Daniil V. Osipov
Astrakhan Tatishchev State University. Astrakhan, Russia. Email: daniio[at]yandex.ru ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3911-9557
Received: 28 July 2023 | Revised: 7 November 2023 | Accepted: 17 November 2023
Abstract
This article examines the potential influence of iconic characters—villains of mass culture—on destructive and aggressive youth behavior. The cultivation of certain societal groups and individual media characters can lead to the normalization of hostility and violence. This study analyzes the communication styles, intelligence, motives, aggression levels, and violent actions of famous villains from films, television, and literature. Particular attention is paid to the Joker’s communicative behavior, dialogues, and language, examining how he psychologically manipulates others and conveys his destructive views through unconventional techniques. Using textual examples from comic books and films, it analyzes how the Joker’s language choices and performative style reflect his background and moral-anarchic worldview. His rhetoric provokes violent reactions from allies and enemies alike, highlighting his ability to destabilize situations. The presented portrait reveals a multi-layered understanding of this legendary creation in different epochs and contexts. The findings indicate certain villain traits that could potentially encourage impressionable youth to engage in harmful behavior. Overall, provocative fiction has a double-edged significance as it can both shape and mislead developing minds. Recommendations are made to reduce the negative effects of glamorizing villains in entertainment media.
Keywords
Communicative Behavior; Lingo-Cultural Image; Self-Identification; Identity; Communication Strategies; Antihero; Cult Villain; Comic Book; Violence; Destructive Behavior
Осипов Даниил Владимирович
Астраханский государственный университет имени В.Н. Татищева. Астрахань, Россия. Email: daniio[at]yandex.ru ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3911-9557
Рукопись получена: 28 июля 2023 | Пересмотрена: 7 ноября 2023 | Принята: 17 ноября 2023
Аннотация
В данной статье рассматривается потенциальное влияние культовых персонажей-злодеев массовой культуры на деструктивное и агрессивное поведение молодежи. Культивирование определенных групп общества и отдельных персонажей в средствах массовой информации может привести к нормализации враждебности и насилия. В данном исследовании анализируются стили общения, интеллект, мотивы, уровень агрессии и насильственные действия известных злодеев кино, телевидения и литературы. Особое внимание уделяется коммуникативному поведению Джокера, его диалогам и языку, рассматривается, как он психологически манипулирует другими людьми и передает свои деструктивные взгляды с помощью нестандартных приемов. На текстовых примерах из комиксов и фильмов анализируется, как языковой выбор и перформативный стиль Джокера отражают его происхождение и морально-анархическое мировоззрение. Его провокационная риторика вызывает бурную реакцию как у союзников, так и у врагов, подчеркивая его способность дестабилизировать ситуацию. Представленный портрет раскрывает многослойное понимание создания этой легендарной фигуры в разные эпохи и в разных средах. Полученные результаты указывают на определенные черты злодея, которые потенциально могут побудить впечатлительную молодежь к пагубному поведению. В целом провокационная художественная литература имеет обоюдоострую значимость, поскольку она может как формировать, так и вводить в заблуждение развивающиеся умы. Даны рекомендации по снижению негативных последствий гламуризации злодеев в развлекательных СМИ.
Ключевые слова
коммуникативное поведение; лингвокультурный образ; самоидентификация; идентичность; коммуникативные стратегии; антигерой; культовый злодей; комикс; насилие; деструктивное поведение
Over the past century, fiction has produced a plethora of iconic villains. These characters are often charismatic, intelligent, and driven by compelling personal motives, yet their actions demonstrate a lack of empathy, hostility toward perceived enemies, and a willingness to use trespassing methods, including murder, to achieve their goals. The glamorization of villainy in entertainment media raises concerns because it can negatively impact impressionable youth audiences who are in the process of developing values and identities. To counter this trend, it is necessary to critically analyze media images fr om ethical and humanistic perspectives, to show that external attractiveness often hides cynical selfishness and contempt for human life.
This study provides a description of the communicative behavior of iconic villains based on an analysis of the components of their identities. Such aspects as communication style expressed through certain strategies and tactics, intelligence level, manifestations of aggression, and psychological motivations are considered. Special attention is paid to analyzing the lingo-cultural image of villains by identifying their characteristic values and features of their “code of ethics”. The study allows for a deeper understanding of the nature of cult villains’ communicative behavior and highlights its distinctive features.
