Who Drinks Your Milkshake? America's Anxieties in Post-9/11 Hollywood Cinema

(1)

WHO DRINKS YOUR MILKSHAKE?

America’s Anxieties in Post-9/11 Hollywood Cinema

Student: Malou Wagenmaker

Student number: 6117635

Supervisor: Abraham Geil

Second reader: Eef Masson

Programme: Master Film Studies

Department: Media Studies

University: University of Amsterdam

(2)

Abstract

The aim of this thesis is to analyze the representation of America’s anxieties in Hollywood cinema of the post-9/11 decade. In order to do so, it examines three films that each have a different position towards the dominant ideology of the American nation.

The major part of this research consists of three case-studies that provide a detailed reading of the films: The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008), There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2008) and The Road (John Hillcoat, 2009). These readings examine the films use the concepts of myth and countermyth to mediate the ideology as consumable and how this indicates the political judgment of the films in relation to America’s anxieties in the political climate of the first decade of the twenty-first century.

The results of the research is that Hollywood cinema of the post-9/11 decade has an ambivalence in its mediation of ideology, because it represents the dominant ideology of American capitalism as being both a cause of and a resolution to the main anxiety about a destruction of American society.

Keywords: film, ideology, myth, countermyth, Hollywood, America, post-9/11, anxiety,

(4)

1. Introduction: Analyzing Anxieties

A film mediates the cultural mood of the nation and time in which it is produced. This cultural mood is influenced by the cultural anxieties of the nation’s society. Through this mediation of its social, economic and political climate films can provide insight into what these anxiety are. In this thesis I will focus on the representation of America’s anxieties in three Hollywood films that were produced during the first decade of the twenty-first century: The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008), There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2007) and The Road (John Hillcoat, 2009). These films give their own

representation of cultural anxieties of America in the post-millennium decade. This decade is a relevant period for analyzing anxieties because there is an intensification of them as a result of several events that were of high-impact to the cultural mood of the American nation. The main incident that started the post-millennium decade with a feeling of anxiety is the terrorist attack of 9/11 on the World Trade Center in New York in 2001. After this attack several other developments, such as former president George W. Bush’s war on terror as a response to the attacks, his invasion of Iraq in 2003, the start of the economic crisis and the growth of global warming stimulated America’s anxieties. This strong relation between American anxieties and American politics is present in Hollywood films. Examples of films of this decade in which cultural anxiety plays an important role and that make implicit references to the political climate are United 93 (Paul Greengrass, 2006) and World Trade

Center (Oliver Stone, 2006). These films use the attacks of 9/11 as the main element to create

suspense in their plot. Other examples of films are District 9 (Neill Blomkamp, 2008), which makes implicit references to society's anxiety about migration, and The Bourne Ultimatum (Paul Greengrass, 2007), which is a ‘conspiracy film’ that refers to an anxiety created by conspiring governmental institutions.

As I will argue in this thesis, there are three important positions Hollywood films take in relation to the dominant ideology. These positions correspond to Jean-Luc Comolli’s and Paul Narboni’s categorization of films in their editorial for Cahiers du Cinéma (1969) published in Screen as “Cinema/Ideology/Criticism” (1971). This categorization is based on the political judgment films make in their mediation of ideology. According to Comolli and

(5)

Narboni most films adapt the ideology without questioning the ideology or even being aware the ideology is mediated within the film. Other films are aware of the ideology and adapt it to reveal its dominance. There are also films that use their awareness of the dominant ideology to challenge the ideology by rejecting its norms and values. The Dark

Knight, There Will Be Blood and The Road each correspond to one of these positions which

means they collectively give a tall picture of Hollywood’s representation of American anxieties. To analyze how Hollywood films mediate American anxieties it is necessary to understand the concepts of national cinema and ideology. The concept of ideology helps to ascribe meaning to national cinema, because it establishes the relationship between the film and the national context in which it is produced.

The concept of national cinema can relate to different definitions. For example, it can embody all the films produced by a national film industry, including production,

distribution, exhibition and reception. Secondly, national cinema can embody the films produced by a national industry and their representation of the ‘nationhood’ (Higson 1989, 36). This is the text-based approach of the concept of national cinema this thesis will focus on. I will not compare American cinema to other national cinema, because my main focus is on how America mediates its ‘own’ anxieties in their Hollywood films. I will use the concept to connect the anxieties of the national and cultural mood of America to Hollywood’s mediation of these anxieties. The level of mediation that films use to represent cultural anxiety is different in every film, because each film has its own attitude towards the ideology it presents. Every film is political, but not every film is explicitly political. This means that every film represents the ideology of the nation and time in which it is produced in some way, but not every film reveals the dominant ideology explicitly.

The implicit mediation of ideology in film is the result of ideology being ‘an

unconscious process’ and ‘a closed system’ (Story 2009, 72). Ideology represents, according to the Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser: ‘the imaginary relationship of individuals to their real conditions of existence’ (1971, 234). Ideology is a practice that works to make the formation of society appear as ‘natural’ (Maltby 2003, 301). The idea that ideology seems natural is reflected by Comolli’s and Narboni’s notion that the majority of films of national cinema affirms the dominant ideology unthinkingly (1971, 31). Ideology is mediated in national cinema through the representation of ‘myth’. The cultural theorist Roland Barthes

(6)

refers to ideology as myth in Mythologies (1973), a collection of essays on French popular culture. Barthes’ definition of myth can be described as: ‘A body of ideas and practices, which by actively promoting the values and interests of dominant groups in society, defend the prevailing structures of power’ (Story 2009, 119). Myth makes ideology consumable because the ideology is presented in a certain form so ‘it makes us understand something and it imposes it on us’ (Barthes 1973, 265). This means that the production of myth is a production of ideology. Barthes uses the terms ‘denotation’ (primary signification) and ‘connotation’ (secondary signification) to explain how myths are present in cultural

products. These terms arrive from linguist Ferdinand de Saussure’s schema of the signifier and signified that produce a sign (1966, 67). The signifier is the form a sign takes and the signified is the concept that the sign represents. The produced sign consists of the whole of the signifier and signified. The term denotation is this whole the sign embodies. Connotation is the activated meaning by the expressed values of the sign’s denotation. This connotation produces myth (and dominant ideology) as consumable (Story 119).

