Avery Poulter
In 1999 came the release of David Fincher’s film, Fight Club, based on Chuck Palahniuk’s novel of the same name. The film’s plot follows an unnamed narrator’s encounter with the charismatic and anti-capitalist Tyler Durden, a fateful meeting that leads to the creation of what Tyler calls ‘fight club.’
What begins as a meeting place for men to join together in monitored hand to hand combat spirals into an uncontrollable, destructive movement based solely around Tyler Durden and his beliefs about men and society.Eventually, the narrator discovers that Durden is a literal extension of his own personality, and must come to terms with the damage his alter ego has done to society. While the term ‘cult’ is never used during the film to reference fight club or their eventual terrorist movement, Project Mayhem, the construct that emerges from these continual meetings can only be described by that word. Durden, in his creation of a private organization and indoctrination of men into acts of terrorism, is a cult leader, and his means of organizing his radical group have roots in actual cultic brainwashing, enough even to garner real life results.
Firstly, it is important to recognize the cultic basis of Durden’s following. In an article by Lorna Goldberg entitled “A Psychoanalytic Look at Recovered Memories, Therapists, Cult Leaders, and Undue Influence,” she explains that in order to understand the “coercive techniques” employed by cult leaders, it is necessary to “examine the vulnerability of the cult recruit… those who are particularly susceptible to cults are typically those who are struggling with living up to a very high ego ideal and those who might have experienced a precipitating event that triggered some disappointment in themselves” (Goldberg 76). This precipitating event, in the societal lens of fight club, comes in the form of inherent emasculation at the hand of capitalist society. In J. Michael Clark’s article on Fight Club, he remarks that Durden “tells these men that they have… no Great War, no other dragon to battle heroically against… [only] their own contemptuous lives lived so passively enslaved to consumerism,” hereby implying that “testosterone-driven men must somehow be ‘up’ against some enemy… or else be ‘up’ against the wall of emasculating self-doubts” (Clark 67). It is this doubt within Durden’s male audience that triggers feelings of inadequacy and vulnerability, and creates a discontent pertaining to themselves and the role they play in society. Goldberg adds that “at the time of recruitment, cult leaders lure potential members into the cult through deception about the true purpose of the group. They… hold out the promise of a better life or the answers to life’s confusion and uncertainty” (Goldberg 76). To capitalize on the uncertain state of his followers, Durden comes forward to give these men an enemy to face in order to restore their lost masculinity. First, he offers a space for the men to fight each other in order to relieve this doubt, presenting it as an answer to their emasculated state. Eventually, he converts his followers to his true goal, uniting against the societal structure that emasculated them in the first place: capitalism. Thus, once these susceptible followers are groomed into believing in Durden’s solution as much as he does, the true dangerous and cultic nature of fight club becomes obvious.
Another important factor of recognizing fight club as a cult is recognizing the brainwashing techniques Durden weaves into the hierarchy of the group. Jennifer Henderson explains that “cult environments do not function like real-world societies, the followers are made to believe that they need to think, act, and speak in a certain way – that they need to lose themselves to be a member… [and] abide by the governance set forth by the cult leader” (Henderson 1-2). This environment is first established by Durden’s use of a hazing ritual when he begins recruiting his followers into his terrorist movement: Project Mayhem. Durden’s hazing ritual consists of forcing recruits to wait on his porch, all while enduring verbally abusive comments, ‘for three days without food, shelter or encouragement.’ After which, they will be welcomed into Durden’s home and be officially recognized as ‘man’ enough for involvement. It is important to keep in mind that by the time this hazing ritual takes place, Durden’s followers are already being manipulated into idealizing Durden’s worldview and approval. As such, the ritual becomes an expression of faith in order to win the approval and acceptance of the cult and its leader. Durden’s hazing employs numerous of the cult indoctrination steps outlined by Goldberg in her article, such as “controlling the recruits’ environment… using sleep deprivation or diet to further induce debilitation and disorientation in recruits… [and] pressuring recruits to meet a new standard of perfection” (Goldberg 76-7). Once the recruits are welcome inside, Durden puts them to work, fulfilling another one of the outlined methods by “monopolizing the recruits’ time with rituals and… the need to study group dogma” (Goldberg 76). Altogether, these tactics serve to “attack and attempt to destroy [a follower’s] pre-cult identity” (Goldberg 76), which allows for the unquestioning, cultic environment Henderson describes to blossom. As the film goes on, the club’s aesthetics begin to further obscure individual identity. After being employed officially by Durden, all the members of fight club are shown to wear matching outfits of stark black, erasing individuality from their wardrobe. Furthermore, when the narrator berates the behavior of members of fight club after the death of his friend Bob, insisting that they recognize him as a person with a name, a confused member objects that ‘in Project Mayhem, [they] have no names.’ Just like this, Durden has created an environment in which his followers have “let go of their original identity and take on a new cultic identity” for the sole purpose of carrying out Durden’s word and doctrine (Goldberg 76). This dangerous ideology is the direct fault of Tyler, who is, of course, the ‘governing’ leader at the center of fight club’s operations.
