is obsessive to the point that the simplest things cause societal uproar, such as disagreeing with the opinion of a beloved celebrity or choosing to order an item that is not the restaurant's specialty. These moments satirize the conformity of Patrick's society by making what would be mundane decisions into ones of high importance. The fact that McDermott becomes so angry with

Patrick when he calls the pizza at Pastels "brittle" (Ellis 109), a comment he later takes back because it conflicts with the opinion of Donald Trump, is quite humorous since it would seem that a differing opinion of taste should not be taken so seriously.

An even funnier moment between this pair occurs later on in the novel, when

McDermott calls Patrick a "raving maniac" (Ellis 363) after realizing that Patrick did not order the hash browns while at Smith and Wollensky. It is implied that everyone always orders the hash browns when dining at this particular restaurant and Patrick's decision not to clearly offended McDermott. Again, what seems like a simple decision that would not normally cause confrontation means everything in their society, which is desperate to have a population of identical beings. When Patrick admits that he is getting a "sick thrill" (Ellis 362) by choosing not to order the hash browns, Ellis is using his main character to satirize the vapidity and true boredom of society in the novel. The fact that something as ordinary as hash browns can evoke this much emotion from two individuals is absurd, virtually mocking what society thinks is important. Ironically, Patrick is a raving maniac not because of his expressed interest in serial killers, not because he secretly is a serial killer, but rather because he chose steak over potatoes at a restaurant.

These satiric moments perpetuate the idea that it is more important to agree with everyone else on the outside than it is to represent one's true opinions from the inside. 10 Another way that Ellis satirically depicts Patrick as an allegorical symbol is

through The Patty Winters Show, which not only parodies society's exploitation of

fascinating individuals such as people who weigh 700 pounds, but is also a reflective

parody of Patrick's own behavior. In other words, Patrick can relate to guests on the

show in the same way he is a representation of his own culture. Although there are a

number of topics on The Patty Winters Shou,s that can be directly related to Patrick, I believe the most pivotal are the first and last ones mentioned in the novel. Patrick's favorite talk show first appears in the second chapter and the focus of that day's show is multiple personalities (Ellis 29). Although Patrick does not necessarily have multiple personality disorder, the murderous behavior that takes place behind closed doors presents a Patrick very different from the one that is defined by society. At times, Patrick even slips out of his own narration and starts referring to himself in the third person. In addition, when he is mistaken for someone else Patrick immediately assumes the role of that person with ease, alluding to the idea that he is more than capable of assuming multiple personalities. Therefore, The Patty Winters Show topic of multiple personality disorder serves as a both foreshadowing for Patrick's behavior and furthers his representation of society in its entirety by relating him to people on the show.

Pages before the novel comes to an end, Patrick and his cohorts are at Harry's watching the The Patty Winters Show with the topic "does economic success equal happiness" (Ellis 396) which they all decide is a definite yes. To the reader, this moment is satirical since Patrick has made it obvious throughout the entire novel that he is unhappy, yet he immediately assumes the opinion of others in the bar over his own. In the end, it comes back to the idea that being a part of society means agreeing with its 11 opinion and ultimately ignoring one's true emotions. Based on Patrick's overall unhappiness the reader can infer that if he could, he would answer with a no, but because

Patrick has assumed the ideas of the status quo and is dependent on fitting in, it is no surprise that he instead agrees with everyone else.

In addition to the specific topics that directly relate to and satirize Patrick as a character, the overall direction of the show topics tends to follow the same pattern of his uncontrollable behavior. In other words, in the same way that Patrick's treatment of his victims becomes more and more disturbing, topics on The Patty Winters Show become stranger as the book progresses. Towards the beginning topics are simple and plausible, like autism (Ellis 63), but by the end of the novel topics are much more disturbing, like the "man who set his daughter on fire while she was giving birth" (Ellis 347). The Patty

Winter Show is a reflective parody of Patrick, since many of the topics literally define him and the overall focus of topics seems to follow his overall behavior.

But if Patrick's representative status is part of Ellis's satiric presentation of mid-

1980s culture, then how can it also be sympathetic? While I have shown how Ellis satirizes the conformity of this culture, I also suggest that he invites sympathy from the reader by acknowledging a poignant fact about Patrick, one that ultimately turns him into the representation of society. Ellis implies that as product of society, Patrick did not choose to be but rather was doomed to become an allegory -- a depiction which offers the possibility that Patrick is as much a victim rather as he is a criminal. As I have tried to suggest, Patrick's behavior is less deviant than it appears; it mirrors his culture rather than departs from it. The identity that Patrick assumes is what is one that he did not event; his despicable nature is part of what makes him representative of his culture. 12 Thus, Ellis ultimately suggests not that Patrick is an anomaly but that his murderous

behavior is merely the most extreme version of his own culture's moral emptiness; if

Patrick is a representative figure, then his homicidal tendencies are an extension of the world he lives in rather than a contrast to it.