The way the myth is represented refers to the condition of existence under which the myth is produced. Myth covers up the political content of film which means that it is not directly or explicitly experienced as political. This attention to ideology and political theory in film studies in the 1970s is connected to the appearance of political films that were produced in this decade. Films such as Jaws (Steven Spielberg, 1975), The Exorcist (William Friedkin, 1973), Taxi Driver (Martin Scorsese, 1976), Close Encounters of the Third Kind (Stephen Spielberg, 1977), Apocalypse Now (Francis Ford Coppola, 1979) give an

interpretation of the cultural mood and anxieties of the 1970s that were influenced by events such as the Vietnam War, the assassination of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King and the Watergate scandal. These films mediate the cultural anxieties in a consumable form by representing ideology in myths. Film analyses of the dominant ideology in national cinema mostly try to reveal the political content films oppress. For example Stephen Heat interprets the film Jaws as a film that refers to the Watergate scandal and that shows that ‘order is fragile, but possible’ (Nichols 1980, 510). He uses elements of structuralism and early semiology to analyze how myth represents the political context (511). Douglas Kellner’s reading of First Blood (also known as Rambo I )(Ted Kotcheff, 1982) interprets the film as a myth about the Vietnam war and the depiction of social conflicts as threats to a conservative

(7)

hegemony. Kellner states that: ‘Reading films politically […] can provide insight not only into the ways that film reproduces existing social struggles within contemporary U.S. society but can also provide insight into social and political dynamics’ (1991, 103). Julian Ross claims that the film Snakes on a Plane (David R. Ellis, 2005) mediates the post-9/11 social anxiety about the American struggle of ‘us’ versus ‘them’. Heroism and solidarity are solutions presented in the film ‘to support for a commitment to war’ (Ross 2009).

In this thesis I am adopting this tradition of investigating how Hollywood films mediate the political situation of a nation. The above mentioned readings of films of the 1970s and 1980s focus on the films’ myths that affirm the dominant ideology of America. My approach will not only pay attention to the elements of the film that promote or affirm the ideology but also to those that challenge or reject the ideology. My claim is that films can do this by revealing problems in the representation of the myth or by turning the myth into a countermyth. A countermyth is produced to challenge the ideology the myth promotes. Films that produce a countermyth are, according to Comolli and Narboni, films which subvert the dominant ideology and are ‘essential in cinema’(1971, 32). The political

judgment of a film determines if it is challenging the ideology or not. To analyze the way a film challenges the ideology it is necessary to take a look at the norms and values the film promotes and how these are mediated by the myth. The challenging of these norms and values gives an indication of what the threats to the ideology are. If the threats in the film are resolved the dominant ideology is prevented from being challenged. Films that do challenge the dominant ideology can give the suggestion that values of the dominant ideology are dangerous and do not always represent any successful solution that resolves the threat.

With this methodology I am going to explore in detail how The Dark Knight, There

Will Be Blood and The Road represent their threats and solutions in relation to the dominant

ideology of the real-life conditions of America. The first case study of The Dark Knight is the second film of director Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy and is set in a post-9/11 America. As I will argue, this film is implicitly political in its mediation of the dominant ideology through the depiction of the myth of American heroism. The threats that attack this ideology are resolved by the values that are promoted in the ideology. In the second case study of

There Will Be Blood the threats are not resolved nor is the dominant ideology affirmed.

(8)

America. However, its threats present similarities with the socio-political climate of post-9/11 America. I will argue that There Will Be Blood presents the myth of the American Dream as a countermyth in order to reject the dominant ideology. In the third case study the dominant ideology is presented in The Road’s depiction of the myth of American exceptionalism. The film challenges the ideology in its representation of a dying

post-apocalyptic America, but without turning the myth into a countermyth as There Will Be Blood does. The Road shows the weakness of the ideology but offers a solution to the threats that stands in line with the values of its myths.

Although the judgment about the dominant ideology is different in every case study, all the films I am going to analyze are political in nature and have a sort of ambivalence in them. The films present certain threats that refer to current dangers in American society in the depiction of an American myth. The destruction of the established order in American society is a reoccurring anxiety in every film of my case studies. However, the presence of this destruction, the precise causes of this anxiety and the solution to the threats are

represented differently in each film. The implicit political character of The Dark Knight, There

Will Be Blood and The Road in combination with their different positions towards the

dominant ideology of America give an impression of how post-9/11 Hollywood cinema represents America’s anxieties.

(9)

2. The Batman and The Myth of American Heroism

I think that one of the things in taking on an action film set in a great American city post-9/11, if we were going to be honest in terms of our fears and what might threaten this great city, then we were going to come up against terrorism and how that might feature in the universe of Batman. And I think we approached it with a great deal of sincerity.

- Christopher Nolan on Batman Begins (2005) (Tapley 2012)

This remark by director Christopher Nolan, who started a trilogy in 2005 with Batman Begins, is an example of the adaption of anxieties in film in the post-9/11 decade. The poster of his next film The Dark Knight (2008) predicts a similar adaption (figure 1). The poster shows Batman standing in front of a skyscraper with a flaming bat-shaped hole in it. Billowing clouds of dust and smoke create a dark atmosphere and a sense of impending danger. The image of a damaged skyscraper brings up memories

of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 on the World Trade Center in New York in 2001. There is no scene in the film that shows a burning building in the way the poster does, but this image does refer to a cultural anxiety in American society that returns in scenes of The Dark Knight. This anxiety is the result of events and developments in the beginning of the twenty-first century of America, such as the attacks of 9/11 and the policy of former president George W. Bush. Bush’s presidency from 2001 till 2009 is marked by a rise of America’s collective feeling of anxiety caused by terrorism, the government’s response to terrorism and the decline of America’s economic power as a result of the economic crisis (The White House, n.d.).

The threats that occur in The Dark Knight are implicit representations of dangers to the post-9/11 American society. As will be argued in this chapter, the political context in which The Dark Knight is produced is mediated in the film in its presentation of the modern

Figure 1: The Dark Knight Film Poster (2008)

(10)

myth of American heroism. This myth promotes the dominant ideology that American values, such as wealth, capitalism, strength and rightness, give the nation the power and the rights to fight against any threat to this ideology. The myth does even justify the forms of resistance that work outside the systems of law and order as long as they protect society’s order. The figure of Batman is the representation of this justified outlaw resistance. The myth in The Dark Knight stimulates the belief in the ideals of American Heroism. The myth of American heroism in the film offers a resolution to real-life threats in American society with its representation of the characters Batman and Harvey Dent. Batman is an implicit personification of the American values in the form of a superhero who fights against the threats that cause anxieties. Batman does this as a ‘Dark Knight’, who represents the necessary outlaw activities to maintain order. Harvey Dent represents the same values, but as a ‘White Knight’, who represents the belief that law and order are the best answer to crime and terrorism.

The threats are represented in the characters of Two Face and The Joker, who are an implicit personification of the dangers in the post-9/11 American society. Batman and The Joker are both outlaws, because they operate outside the rules of the system, in contrast to Harvey Dent who is a representative of the rules of the system and the law. Batman and Harvey want to protect the order in contradiction to The Joker who is a villain trying to create chaos. The Joker represents the threat of an anarchist form of terrorism and the decline of economic power in America. When Harvey no longer believes in the American values he changes into character Two Face. With this transformation his goal to protect order changes in the goal to attack the order. This gives the indication that Two Face represents the threat of governmental corruption and conspiracy. In The Dark Knight, Two Face and The Joker are both depicted as villains and threats, in contrast to Batman and Harvey Dent who are referred to as ‘heroes the city needs’ or ‘deserves’. This means that those who possess the values of American society are not depicted as a threat to American dominant ideology. The events and developments of (post-)9/11 that caused the collective anxiety are depicted in The

Dark Knight as threats that attack the American values of its dominant ideology.

