The Death of Optimism

We last left off looking at the primary characters in the film, just beginning to touch on Rachel. Rachel holds a useful position in Nolan’s Batman films. She functions as a plot device, splitting Batman from the police when she is kidnapped. She is the love interest of two of the primary characters, arguably three, as Alfred clearly takes a paternal view of her, knowing her through her entire life, trusting her as much as he trusts Bruce Wayne. More than that, she is a barometer for Gotham as a whole.

In “Batman Begins”, Rachel begins to accept Wayne/Batman, only to ultimately reject him. She latches onto Dent, through both her love and her career, as she sees that he is the real future of Gotham. Rachel realized, in the first film, she could never be with Bruce Wayne, because of the duplicity of his nature. He had split himself in two so completely that there was little anyone could call a full human. Wayne is far more Batman than he is billionaire playboy, but the Batman persona can’t last. What will happen to him when Batman outlives his usefulness? No one can tell, but Rachel didn’t see what she needed to. Contrast that with Harvey Dent, who does have a real future when his life District Attorney ends.

Her death represents, in a very real way, the death of hope in Gotham. This would be interesting enough, in terms of storytelling, but Nolan is too much a director to stop there. She steps out of her role as symbol for everyone else when she not only makes her decision, but carves it in stone. She writes her decision to marry Dent in an unsealed envelope, then gives to Alfred to give to Wayne. By giving it to him, she was separating herself from her father figure. She had grown up, and she proved it to herself, and us. It also guaranteed that Wayne would take her seriously. Coming from Alfred, her words would have real weight. That act also gave Alfred his own chance at growth, when he burns the letter. He established his own life in that act. Not as a servant, not even as family, but as Wayne’s, not Batman’s, protector. His gray knight, if you will. But her death marked the death of optimism, made possible by Batman, for the coming chaos, started by the Joker. Her death triggered it, not Dent’s. Dent’s actions, after he lost Rachel, were a foregone conclusion. What if the Joker had not confronted Dent in that hospital room? He may not have picked up a gun, but he would’ve certainly rejected the role of Gotham’s white knight. The net effect would only be different by a matter of degree. Rachel’s role caused Gotham’s final test, Dent was just the trigger.

Some final thoughts on these pieces, and the movie on the whole. This is akin to the type of stuff I wrote in college, studying Shakespeare,Vladimir Nabokov, and Hunter Thompson. The question occurred to me, as I wrote them, as to why exactly I’m doing so. I mean, at the end of the day, this movie is entertainment. Good entertainment, to be sure, but no more important than any of the other hundreds of thousands of films ever made. That’s true on one level, but on another, this type of art definitely has a role to play in the human experience.

I write these things because I can. Because the movie supports a close, multi-layered look. Nolan created films about a comic book superhero, but also managed to treat crime and terrorism as real threats, not just something that might effect someone else. He also manages to touch on themes as old as humanity itself, such as the tropes of heroes, villains, one’s role in the world, family. Hopefully, by exploring some of the effects of these films, I can help others to understand a little bit more of the film, and will think just a little bit about these, and other, themes. The information and analysis is there, it just takes a thoughtful look to begin to bring them to light. This is not intended to be the end-all be-all of Dark Knight pieces, just a beginning. I could’ve taken these in very different directions. That’s good, it makes for a complex, interesting movie.