The personal component of identity is defined as the set of qualities and properties that make an individual unique and different from all others. This is how a person defines his/herself. The social component of identity refers to a person’s desire to belong to a group or society, to successfully communicate with other members who share that identity. An individual’s “us” group consists of those with whom one identifies and shares an emotional connection, based on common values, behavioral norms, and interests. “Them” constitute a group whose norms, interests, and values differ from those that shape a person’s self-identification and are reflected in their communicative behavior when interacting with that group. Values are ideas shared by the majority about what is right or wrong, fair or unfair, relevant or irrelevant (Althen, 2003, p. 3(36); Ting-Toomey, 2005, p. 35). A person develops his/her own unique set of values through socialization, but in most cases s/he inherits rather than creates them by living in a particular cultural environment.
Following R. A. Gazizov (Gazizov, 2004), V. I. Karasik (Karasik, 2007), Y. E. Prokhorov, and I. A. Sternin (Prokhorov, 2007), communicative behavior is defined as an enduring reaction to a situation through a person’s interaction with society, or a set of actions based on a system of values, norms, rules and prohibitions laid out by society and manifested through one’s self-identification. An important component in communication is the transfer and acceptance of information, so the definition of communicative behavior includes the moment of information transfer as a reaction to the situation. In the process of communication, the individual’s self-identification is revealed, which is also captured in the definition of communicative behavior. The presence of emotional connection with the interlocutors depends on whether they belong to the “us” or “them”. National culture is reflected in the communicative behavior of representatives from a particular society. A choice of action or decision (communicative act) is influenced by the norms and values of the society. The relationship between one’s self-identification and communicative behavior is noted through the basic societal values.
At the center of any social relations there is an individual, who is considered in linguoculturology from the perspective of the linguistic personality concept (“the set of abilities and characteristics of a person that determine the creation of speech works (texts) by this person”) (Karaulov, 1989, p. 3). The lingo-cultural image appears as a manifestation of the national linguistic personality, which emerges as a communicative personality in a particular speech interaction situation. It represents a generalized type with perceptual, figurative, conceptual, and definitional characteristics, value preferences, and corresponding verbal and nonverbal behavioral sign markers expressed in speech (Shalina, 2009). In consciousness and communicative behavior of individuals and human collectives, it is possible to identify distinct mental constructs that interpret and fix reality in fragmented representations. These mental constructs are designated as “concepts” (Karasik, 2006). A lingo-cultural image is a concept. As a semantic entity marked by lingo-cultural specificity, a concept in some way characterizes the speakers of a certain ethnoculture. The totality of such concepts occupies a distinct part of the sphere of concepts as an integral and structured semantic space (Vorkachev, 2001).
In addition to the above mentioned, speech behavior is another component of the “lingo-cultural image” concept, as the vocabulary used by the communicators reflects the degree of influence of the country’s culture on speech, education level, etiquette, and status. Speech behavior is understood as a form of interaction between people for exchanging cognitive or affective-evaluative information, manifested in speech. Individual speech behavior features are primarily determined by sociocultural factors that shape the speech actions of a developing personality. A lingo-cultural image is a model personality with a set of unique characteristics specific to a given culture, i.e., it is a symbol both within the culture and for members of other national-cultural communities. It is a concept encompassing conceptual, figurative and evaluative components (Bazikova, 2012).
However, unlike the model personality which always acts as a behavioral standard and role model, the lingo-cultural image is not necessarily such an exemplar (Dmitrieva, 2007, p. 82). The notion of “lingo-cultural image” is specified based on the evaluation marker: positive lingo-cultural image and negative lingo-cultural one (Karasik, 2007). The three-part model for analyzing the lingo-cultural image as a concept, in which it is examined as a three-dimensional formation comprising conceptual, figurative and value components, is as follows: the definitional features of the object; the manifestation of the object through its direct and mediated perceptual characteristics; the significance of the object for the corresponding culture (Dmitrieva, 2007). Thus, the scheme for modeling this process is:
Conceptual characteristics built on definitions, descriptions, interpretations.
Perceptual and figurative representation of the image, called the “passport of the lingo-cultural image” by O. A. Dmitrieva (Dmitrieva, 2007). It includes the following items:
External appearance. Parametric data can relate to value characteristics and vice versa. Clothing is also included in this section. Age is another element of appearance that is a central feature for some types, while for others age is of small value or is indicated as optional, depending on the stereotypical idea of a certain type.
Gender belonging. This attribute can vary across image (type) characteristics. Some images belong exclusively to one gender, while others are represented by both male and female.