The main threat that is referred to in the film is anarchist terrorism, because it is the most difficult threat to be resolved. The threat attacks American values and is therefore hard to be understood by Batman because his character represents these values. The threat of

(11)

governmental corruption and conspiracy is presented as a less dangerous threat, because it is better understandable and easier to be resolved. Governmental conspiracy is even presented as something necessary to attack the more dangerous threats, because the rules of the system are not able to resolve all the threats. This refers to James Gordon, head of the police department of Gotham (of which some police officers have questionable backgrounds) who does not fulfil the policy of arresting outlaw Batman. Nevertheless he still represents the myth and promotes the ideology, because he acknowledges the values of American society.

The actions of Batman in his attempt to fight the threats in Gotham promote the myth of American heroism. What is defined as heroic in America is based on what is defined as noble and courageous in America according to the ideology. American heroism is based on the idea that America is able to perform heroic acts as a nation in order to preserve the values of its society. The act of self-sacrifice is an important example of an heroic act because it represents moral greatness. The concept of American heroism gained a lot of attention in American society in the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11 in which American police men, firefighters and citizens offered help and made sacrifices to save others (William R. Thomas 2001). The myth of American heroism in the film plays an important role in the resistance against the threats that it presents. This heroism is about superheroism and democratic heroism, because the heroic deeds are not only performed by superhero Batman, but by the citizens of Gotham as well. Thus, The Dark Knight promotes the myth of American heroism in order to affirm a dominant American ideology. This means the film could be categorized in the first category of films Jean-Luc Comolli and Paul Narboni created about ideology in films:

The first and largest category comprises those films which are imbued through and through with the dominant ideology in pure and unadulterated form, and give no indication that their makers were even aware of the fact. […] The ideology is talking to itself; it has all the answers ready before it asks the questions. […] The whole thing is a closed circuit, endlessly repeating the same illusion (1971, 31).

(12)

The Dark Knight repeats the illusion that the anxieties about threats in post-9/11 America can

be reduced by the ideology of American heroism that offers the power to save society from any threat.

2.1 Anarchist Terrorism: The Shift from Crime to Chaos

You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble.

They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll show you. When the chips are down, these... these civilized people, they'll eat each other. See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve.

- The Joker in The Dark Knight

The first scene of The Dark Knight immediately introduces The Joker as the personification of the main threat. He is an unpredictable, maniacal anarchist, who calls himself ‘an agent of chaos’. With the arrival of The Joker daily crime in Gotham shifts from an understandable form of crime to a less understandable form of crime. In the opening scene The Joker robs a mob bank with his accomplices. The Joker informed each of them to kill one of the other robbers after they finished their part of the job so The Joker is the only one who survives the robbery and owns all the stolen money. This well thought-out plan shows The Joker’s intellect and his lack of empathy. It also introduces the current situation in Gotham. The ‘traditional’ criminals who, apparently, own banks and are after power are replaced by a new kind of criminal that commits crime in order to create chaos. The manager of the bank asks The Joker: ‘Criminals in this town used to believe in things; honor, respect! Look at you! What do you believe in?’ The bank manager claims there was a time in Gotham when criminals still had sense of morality, which is something The Joker does not have. There is a shift from rational crime to anarchist, destructive terrorism. The traditional criminals steal money out of greed. The Joker steals money to stimulate the chaos and economic decline in the city. The Joker answers the bank manager: ‘I believe whatever doesn't kill you, simply makes you stranger.’ Replacing ‘stronger’ for ‘stranger’ gives this sentence a completely different meaning. It relates to The Joker himself, who looks ‘strange’ because of his scars and make up, but also to the characters Bruce Wayne and Harvey Dent who survived (or

(13)

will survive) something life threatening but have to pay the price of becoming ‘stranger’, because they become outlaws and their looks separate them from the ‘everyday’ person.

Therefore, it refers to a social and mutual

change of representatives of order. This creates a shift from order to chaos as well because the representatives of order become representatives of chaos.

This shift from crime to chaos is the goal of The Joker. He has no interest in money, friendship or appreciation. He just wants, as Bruce Wayne’s butler Alfred mentions, to ‘watch the world burn.’ In a conversation with a member of the mob The Joker says: ‘All you care about is money. This city deserves a better class of criminal. And I'm going to give it to them.’ The Joker burns the money he stole

because it is not his goal to become rich but to destroy American society by burning its capital (figure 2). The burning of the money brings up memories about the attacks of 9/11. The attacks on the World Trade Center symbolized the militant group Al-Qaeda’s rejection of American values such as capitalism. The Joker argues that his introduction of crime in the city is different than that of the others: ‘It's not about money. It’s about sending a message.’ The interest in money by criminals is understandable, because it is based on the value of American capitalism. The message that The Joker sends is much harder to understand, because it rejects this dominant American ideology. The rejection of interest in capital and the power of money in combination with the planning of attacks on buildings and citizens of an American city are remarkable similarities between The Joker and an anarchist form of terrorism. The Joker also uses videotapes of himself to shock people and to stimulate chaos in society (figure 3). The attacking of buildings and capital of America and threatening

Figure 2: The Joker's videotape Figure 3: The Joker burns the stolen money

(14)

America in self-recorded videotapes are similar to the acts of Al-Qaeda around 9/11 (Brumfield and Tawfeeq, 2013).

The actions of The Joker, his unknown identity and his constantly changing story of his past1 refer to an existential form of nihilism. The Joker does not believe in life having meaning nor does he have any concern for morality, which makes him a moral nihilist. He argues: ‘The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules.’ The Joker’s rejection of the rules that American society and ideology is based on is presented as an

incomprehensible threat of anarchist terrorism for those who live by the rules and ideology of American society. According to The Joker, the rules of the system do not work:

Nobody panics when things go "according to plan". Even if the plan is horrifying! If, tomorrow, I tell the press that, like, a gang banger will get shot, or a truckload of soldiers will be blown up, nobody panics, because it's all "part of the plan". But when I say that one little old mayor will die, well then everyone loses their minds!

This statement of The Joker argues that moral goodness is only measured to the conditions of existence and that these conditions of existence, meaning the dominant ideologies in American society try to cover up the ‘horrors’ of the system. The Joker’s appearance

supports the fear he tries to generate. He wears make-up as war paint, a purple suit and his messy hair is painted green. A scar on his face draws a line that looks like an extension of his mouth. The scar is accentuated with red make-up, making him constantly ‘smiling’ (figure 4). The Joker uses the figure of the joker of the playing cards to create the chaos. The joker of a card game is able to ‘break’ in during the game: It can push the game into another

direction, work as the highest trump and have different meanings every time it is revealed. Sometimes the card is used to replace a lost card (Adam and Simon Wintle 2014). These effects are similar to the actions of The Joker in The Dark Knight who uses the joker card to mark places he has been (figure 5) or to mark people he will attack. The card is a motif in the film, because it is a constantly returning prop that refers to the actions of The Joker. The image of the joker on the card is a sign that creates the denotation of violence and murder; things that happened or will happen at the places the cards are found. Therefore the joker 1 The Joker’s explanation of what caused his scars returns several times, but every time he tells a different story about his past (The Dark Knight. Dir. Christopher Nolan. Warner Bros, 2009).

