What are the hidden underpinnings of what may broadly be described as ‘vigilante’ stories, such as those in popular television series or films? What leads one to suspect that there are such out-of-sight presuppositions on which they are predicated, is their lasting appeal, which may be framed in terms of the tension between the ‘law’ and the (moral) ‘Law’, or alternatively, between the ‘law’ and ‘violent justice’. This suspicion is pursued via an examination of the popular, multi-season American television series, "Dexter". It is argued that in such films one witnesses the valorization of clearly unlawful acts of murder, which are justified, intra-cinematically, with reference to the inability of the ‘law’, or law-enforcing agencies, to combat a certain kind of crime. In "Dexter" there is an implicit distinction between the ‘law’ and the ‘Law’, as well as between the ‘law’ and ‘justice’, albeit violently enacted. These narrative nuances are explored in terms of the idea of the complex interbraiding of what are usually seen as mutually exclusive concepts, such as crime and law-abiding activities, and by drawing on the work of Derrida regarding justice, as well as Lacan and Kant on the Law. In particular, it is argued, in the light of what is thematized in this television series, the universalist claims (regarding the ‘categorical imperative’) of Kant’s moral philosophy is there replaced with what one might term the ‘quasi-universalist’ imperative, characterized by complexity. Bauman, Žižek and Kearney further allow one to probe the relationship between these vigilante killings and the ‘monstrous other’.
Wanneer die ‘wet’ nie meer voldoende is nie: "Dexter". Wat is die versteekte voorveronderstellings van wat bekend staan as ‘vigilante’-verhale, soos dié wat in populêre films en televisiereekse voorkom? Die gewildheid van sodanige verhale laat ‘n mens vermoed dat daar wel onuitgesproke aannames ‘agter’ die narratiewe verskuil is, en dat hulle aan die hand van die spanning tussen die ‘wet’ en die (morele) ‘Wet’, of die ‘wet’ en ‘gewelddadige geregtigheid’ geformuleer kan word. Hierdie vermoede word langs die weg van ’n interpretasie van die gewilde, multi-seisoen Amerikaanse televisiereeks, "Dexter", ondersoek. In "Dexter", asook in soortgelyke verhale word ‘onwettige’ of immorele handelinge soos moord implisiet verheerlik in die lig van die onvermoë van die ‘wet’, oftewel die polisie, om ‘n bepaalde sort misdaad effektief te bekamp. Bowendien is daar in "Dexter" ‘n implisiete onderskeid tussen die ‘wet’ en die ‘Wet’, sowel as tussen eersgenoemde en ‘geregtigheid’, ofskoon laasgenoemde met geweld ‘afgedwing’ word. Hierdie narratiewe nuanses word in terme van die idee van ‘n komplekse verweefdheid van (gewoonweg) wedersyds-uitsluitende begrippe geartikuleer, insluitend misdaad en wetsgehoorsame handelinge, en deur Derrida se werk oor geregtigheid, asook Lacan en Kant se werk oor die (morele) Wet te benut. Meer spesifiek word aangevoer dat, in die lig van die tematisering van vigilantehandelinge in die televisiereeks, die universalistiese ‘kategoriese imperatief’ van Kant daar met ’n (komplekse) ‘kwasi-universalistiese’ imperatief vervang word. Bauman, Žižek en Kearney se werk help ’n mens verder om die verhouding tussen vigilante-handelinge en die ‘monsteragtige ander’ te verstaan.