In other words, Ellis invites sympathy from the reader by suggesting that Patrick is not the depiction of society as a whole by choice but forced to assume the role after basically being raised by the very culture he represents. He is a victim as well as the embodiment of his society. Indeed, Ellis suggests, somewhat poignantly, that Patrick has been raised by his society rather than his own family. In the few chapters where Patrick mentions his family, one can easily assume that he did not having much, if any, of their support growing up. Ellis's depiction of Patrick's estranged and fragmented family is genuinely sad. Patrick admits to despising his brother and when they meet for dinner it is only because Patrick is tlTing to get dirt on Sean's life as requested by his father's accountant (Ellis 224). At dinner, Sean seems adamant on doing things to anger Patrick like ordering the most expensive lobster dishes for his appetizer and entree, and by the end Patrick clearly regrets meeting with his brother in the first place. The only time

Patrick meets with his mother is towards the end when he visits her in an unspecified care facility where she is a "permanent resident" (Ellis 365). Patrick's father never even appears in-person; he is only casually mentioned here and there. This lack of a family unit shows that Patrick "is a child of society.., who wants desperately to be told 'No!"'

(Blazer 10). Patrick has been raised more by a cultural environment than by his own family. Therefore, Patrick has become this depiction not by choice but because of how he was raised, inviting the reader to feel sorry for Patrick by suggesting that his family and 13 society are ultimately the ones responsible for his behavior.

The fact that society is completely subordinate to following the status quo is what

continually forces Patrick to be a representation of all the novel's characters. Because

Patrick is "straightjacketed" (Schoene 384) by the norms of his society, he cannot accept

those who are not a part of his culture. Patrick is sympathetic when portrayed as an

allegory because it asserts that there is no hope for anyone in his society. Even the bum

Patrick blinds at the beginning of the novel is later found holding a sign claiming that he was "blinded in Vietnam" (Ellis 385) in order to victimize himself for his own personal gain, suggesting that hopelessness extends beyond social status. Patrick knows that his urge to kill is wrong, so when he faces interactions with people who are also hiding something, like Tim Price's unexplained disappearance or the real estate agents quickness to cover up Paul Owen's once-bloodied apartment, he faces a moment where he confirms that because society is just like him, anyone who enters into his society, what is essentially what I argue to be a culture of cruelty, should "abandon all hope" (Ellis 3) since there is no escaping its evilness.

The novel's repeated suggestion that Patrick is not unique--indeed, that he may even be run of the mill--is a terrifying thought, but it also creates possibility for Ellis's readers to feel some compassion for his main character. To think that Patrick is incapable of any control over his actions suggests the possibility that anyone could assume his behavior, that "the only difference between us and Patrick is that he has indulged"

(Helyer 727) in his urges. After all, it is likely that readers themselves can remember a time where they wished death or something else ill-natured upon someone in a moment of anger. So in a society like Patrick's, where people are too careless to concern 14 themselves with morals, it is possible that readers put in Patrick's position would become

so fed up with society that they too would indulge in murder. If that is the case, then it is

disturbingly true that readers share similarities to Patrick, and if one's rationality and

control is lost, anyone could become a serial killer. Therefore, it is possible for readers to

see Patrick's violence as relatable and respond with compassion instead of hatred. Ellis's

depiction of Bateman as a representative character provocatively creates an opportunity

for readers to see themselves in Patrick and sympathize with his actions instead of

condemn them.

Ellis uses the interchangeability of characters in American Psycho to make Patrick

Bateman a representation of his vapid society, a main character who is satirical and at the same time invites the reader to feel sympathetic towards him. Textually, Ellis uses repetition to create characters that are so strikingly similar that they are hard to tell apart from one another yet think they themselves to be individuals. At times characters get worked up over what seem like the smallest things, exposing the true emptiness of

Patrick's world and their addictive need to follow the status quo. These moments in the novel illustrate Patrick as a depiction of his culture and are satirical because they mock the very values his society stands on. However, Patrick's representative characterization can also be argued as sympathetic in that his lack of family support is what resulted in his dependency on society and therefore is not his choice, creating a moment for the reader to see themselves in Patrick and respond with empathy. 15

Culture of Cruelty

I have shown how Ellis uses satire in his identical characters to create an empty,

confomaed society and also how he invites sympathy from the reader by depicting main

character Patrick as a strayed yet representative product known as the Everyman. Now I

explore the ways in which this vapidity, combined with materialism, actually creates a

culture of cruelty by placing selfishness and ownership at the top of every individual's priorities. Patrick and the rest of society make it clear throughout the novel that they are dependent on owning the best and most expensive products on the market. When Patrick talks about the things he owns to other characters he often describes the situation in a way that reads like contest trying to determine who is more worthy as a person based on possessions they own. The society Patrick lives in does not accept people based on personality but rather by their amount of expressed ownership.

