For this assignment, the relationship between Claudia, Louis, and Lestat from the movie “Interview with a Vampire” based on the novel by Ann Rice is being deconstructed using Psychological Criticism. Using this method, it is clear the character Claudia is suffering from the Electra Complex. Since her parents are both males, it may be unclear who the mother and father figures are. After deep analysis, it is apparent that Lestat’s grooming of Claudia, and her unmistakable hatred for him, that Lestat is the mother figure. The Electra Complex is essentially the Oedipus Complex, but for girls. In short, the girl wants to kill her mother and possess her father. According to Freud, there are five stages to psychosexual development (Cherry, n.d.). During the first two stages, oral and anal, the girl has no hatred toward her mother and is dependent of her (The Electra Complex, 2009). As stated by Cherry (2009), during the oral stage, the infants main source of contact occurs through the mouth. The second stage, the anal stage, is when the young girl has to learn to control her bodily needs. This stage is very dependent on which tactics parents use to handle this stage. The third stage, which is the phallic and also the stage in which the Electra Complex occurs, is when the child’s focus is on genitals (Cherry, n.d.). According to The Electra Complex (2009), this illumination comes with powerful feelings of insecurity, lust, and jealousy. In line with the Freud’s theory, the girl holds her mother responsible for castrating her in and turn standing in her way of achieving her goal to possess her father. The text being deconstructed, once again, is the movie “Interview with a Vampire based on the novel by Ann Rice. The specific relationship being deconstructed using Psychological Criticism is between the characters Claudia, Louis, and Lestat. In the movie, Louis is a rich young man who sees no point in life. Lestat, already a vampire and stalking Louis, sees this and turns him into a vampire. Lestat takes him under his wing, but Louis, with an inch of humanity still left in him, refuses to kill people in order to survive. One night, Louis is walking around town and walks through a neighborhood that has been condemned due to The Plague. He walks into a house and finds Claudia, no older then 10, crying next to her dead mother. At this point Louis had been eating rats and poodles to survive and he gives into temptation when Claudia fell into his arms. Lestat walks in the house laughing at Louis because he knew that he would not be able to live off rats forever. Louis, ashamed and embarrassed, leaves Claudia and runs into the night. When Louis returns home, he finds Claudia in bed and watches Lestat turn her into a vampire. Just as Lestat did with Louis, he took Claudia under his wing. He taught her how to kill, how to lure, but he did more than this. He also educated her, he got her a piano teacher, he got her a seamstress to make all of her dresses, and he even got her a doll every year on her “vampire birthday”. Although he got her these people to teach her and make her dresses, Claudia would feed on them and Lestat would tell her “not in the house”. One day the three vampires are walking and they saw a naked woman in her home. Claudia expresses feelings of wanting to be like her, but neither Lestat nor Louis truly acknowledges her statement. Later, on her “vampire birthday”, Lestat enters Claudia’s room and gives her a doll. She gets upset because she is too old for dolls, and reveals the naked woman’s body under all the dolls that Lestat has given her, amounting to more than 30. In this scene Claudia realizes that she will never grow up and will forever be trapped in a child’s body.