(15)

card becomes a connotation for anarchist terrorism: The actions of The Joker are all done with the goal to create chaos and destroy order in Gotham. This threat is fought by Batman whose goal is the opposite: He wants to create order and maintain justice.

2.2 American Heroism: Self-Sacrifices and Legalized Lies

You thought we could be decent men in an indecent time. But you were wrong. The world is cruel, and the only morality in a cruel world is chance.

- Harvey Dent in The Dark Knight

Batman’s job as a superhero is to save the city from crime and other threats. The general characteristic of superheroes is that their supernatural powers give them some sort of superiority that ‘normal’ citizens do not have. Batman has no supernatural powers; he is a superhero, because he has access to material resources, such as high-technological gadgets that make him ‘super’. This presented superiority of Batman is made possible by his capital, his moral goodness and his rules. His fortune gives him the possibility to buy the things he needs to convince society he is a superhero and give him access to the weapons to fight criminals. His moral goodness gives him the drive to save others first and not himself. Besides this, Batman has the rule never to kill anyone, not even an enemy (unless it prevents the death of an innocent person); a rule most outlaws in Gotham do not have. Batman cooperates with lieutenant James Gordon and district attorney Harvey Dent which legalizes his existence as an outlaw. All his personal investments to fight for the greater good make

Figure 5: The Joker cards after an attack

(16)

him a figure that represents the ‘good’ capitalist. A citizen (Bruce Wayne) becoming a hero (Batman) without gaining any direct profit from his deeds, represents the myth of American heroism. This myth promotes the belief that American citizens are able to make sacrifices for the greater good and that their morals are based on the importance of protecting order and justice in society.

This myth is shown in the scene in which The Joker threatens to blow up two ferries if the travelers on the one ferry do not blow up the other ferry within one hour. One of the ferries is filled with prisoners. One prisoner is the first to decide to not blow up the other ferry by demanding the detonator from a guard: ‘You don't want to die, but you don't know how to take a life. Give it to me. These men will kill you and take it anyway. Give it to me. You can tell people I took it by force. Give it to me, and I'll do what you should have done ten minutes ago’. The prisoner throws the detonator into the canal. The people on the other ferry are also too noble to use the detonator. This means they rather die than live with the idea of killing other people — even when they are criminals. Batman says in his fight with The Joker: ‘This city just showed you that it's full of people ready to believe in good’. These acts of self-sacrifice by persons who are no superheroes, but ‘ordinary’ citizens, affirms the belief that American heroism is an American value any American citizen can own.

Although he is a protector of the American values of the dominant ideology Batman permits himself to break some of these values for a short period to reach his goal. This happens in the scene where Batman uses the sonar system of Lucius Fox to find out where The Joker is hiding (figure 6). This sonar system gives access to every mobile cellphone in Gotham. Lucius criticizes the system, because he finds it ‘unethical’, ‘wrong’ and

‘dangerous’ to ‘spy on thirty million people’. The spying is done without the awareness of the citizens and is a violation of privacy. Eventually, Fox agrees to use the system because it is to protect Gotham from something even more dangerous on the condition that the system will be destroyed afterwards. Batman breaks the value of freedom and privacy, but because he does this to protect society from terror, it is presented as a necessary outlaw activity. The image of the hundred screens that show private information about citizens refers implicitly to the mass surveillance in American society in the name of the war on terror. The Bush administration and the NSA both authorized illegal wiretapping because it was presented as necessary to find links with Al-Qaeda and to protect society (Risen and Lichtblau 2005).

(17)

Although the system in The Dark Knight is, in contrast to the American system, destroyed after the threat is resolved, the film's representation of the importance and authorized goal of the secret surveillance is similar. In a certain way the system does the same ‘secret surveillance’ as Batman does. Even James Gordon concludes the film with: ‘He's a silent guardian. A watchful protector. A dark knight’, reinforcing this idea.

Harvey Dent is also participating in the myth of American heroism but is, unlike Batman, a hero with a face. He represents the person who should maintain the order through the legal system of law and order. Therefore, Harvey is referred to as ‘White Knight’ and ‘the hero Gotham needs’. Bruce calls Harvey ‘a hero with a face’. He sees him as the personification of the goal he as Batman wants to reach. However, it turns out that Harvey cannot stop all the criminals in Gotham without using the outlaw Batman. The governmental system does not work successfully on its own. It needs to break the law to protect the order, but when it does, it destroys the order, because the system is not supposed to break the law but to obey it. Batman is breaking the law without destroying order, because he is a vigilante who is not part of a governmental system. His outlaw activities are accepted by the citizens of Gotham, but the breaking of the law by those who are part of the governmental system is not

accepted at all. This is why Harvey and James hide their illegal activities from the public. In the scene where Harvey just has discovered Rachel will be the next person The Joker wants to kill, one of Harvey’s outlaw activities is shown. Harvey's anxiety to lose a loved one makes him lose control of rightness. He kidnaps and tortures an accomplice of The Joker. He threatens the man by saying he will kill him if he does not reveal the location of The Joker. Every time the man says he does not know the villain’s location, Harvey flips his lucky coin: ‘Heads, you get to keep your head. Tails, not so lucky’. This act is criticized by Batman, because it is an act of breaking the law, which can only be done by an outlaw,

Figure 7: The burned lucky coin Figure 6: The sonar system

(18)

not by a district attorney. According to Batman: ‘If anyone saw this, everything would be undone’. Harvey does not agree, because he knows that his lucky coin is a fake coin with heads on both sides, meaning he will never actually physically harm the interrogated man.

This lucky coin is a motif in the film, first used by Harvey to tease his girlfriend Rachel when he gambles about an important court case, secondly to interrogate the accomplice and thirdly several times to actually gamble about a person's life. Every time the coin is flipped by Harvey he blames its outcome to chance. The first time it is a rather innocent white lie to impress Rachel with his confidence. The second time Harvey's behavior is less innocent, because he mentally tortures the man with the thought of a possible death. Harvey

mentioned earlier that: ‘You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain’. Eventually, this happens to him after he is transformed into Two Face. This is foreshadowed by the lighting during the torture scene. The dark shadows of the setting split his face in two sides, visualizing that his 'dark' side is already present (figure 8 and 9). Although Harvey will never actually kill the man, he uses the outlaw methods Batman is allowed to use that he himself is not. Harvey breaks the rules of the system to protect his personal interests (presented in the figure of Rachel). Important is that Harvey uses the coin as manipulation trick and to lie to the man. He hides the most important element of the coin (the absence of tails) to reach the desired goal. Harvey does, as he says, ‘make his own luck’. Therefore, the coin becomes a symbol of controlled power. Harvey controls his luck, because he withholds information from the public. This represents the unequal relation between society's rulers and its citizens who are controlled by the system.