Since the culture is completely lacking in personality or any sense of individuality, Ellis fills that void with materials. Patrick spends easily a quarter of the book mentioning every detail concerning characters' clothing, the products he personally uses, and all the exquisite food no one ever seems to eat. An entire chapter is spent describing every product used in Patrick's morning routine and spares no details on the proper steps of shaving facial hair. In addition Patrick spends three nonconsecutive chapters talking about his favorite recording artists and the depth of their music, a satirical irony considering songs like "How Will I ICnow" by Whitney Houston and "Hip to be Square" by Huey Lewis and the News are anything but meaningful. Indeed, the 16 products and music that Patrick finds to be so innovative are the very things that make

him so shallow, and the rest of his society is no different.

Conversations that take place between Patrick and his buddies contain no intellect

but are rather about rules on clothing attire, who's handling the most expensive accounts

at their job, and how the latest restaurant was reviewed by critics. Characters do not

bother concerning themselves with current events in the news and pay little attention to

the blatant poverty in their city. In fact, the only time Patrick and his buddies

acknowledge the homeless is when they pretend to offer them money before pulling it

away and continuing down the street. Their inhumane behavior is like a game, one that they receive enjoyment from participating in, proving just how cruel Patrick's society really is. In addition, this treatment of the homeless further exemplifies Patrick as the

Everyman since all other characters are participating in this game and receive some sense of pleasure from torturing the homeless in the same way that Patrick does when he tortures his victims.

Overall, the society in which Patrick lives is a culture of cruelty because their dependency on products creates skewed priorities that leave no compassion for others.

Instead of doing anything to help those who are in need, Patrick and his friends actually do the opposite by basically ignoring them even though they have the money and power to do something about it. At the same time, these characters take what money they have for granted and indulge in the most expensive things their city has to offer. Patrick spends hundreds of dollars on a single meal and likes to brag about the things he owns to others. When out at dinner one night with Courtney, her friend Scott is talking about the high quality of his stereo, an Awia. Patrick calls the Aiwa okay and informs Scott that the 17 stereo that is really the best is the Sansui, which Patrick happens to own. The two of

them then begin an exchange over the details of the two systems and in the end, Patrick

satisfyingly stumps Scott (Ellis 101). The need to have the best is a competition between

characters and therefore places all of their interests in the products they own. Characters

have nothing to spare for those who are in need because they have to ensure they will be

accepted by their own social class.

These skewed priorities are illustrated throughout the novel to show the cold-

heartedness of Patrick's society. Ellis depicts a culture in which those who are less

fortunate are ignored instead of helped. For example, when Patrick and fellow yuppie

Tim Price are heading to Evelyn's house in a taxi cab counting the number the homeless people on the streets and discussing the poverty of New York, it becomes clear that this is not a true concern of theirs. Although Tim seems bothered by the amount of homeless people, his casual switch to discussing clothing suggests that the homeless are just another subject of conversation. Patrick and Tim inside a taxi cab in their designer suits juxtaposes against the filthy, impoverished streets they are riding along. This scene outlines the idea that to Patrick and friends, the homeless mean nothing and at the same time, creates the divide between social class that remains throughout the entire book.

While Patrick's speech at Evelyn's proposes fixing America through "promot[ing] general social concern and less materialism in young people" (Ellis 16), as the novel progresses it becomes clear that Patrick does not really believe any of what he has suggested but was simply putting on a show in an attempt to garner a response from the other characters, most of which barely pay attention. Patrick and his cohorts do not even care about each other, let alone the bums on the streets and those who are not as fortunate as them. 18 Although Patrick's society is most definitely a cruel one because of they place a

higher value on inanimate objects rather than humanity, their materialism often evokes

the satire of the novel. Perhaps the funniest scene is when Patrick is out to dinner with

his girlfriend Evelyn and plays a mean trick on her. He takes a used urinal cake, covers it

in chocolate, and places it into a Godiva box which he later gives to the waitress at dinner

to bring out to the table. Although Patrick sees her disgust in the first bite, Evelyn

maintains her composure and continues to eat the majority of the chocolate urinal cake

simply because it was in a Godiva box. When Patrick asks Evelyn what she thinks of it,

she chokes out that "it's just.., so minty" (Ellis 337). Indeed, this is a true moment of

satire in the book, proving that characters in the novel are so fixated on brand names that they will force themselves to enjoy them. Personally, I laughed out loud when I first read this passage since I could not imagine eating something so disgusting just because it is unacceptable to have a negative opinion of a Godiva product. Evelyn eating the urinal cake is representative of their coldhealÿed society since it is a cruel trick that Patrick plays on her yet it highlights the fact that everyone must hold the same opinions at all costs.