Claudia is looking for someone to blame and Louis tells her the story of the night she was born. He also admits that he took her life, and Lestat gave her another one. Claudia then proceeds to tell Louis that they need to get away from Lestat, all the while calling him “My Love”. She devises a plan and pretends to forgive Lestat. As a present she gives him two twin boys from which he can drink. Lestat, convinced that there are no longer hard feelings between them greedily drinks. He tastes liquor in their blood and tells Claudia this when he pulls away. She confesses that it is not liquor but actually a drug that killed the boys but kept their blood warm. Furious, Lestat screams at her for letting him drink dead blood and she screams back “If there’s one lesson you taught me, never drink from the dead”. Lestat collapses on the floor and Claudia takes a knife and slits his throat and sets him on fire. According to Freud’s theory, Claudia’s Oral Stage was when Lestat was teaching her how to feed, of course using her mouth because she is now a vampire. Her Anal Stage was when Lestat would tell Claudia “not in the house” when she feed on her piano teacher and seamstress, in essence teaching her how to control herself. The Phallic Stage began when she saw the naked woman. Claudia’s statement of wanting to be like her was clearly meant to mean that she wanted a body like hers. She is jealous of this woman and that is why she kills her and hides her under her dolls. She may look like a doll, but under the surface she is a woman. Although to the audience it may be clear which roles these two men hold, Claudia wants to know who it was that created her. Louis tells her that Lestat gave her life, like a mother to a child, automatically giving the mother role to Lestat. Claudia then decides to kill Lestat, but first talks to Louis and calls him “My love” giving off a lot of sexual tension. Her reasoning for killing Lestat is of course because he made her how she is but now she will not be able to express herself sexual, essentially castrating her. Due to this castration, Claudia will never be able to possess Louis sexually and kills Lestat for putting her in that position. Using Psychological Criticism, we were able to deconstruct the movie Interview with a Vampire, based on the novel by Ann Rice. Using this method, it is obvious that Claudia was suffering from the Electra Complex due to Lestat’s castrating of her by making her a child vampire. Unlike most children, Claudia was not able to move past this stage, but was not able to possess Louis either. Cherry, K. (n.d.). Freud's stages of psychosexual development. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/ss/psychosexualdev_2.htm The electra complex. (2009, July 30). Retrieved from http://www.psychosexual.com/the-electra-complex.html
Holmes and Watson: More than Meets the Eye The famous literary character of Sherlock Holmes, created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, has been a pop-culture phenomenon since his inception. Holmes has been featured in numerous films, television series, and spin-off novels, but no previous writers have approached the master of deduction in the way that those of the recent BBC series “Sherlock” have. While notoriously blunt and at times narcissistic, the emotional and vulnerable side of Holmes is rarely seen. In “Sherlock” the writers have stayed true to the character, but have developed him in such a way as to add a new dimension to the beloved protagonist. This new age Sherlock Holmes is exposed through his endearing, and at times exasperated, relationship with his flat-mate, Dr. John Watson. In previous adaptations of Holmes’s adventures, Sherlock played the part of the self-sufficient hero, and Watson that of the intelligent but fumbling story-teller. In the BBC series, Holmes now finds himself quite often at the mercy of Watson, who must parry the intrusions of Holmes’s enemies and occasionally lend a bullet or two. The chemistry between Holmes in Watson in Sherlock is positively addicting and adds the twist of an unprecedented sexual tension between the two. By examining the first episode of the series, “A Study in Pink,” one can find the groundwork in which this relationship is laid. Watson, recently returned from a tour in Afghanistan and recovering from a battle wound, finds himself facing emotional and financial difficulties. In seeking out a roommate to circumvent the second of these problems, he is introduced to Holmes, who immediately impresses him with his quick wit and keen eye for detail. Holmes is in the midst of various experiments, and so it is difficult to gauge his initial reaction to Watson. The matter is cleared, however, upon the entrance of a young woman who puts on and removes her lipstick in hopes of attracting Holmes. He is completely impervious to her charms, and instead focuses his attention on Watson. Upon leaving the lab, Holmes informs Watson that he has a place in mind and to meet him at a certain time and location. Watson is wary of Holmes’s certainty and questions him. Holmes then responds by introducing himself, giving the address of his residence, and parting with a wink. The wink alone is not a solid indicator of what Holmes is trying to convey to Watson, but when placed in the context of the rest of the episode, it seems as though Holmes may be homosexual. The episode then proceeds to their next meeting, in which Holmes shows him the apartment, and introduces him to the landlady, Mrs. Hudson. She’s very fond of Sherlock and welcoming of Watson, but then asks a question which makes the doctor a bit uncomfortable: Mrs. Hudson: There's another bedroom upstairs, if you'll be needing two bedrooms. Dr. John Watson: Of course we'll be needing two bedrooms. Mrs. Hudson: Oh, don't worry. We get all sorts 'round here. Mrs. Turner next door's got married ones. (“Sherlock”) Watson’s discomfort could very well be the product of defensiveness towards homosexual accusations, but this particular situation implies that it wouldn’t be out of the question for Sherlock to have male partner sharing his room. Watson is the only one who has any objections to Mrs. Hudson’s implications.