Origin or social status defined by the image. This point characterizes the value priorities of the type to some extent, and allows singling out the means used to emphasize social status.
Place of residence, living environment, character of dwelling. These data act as artifacts for modeling the image.
Sphere of activity fixes peculiarities of the image’s communicative behavior in providing life values.
Sphere of leisure also indicates the value scale of priorities and lifestyle.
Family status sets value priorities, as family is a priority for some images as a stronghold of stability, while other images are not associated with this concept.
Environment includes secondary reactions to stimulus words.
Communicative features provide linguistic portraiture of the image. Manner of speech, linguistic competence, communication style help establishing relevant properties.
Based on the above-leaked “passport”, the negative lingo-cultural image can be visualized as follows:
External Appearance. Most likely it is a character with distinct, memorable features and looks. There may be an emphasis on a specific detail like a scar or a tattoo. Clothing can also be distinctive.
Age is not a defining trait, although the stereotypical image suggests an adult character.
Gender is not fixed; it can be male or female. However, most villains are male.
Origin and social status. Most likely it can be an antagonist rejected by society.
Residence and environment. Probably it might be dingy rooms filled with many small elements, either perfectly clean or filled with trash.
Sphere of activity related to the underworld and pursuit of selfish goals.
Leisure also has a dark orientation.
Family and close relationships are most likely absent.
Environment includes accomplices, henchmen, victims, often acting as a background for the villain.
Communicative features: cynical tone, threats, manipulation.
Lingo-cultural image of the Joker:
Appearance: pale face, bright makeup, green hair. Extravagant costume and cape.
Age: adult male.
Gender: male.
Origin: unknown, outcast by society.
Habitat: dark alleys and abandoned buildings of Gotham.
Sphere of activity: underworld, chaos and anarchy.
Leisure: entertaining himself by setting dangerous games and traps for Batman and Gotham citizens.
Family: absent.
Environment: gangsters, criminals, psychopaths.
Communicative features: ironic tone, riddles, puns.
The Joker is a charismatic manipulator and trickster, the embodiment of chaos and anarchy, Batman’s nemesis and protector of criminal Gotham. His image corresponds to the classic archetype of the trickster and villain.
To develop the value component of villains’ image and understand their communicative behavior, it is essential to examine their communicative style, intelligence level, aggression, psychological motives (drivers), and the principle of dehumanization.
Cult villains demonstrate above-average verbal intelligence and possess remarkable rhetorical skills. Through their eloquent speech, they can manipulate and present their unethical actions as legitimate and rational. For example, in the movie The Dark Knight Rises, the character Bane utilizes elegant language and dramatic pauses in his rhetoric to present himself as a righteous revolutionary, even as he terrorizes Gotham City. Similarly, the Joker employs philosophical reasoning and dark humor to justify his chaotic actions. He is known for his flamboyant, insane, and theatrical communication style.
Many villains excel in devising arguments to justify their behavior and manipulate others. Villains utilize metaphors, rhetorical questions, and appeals to emotion in their persuasive communication strategies. Their advanced communication skills enable them to destructively influence others’ attitudes.
Most cult villains possess high general intelligence demonstrated through ingenuity, strategic planning, technological prowess, and the ability to outsmart opponents. Many villains supplement high innate intelligence with specialized knowledge. For instance, the Joker in Batman stories boasts knowledge of chemistry, engineering, and psychology, enhancing his capacity for villainous schemes. The consistent portrayal of intelligent villains emphasizes that intelligence provides an advantage in devising creative means of destruction.
Content analysis reveals that villains are driven by powerful psychological motives, most commonly revenge, desire for power, obsession with purpose, and sadism. These drivers are often presented as stemming from psychological wounds or trauma. For the Joker, creating chaos and subverting social order is an end in itself, representing the pursuit of self-actualization through destroying meaning and morality.
Few narratives depict villains seeking psychological healing; they act compulsively, following urges. The Joker does not seek psychiatric help, possibly demonstrating that acting on dark impulses is inevitable.
Cult villains exhibit more frequent and extreme physical aggression at higher severity levels (e.g., murder versus threats). The Joker commits more gratuitous random violence like mass murder at public events. Villains also face fewer negative consequences from aggression than opponents. They may experience initial setbacks but often emerge victorious. Thus, in comic books, violence can be associated with success. Comics have a monopoly on violence: not just physical but also ideological violence (Ocheretyany, 2020, p. 33).
A notable theme in villain portrayal is language that dehumanizes adversaries as less than human, often comparing them to vermin, disease, demons. The Joker’s rhetoric depicts humans as expendable pawns in his schemes.
