One of many challenges of breaking down the satirical warning components of “Battle Membership” is that the novel’s writer is fairly ambiguous in regards to the ethical implications of Tyler’s imaginative and prescient for the world, which promotes that males reside strictly in line with historically masculine beliefs. In an interview with Huffington Publish, Palahniuk revealed that he would not suppose the novel is a critique or celebration of violent masculinity, as a result of he feels that such violence has function in sure confines (like, say, a combat membership.) When requested if he felt that followers have been misinterpreting the fabric by taking Tyler at face worth, his reply was fascinating:

“No, not likely. As a result of they’re type of recognizing the section the place they uncover their private energy by appearing out in opposition to the world.”

What Palahniuk describes is a section I went by across the time I first learn and watched “Battle Membership,” circa 2002 or so when the movie was on a free HBO weekend. Tyler’s anti-capitalist notions felt revolutionary, and his rejection of working a 9-5 after I was an adolescent staring down many years of cubicle work was attractive. As an adolescent, “Battle Membership” was part of my persona. It was solely a section, although, as a result of I grew older, realized extra, and realized that Tyler’s classes have been simply as a lot of an issue because the issues it preached in opposition to. The anti-capitalism side remains to be value listening to, however Tyler’s misogyny, lack of private accountability, and penchant for violence are points that must be addressed. It is okay to be an apathetic anarchist whenever you’re 16, however not whenever you’re 36.