Again in the episode, a more intimate relationship is suggested when Holmes and Watson are in pursuit of a serial killer. They station themselves at a restaurant, and the owner insists on calling Watson Holmes’s date. Watson repeatedly says that he they are not on a date, but Sherlock doesn’t even seem to notice the exchange. They then go on to have what could be considered their most awkward conversation in the episode: Dr John Watson: You don't have a girlfriend then? Sherlock Holmes: Girlfriend? No, not really my area. Dr John Watson: Alright... Do you have a boyfriend? Which is fine, by the way. Sherlock Holmes: I know it's fine. Dr John Watson: So you got a boyfriend? Sherlock Holmes: No. Dr John Watson: Right. Okay. You're unattached. Like me. Fine. Good. Sherlock Holmes: John, erm... I think you should know that I consider myself married to my work, and while I'm flattered by your interest, I'm really not looking for any... Dr John Watson: No. I'm... not asking. No. I'm just saying, it's all fine. Sherlock Holmes: Good. Thank you. (“Sherlock”) Watson is obviously curious about his new friend, but uncomfortable asking him about his sexual orientation. After reassuring Holmes that he’s “fine” with whatever it is that is going on, he mentions that they are both unattached. This could be a subconscious confession on the part of Watson that they are two single people and there are no barriers to keep them from getting together. However, Holmes seems to pick up on Watson’s meaning and says that he’s “married to his work,” neither denying nor confirming his attraction to Watson. In the rest of the episode, Holmes reintroduces some excitement into Watson’s life and proves that his limp is purely psychosomatic, while Watson saves Holmes’s life by shooting the serial killer. Though they have not known each other long in this episode, Watson has already formed a deep and unwavering loyalty to Holmes, and Holmes has come to rely on Watson for this very quality. Watson provides the support that Holmes needs and Holmes gives Watson the adventure and livelihood that he yearns for. By the end, they are both so filled with joy that they run away laughing, to which Watson says, “We can't giggle, it's a crime scene. Stop it.” By this point, the relationship has been initiated and yet the terms remain ambiguous (“Sherlock”).
Work Cited ""Sherlock" A Study in Pink (2010) - Memorable Quotes." The Internet Movie Database (IMDb). Amazon.com. Web. 12 Feb. 2012.
A Psychological Analysis of Himura Kenshin The manga series Rurouni Kenshin, by Nobuhiro Watsuki, is the story of a man with a murderous inner demon. Himura Kenshin, the main character, is afflicted with a condition called Dissociative Identity Disorder, or split-personality disorder. Through the critical method known as psychological criticism, one that examines the author’s or a character’s state of mind and looks for evidence in the work of this mentality, I will delve into Kenshin’s mind and bring to light the evidence of his condition. I will explain specifically what DID is; analyze Kenshin’s psychological state through his behavior before, during, and after the switch to his “alter”; and talk about certain symbols that appear in the manga that symbolize his disorder. Dissociative Identity Disorder is a mental illness usually caused by childhood trauma, such as any kind of abuse (Chakraburtty). This easily applies to Kenshin, as his parents were killed when he was young. He found himself in the care of a master swordsman who basically beat him with his techniques until Kenshin also mastered his art. Some symptoms of DID include, most obviously, the presence of an “alter,” or a second personality that emerges under certain circumstances (Chakraburtty). This also quite obviously applies to Kenshin, since he switches to the killer he was during the Bakumatsu—the time of violent conflict between patriots and imperials in Japan in the mid-1800s—when his loved ones are threatened. Other symptoms include mood swings, depression, anxiety, flashbacks, reactions to stimuli, and certain compulsions; Kenshin displays most of these symptoms throughout the series (Chakraburtty). There are two descriptions of this disorder that describe Kenshin’s condition perfectly: “Two or more distinct identities or personality states are present, each with its own relatively enduring pattern of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about the environment and self” and “At least two of these identities or personality states recurrently take control of the person’s behavior” (Chakraburtty). In the manga, Himura Kenshin’s past is a mystery that is gradually revealed halfway through the series. It is revealed that Kenshin lost his parents at a young age and was taken in by Hiko Seijūrō, master swordsman of Hiten Mitsurugi-ryū, a sword art that requires unbelievable speed and dexterity to master (Watsuki). Kenshin learned this art through experiencing the techniques being used on his own body. The trauma, though he does not view it as trauma, of losing his parents and basically being beaten into a killer set him on his way to DID. He did not fully develop this split in personality until much later, however; during the war, “Battosai the Manslayer,” as he was known, was his only personality. It wasn’t until he got married and, during an ambush meant for him, accidentally killed his wife that he fully split into the rurouni and the battosai. His grief following the incident pushed the battosai into a place deep within his mind and the wandering swordsman who would never again take a life emerged.