Another way in which Ellis uses satire to depict the cruel consumerism is through

Patrick, who at times literally feels controlled by the things he owns. For example, in the chapter titled "Glimpse of a Thursday Afternoon," Patrick has lost control of his own mind and is running all around downtown. In his panic, he is trying to remember who he had lunch with, but "even more important, where" (Ellis 149). Again, the idea that places and possessions are more important than people comes to the foreground and suggests the cruelty of characters because they could not care less about each other. At the end of the 19 day, all that matters to Patrick and rest of society is being at the newest joint in town and

trying the most expensive food with no concern for the people surrounding them.

During his manic run-around, Patrick mentions how his Walkman "suddenly feels

like a boulder strapped around [his] throat" (Ellis 149) which prompts him to throw it

away. Throughout the few pages of this chapter, Patrick has become so dependent on his

possessions that he starts believing they are taking him over. The Walkman is meant to

depict Patrick being suffocated, or controlled by his possessions. Further, because he uses things to define himself, the Walkman also doubles as a form of baggage, something that Patrick will not be able to live without.

Ellis certainly uses materialism to mock the culture of cruelty in American Psycho by malting them so obsessive over products that they are literally bound to them, but in what ways does this materialism open the floor for sympathy too? I argue that this dependency creates a lack of interest for characters to develop meaningful relationships and the result is a very disconnected culture. Despite Patrick's awareness of this disconnect, he still attempts to admit his murders to just about everyone in the book in hopes of a response that never comes. In these moments the reader sees Patrick constantly trying to reach out in a society that is too absorbed in itself and therefore simply does not care. Overall, the lack of interest in other human beings and blatant consumerism leaves Patrick ignored and dismissed, ultimately creating the opportunity for readers to respond with compassion.

The only time Patrick talks to other characters about society's problems is in a completely mocking fashion, yet he often expresses serious revelations to the reader that confirm the hopelessness of the world he lives in. Because all value in characters' lives is 20 found in the things they own instead of the people that surround them, Patrick is

constantly misheard and even mocked at times in a way that draws sympathy from the

reader. The cruelty of society in the novel extends past the satire of materialism to create

a world of careless souls. Although Patrick may be the Everyman of his society, the

reader can clearly see his alienation in his failed attempts to confess to his murders.

The self-absorption of characters makes them incapable of actually listening to

one another, let alone the vague confessions Patrick attempts throughout the book. After

basically telling Evelyn he cannot control his urges to kill, which provokes his emotions, he notes that "as usual, Evelyn misses the essence of what I'm saying" (Ellis 338), and it is not until he dumps her that she starts calling him '"pathological" and "inhuman" (Ellis

340-341). Ironically, Evelyn has not actually realized that Patrick really is an inhumane person but is only trying to hurt his feelings through words that also happen to ring truths to Patrick's true nature. At this point, it is pathetic to realize that Evelyn, who is supposed to be Patrick's girlfriend and presumably should know a great deal about him, is accurately describing who Patrick really is without even realizing it despite the numerous times throughout the book he makes references to his savage urges and killings. Though

Evelyn may emit some form of feelings for Patrick, the fact that she has no idea about his uncontrollable psychosis invites the reader to feel sorry for Patrick.

Despite multiple attempts at confessing his crimes, from the infamously misheard

"murders and executions" to leaving a detailed message on Harold Carnes answering message about murdering Paul Owen and "tortur[ing] dozens of call girls" (Ellis 388),

Patrick is never fully understood. When Patrick confronts Carnes about the message left on his answering machine, Carnes mistakes him for another yuppie named Davis and 21 calls the message a good joke before continuing on with the conversation. His

lightheartedness confuses Patrick so he continues to ask Carnes why he thought it was a joke, in which Carnes replies that the message wasn't believable because Patrick is "such

a bloody ass-kisser, such a brown-nosing goody goody" (Ellis 387). Carnes goes on to

insult Patrick to his face, saying he is not surprised that Evelyn dumped him and that he

could barely get an escort girl, not to mention kill one and "chop her up" (Ellis 388).

Insulted and stressed that he is not believed, Patrick begins to re-confess his crimes to

Carnes in such a serious rage that Carnes begins to become uncomfortable and admits that it cannot be true because he just saw Owen in London a week and a half ago. This

shuts Patrick up and Carnes excuses himself, calling Patrick by a new name, Donaldson, before walking away. In this moment, the reader sees the true cruelness of society since

Carnes becomes uncomfol"mble and that causes him to walk away instead of question the

situation.

The culture of cruelty presented by Ellis in American Psycho carries themes of satire and sympathy. On one hand, it is funny to watch characters rave and obsess over material items to the point that they will suffer through eating something as disgusting as a chocolate-covered urinal cake if they believe it to be from an expensive brand. On the other hand, the investment they place into products leaves no feelings or compassion for each other and creates a heal"dess society only concerned with benefiting themselves.