Villains show no remorse after harming others; murder and torture are committed for strategic rather than impulsive reasons. When violence has an emotional catalyst, it is most often pleasure or fun. Extreme violence often targets vulnerable groups like women, ethnic minorities, or the poor. The Joker inflicts substantial collateral damage with mass terrorist attacks, displaying impulsive, disorderly mayhem to satisfy his addiction to chaos and defy meaning itself. Such representations model the permissibility of intentional violence, especially against dehumanized groups labeled as “them”.
According to Social learning theory, people can acquire new attitudes and behaviors by observing and imitating others (Bandura, 1971). Media characters can serve as role models. Research shows that exposure to media violence can increase aggression, especially in children (Huesmann, Moise-Titus, Podolski, & Eron, 2003). Thus, violence may become an acceptable way to solve problems or defeat enemies.
Cultivation theory based on the idea that immoderate information consumption shapes attitudes and beliefs, proposes that frequent portrayal of villains as violent and unforgiving can create a perception that unethical behavior is acceptable and even normal.
Repeated exposure to media violence can desensitize viewers to real-world aggression (Mrug, Madan, & Wright, 2016). As violence becomes normalized, deterrents to destructive behavior may weaken. Bandura (1999) notes that moral disengagement, or rationalizing unethical acts as acceptable, enables aggression. In villain movies, antagonists often justify their actions. Exposure to such rationalizations can promote moral disengagement in viewers.
Factors that may increase media-induced aggression include portraying violence as justified revenge, associating violence with positive consequences, and presenting harm against dehumanized groups as acceptable (Anderson & Bushman, 2002). Iconic villains often exhibit these aggression-enhancing factors.
Excessive cultivation of cruel, consequence-free evil imagery can dull empathy and compassion and create distorted views of moral norms.
The Joker’s portrayal in comic books, television, movies, and other media has made him a seminal figure in popular culture for generations. As the hero’s moral inverse, the Joker represents the rejection of social order in favor of chaos. Depicted as a psychopathic criminal, he espouses anarchy and shuns moral structure. His flamboyant appearance and defiant behavior render him both comical and terrifying.
The Joker often employs an exaggerated, performative communication style for both theatrical impact and strategic manipulation. He frustrates both allies and enemies with his erratic behavior, throwing them off balance. The Joker uses communication opportunistically to control situations and influence opponents. In the graphic novels, the Joker combines violent actions with playful speech. After poisoning a hapless henchman in Alan Moore’s, The Killing Joke, he says: “Now, now, don’t get all choked up!” This mocking of suffering reflects the Joker’s treatment of morality as a joke. In the same work, his non-sequitur reasoning and imaginary conversations with Batman demonstrate delusional thinking. The disconnection between words and deeds highlights the Joker’s lack of empathy. In Grant Morrison’s graphic novel Arkham Asylum, the Joker taunts Batman and asylum staff by whistling and spewing insults like “lunatic scum”. This provocative speech elicits an emotional response from those around him.
In Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight, the Joker often pretends to be preoccupied with manipulating others. Bursting into a crowded meeting, threatening it with brutal violence he states politely: “You see, I’m a man of simple tastes”. His false politeness mocks social norms. Heath Ledger uses shifting vocal tones and facial expressions to convey unpredictability – he smiles while recounting terrible crimes. The Joker’s conversational tone fluctuates between lighthearted and sinister, forcing listeners to guess his intentions. Across interpretations, the Joker’s communication demonstrates play, deception, and dark humor. His inconsistent speech keeps characters (and the audience) vigilant, uncertain of what to expect. Manipulation is his primary influence method. A key aspect of the Joker’s speech behavior is his arrhythmic vocal modulation. Especially in live portrayals, actors emphasize the abnormal pace and emotionality of his voice – abrupt shifts from whisper to scream, elongated syllables, and fits of laughter. This uneven vocal rhythm, along with palilalia and involuntary laughter, stresses the Joker’s mania and depression.
In Tim Burton’s Batman, Jack Nicholson speaks with exaggerated expression, emphasizing words in a syncopated rhythm. His Joker breaks into a harsh, barking laugh that conveys unbalanced emotion. Heath Ledger gave the Joker a peculiar rhythm using stressed syllables and klang associations. In phrases like “look at ME” the stress lands unpredictably. Heath Ledger also uses clicking tongue and smacking lips. Combined with the lengthening and repetition of words – “hello-la” or “bye bye” – this creates an unsettling, stilted cadence evoking a fragmented psyche.
