Untitled - Sexey's School Moodle

oycott the novel based on her perception that Ellis’ book acted as a misogynistic manual
of sexual torture and mutilation. Moreover, in what appears to be a misconception of the
properties of art and authorship—a gross failure to distinguish between text, narrator and
author, as well as fiction and reality—Tara Baxter, amongst others, assumed that the
novel was a reflection of Ellis’ own perverse fantasies and misogynistic views. In a
public protest she voiced the following opinion:
There are better ways of taking care of Bret Easton Ellis than just
censoring him. I would much prefer to see him skinned alive, a rat
put up his rectum, and his genitals cut off and fried in a frying pan,
in front of—not only a live audience—but a video camera as well.
These videos can be sold as "art" and "free expression" and could
be available at every video outlet, library, liquor, and convenience
store in the world. We can profit off of Ellis' terror and pain, just as
he and bookstores are profiting off of the rape, torture, and
mutilation of women. 24
By referring to certain passages of the novel, she clearly demonstrates her assumption
that the acts of sexual violence perpetrated by Bateman are indeed a projection of the
author’s own vicious desires. What is most distressing, however, is that by misreading
and misinterpreting American Psycho these protesters seemingly overlooked the novel’s
satirical nature and totally missed the fact that Ellis’ book actually criticizes the very
same acts they assumed it glorified. Within the context of contemporary popular culture,
one is entitled to question whether the novel’s reception would have been the same if the
subjects of Bateman’s gruesome murders had strictly been males, or if either the author
and/or the protagonist had been a black female, and the victims white heterosexual
24 Tara Baxter’s article can be read in its entirety at http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/Porn/Ellis1.html
172