It is said that we are living in the golden age of television, shows such as Breaking Bad, Sons of Anarchy, Walking Dead, and Game of Thrones are extremely popular. A similar characteristic of these shows, and the relation to contemporary literature is the use of the anti-hero. These characters are flawed, and more complicated and robust then traditional protagonists. We typically view situations from their prospectives and because of this we, like the characters, justify their actions. It is alright, in the eyes of the viewer, for Walter White to sell drugs and kill people because he is doing it to protect and support his family.
Initially I attempted to view Amy in the archetype of the anti-hero, she is a strong and intelligent woman who is trapped in an undesirable position, and has never been in control of her life. However, as we learn more about Amy, we learn she is not an anti-hero at all, but more of a satirical foil to the anti-hero that has become so common in contemporary art. We initially think that we are seeing the story from her perspective, but we learn that her accounts of her marriage are a lie, part of a diabolical plan to exact revenge on those who loved her. It is refreshing to see a female character flip the table on the damsel is distress cliche, yet for me it leaves me frustrated and angry with her for so callously hurting those around her. Like any anti-hero her actions are justified, Nick was a bad husband and her parents are also deeply flawed. Yet I still feel for Nick, and all those Amy is betraying. The traditional anti-hero’s actions are justified because the reader/viewer is able to understand their motives, yet Amy is more complicated than these characters because we see the effect her actions have on others. Breaking up perspective between Nick and Amy as well as the before and after we know the truth is a powerful tool the author uses to control the way we view the characters and their situations.
April 30, 2016 at 5:05 pm
I totally agree that Amy is Flynn’s unique twist on the lovable anti-hero. I think the whole book can be characterized on it’s ability to both examine, poke fun at and morph cultural and literature clichés and tropes –that we have all become familiar with. For me, what makes Amy stand out against other anti-heroic protagonists (or antagonists?) that we see in all aforementioned shows and other popular texts, is the fact that we never see Amy feel guilt. Even if we can recognize that her desire for vengeance is founded in a reality of shitty husband and parents, we never see her apologize for what she has done. Most anti-heros have more of a sense of shame, they admit they’re doing bad things and give the audience a chance to see their guilt, but if she feels anything at all over what she does; Amy is probably proud of all the pain she inflicts. She views it as examples of her success and intelligence. She doesn’t pretend to justify her reasons for the greater good, her reality is her own point of view and only her point of view.
LikeLiked by 1 person