Joaquin Phoenix’s performance in Joker also features unique vocal pacing. Phoenix conveys a sense of rising, uncontrollable laughter with jerky breaths. He endures awkward mid-sentence pauses before continuing. This stiffness along with sudden fits of giggling indicates the character’s distorted internal state. As the performance progresses, the Joker’s laughter becomes not just an expression of mirth, but an outward display of fragmented thoughts, all-consuming anxiety, and despair. The abnormal vocal rhythms signify his mental disorder and loss of self-control.
The Joker’s accent and word choices suggest his background and education level. Across interpretations, he is often portrayed as coming from a lower-class background. His vulgar phrases contrast Batman’s coherent speech. In Tim Burton’s Batman, Jack Nicholson uses expressions like “greaseball” and “broad” as well as crude sexual references to insult opponents. His casual, demeaning manner conveys a lack of etiquette and sophistication.
In The Dark Knight, Heath Ledger’s accent shifts between American regional pronunciations, making the Joker an unreliable narrator of his origins, but his guttural voice retains a menacing blue-collar tone. He derisively refers to court proceedings as “show and tell”, demonstrating disdain for educated authorities. His speech patterns indicate poverty and limited education.
The evolution of mass media provides more opportunities to convey the Joker’s linguistic nuances. Comic books rely more on vocabulary and grammar, while movies permit class identity to be conveyed through regional accents and vocalizations. However, the various interpretations consistently point to the Joker’s low social status through his crude expressions.
The Joker causes extensive death and destruction without remorse for his victims. He kills innocents and comrades, finding his murderous betrayals humorous. The Joker’s deadly pranks and toxic Joker Venom exhibit his cruelty and disregard for human dignity (White, 2008). He wreaks havoc indiscriminately with no concern for the damage. This vicious behavior violates traditional heroic virtues like justice, restraint, and compassion. The Joker demonstrates immorality, irresponsibility, corruption, and injustice. His complete lack of empathy and desire for self-gratification exhibit the vice of excessive selfishness. Per traditional moral philosophy, the Joker is a clear moral bankrupt and abhorrent evil. However, by analyzing the Joker solely through the lens of vice, we might lose sight of what lies at the heart of his madness. Behind the Joker’s outward immorality there is a consistent “ethical” basis underlying his villainy.
An examination of the Joker’s rhetoric and the motives behind his actions reveals a twisted set of principles reflecting his anarchist worldview:
Autonomy. The Joker highly values personal freedom and self-determination, exceeding all external rules and restrictions. He disregards laws and rejects societal pressure, thinking and acting as he pleases. This motivates his choice in favor of evil and chaos.
Self-creation. The Joker constantly reinvents his personality, story, and identity, viewing life as a work of art for self-expression. This is tied to his “virtue” of desiring radical freedom.
Instrumental Rationality. Each of the Joker’s crimes serves a strategic purpose in his crusade against order.
Selfishness. The Joker puts his desires, whims, and interests first. His ruthless behavior is determined by the selfish desire for self-gratification.
Authenticity. The Joker is true to his own twisted desires and nature rather than obeying public morality. He sees virtue in staying true to his inner character.
Iconoclasm. The Joker seeks to undermine and destroy corrupt social institutions, values, and order. His crimes are intended to expose the fragility of civilization’s rules.
This explains the Joker’s crimes as “moral” within his own value system. He follows a code of brutal ethics centered on freedom, authenticity, and the instrumental destruction of societal rules to reveal the truth of disorder and absurdity. At the same time, we might highlight his belonging to American national identity with such prominent core values as freedom and individualism.
The Joker expresses his ethics most eloquently in The Dark Knight: “Their morals, their code, it’s a bad joke... I’m not a monster, I’m just ahead of the curve” (Nolan, 2008). Here, the Joker shows he truly acts per an internal code rather than just chaotic insanity. In his view, society lives by false virtues – compassion, justice, order. He believes most people are hypocrites who pretend morality but easily abandon it under pressure. To him, only radical freedom, creativity, authenticity and self-interest make sense in an absurd world. This aligns with philosophical views of the Joker as an enlightened form of villainy. He seeks to enlighten by exposing arbitrary morality and fundamental chaos (White, 2008). In the Joker’s twisted virtue ethic, crimes are morally righteous while justice and order are true sins. Through this lens, the Joker becomes an antihero rejecting false virtues, leading an individualistic crusade against perceived corruption. He exhibits virtues like courage, honesty, wisdom, and integrity in achieving his philosophical goals of enlightenment. His “virtue” ethical conflicts with conventional morality yet forms a codified ethical framework from his anarchist viewpoint.