With these things in mind, it becomes easier to see Durden as a deliberate, manipulative cult leader. Even the first, seemingly harmless phases of fight club required members to strictly adhere to the eight rules Durden defines. When the club began to transition more into an organized cult, the condition of these rules, as well the worship of Durden, were taken to an extreme. Henderson remarks that “prolific or dangerous cult leaders believe that they are the answer to all problems,” which both Durden and the members of fight club are shown to believe over the course of the film (Henderson 2). In a way, Durden comes across as the ideal man, as he is literally a figure of the Narrator’s idealized masculinity: attractive, assertive, and dominant. As a result, he becomes a lure for vulnerable men seeking to find that extreme standard of masculinity within themselves, hoping to become the man he presents himself as. Durden is shown the most respect out of any of the members, being referred to as ‘sir’ by his followers. His word became law to his group: when the fight club members were asked to start a fight with someone outside the group, they did so without question. When these tasks eventually moved up in scale to acts of vandalism, terrorism or assault, the members continued to obey without a whisker of hesitation. All the members are shown to endanger themselves to act out Durden’s dislike of capitalism, exemplified by the death of Bob in a mission to destroy corporate art. When Durden, or the Narrator as Durden, makes a statement, it is taken to heart, chanted, or considered a ‘test’ that must be passed to win further cult approval. As a result, fight club becomes an unquestioning vehicle Durden can use to unleash mayhem upon society, something he could only accomplish with the aid of so many devoted followers.
With these conditions in mind, it is important to consider the effect of Durden’s ideals not only on his followers in Fight Club, but upon real life audiences. Durden is a cult leader, charismatic and radical in his ideas. He speaks to men who feel emasculated by the state of the world, and offers them a purpose – one that is ultimately toxic and dangerous – in exchange for action. While the film makes a point of portraying Durden’s increasing antics as undesirable and unhealthy, there are still those in society who may fall prey to his ideology, whether through the medium of film or by similar doctrines filtering in through to other platforms. Modern foundations of incel or ‘bro’ culture are known to lean on ideas of lost manhood and the need to find and overcome an enemy in similar ways to the members of Durden’s fight club – some of which are even directly inspired by the film. As a result, real people can fall prey to these harmful ideals, embracing a dangerous form of masculinity in order to account for the ‘threat’ to manhood formed by today’s passive society. By subscribing to these mindsets, audiences are falling prey to the same methods of brainwashing Durden uses on his followers: being lured in by their own insecurities to idealize and follow an ultimately harmful figure. While Tyler Durden is meant to encapsulate the ideal man defined by toxic masculine ideals, as touched on by Clark, idolizing his lessons not only serves to perpetuate this harmful standard, but also to breed dangerous, destructive ideas in accordance with his teachings. In conclusion, awareness about these constructs both within the basis of the film and in real life are vital. It is important now more than ever to call Durden what he is: an abuser, not a revolutionary.
Bibliography:
Clark, J.Michael. “Faludi, Fight Club, and Phallic Masculinity: Exploring the Emasculating Economics of Patriarchy.” The Journal of Men’s Studies, vol. 11, no. 1, Fal 2002, pp. 65–76. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.1101.65.
Fight Club. Directed by David Fincher, 20th Century Studios, 5 Oct. 1999.
Goldberg, Lorna. “A Psychoanalytic Look at Recovered Memories, Therapists, Cult Leaders, and Undue Influence.” Cultic Studies Review, vol. 2, no. 3, 2003. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=psyh&AN=2004-11417-001&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Henderson, Jennifer. “Psychological Manipulation and Cluster-B Personality Traits of Cult Leaders.” Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, vol. 85, no. 2–B, ProQuest Information & Learning, 2024. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=psyh&AN=2024-12027-208&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