When one of the coin’s sides is damaged and colored black after the explosion (that damages half of Harvey's face as well) the meaning of the coin changes (figure 7). Now the

Figure 9: Two Face tortures Figure 8: Harvey Dent tortures

(19)

coin is used by Two Face and does really decide about someone’s life by chance because it has two different sides. Now it is a denotation for corruption and a connotation for

uncontrolled and dangerous power that exists in the governmental systems. Harvey Dent's power that is gained by the use of his coin is based on unfair methods, such as lying, torturing and withholding crucial information. However, this enables him to control his power over society as a district attorney. When Harvey turns into Two Face his power that is gained by the coin is based on the fair method of chance. Although chance is fair because its outcome cannot be influenced by power, it is also uncontrollable and therefore it cannot exclude the destruction of order in society. Two Face represents the threat of governmental corruption as a result of uncontrollable power caused by the loss of family and moral nihilism.

At this point, Harvey has become a threat to order in Gotham and an enemy of Batman. When Harvey discovers it was James Gordon who did not save Rachel in time, he takes James’ family hostage and threatens to kill James' son. The threat of losing family is presented as another important threat in the film, because it happened to Batman and Harvey and both are still seeking revenge. Batman tries to convince Two Face he should point the gun at the people who are responsible for Dawes death, meaning himself. This act of self-sacrifice in an attempt to save the innocent promotes the myth of American heroism again. Two Face still wants to kill the son, so Batman pushes him out of the building which results in his death. Now Batman decides he has to sacrifice himself and he takes

responsibility for the actions of Two Face, because the citizens of Gotham must never know their ‘hero’ has turned into a ‘villain’. This decision is visualized by Batman turning the head of Two Face so his ‘good’ half is the only one visible. Batman repeats Harvey’s line: ‘You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain’ that now refers to himself. In this final scene Batman brings a big sacrifice, because he gives up his role as superhero to prevent the citizens of Gotham from getting to know the truth about

governmental corruption. This act of self-sacrifice is presented as heroic which suggests that disguising the truth for citizens by representatives of order and capitalism is good when it is done in order to maintain order in society: ‘I'm whatever Gotham needs me to be […]

Sometimes the truth isn't good enough, sometimes people deserve more. Sometimes people deserve to have their faith rewarded’. This line of Batman promotes the importance of

(20)

withholding information in order to prevent the loss of moral goodness that is a threat to order in society. This suggests that the film argues that it is better to lie or to manipulate someone’s thoughts than tell the truth, because the certainty of order is more important than the chance of chaos.

2.3 Threatening Lights, Heights and Glass

As already mentioned in the section above, the use of light in The Dark Knight’s supports the representation of threats. The separation of the threat and it resistance is represented in the contrasts between interior and exterior, lightness and darkness. Dark places are mostly representing threat, fear and chaos. Light settings involve goodness and solutions for chaos. The interior represents the safe and the exterior the dangerous. In many scenes the interior is separated from the exterior by the use of glass windows. The glass separates the safe from the danger, but keeps both visible for each other. This separation by windows can turn into a connection when the glass is broken. This happens in several important scenes in the film, symbolizing a break between the safe and the dangerous by connecting the safe interior with the dangerous exterior.

In the first establishing shot of the film the setting of Gotham is introduced; the camera moves forward towards a glass, dark skyscraper. When the camera is closer, one of the windows of the skyscraper breaks and glass falls down (figure 10). Behind the broken glass appears a man with a clowns mask who shot the window. The shattered glass represents the arrival of chaos. Later in the scene the bank manager, who is hiding behind a glass window of his office, shoots the glass first before he attacks the robbers. By breaking the glass the

Figure 11: The Bat light's destruction

(21)

manager reveals his identity and presence and therefore loses his safety, which means he gets shot by The Joker. In another scene where The Joker breaks in at the fund-raising party at Wayne’s penthouse, the villain breaks a glass window to throw Rachel outside in an attempt to kill her. In the final scene James breaks the glass of the Bat light (figure 11), symbolizing that Batman is no longer a symbol of hope for the citizens of Gotham, because he takes responsibility for a murder he did not commit in order to stop the chaos in society.

The settings’ use of height, light and glass is another important aspect of representing threats and the resistance to the threats in the film. Gotham is a large and modern developed city with many glass skyscrapers. The glass skyscrapers represent American civilization and American capitalism. The penthouse of Bruce is in a glass skyscraper (figure 12). From the exterior it looks like a dark building, reflecting the idea of ‘The Dark Knight’, a masked hero, but from the interior it is a bright place, reflecting the goodness of capitalist Bruce Wayne (figure 13). In contrast, the building of the police department has hardly any windows and is always dark. The lightning is poor and the furniture is dark. This represents the

corruption and the information hiding that the governmental institutions in Gotham are guilty of. The place where Harvey tortures The Joker’s accomplice is also a dark place and the poor lighting places the half of Harvey’s face in the dark, a reference to his ‘bad’ side and him becoming Two Face.

Another notable aspect is that most of the threats operate from the ground, while Batman operates from above and also lives in a skyscraper2. The resistance to the threat comes from the sky, from the source of light, as opposed to the threat itself that comes from the

underground, from the source of darkness. In the scene where the Joker attacks Harvey's 2 This is a contradiction to the other Batman films, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight Rises (Christopher Nolan,

2012) where Batman lives in his mansion outside the city and operates from his ‘Bat cave’ under the ground.

Figure 13: Wayne Enterprises' interior Figure 12: Wayne Enterprises' exterior

(22)

transport on the streets of Gotham, one of the cops gives the order to go to ‘the lower fifth’, because a burning fire truck blocks the road. His colleague responds: ‘The lower fifth? We will be as turkeys on Thanksgiving down there’, meaning there will be no air support downstairs and there is a big chance of being attacked underground. In the scene with the parade marching cops walk through the straight lined streets of Gotham that are

surrounded by skyscrapers, representing the structured order of the city (figure 14). James Gordon is worried, because The Joker gave information about an attack on the major. The high amount of glass windows in the buildings that surround the parade, symbolizes the presence of the hidden upcoming danger. During the speech of the major, James is

constantly looking up at the windows not knowing the real danger is already in the middle of the parade, because the threats in this film operate from the ground. The Joker and his accomplices took the uniforms and guns of real cops to take their place during the saluting shots in the parade and open fire on the major. After the firing starts, cops and citizens leave their structured formation and start running over the streets; a chaos is literally created by The Joker (figure 15).