The Joker’s strategic verbal manipulation indicates language’s power. His unwavering speech exposes society’s tensions and contradictions, offering a twisted nihilism and madness. With provocation, irony, and unstable meaning, he questions rationality itself. Like trickster gods in folklore, the Joker breaks conventions via pranks and outrageous acts. His jokes and ridicule resemble the satirical denunciation of fool characters. This archetypal resonance reinforces the Joker’s cultural and psychological weight. His Harlequin appearance echoes the commedia dell’arte’s ironic dissolution of individuality. His absurdist speech rejecting predictable reality echoes philosophical skepticism. Such precedents give additional semantic layers to the Joker’s madness and moral criticism.
It is notable that the Joker often resonates with teenage and youth audiences. His rhetoric and portrayal of chaotic evil serve as a compelling fictional mirror for youth identity, morality, and social structure issues. The provocative speech and behavior of the character interacting with Batman shapes twisted but compelling views of authority, justice, and sanity. Appreciating the Joker’s impact on youth culture requires understanding how fiction’s provocations affect a teenager’s psychology and worldview.
The Joker has long been portrayed as a destructive anarchist related to countercultural movements that attract rebellious youth. His flamboyant appearance and chaotic evil philosophy serve as a fictional embodiment of radical social criticism. In graphic novels like The Killing Joke, the Joker is a twisted vigilante attacking corrupt leaders. This origin brings his crusade toward countercultural ideals. Similarly, Jack Nicholson’s Joker in Tim Burton’s Batman draws partly on punk rock imagery, with rhetoric that undermines convention. In these depictions, the Joker voices an extremist philosophy questioning fundamental ideas of civility, law, and order. While morally repugnant, his worldview provides a radical exercise for young viewers. The Joker models outrageous social constraint-free behavior. For youth in a rebellious stage, this can express frustration with parental or institutional authority.
The Joker’s provocative appeal ties into the glorified outlaw antihero theme common in youth media. Like characters in A Clockwork Orange or Fight Club, the Joker offers a forbidden fantasy of living by one’s own code. His rhetoric promotes moral relativism, individualism, and selfishness. While still a villain in his stories, the Joker’s charisma sometimes blurs the line between anarchy and heroism for young fans. Some argue Heath Ledger’s Joker in The Dark Knight makes him a dangerously attractive agent of change compared to Batman’s flawed institutions. This demonstrates the appeal to youth of fictional antiheroes who rebuild society through radical methods.
At the same time, the Joker offers no solutions only criticizing existing structures. This moral ambiguity and nihilism represent an intellectually seductive adolescent rebellion, attributing institutional problems to hypocrisy while justifying extreme measures. The Joker’s persuasive voice ennobles opposition for its own sake.
The provocative influence of fictional characters like the Joker may pose increased risks for young people with certain psychological vulnerabilities. Mental health issues or social isolation can cause over-identification with media violence figures and themes. Psychologists link poor parental attachment, trauma, depression, and pathological narcissism to youth attraction to antisocial role models. Anomie – a sense of disunity – can drive young people toward radical communities and ideals. The Joker can attract downtrodden outcasts or those experiencing strong societal alienation. Similarly, sadistic teens may identify with the Joker’s cruel humor and vicious actions. His rhetoric glorifies inflicting suffering as a distorted means of gaining power and meaning. For teens experiencing powerlessness, the Joker can exemplify fulfilling desires through violence rationalized philosophically.
This analysis shows how cult villains embody traits and behaviors that can potentially contribute to “dark” inclinations in youth, including:
Intelligence and eloquence used to manipulate and justify unethical acts.
Aggression as the main obstacle-removal strategy.
Dehumanization of victims dismissing moral consequences.
Lack of remorse and rewards for destructive behavior.
Long-term exposure to such images risks forming destructive attitudes and behaviors in young people. Consistently treating minorities as expendable can reduce empathy. Moreover, aggression can become normalized as inevitable and effective. However, media villain risk depends on individual susceptibility. Not all teenagers internalize destructive models from media. Those highly aggressive, thrill-seeking, with mood disorders, trauma, and poor parenting may be more susceptible.