Patrick's expressed cries for attention are overlooked, leaving him neglected in a way that solicits sympathy from the reader. 22

Unhappiness

The third major way in which Ellis invites his reader to engage in satire and at the

same time have sympathy for Patrick is in his expressed unhappiness. As discussed

previously, Patrick lives and participates in a society that is vapid, materialistic, and

downright cruel. Ellis depicts moments where Patrick is '°on the verge of tears" (Ellis 39)

over what are meaningless issues, like not getting seated at one of the new restaurants. At

other times Patrick blames his feelings on his products rather than the situation he is in,

which are meant to be read satirically. However, it is undoubted that the carelessness and utter vacancy within his culture are what cause Patrick's true unhappiness. Although

Patrick is truly representative of his society and is willingly apart of it, his "awareness that it is all meaningless and artificial" (qtd. in Kauffman 42) is often expressed in moments that can draw compassion from the reader. Overall, Patrick's implicit unhappiness invites sympathy because he is truly a ruined soul; he looks forward to nothing, the best emotion he experiences is relief, and it seems as though Patrick's torture scenes are a poor attempt to force his own feelings. In addition, the only meaningful relationship Patrick has with his secretary Jean and when she expresses her feelings towards him, Patrick knows he could never be with her because of the horrible things his unhappiness drives him to.

Patrick does not explicitly tell other characters about his unhappiness, but he often lets readers know his inner feelings. At dinner one night, Patrick tells Jean about a Wall

Street guy who wrote "Kill All Yuppies" (Ellis 374) on the bathroom wall in one of the 23 fancy new places downtown. Although he recognized the guy, as usual was not really

sure of his true identity, another nameless face of the conformed yuppie culture. Patrick

is definitely bothered by this event, perhaps in a realization that anyone on Wall Street

could be a killer too, that anyone can be driven to murder after being disgusted by

something for long enough. This thought throws Patrick into a sad moment of revelation

about his society, where instead of seeing lively souls striving to make a better life for

everyone he sees "a desert landscape.., so devoid of reason and light and spirit" (Ellis

374). Patrick goes on to say that he does not think of people as good or bad, nor are they

capable of changing who they are. In this moment, Patrick sums up his feelings about the

world he lives in:

Nothing was affirmative, the term "generosity of spirit" applied to nothing,

was a clichd, was some kind of bad joke. Sex is mathematics.

Individuality no longer an issue. What does intelligence signify? Define

reason. Desire - meaningless. Intellect is not a cure. Justice is dead. Fear,

recrimination, innocence, sympathy, guilt, waste, failure, grief, were

things, emotions, that no one really felt anymore. (375)

For the reader, Patrick's generalization of his own world is strikingly accurate.

Sex is mathematics because it is about putting two people together to obtain some form

of personal pleasure, which for Patrick is the control he demands over the women he has

relations with. During these scenes, the wording Patrick uses is crude and mirrors the

descriptions of the pornographic films he enjoys rented and previously mentioned.

Individuality is out of the question, a conclusion we have already come to after reading what feels like one hundred pages worth of designer names scattered throughout the 24 entire text. Patrick lcnows that being smart, that being aware of how to fix problems in

America is meaningless; Patrick had ideas to solve all the world's problems in his speech

at Evelyn's during first chapter of the book, yet has not bothered to lift a finger and try

one out because in the end selfishness prevails over altruism. Patrick is unhappy because

sees a dying world, one that has become so self-indulged and dependent on their materials that the rules of society have become skewed and nothing is fair. In this moment, Patrick sums up all reasoning behind their warped society by noting that justice is dead, and "surface, surface, surface" (Ellis 375) was now the only thing that mattered.

During a few scenes in the novel, Patrick's blatant unhappiness is presented as satire because his explicit statements that he is on the verge of tears are usually for a silly reason. For example, before meeting his ex-girlfriend Bethany for lunch Patrick is nervous and decides it is either because he is aft'aid of rejection or because he is using a new brand of mousse. Patrick notes that the mousse is "something I could easily blame my nervousness on" (Ellis 231), and from that point on remains concerned with his hair.

Patrick is unable to sustain thoughts about his hair to the point that he brings it up a few times in conversation. Instead of confronting his feelings, that he is likely nervous because Bethany is his ex-girlfriend and he knows that she has moved on and is happily dating someone else, he instead blames his feelings on a new product he owns. This scene clearly mocks the values of Patrick and the rest of society because they are so out of tune with their own emotions that they blame everything on the things they own.

However, moments where Patrick blames his products for his feelings can have elements of both satire and sympathy. For example, while dining out with a drugged-up

Courtney one night, Patrick witnesses an exchange of compromise between Courtney's 25 married friends Scott and Anne. Anne orders a Diet Coke with rum to please Scott, who

wants to drink but presumably not alone, because she loves him and knows how much he

likes the wine he had planned on ordering. At this moment, Patrick suggests that Anne

should order a Diet Pepsi instead of a Coke, becoming extremely emotional after

receiving skepticism for malting this remark. Just as Patrick thinks he might cry,

Courtney reaches out to assure him everything is okay, and in a second is "feeling

calmer" (Ellis 98). Though this scene initially reads as a satire mocking Patrick's

materialism since he is getting upset over something as mundane as beverage decisions, a

closer analysis reveals it is the loving interaction Patrick watches that upsets him, and

ultimately Courtney's caring that calms him back down.