2.4 Conclusion

As argued in this chapter The Dark Knight mediates the cultural anxiety about the order of American society turning into chaos. This change is caused by several threats that attack the norms and values of the dominant ideology. The threat of anarchist terrorism, represented by The Joker, rejects the values of American capitalism and the existence of morality, rules, law and order in general. The threat of governmental corruption, represented by Harvey

(23)

Dent, shows the illegal activities by representatives of order. The third threat of mass surveillance is the result of the outlaw activities of Batman and shows the violation of privacy.

The intensity of the danger each threat presents differs, because The Dark Knight suggests certain threats are necessary to resolve other, more dangerous threats. This means the film covers up these necessary threats in its representation of a myth. Anarchist terrorism is presented as the most dangerous threat; difficult to resolve and hard to be understood because it does not believe in the values of the dominant American ideology the other threats do believe in. The intensification of anxieties this threat causes justifies the outlaw activities performed by Batman and the authorization given to this outlaw by James Gordon and Harvey Dent. Although the legalization of an outlaw is an act of corruption itself and therefore a threat to the order, The Dark Knight does not present it as such.

The film uses the myth of American heroism to hide the problems the dominant ideology in America causes. As argued before, The Dark Knight can be categorized as a film in which ideology is affirmed and it ‘is talking to itself; it has all the answers ready before it asks the questions. […] The whole thing is a closed circuit, endlessly repeating the same illusion’ (Comolli and Narboni 1971, 31). The Dark Knight depicts the problems of the

ideology by its presentation of corrupt cops in de police department, a legalized outlaw that fights crime, illegal wiretapping to stop The Joker and a district attorney torturing a

prisoner. However, it ‘has all the answers ready’ to these problems in the myth of American heroism that affirms the norms and values of the ideology. It shows the power of the nation to perform noble acts, such as self-sacrifices, to protect the society from chaos. That these noble acts cannot exclude outlaw activities, such as fighting criminals and spying on citizens, is justified by the need to reduce the anxiety about anarchist terrorism. The Dark

Knight’s presentation of heroism as a characteristic any American can possess promotes the

belief in the nation’s collective power.

As argued, the presentation of Batman as a ‘masked’ resolution to the threat of anarchist terrorism can be interpreted as a symbol for the ‘masked’ gaps in the dominant ideology of American society. The illegal activities in The Dark Knight present similarities with activities by governmental institutions of the post-9/11 decade, such as wiretapping, torturing and withholding information from citizens. These real-life activities in America

(24)

have been justified by the Bush administration in order to win the war on terror. The excuse to use illegal methods for ‘the greater good’ is mirrored in The Dark Knight. Batman’s outlaw activities are made possible by American capitalism that gives Bruce Wayne the material goods to be a superhero and therefore to represent the good capitalist who uses his fortune for the greater good.

The threat of anarchist terrorism is represented in the surprise attacks of The Joker and refers to America’s anxiety about terrorism after 9/11. The use of signs such as joker cards and videotapes in the film are closely linked to the threatening messages America received from Al-Qaeda around 9/11. These signs are a connotation for chaos and

destruction. The contrasts used between interior and exterior and shadows and lights are not only raising the tension in the atmosphere of the film, but also can be interpreted as a

symbol for the shift from crime to chaos and the blurred lines between what can be classified as a threat and what as a necessary solution to another threat. The opacity of glass and the shattering of glass indicates this ‘blur’. The film’s depiction of threats on the ‘ground’ can be interpreted as an indication that real-life threats can evolve from within the rules of the system, such as corruption.

As I have argued in this chapter, The Dark Knight’s resolution for the threats that raise the anxiety about the destruction of order is American heroism, because this myth gives the idea that self-sacrifice, courage and knowledge of what is morally good can protect the American society. Besides this, the myth covers up the threats this myth cannot resolve, because certain threats are coming from within the dominant ideology. In the second case study I will argue that There Will Be Blood presents the dominant ideology in the form of a countermyth that uses elements of the myth to challenge the American norms and values the ideology usually promotes. This film can be interpreted as the opposite of The Dark Knight in its position towards the dominant ideology.

(25)

3. The Oilman and The Myth of The American Dream

I have a competition in me. I want no one else to succeed. I hate most people.

- Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood

The historical epic There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2007) is loosely based on the first one hundred and fifty pages of Upton Sinclair's novel Oil! (Rosenstone and Parvulescu 2012, 303) with its socio-political satire on the view on the oil industry (Sinclair, 1927). Both

Oil! and There Will Be Blood set their story between the end of the nineteenth century and the

beginning of the twentieth century. The novel refers more explicitly to the political situation it was produced in, because its narrative is set in a similar time as its publication. The film refers more implicitly to the political situation of the time it is produced in because it presents a story that is set in the past. However, there are certain similarities between the anxiety of American society’s past and present. This enables There Will Be Blood to mediate post-9/11 American anxieties in its representation of the first decades of the twentieth century.

This period in the American west was characterized by industrialization and the need for oil. The value of oil caused a scandal in the early twenties when Albert Bacon Fall, Secretary of the Interior, secretly granted oil reserves to several oil companies from which he received no-interest loans and other gifts in return (Payne 2002). There Will Be Blood’s main character Daniel Plainview is based on the real-life oil tycoon Edward L. Doheny, who had his share in the scandal as well (Cherny, n.d.). This scandal is called the Teapot Dome Scandal, named after the teapot-shaped rock formation in Wyoming that was one of these reserves. The scandal affected the reputation of the administration of former American president Warren G. Harding. The scandal has been labeled as a synonym for ‘the scandalous reputation between money and political influence’(Payne 2002), a reputation former president George W. Bush has been found guilty of as well. An example of this ‘scandalous reputation’ is the Enron scandal of 2001. Enron was one of the largest American companies that turned out to have been lying about its profits and had to declare

(26)

linked to Bush, because it provided money for his election campaign of 2000 and it discussed the administration's energy policy with Vice President Dick Cheney (BBC News 2002). Another example that caused anxiety in the post-9/11 era (and to which There Will Be Blood implicitly refers) is the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Bush's war on terror in the Middle East led to the interest of oil firms in developing oil fields in Iraq after the war. This stimulated the debate about the rumors that the real drive to invade Iraq was the land's oil reserves and not the war on terror (BBC News 2003).

In There Will Be Blood the value of American capitalism is of similar importance as it was in the scandals of Bush's administration and post 9/11 American society in general. The importance of American capitalism and being a successful businessman affirms the ideology of the American Dream. The American Dream is based on the belief that the American values equality, freedom and opportunity give access to prosperity for those who work hard and have perseverance. This belief can be interpreted as myth, because it promotes and defends the values the dominant ideology of American society is based on. This promotion of the dominant ideology is similar to the effect of the presented myth in The Dark Knight. In

There Will Be Blood the myth of the American Dream is not only promoted, but also

challenged in the form of a countermyth. As mentioned before, a countermyth combats the original myth, but it needs elements of the myth in order to do so effectively. The awareness and knowledge of the myth of the American Dream in There Will Be Blood are used to

challenge the dominant ideology in the form of a countermyth.