As much as Kenshin wishes he could kill off the violent part of him, the battosai still lives within. As the wanderer, Kenshin refuses to kill, carrying a sakabatō—a reverse-blade sword that, if used correctly, cannot take a life (Watsuki). The sword is a symbol of Kenshin’s vow never to kill, but it is also a representation of his state of mind. It is obvious when Kenshin is in the rurouni mindset; his reverse-blade sword is held cutting edge away from his opponent, towards himself. This could represent his hatred for the person he used to be and his desperation to protect others from that person. When he transforms, he turns the sword over, representing his violence toward his opponent and his apathy towards his own murderous tendencies. Another symbol that is frequently mentioned throughout the series is Kenshin’s “cross-shaped” scar on his left cheek. His wife, Tomoe, gave one cut of the scar to him at the time of her murder while the first was given by her previous fiancé, whom Kenshin killed. The scar is a symbol of the burden he carries and his vow not to kill. The scar is a reminder of how many people he hurt when he killed; it is something that keeps him in control of the battosai at certain points in the story. At the end of the series, when he has defeated his demons and can move on from his grief and regret, the scar begins to fade. Himura Kenshin is a tragic character who is constantly struggling with his mind and the demons from his past. He is a softspoken yet strong and wise person as the rurouni; when his loved ones are threatened he reverts to the personality of the battosai, a killing machine that will stop at nothing to see his enemies vanquished. This change is an obvious sign of Dissociative Identity Disorder, a mental illness characterized by the appearance of multiple personalities in one person. Because of different traumatic events throughout his life, Kenshin eventually developed full-blown DID, which is symbolized in the story by things such as his sword and his scar. It is this disorder, however, that makes Kenshin such a well-loved and classic character in the eyes of the manga community.
Psychological Criticism: “1408” In Stephen King’s short story “1408”, a haunted house writer Mike Enslin attempts to spend a night in the haunted room 1408 in the Dolphin Hotel. However, the happenings in the room cause Mike to only spend about seventy minutes in the room, exiting with his shirt burning and horrible memories that he can’t recall. An interesting element that King plays with is almost giving the room its actual persona, treating it as an entity with personified characteristics. In doing so, King’s story reveals that the room exhibits the same behaviors as a person who suffers from technophobia, intermittent explosive disorder, and autophobia. Technophobia is “the fear or severe dislike of technology or electronic complex devices” (Peacher 451). Before Mike enters the room, the hotel’s manager Mr. Olin tries to warn him of the dangers of 1408 in attempts to convince Mike to not enter the room. He describes, “Digital wristwatches don’t work in room 1408… The same is true of pocket calculators and cellphones” (King 470-1). Mike uses a mini-recorder to record his voice as he explores 1408, and although it was in his shirt pocket as his shirt caught flames before his escape from the room, it is barely touched and only slightly charred. The fact that the room’s evil did not touch the device and that even in later analysis of his burns shows that his skin wasn’t burned in the exact location where the recorder was in his pocket shows that it was avoidant to the device. The one piece of technology already in the room, the telephone, does not work for Mike as well. In fact, when Mike tries to use the telephone, a voice that “was not a machine-generated voice, but…wasn’t a human voice, either” (King 499) answers the phone. The voice on the phone is revealed to be the voice of the room, screaming, “This is nine! Nine! This is nine! Nine! This is ten! Ten! We have killed your friends! Your friends are now dead! This is six! Six!” after Mike had tried to dial 0 for the operator (499). This outburst amongst other symptoms is part of the room’s intermittent explosive disorder. According to Manfred Peacher, intermittent explosive disorder is, “a behavioral disorder characterized by extreme expressions and outbursts of anger, often to the point of violence” (401). The quick and violent impulses the room forces upon its visitors show its extreme and unnecessary angry and violent actions. In 1408, there have been “twelve suicides in twenty-eight years…[and] thirty [natural deaths]” (King 475-8). Olin also tells the story of a maid: She was dusting the top of the television, and all at once she began to scream. I asked her what was wrong. She dropped her dustrag and put her hands over her eyes and screamed that she was blind…but that she could see the most awful colors. They went away almost as soon as I got her out through the door, and by the time I got her down the hallway to the elevator, her sight had begun to come back. (474-5) The quick violent and angry outbursts of the room are just like the characteristics shown by people with intermittent explosive disorder. During the screams on the phone, the room blurts: “Even if you leave this room, you can never leave this room!” (501). Through its intermittent explosive disorder, the room reveals something below that: autophobia. “Autophobia is the specific phobia of isolation” (Peacher 455). Although the room is known for its violent attacks and suggestions to its guests, it shows that it collects its guests and those who enter 1408. When Mike first enters the room, he analyses a picture on the wall of a ship, and later discovers that the picture has changed.