Some argue provocative characters like the Joker provide a safe outlet for taboo thoughts and youthful rebellion. His fictional extremism allows exploring radical ideas without enacting them. Others advocate regulating youth media to limit exposure to potentially harmful content. Those cite studies showing decreased empathy and increased aggression after watching violence, and linking sensational news and mass shooting threats. Thus, the role of provocative fiction like the Joker in normalizing antisocial thinking remains debated.
Intervention strategies to reduce risks include media literacy education, co‑viewing and discussing with parents, prioritizing pro-social media, and mental health support.
The Joker’s manipulative speech strategies and dark archetypal roots contribute to his cultural symbolism, reflecting societal anxieties. His unstable language promotes suspense and madness, strategically influencing other characters while conveying an anarchist worldview. This clown, the Prince of Crime, will likely continue causing controversy and discussion as his lingo-cultural image transforms in subsequent works. But his distinctive voice and rhetoric will remain integral to his provocative role, providing the self-proclaimed agent of chaos a dark verbal mirror to criticize civilization’s stupidity.
The Joker’s transgressive rhetoric and philosophy is appealing to youth seeking to rebel against conventional ‘wisdom’. In some cases, its provocative influence risks promoting moral relativism and violent extremism. Managing provocative fiction’s impact requires nuance beyond censorship or denial.
Ultimately, growing youth interest in provocative characters like the Joker may indicate a broader need for empathic communities wh ere young people can openly discuss moral issues. Rather than censorship, the solution may be developing skills that help teens think through complex ideas.
By teaching critical thinking and introspection, parents and mentors can help young people display the moral ambiguity and allure of antiheroes. Creative work can highlight issues through empathy and deprecate bloodshed or cynicism. Fictional villains like the Joker expose disturbing aspects of human nature requiring reasoned consideration, not reactive condemnation.
Well-designed media literacy training, co-viewing with parents, and pro-social media can mitigate the risks. Future research wants longitudinal studies assessing long-term effects of atrocity glamorization on aggressive or traumatized adolescents. Media creating iconic villains must balance making antagonists interesting without overly charming. With thoughtful approaches and guided adults, young people can enjoy compelling fiction without becoming villains.
The study was supported by grant No. 23-28-00765 of the Russian Science Foundation, https://rscf.ru/project/23-28-00765/
Althen, G. (2003). American ways: A guide for foreigners in the United States. Intercultural Press.
Anderson, C.A. & Bushman, B.J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27-51. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231
Bandura, A. (1971). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.
Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193-209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
Basikova, A. A., Voroshilova, M. B. (2012). Lingo-cultural type of a blonde: associative signs. Lingvoculturologia, 6, 19–23. (In Russian).
Breskin, D. (1989). Inner views: Filmmakers in conversation. Faber & Faber.
DiPaolo, M. (2011). War, politics and superheroes: Ethics and propaganda in comics and film. McFarland.
Dmitrieva, O. A. (2007). Lingvokulturnyye tipazhi Rossii i Frantsii XIX veka: Monografiya [Linguistic and cultural types of Russia and France of the 19th century: monograph]. Volgograd: Publishing house of VGPU “Peremena”. (In Russian).
Gazizov, R. A. (2004). O statuse etiketnogo obshcheniya i ponyatii kommunikativnogo etiketa [On the status of etiquette communication and the concept of communicative etiquette]. Filologicheskiye Nauki, 14, 5–9. (In Russian).
Gerbner, G., & Gross, L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of Communication, 26(2), 172–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1976.tb01397.x
Huesmann, L. R., Moise-Titus, J., Podolski, C.-L., & Eron, L. D. (2003). Longitudinal relations between children's exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and violent behavior in young adulthood: 1977–1992. Developmental Psychology, 39, 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.201
Hursthouse, R. (2013). Virtue ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/
Jonason, P. K., Webster, G. D., Schmitt, D. P., Li, N. P., & Crysel, L. (2012). The antihero in popular culture: Life history theory and the dark triad personality traits. Review of General Psychology, 16(2), 192–199.
Karasik, V. I. (2007). Yazykovyye klyuchi [Language keys]. Volgograd: Paradigma. (In Russian).
Karasik, V. I., Yarmakhova, E. A. (2006). Lingvokulturnyy tipazh “angliyskiy chudak” [Linguistic and cultural type “English eccentric”]. M.: Gnosis. (In Russian).
Karaulov, Yu. N. (1989). Russkaya yazykovaya lichnost i zadachi ee izucheniya [Russian linguistic personality and the tasks of its study]. Yazyk i lichnost, 3–8. (In Russian).