The countermyth shows the danger of an American ideology in the film’s

presentation of Daniel Plainview, the self-made man who abuses American values for his own benefits. The representation of both the myth and countermyth of the ideology make

There Will Be Blood an example of Comolli’s and Narboni’s category that designates films:

… which seem at first sight to belong firmly within the ideology and to be completely under its sway, but which turn out to be so only in an ambiguous manner. […] The films we are talking about throw up obstacles in the way of the ideology, causing it to swerve and get off course (1971, 32).

(27)

‘at first sight’ seems to promote the ideology. The ‘obstacles’ that are thrown in the way of the American Dream are the threats to its ideology. These threats are presented in the characters Daniel Plainview, his competitor Eli Sunday and the oil business.

The anxiety There Will Be Blood presents is about the threat that a desire for power can destroy American society. This power is gained with money, possessions and prestige the oilman receives from his successful oil business. Daniel is a competitor who wants no one else to succeed. His strategy to become a powerful person is to use elements of the dominant ideology to mislead his competitors and the community. Daniel presents himself as a 'believer' of the myth to convince others to trust him, cooperate with him or sell their property to him. Actually he does not acknowledge the practices and morals the myth promotes which means he lies for his own profit. There Will Be Blood shows the threat of capitalist power that can have destructive consequences for the representatives of power, but also for the society they try to profit from. This is an anxiety that refers to threats in the post-9/11 American society, a society that is largely based on the power of capitalism. This chapter argues how the film establishes the myth and transforms it into a countermyth by the representation of ambition, family, community and religion and how the film suggests America is not able to resolve the threats that attack the myth.

3.1 The American Dream as Myth

I'm a family man. I run a family business. This is my son and my partner, H.W. Plainview. We offer you the bond of family that very few oilmen can understand.

- Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood

The first sequence of There Will Be Blood suggests that the film promotes the myth of the American Dream, because it presents the success it can bring to those who make use of the American values of freedom and opportunity. Nevertheless, there are signs in the first scenes that refers to the countermyth the film produces. These signs mostly refer to the destructive force of American capitalism.

(28)

man in an America that is at the start of the industrial era. Daniel’s ambition is shown by his work as a singular man in the middle of the desert to earn his fortune. He spends his days in a dark hole in the ground with the only light coming from the sun above. The landscape with the mountains, rocks and the absence of civilization are an indication for the American west. The vast, open landscape is an indication for the seclusion and loneliness of Daniel. He works alone and stands outside society (figure 16). It is his individual drive that separates him from others and gives him the ability to follow the American Dream. His hunger for success is so strong that even with his broken leg he manages to reach the town miles away behind the mountains. He works himself literally from the bottom to the top: He has to cover himself in mud to find his fortune and crawl on his back to own it. Daniel is no ordinary businessman but a man who traveled a long and difficult way to achieve his success. Although this scene promotes Daniel’s perseverance as a hardworking man, it also shows the danger of his ambition. The dynamite he uses to speed up the digging, the step of his ladder that breaks and Daniel breaking his leg introduce the danger of ambition. Because Daniel wants no competition he works alone so there is no one to help him back to civilization after he breaks his leg. These events are the first indication of the destructive power of ambition, greed and American capitalism.

In 1902 Daniel starts the business of oil drilling with the help of other men. Shortly after the first oil is discovered one of his co-workers dies in the well. Daniel adopts his son, who he names H.W. and who he raises as if the boy is his own blood. Daniel is, as he calls himself, ‘a family man’. Having a family and taking care of it is important to the American Dream. After the discovery of oil, Daniel travels by train with toddler H.W. The shot establish the image of the caring father, who lets his ‘son’ play with his mustache while he sits next to him. Another image that gives the impression that Daniel is a family man is presented in 1911 when Daniel speaks to the small community of Little Boston he wants to buy land from. While Daniel sits in an armchair H.W. stands quietly next to him (figure 17). The scene opens with a frontal shot of the two that creates the familiar image of a family portrait (Rosenstone and Parvulescu 2012, 316). Daniel's success as a self-made man is represented in the development of his appearance and his business. At first, in 1989, Daniel is covered in dirt, unshaven, digging by hand in a hole in the ground that looks like a cave. In 1902 he has co-workers, more equipment and a constructed well. The landscape is less

(29)

empty and Daniel travels not by foot but by train. In 1911 Daniel wears a suit, appears in a civilized world and presents himself as a family man and oilman. Besides this, Daniel owns a car which means he is more successful than his competitors who travel by train.

Although this first sequence uses the myth

to promote the ideology of the American Dream the countermyth is already present in these first scenes as well. In the scene that is set in 1902 an accident as a result from the discovery of oil shows the destructive force of greed. This time it even causes the death of a father. In 1911 Daniel uses the image of the family man to gain the trust of the community he wants to buy land from. He knows a child is a symbol for innocence. By putting the boy next to himself, who is a symbol for success, Daniel creates the image of the innocent businessman, who wants to share his knowledge for the benefit of the community. However, this image is a thought-out construction of Daniel, who knows the values of the myth and who uses symbols that give the impression he is affirming the dominant ideology. In another scene when the first derrick in Little Boston is opened he holds a speech about family, education, employment and agriculture; about what is important according to the American Dream. He even uses the youngest daughter of the Sunday family to help establish the image of the family man by placing her next to his side and kissing her on the forehead. The connotations of trust, innocence and wealth Daniel constructs reveal the artificial characteristics of myth.

In short, Daniel Plainview appears as the self-made man in the myth of the American Dream, because he knows how to present himself like one that fits in the ideals of its

ideology. Actually, Daniel is a threat to the myth of the American Dream, because he is aware that it promotes values he experiences as a threat to his own ideals. His ideals are based on power, money and possessions. His individualistic perspective makes it difficult to work with others, to see the value of family and community and to treat his competitors as

Figure 17: Daniel Plainview in 1911 Figure 16: Daniel Plainview in 1898

(30)

equal. Thus, the destructive power of American capitalism turns the myth of the American Dream in There Will Be Blood into a countermyth of the American Dream.

3.2 The American Dream as Countermyth

Oh, Daniel, you've come here and you've brought good and wealth, but you have also brought your bad habits as a backslider. You've lusted after women, and you have abandoned your child - your child that you raised. You have abandoned all because he was sick and you have sinned. So say it now: "I am a sinner."

- Eli Sunday in There Will Be

Blood

The countermyth challenges the ideology of American society instead of promoting it. The first sign of Daniel’s morality is revealed when he tells H.W. he wants to exploit the Sunday family for his own profit: ‘I won’t give them oil prices. I’ll give them quail prices.’ The image of the family man and its connotations of wealth and innocence that were established in the first sequence turn out to be created with Daniel's knowledge of the ideology to win the trust of the community. Daniel disguises his own ideals with those of the myth, because he knows that is what the community wants to hear. The people who are part of the community in Little Boston are depicted as the ignorant people who act and think according to what the dominant ideology desires of them. Daniel knows this and abuses this for his own interests. The only person who seems aware of Daniel’s ‘misbehavior’ in relation to the myth is Eli Sunday, who is his greatest competition because he has a similar goal he wants to achieve.