At the rail of the sailing ship, the tars had been replaced by a line of pallid men and women. The man on the far left…[was] Kevin O’Malley, this room’s first occupant…who had jumped from this room in October of 1910. To O’Malley’s left were the others who had died here, all with that vacant, shocked expression. (King 496-7) Olin also speaks of how the room “collects” its visitors and guests so as to not be vacant. He speaks of how many maids who have turned the room have experienced health problems and a healthy maintenance man who entered the room to fix something and died the next day of a hemorrhage (479). In focusing on the humanlike psychological qualities of 1408 rather than those who enter it, the characteristics of technophobia, intermittent explosive disorder, and autophobia are revealed. The angry and violently explosive qualities of 1408 along with its avoidance of technology and desire to not lose its guest and visitor companions are all personification tools making the room an observable psychological being.
Mini Critique of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man Using Psychological Criticism
When one reads A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce, one finds a lot of inner conflicts and agonizing struggles that are experienced by the protagonist, Stephen Dedalus. Stephen is in a Jesuit boarding school experiencing a great many struggles with regards to authority, tradition, faith, and the various meanings of life. From a psychological perspective, it can be argued that a host of Stephen’s problems are caused by repression of feelings he has. The fact that he is placed in an all-male boarding school does not help matters for him in the least. Stephen struggles with authority figures in the school. The fact that the authority figures in the school are male priests under the title of “Father” makes things all the more interesting (and meaningful in a Freudian sense). Stephen often engages in quarrels with his male teachers, from having “heresy in his essay” (79) to being late for class and arguing about that. Stephen problems stem from his dissatisfaction with the lifestyle imposed upon him by the boarding school. As he participates in the church rituals, for instance, the third-person omniscient narrators states that Stephen engages in “a disjointed lifeless thing [that] … seemed now to play itself, he and his fellow actors aiding it with their parts” (85). Stephen’s detestation of the priests stems from the organized, dull and ritualistic lifestyle of the order he is in. Therefore, Stephen expresses that he does not even feel like a boy. The narrator notices that “He had known neither the pleasure of companionship with others nor the vigour of rude male health nor filial piety” (96). Elsewhere, it is explained that “For one rare moment he seemed to be clothed in the real apparel of boyhood” (85). Evidently, then, the male-dominated order of “Fathers” is repressing Stephen’s intense desire to subjugate and conquer mother-figures. Stephen tries to deal with his repressed feelings, though, by visiting prostitutes. But “He cared little that he was in mortal sin, that his life had grown to be a tissue of subterfuge and falsehood” (98) because “His blood was in revolt” (99), leading him to want “to sin with another of his kind, to force another being to sin with him and to exult with her in sin” (100). These are images of inner turmoil being experienced by the artist, Stephen. The turmoil is caused by the priests, though, who are emblems of fatherhood. Stephen detests the excessive repression of emotion, and even ill feelings, encouraged by the priests – “His [Father Arnall’s] commands, to hoodwink one’s fellow men, to commit sin after sin after sin after sin and to hide one’s corruption from the sight of men” (112). This is the true nature of Stephen’s contempt for the father-figures in the book. The spirit of hypocrisy is present because men like the priests want to appear pious and godly. However, there is clear irony in that appearing before men as godly, while hiding innate desires and sins, only makes men (in a sense) dead.
For this assignment, the relationship between Claudia, Louis, and Lestat from the movie “Interview with a Vampire” based on the novel by Ann Rice is being deconstructed using Psychological Criticism. Using this method, it is clear the character Claudia is suffering from the Electra Complex. Since her parents are both males, it may be unclear who the mother and father figures are. After deep analysis, it is apparent that Lestat’s grooming of Claudia, and her unmistakable hatred for him, that Lestat is the mother figure.