Although Patrick blatantly expresses his unhappiness to the reader, he is not so

quick to admit his true feelings to other characters, another way in which Ellis brings the

element of sympathy to the foreground. When Patrick's mother questions his apparent

unhappiness he inadvertently denies her of the truth, likely because he cannot handle the

feeling of vulnerability. His supposed friends only listen to him when he is talking about

clothing, so when his mother attempts to expose his true emotional state Patrick quickly

becomes defensive and accuses her of looking unhappy too. Because Patrick is not used to anyone actually paying attention to him, let alone address his feelings, when someone

finally does not know how to react and pushes them away. Since Patrick has become so

used to a world that is neglectful he literally is unable to admit his feelings to other

characters in the book likely because he believes that no one cares.

Patrick shows his desperation to be loved again while at lunch with Bethany.

After getting upset that Bethany is dating Robert Hall, Patrick apologizes and because 26 Bethany has been drinldng, she continues to talk. Patrick thinks back to college, during a

time when he "wanted to show [Bethany] everything beautiful in the world" (Ellis 241)

and then recalls decapitating a female freshman he had met at a bar. Textually, Patrick's thoughts are a reflection of his reality in the sense that one minute he is convincing himself that he is happy by having something he wants, and the next minute he upset to the point of committing murder. Patrick's thoughts are also foreshadowing, as we quickly learn that Patrick is only being so nice to Bethany because he is plotting to murder her and does so. When Bethany refers to knowing him as a lover, Patrick is reminded of

"someone human" (Ellis 241). For a short moment, Patrick is reminded that there is such a thing as humanity and finds comfort that Bethany cared, that at one point she loved him. However, when Patrick looks at her, he is reminded of the reality that Bethany has moved on, chose someone else over him, and that her feelings are just a part of the past.

Patrick is a pathetic soul who needs someone to care about him, and because Bethany moved on from caring about Patrick it is likely the reason he ends up killing her.

Reversely, the reason that Luis Carruthers is not killed is because he admits to

Patrick that he genuinely is in love with him. When Patrick finally gets so fed up with the mediocrity of Luis that he decides to follow him into the bathroom and kill him, Luis mistakes it for a sexual advance and ends up coming on to Patrick. Although this is supposed to be a moment that is terrifying for Luis, his confession results in a moment that is instead terrifying for Patrick who is not sure how to react to having homosexual feelings directed at him. Ultimately, this becomes a moment of satire for readers since

Patrick is so shocked by Luis's confession that he is literally paralyzed before storming out. However, Patrick does not attempt to kill Luis again and is almost sympathetic 27 towards him when Luis gets upset that Patrick will not verbally accept his love. In the

end, the only logical and pitiful conclusion is that Patrick does not kill Luis because he

has desperation to be loved and cared for, even if it is from someone he despises.

Perhaps the biggest way in which Ellis invites his readers to feel sympathy for

Patrick is through his relationship with secretary Jean. As Schoene points out, there are

few characters "who are not primarily reflections or imaginary extensions of Patrick's

self' (382) and Jean is one of them. Ellis presents Jean as a character with more naivety

and innocence from the materialistic evils of society, separating her from all other

characters in the novel that are interchangeable with one another. Similarly, the

relationship Patrick has with Jean is more intimate and meaningful compared to what he

shares with other people such as Evelyn or Tim Price. It is through his time spent with

Jean that Patrick realizes his true unhappiness.

Ellis uses ellipses in Patrick's dialogue when he is speaking with Jean, alluding to the fact that he is nervous around her. Because Patrick thinks that Jean can see him on a deeper level, and that she actually listens, much unlike Evelyn, Courtney, or any other girl in the text, he actually tries to appear as human as possible around Jean. When around others, he constantly is admitting his crimes casually in conversation and hoping to be heard, though he is always ignored. With Jean, when he accidentally says decapitated instead of decaffeinated when ordering coffee, he becomes worried that she might have heard him, but like everyone else, she misses what Patrick actually says and hears differently. While this ignorance might make her similar to the vapid characters in the book, in Patrick's mind she is a separate entity, one that cannot find out his true nature. 28 Patrick's feelings towards Jean seem to be mixed because she is not as wealthy as

the rest of his friends and therefore, not as good as them since society places all value in

monetary status. Despite any sort of positive feelings Patrick has for Jean, he is still

clouded by his obsession of materials, unsatisfied by her not because of her personality

but because of the clothing brands and style that she chooses. On one hand, Patrick

wants Jean to be like the other girls -- he wants her to wear heels and thinks less of her

because she does not can'y a briefcase. On the other hand, the fact that Jean is not like

Evelyn or Courtney and truly cares about Patrick is what makes him so interested in her.