Daniel's problems with the values of family are shown in his behavior towards H.W. who actually is not his son at all. Firstly, the boy is named H.W. which can be interpreted as a sign of rejection of family because the two initials reduce the boy to a rather anonymous ‘partner’. The boy is used as a ‘mask’ to ‘cover up’ the fact that Daniel is no family man at all. The use of initials instead of a full name is to hide the real reason of his existence, which is Daniel’s need of ‘a sweet face to buy land’. Besides this, H.W. are also the initials of the middle names of former president Bush, father of president George W. Bush. Therefore the

(31)

boy can be interpreted as a reference to the political climate of post-9/11 America and the father-son relationship of the two presidents3. Both George H.W. and George W. Bush earned millions of dollars in the oil industry that were helpful for their election campaigns (Jackson 1999). The power George W. Bush gained was partly the result of his family bond with a former president and the oil business; elements that are similar to Daniel Plainview, although Daniel’s family is a construction.

An example of Daniel’s indifference towards family is shown in the scene where H.W. gets injured after a gas explosion in the well. Daniel leaves his terrified son alone to take care of his oil business. When H.W. turns out to be deaf Daniel does not bother to learn sign language. H.W. is frustrated about his father’s indifference and sets their cabin on fire to get Daniel’s attention. After this, Daniel decides to send him away to boarding school

because his behavior is not helpful for the goal he wants to reach. Instead, Daniel uses his ‘brother’ Henry to establish the image of the family man. When Henry turns out to be no real family and no help either, Daniel kills him. Daniel cares about family as long as it benefits his business and his image as family man. When Daniel discovers the diary of his real brother, who died months earlier, he cries when he reads the line: ‘My brother is a stranger to me’. Daniel mourns because it affirms his role as an outsider which is the very thing he tries to change in order to become powerful. It is hard for Daniel to receive criticism on his role as a family man, because it is the thing he struggles most with. His ambition and hard work are his nature, but his role as a family man is a set-up construction. Nevertheless, Daniel has a honest desire to become accepted as a family man. It is something his success in the oil business cannot bring.

Daniel’s struggle with criticism on his role as a father is presented in the scene where two other businessman, H.M. Tilford and J.J. Carter, speak about his oil discovery and his idea to build a pipeline to the sea to avoid the expensive railroad costs. The scene is shortly after Daniel sent H.W. away. The men propose to take over Daniel’s business: ‘Why not turn it over to us? We'll make you rich. You spend time with your boy. It's a great discovery. Now let us help you.’ After a long silence Daniel responds: ‘Did you just tell me how to run my family?’ When H.M. Tilford tries to explain what he means Daniel threatens him: ‘One night, I'm gonna come inside your house, wherever you're sleeping and I'm gonna cut your throat. 3 In the novel, the son is named ‘Bunny’, which suggests that the choice for H.W. is explicitly chosen to refer to

(32)

[…] You don’t tell me about my son.’ To actually get his pipeline Daniel is forced to undergo a salvation, led by Eli (figure 18). Eli demands Daniel to confess that he ‘abandoned his son’, because he sent him to boarding school. This is the first time Daniel

has to publicly confess

that he does not match the image of a family man. Once again, it is hard for Daniel to speak the truth about the things he is not successful in. Nevertheless, his confession enables him to build the pipeline he desires and that stimulates his business. Daniel realizes the baptizing is a ritual of the community that is necessary for him to achieve his goal. This scene is another example in which Daniel uses his knowledge of the dominant ideology to get what he want. The baptizing is used to cover up that his real reason he confesses is not a desire for

salvation but a desire for power.

During the baptizing scene Daniel is in a vulnerable position because he realizes he abandoned his son and he has never known his brother. Eli knows that family is an

important element for Daniel and uses this to humiliate Daniel in front of the community and affirm his own powerful role as preacher. Daniel is lowered to his knees and forced to say things he does not want to say. Eli uses religion as a power symbol to demand things and even to use violence to ‘get the devil’ out of Daniel. Daniel’s and Eli’s goal are both based on power. Eli presents himself as a prophet who can send away the devil. Daniel presents himself as a prophet who can bring wealth to the community. Daniel does not believe in Eli’s power or the value of religion. In the scene where Daniel dines with the Sunday family, Eli tries to pray with him, but he pulls his hands back. When Eli says he wants money for his church Daniel responds ironically: ‘For your church? That's a good one!’ Later, when Eli performs an exorcism Daniel visits him to ask him if he wants to say his blessings at the funeral of coworker who died down the well. He watches the

performance with skepticism and mocks it: ‘That was one goddamn hell of a show!’ Using the term ‘show’, means that Daniel sees Eli’s presentation of himself as prophet as a fake construction. Eli blames Daniel for the death of the coworker because he did not let Eli bless the well. The oilman responds to him: ‘We need these men well rested to bring in this well. They can't get that if they're up here listening to your gospel, and then the well can't

produce and blow gold all over the place.’ Daniel refers to gold, because he knows power is more important to Eli than the community. However, it bothers Daniel that Eli dares to claim the money Daniel earned with hard work and perseverance while Eli himself does not

(33)

want to get his hands dirty. Again he reveals his disbelief in Eli as prophet: ‘Aren't you a healer and a vessel for the holy spirit? When are you coming over and make my son hear again? Can't you do that?’ and he drags him into the mud to punish him (figure 19). Daniel and Eli both baptizes each other to show they see themselves as more powerful than the other.

Eli and Daniel are competitors because both demand power, recognition, money and prosperity. Daniel rejects the way Eli tries to reach his power and Eli rejects Daniel’s

business. Nevertheless they need each other to reach their goal. Daniel needs the property of the Sunday Ranch and the appreciation of the family to drill successfully for oil. Eli needs the money Daniel earns to expand his church. In There Will Be Blood this relation between a capitalist person and a religious person is presented as problematic. In the post-9/11 decade America's president George W. Bush was both a capitalist who earned a lot of money in the oil business and a faithful Evangelical Christian who made a lot of biblical references in his speeches. George W. Bush is the personification of the power capitalism and religion can bring when brought together. There Will Be Blood shows the power of a combination of these two elements as well but depicts it as a power that can destroy and cause chaos in society because the two cannot work together without competing with each other. When Daniel builds his derricks, Eli tries to compete with him by building his new church at the same time. Daniel undermines Eli’s authority as a prophet by blessing the well himself and ignoring Eli. After Daniel intimidated Eli with his power by dragging him into the mud, Eli takes revenge by humiliating him during the baptizing. This constant power struggle between religion and capitalism challenges the dominant ideology of post-9/11 American

Who Drinks Your Milkshake? America's Anxieties in Post-9/11 Hollywood Cinema