ReplyDeleteThe Electra Complex is essentially the Oedipus Complex, but for girls. In short, the girl wants to kill her mother and possess her father. According to Freud, there are five stages to psychosexual development (Cherry, n.d.). During the first two stages, oral and anal, the girl has no hatred toward her mother and is dependent of her (The Electra Complex, 2009). As stated by Cherry (2009), during the oral stage, the infants main source of contact occurs through the mouth.
The second stage, the anal stage, is when the young girl has to learn to control her bodily needs. This stage is very dependent on which tactics parents use to handle this stage. The third stage, which is the phallic and also the stage in which the Electra Complex occurs, is when the child’s focus is on genitals (Cherry, n.d.). According to The Electra Complex (2009), this illumination comes with powerful feelings of insecurity, lust, and jealousy. In line with the Freud’s theory, the girl holds her mother responsible for castrating her in and turn standing in her way of achieving her goal to possess her father.
The text being deconstructed, once again, is the movie “Interview with a Vampire based on the novel by Ann Rice. The specific relationship being deconstructed using Psychological Criticism is between the characters Claudia, Louis, and Lestat. In the movie, Louis is a rich young man who sees no point in life. Lestat, already a vampire and stalking Louis, sees this and turns him into a vampire. Lestat takes him under his wing, but Louis, with an inch of humanity still left in him, refuses to kill people in order to survive. One night, Louis is walking around town and walks through a neighborhood that has been condemned due to The Plague. He walks into a house and finds Claudia, no older then 10, crying next to her dead mother. At this point Louis had been eating rats and poodles to survive and he gives into temptation when Claudia fell into his arms. Lestat walks in the house laughing at Louis because he knew that he would not be able to live off rats forever. Louis, ashamed and embarrassed, leaves Claudia and runs into the night.
When Louis returns home, he finds Claudia in bed and watches Lestat turn her into a vampire. Just as Lestat did with Louis, he took Claudia under his wing. He taught her how to kill, how to lure, but he did more than this. He also educated her, he got her a piano teacher, he got her a seamstress to make all of her dresses, and he even got her a doll every year on her “vampire birthday”. Although he got her these people to teach her and make her dresses, Claudia would feed on them and Lestat would tell her “not in the house”. One day the three vampires are walking and they saw a naked woman in her home. Claudia expresses feelings of wanting to be like her, but neither Lestat nor Louis truly acknowledges her statement. Later, on her “vampire birthday”, Lestat enters Claudia’s room and gives her a doll. She gets upset because she is too old for dolls, and reveals the naked woman’s body under all the dolls that Lestat has given her, amounting to more than 30. In this scene Claudia realizes that she will never grow up and will forever be trapped in a child’s body.
Claudia is looking for someone to blame and Louis tells her the story of the night she was born. He also admits that he took her life, and Lestat gave her another one. Claudia then proceeds to tell Louis that they need to get away from Lestat, all the while calling him “My Love”. She devises a plan and pretends to forgive Lestat. As a present she gives him two twin boys from which he can drink. Lestat, convinced that there are no longer hard feelings between them greedily drinks. He tastes liquor in their blood and tells Claudia this when he pulls away. She confesses that it is not liquor but actually a drug that killed the boys but kept their blood warm. Furious, Lestat screams at her for letting him drink dead blood and she screams back “If there’s one lesson you taught me, never drink from the dead”. Lestat collapses on the floor and Claudia takes a knife and slits his throat and sets him on fire.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Freud’s theory, Claudia’s Oral Stage was when Lestat was teaching her how to feed, of course using her mouth because she is now a vampire. Her Anal Stage was when Lestat would tell Claudia “not in the house” when she feed on her piano teacher and seamstress, in essence teaching her how to control herself. The Phallic Stage began when she saw the naked woman. Claudia’s statement of wanting to be like her was clearly meant to mean that she wanted a body like hers. She is jealous of this woman and that is why she kills her and hides her under her dolls. She may look like a doll, but under the surface she is a woman.