Mrug, S., Madan, A., & Wright, R. A. (2016). Emotional desensitization to violence contributes to adolescents’ violent behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 44(1), 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-9986-x
Nolan, C. (Director). (2008). The dark knight [Film]. Warner Bros. Pictures.
Ocheretyany, К. А. (2020). Super-non-hero: from superpower to ultra-violence. Galactica Media: Journal of Media Studies, 3, 27-46. https://doi.org/10.46539/gmd.v2i3.109 (In Russian).
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6
Prokhorov, Yu. E., Sternin, I. A. (2007). Russkie: kommunikativnoe povedenie [Russians: communicative behavior]. Moscow: Flinta: Nauka. (In Russian).
Shalina, I. V. (2009). Uralskoe gorodskoe prostorechie: Lingvokulturnye tipazhi [Ural urban vernacular: linguocultural types]. Izv. Ural. un-ta, 4(66), 134–143. (In Russian).
Ting-Toomey, S., & Chung, L. (2005). Understanding intercultural communication. Oxford University Press.
Vorkachev, S. G. (2001). Lingvokul'turologiya, yazykovaya lichnost', kontsept: Stanovleniye antropotsentricheskoy paradigmy v yazykoznanii [Linguoculturology, linguistic persona, concept: the formation of an anthropocentric paradigm in linguistics]. Philologicheckie Nauki, 1, 64–72. (In Russian).
White, M. D. (2008). Watchmen and philosophy: A rorschach test. John Wiley & Sons.!
Althen, G. (2003). American ways: A guide for foreigners in the United States. Intercultural Press.
Anderson, C.A. & Bushman, B.J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27-51. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231
Bandura, A. (1971). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.
Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193-209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
Breskin, D. (1989). Inner views: Filmmakers in conversation. Faber & Faber.
DiPaolo, M. (2011). War, politics and superheroes: Ethics and propaganda in comics and film. McFarland.
Gerbner, G., & Gross, L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of Communication, 26(2), 172–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1976.tb01397.x
Huesmann, L. R., Moise-Titus, J., Podolski, C.-L., & Eron, L. D. (2003). Longitudinal relations between children's exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and violent behavior in young adulthood: 1977–1992. Developmental Psychology, 39, 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.201
Hursthouse, R. (2013). Virtue ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/
Jonason, P. K., Webster, G. D., Schmitt, D. P., Li, N. P., & Crysel, L. (2012). The antihero in popular culture: Life history theory and the dark triad personality traits. Review of General Psychology, 16(2), 192–199.
Mrug, S., Madan, A., & Wright, R. A. (2016). Emotional desensitization to violence contributes to adolescents’ violent behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 44(1), 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-9986-x
Nolan, C. (Director). (2008). The dark knight [Film]. Warner Bros. Pictures.
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6
Ting-Toomey, S., & Chung, L. (2005). Understanding intercultural communication. Oxford University Press.
White, M. D. (2008). Watchmen and philosophy: A rorschach test. John Wiley & Sons.
Базикова, А. А., Ворошилова, М. Б. (2012). Лингвокультурный типаж блондинки: ассоциативные признаки. Лингвокультурология, 6, 19–23.
Воркачев, С. Г. (2001). Лингвокультурология, языковая личность, концепт: становление антропоцентрической парадигмы в языкознании. Филологические науки, 1, 64–72.
Газизов, Р. А. (2004). О статусе этикетного общения и понятии коммуникативного этикета. Культура общения и ее формирование, 14, 5–9.
Дмитриева, О. А. (2007). Лингвокультурные типажи России и Франции XIX века: монография. Волгоград: Изд-во ВГПУ «Перемена».
Карасик, В. И., Ярмахова, Е. А. (2006). Лингвокультурный типаж «английский чудак». М.: Гнозис.
Карасик, В. И. (2007). Языковые ключи. Волгоград: Парадигма.
Караулов, Ю. Н. (1989). Русская языковая личность и задачи её изучения. Язык и личность, 3–8.
Очеретяный, К. А. (2020). Супернегерой: от суперсилы к ультранасилию. Galactica Media: Journal of Media Studies, 3, 27-46. https://doi.org/10.46539/gmd.v2i3.109
Прохоров, Ю. Е., Стернин, И. А. (2007). Русские: коммуникативное поведение. М.: Флинта: Наука.
Шалина, И. В. (2009). Уральское городское просторечие: лингвокультурные типажи. Известия Уральского университета, 4(66), 134–143.