Unfortunately, Patrick's obsession with fitting in and Jean's naivety of the norms of

society are what keep them from becoming romantically involved.

Although Patrick's relationship with Jean is sympathetic because Patrick knows

his evilness is too much for her innocence, Jean is the only character in the novel that

presents readers with a glimpse of hope, as it seems that she has the capacity to incite

change in Patrick. Towards the beginning of the novel, Patrick is rude to Jean and

basically describes her as a pathetic girl who is in love with him. After Jean brings

Patrick a Perrier and a file into his office, he retorts by telling her not to wear her outfit

again but rather put on a dress and some heels. As the novel continues, however, and

Patrick gets to know Jean's true innocence, since she laughs at Patrick's "sense of humor"

(Ellis 262) when he cannot get them into Dorsia, Patrick begins to treat Jean more

respectfully. By the end of the novel it is clear that Patrick must have some feelings for

Jean, since he actually reaches out and takes her hand in his. A little later on, Patrick

admits that he "experiences a spontaneous kind of internal sensation.., and anything is possible (Ellis 380). Indeed, Jean is the only beacon of hope for both Patrick and readers. 29 Patrick's unhappiness is expressed both implicitly to other characters and explicitly to the reader. On one hand, moments depicting Patrick's unhappiness can be satirical since he often blames his feelings on products instead of the situation at hand.

On the other hand, Patrick's unhappiness is brought out through relationships with others that suggest just how lonely and desperate for attention Patrick really is. As a lost soul, his only hope lies in his secretary Jean, who Patrick cannot bring himself to be with even though she is clearly the only female that is truly invested in his feelings and openly admits her love for him. Although it is Patrick's materialism and murderous behavior that keeps him from being with Jean romantically, her lack of materialism is what actually draws Patrick to her and ultimately suggests that maybe Patrick is capable of breaking away from the society he is so bound to. 30

Conclusion

American Psycho may have received a lot of negative feedback when it was first released and there are critics who still question the novel's merits, but I argue that the novel is an overall satire meant to warn against vapid materialism resulting in unoriginality, conformity and, at least in Patrick's case, insanity. Ellis uses the element of satire to create a society in which people are shallow and self-indulgent, often mistaking one person for another. While the novel is clearly a satire, I argue that Ellis also creates passages that suggest sympathy for main character Patrick Bateman by presenting him as a victim of the society in which he lives.

Patrick is the Everyman of the novel because he is a physical representation of his society. All characters dress alike, talk about mundane subject matter, and spend their time at new restaurants and night clubs. In addition, all of the characters in Patrick's society are self-absorbed to the point that they are incapable of thinking about anyone but themselves. Because all characters are presented this way, the culture within the novel is depicted as cruel and uncafing. Patrick and his friends place all of their value into the things they own instead of into each other and the poverty of their society, suggesting that there is no hope for anyone. The interchangeability of characters paired with their overall cruelness is the root of Patrick's unhappiness which he expresses explicitly to the reader.

The only glimpse of hope we are offered is through Patrick's relationship with Jean, which suggests that just maybe, someone as horrible as Patrick is capable of change.

Although elements of satire are clearly present, sympathy is a hard subject to 31 argue when talking about American Psycho since the main character commits acts on his

victims that are truly shocking to read and at times, hard to digest. So how was it

possible for me to warrant the claim that readers should feel sorry for Patrick?

Personally, the first time reading this novel I literally had to set the book down at times

because I could not handle its shockingly violent passages. However, the more closely I

worked with the text and truly analyzed Patrick beyond his killings, I began to see a very

lost, neglected, and hopeless soul, one who had the world figured out and was so

depressed by it that he needed to physically shock himself in order to feel. So while

many critics have condemned his misogynist violence and it is only possible to justify

Patrick's inhumane actions so much, I believe that by looking past his personal atrocities

and instead focusing on the atrocities of his society as a whole, it is very possible to feel

sorry for a person like Patrick who is trapped in a world that is every bit as cruel as he is.

In 2000, film director produced her movie adaptation of American

Psycho which also received critical backlash including a lawyer who threatened to sue

her even though "he had not read the book or script, and he had not even seen the film"

(Kauffman 45). Harron tried to depict more developed female characters while portraying a colder, more disconnected Patrick Bateman. As far as violence goes, the movie is tame compared to the horrible acts that Patrick commits in his book. So how did this movie receive the negativity it did? It is likely that the controversy originally surrounding the novel's violence had many assuming that the movie would be as close to the book is possible, which was actually not the case at all, The backlash that Harron received when making this movie just goes to show that people were still worked up over 32 the original controversy that the novel created almost twenty years beforehand, and it is

presumable that there are still advocates against the novel and its movie adaptation to this

day.

