Five Reasons why Amy Elliott Dunne is a Sociopath

WARNING: Major Gone Girl Spoilers Including the Ending

Anyone who read the book Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn will have sympathy for Amy within the first 200 pages.  Her diary entries and the clues left around her house make it seem like her husband, Nick Dunne, murdered her.  The public begins to detest Nick and the police force begins to turn on him too.  However, Nick knows he is innocent and the readers begin to believe him once they see the real, devilish side of Amy.  Amy Elliot Dunne is a sociopath and these shocking reasons will prove it.

1.  Amy Elliot Dunne framed her husband, Nick Dunne, for her murder.  This was the major plot twist in the book.  She did everything right to try to convince the world that he had killed her.  Here are some of the items on her checklist:

 "Item 18: Stage the living room.  Tip ottoman.  Check” (220).

“Item 22:  Cut myself “(219).

“Item 33: Get out of dodge” (220).

“Item 34: Change look. Check” (236).

 Amy framed Nick because Nick got lazy and fell out of love with her and in love with a young woman named Andie.  Most normal people would file for a divorce and let it go, but Amy couldn’t do that because she would be giving Nick what he wanted…so she framed him for murder.  That’s some pretty messed up revenge, huh?  Amy says, “So I may have gone a bit mad.  I do know that framing your husband for murder is beyond the pale of what an average woman might do.  But it’s so very necessary.  Nick must be taught a lesson” (Flynn 234).

2.  Amy created fake diary entries from 2005 to 2012 where she wrote horrible and false things about Nick to make it seem like he had something to do with her disappearance.  Amy said “One hundred and fifty-two entries total, and I don’t think I ever lose her voice.  I wrote her very carefully, Diary Amy.  She is designed to appeal to the cops, to appeal to the public should portions be released.  They have to read this diary like it’s some sort of Gothic Tragedy” (Flynn 238).

3.  Amy faked a pregnancy to get more sympathy from the public.  Amy started a fake friendship with the already pregnant, Noelle Hawthorne, so that Noelle could become attached with Amy and reveal Amy’s pregnancy once she disappears.  The pregnancy made her disappearance look like Nick killed her because he didn't want a baby.  This is where things get really weird.  Amy started this crazy idea with steps such as “A search online: how to drain your toilet for repair.  Noelle invited for lemonade.  Lots of lemonade.  Noelle peeing in my drained, unflushable toilet, each of us so terribly embarrassed!  Me, a small glass jar, the pee in my toilet going into the glass jar.  Me, the glass jar of pee hidden in my purse, a doctor’s appointment (oh, I can’t do a blood test, I have a total phobia of needles…urine test, that’ll do fine, thank you).  Me, a pregnancy on my medical record.  Me, running to Noelle with the good news” (Flynn 259).

 4.  Amy wants to return home to Nick because of the interviews she has seen of him on T.V.  She actually believes that he loves her again and that he is sorry for neglecting her.  Amy comes up with a disturbing plan that will prove that her husband is innocent and that she is innocent as well so that she can return home.  She has to make sure that no one knew she was framing her husband because she could get in heaps of trouble for that.  She plans to frame Desi, the man that came to her rescue when she was in desperate need of help after she ran away and hid from the mess she started.  She returns home beaten up and bruised, claiming that Desi kidnapped her and raped her.  When Nick asks Amy how she set Desi up she responds “I found some twine in one corner of his basement.  I used a steak knife to saw it into four pieces.  Whenever Desi wasn’t around, I’d tie the pieces as tight as I could around my wrists and ankles so they’d leave these grooves” (Flynn 388).  She did these acts of discipline so it would look like qualities of a rape victim.  It was definitely insane, but her conniving plan worked.  The police believed her and Desi died a guilty man.  Amy killed him to make it look like an act of self-defense and so that she could return home and tell her story of lies with no one to fight it.

5.  Amy is a sociopath just in the fact that she pulled this whole act off.  She left no trace of evidence in what she had done.  Nick says “She fool proofed everything.  It’s ludicrous, her story, but no more ludicrous than our story.  Amy’s basically exploiting the sociopath’s most reliable maxim…The bigger the lie, the more they believe it” (Flynn 390).  Amy had been planning these insane events for a year and they were so over the top and constantly on her mind that she committed to the role and started to believe her husband was the bad guy, not her. 

How to spot a Sociopath according to Psychology Today:

     Superficial charm and intelligence

     Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking

     Absence of nervousness or neurotic manifestations

     Untruthfulness and insincerity

     Lack of remorse and shame

     Specific Loss of insight

Amy follows the above descriptions without hesitation which is why she is a sociopath.  Her conniving mind and horrific actions make up the whole plot line of the book which is why her sociopath tendencies are allowed and accepted in this novel—crazy people and their actions make for a thrilling novel.

Blog Post #5

I think a book has to be partially true to be considered non-fiction.  As long as the book that the author considers “non-fiction” is a good read, I would say it’s acceptable to have a few false details in there.  There is no way to tell if the author is making the story up or not, so you might as well just enjoy it.  When I try to recall certain small facts like “What did I wear on Tuesday?” I have a hard time remembering so I’m sure writers can’t remember those tiny details to include in their story.  I’m ok with writers changing the facts a little if it doesn't upset anyone.  Writers have to embellish the story a little to make it more interesting to read otherwise it’s just a bunch of facts being listed and most people don’t like reading history text books for fun.  However, I do think it is immoral when an author writes a non-fiction book about serious events such as the holocaust or 9/11 and lies about it because it’s wrong to lie about events that hurt so many people and the people actually know the truth of the matter so they can tell what the author lied about.  I think we do need lines between genres so we know what is true and what is made up, but there’s no way to do that because authors can completely make up a story and say it’s true and there is really no way to prove them wrong.  Most people don’t have the time to research authors and find all the facts to show that they made up every aspect of a book they wrote.  As long as a book that is claimed to be non-fiction is a fascinating story and doesn’t disrespect tragic events, than its ok to add extra detail in the book that isn't true.