Harron's movie adaptation also follows the very elements I have argued about the

novel in this thesis. All of the characters dress in suit and tie with their hair slicked back

and at times Patrick is wearing the exact same glasses as someone else, making Patrick representative of his society. In addition, the culture indulges in fine restaurants and rarely listens to what one another are truly saying. When Patrick makes his speech about fixing America the characters are barely listening, as some peer down at their plates while others stare vacantly at him. Lastly, Patrick is mocked by Paul Allen (the names are slight variations of the novel's characters) right to his face since Paul believes Patrick is actually a guy named Marcus. Overall, Harron's representation of Patrick's world a fitting adaptation and helps to support the very themes I have argued.

In March of 2012, Ellis had posted tweets for followers of his Twitter account stating that he was contemplating writing a sequel to American Psycho since he could not stop thinking about where Patrick might be now in modern society. Ellis went on to tweet about discussing Patrick's first killing and how he would feel about present day celebrities like Kim Kardashian. Although no fresher word has been made since these tweets, it is interesting to consider where Patrick's life might be if it was written twenty years after American Psycho took place. Is it possible that Patrick has become a changed man in twenty years or would he still be just as unstable? In the end, would he eventually end up with Jean and finally experience some form of happiness, or would Patrick continue to be promiscuous and uncaring? How would Patrick handle aging? Knowing 33 how Patrick's life has progressed from twenty-seven to forty-seven would be valuable

information to use in order to further analyze whether or not the reader can sympathize

with Patrick, but until Ellis actually writes and publishes a sequel, we are only left to wonder how society and our murderous narrator would change over a couple of decades. 34 Primary Works

Ellis, Bret Easton. American Psycho. A Novel. New York: Vintage, 1991. Print.

Works Cited

Blazer, Alex E. "Chasms of Reality, Aberrations of Identity: Defining the Postmodern

through Bret Easton Ellis's American Pyscho." Americana' The Journal of

American Popular Culture 1.2 (2002): n. pag. American Popular Culture.

Web. 19 Sept. 2012.

Freccero, Carla. "Historical Violence, Censorship, and the Serial Killer: The Case of the

American Psycho." Diacritics 27.2 (1997): 44-58. Project Muse. Web. 17

Sept. 2012.

Helyer, Ruth. "Parodied to Death: The Postmodern Gothic in American

Psycho." Modern Fiction Studies 46.3 (2000): 725-46. Project Muse. Web.

9 Sept. 2012.

Jackson, Bill. "American Psycho More than It Seems." The Tech [Cambridge, MA] 9 Apr.

1991, Volume 111, Number 18 ed.: 4. The Tech. MIT. Web. 12 Sept. 2012.

Kauffman, Linda S. "Reviews: American Psycho by Mary Harron," Film Quarterly 54.2

(2000-2001): 41-45. JSTOR. University of California Press. Web. 14 Sept.

2012.

Schoene, Berthold. "Serial Masculinity: Psychopathology and Oedipal Violence in Bret

Easton Ellis's American Psycho." Modern Fiction Studies 54.2 (2008):

378-97. Project Muse. Web. 26 Sept. 2012. 35 Stiles, Todd. "How Bret Ellis Turned Michael Korda Into Larry Flynt." Spy Nov.-Dec.

1990: 43. Books.google, com. Web. 9 Sept. 2012.

Tighe, Carl. Writing and Responsibility. London: Routledge, 2005. Print

Young, Elizabeth, and Graham Caveney. Shopping in Space' Essays on America's Blank-

generation Fiction. New York: Atlantic Monthly with Serpent's Tail, 1992.

Print.

Works Consulted

Brien, Donna Lee. "The Real Filth in American Psycho: A Critical Reassessment." M/C

Journal 9.5 (2006). 17 Sept. 2012.

Conley, John. "The Poverty of Bret Easton Ellis." Arizona Quarterly. A Journal of

American Literature, Culture, and Theory 65.3 (2009): 117-37. Project

Muse. Web. 12 Sept. 2012.

Flood, Alison. "Ellis Contemplates American Psycho Sequel." The Guardian. Web. 5 Oct.

2012

Heise, Thomas. "Amertcan Psycho: Neoliberal Fantasies and the Death of

Downtown."Arizona Quarterly: A Journal of American Literature,

Culture, and Theory 67.1 (2011): 135-60. Project Muse. Web. 24 Sept.

2012.

Mack, Bob. "Hats Offto Censorship." Spin Magazine, Feb. 1991: 19. Books google.com.

Web. 9 Sept. 2012.

S6derlind, Sylvia. "Branding the Body American: Violence and Self-fashioning from The

Scarlet Letter to American Psycho." Canadian Review of American 36 Studies 38.1 (2008): n. pag. Project Muse. Web. 25 Sept. 2012.

Tanner, Laura E. "American Psycho and the American Psyche: Reading the Forbidden

Text."Intimate Violence." Reading Rape and Torture in Twentieth-century

Fiction. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1994, 96-114. Print.