Although to the audience it may be clear which roles these two men hold, Claudia wants to know who it was that created her. Louis tells her that Lestat gave her life, like a mother to a child, automatically giving the mother role to Lestat. Claudia then decides to kill Lestat, but first talks to Louis and calls him “My love” giving off a lot of sexual tension. Her reasoning for killing Lestat is of course because he made her how she is but now she will not be able to express herself sexual, essentially castrating her. Due to this castration, Claudia will never be able to possess Louis sexually and kills Lestat for putting her in that position.
Using Psychological Criticism, we were able to deconstruct the movie Interview with a Vampire, based on the novel by Ann Rice. Using this method, it is obvious that Claudia was suffering from the Electra Complex due to Lestat’s castrating of her by making her a child vampire. Unlike most children, Claudia was not able to move past this stage, but was not able to possess Louis either.
Cherry, K. (n.d.). Freud's stages of psychosexual development. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/ss/psychosexualdev_2.htm
The electra complex. (2009, July 30). Retrieved from http://www.psychosexual.com/the-electra-complex.html
Holmes and Watson: More than Meets the Eye
ReplyDeleteThe famous literary character of Sherlock Holmes, created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, has been a pop-culture phenomenon since his inception. Holmes has been featured in numerous films, television series, and spin-off novels, but no previous writers have approached the master of deduction in the way that those of the recent BBC series “Sherlock” have. While notoriously blunt and at times narcissistic, the emotional and vulnerable side of Holmes is rarely seen. In “Sherlock” the writers have stayed true to the character, but have developed him in such a way as to add a new dimension to the beloved protagonist. This new age Sherlock Holmes is exposed through his endearing, and at times exasperated, relationship with his flat-mate, Dr. John Watson. In previous adaptations of Holmes’s adventures, Sherlock played the part of the self-sufficient hero, and Watson that of the intelligent but fumbling story-teller. In the BBC series, Holmes now finds himself quite often at the mercy of Watson, who must parry the intrusions of Holmes’s enemies and occasionally lend a bullet or two. The chemistry between Holmes in Watson in Sherlock is positively addicting and adds the twist of an unprecedented sexual tension between the two.
By examining the first episode of the series, “A Study in Pink,” one can find the groundwork in which this relationship is laid. Watson, recently returned from a tour in Afghanistan and recovering from a battle wound, finds himself facing emotional and financial difficulties. In seeking out a roommate to circumvent the second of these problems, he is introduced to Holmes, who immediately impresses him with his quick wit and keen eye for detail. Holmes is in the midst of various experiments, and so it is difficult to gauge his initial reaction to Watson. The matter is cleared, however, upon the entrance of a young woman who puts on and removes her lipstick in hopes of attracting Holmes. He is completely impervious to her charms, and instead focuses his attention on Watson. Upon leaving the lab, Holmes informs Watson that he has a place in mind and to meet him at a certain time and location. Watson is wary of Holmes’s certainty and questions him. Holmes then responds by introducing himself, giving the address of his residence, and parting with a wink. The wink alone is not a solid indicator of what Holmes is trying to convey to Watson, but when placed in the context of the rest of the episode, it seems as though Holmes may be homosexual.
The episode then proceeds to their next meeting, in which Holmes shows him the apartment, and introduces him to the landlady, Mrs. Hudson. She’s very fond of Sherlock and welcoming of Watson, but then asks a question which makes the doctor a bit uncomfortable:
Mrs. Hudson: There's another bedroom upstairs, if you'll be needing two bedrooms.
Dr. John Watson: Of course we'll be needing two bedrooms.
Mrs. Hudson: Oh, don't worry. We get all sorts 'round here. Mrs. Turner next door's got married ones. (“Sherlock”)
Watson’s discomfort could very well be the product of defensiveness towards homosexual accusations, but this particular situation implies that it wouldn’t be out of the question for Sherlock to have male partner sharing his room. Watson is the only one who has any objections to Mrs. Hudson’s implications.
Again in the episode, a more intimate relationship is suggested when Holmes and Watson are in pursuit of a serial killer. They station themselves at a restaurant, and the owner insists on calling Watson Holmes’s date. Watson repeatedly says that he they are not on a date, but Sherlock doesn’t even seem to notice the exchange. They then go on to have what could be considered their most awkward conversation in the episode:
ReplyDeleteDr John Watson: You don't have a girlfriend then?
Sherlock Holmes: Girlfriend? No, not really my area.
Dr John Watson: Alright... Do you have a boyfriend? Which is fine, by the way.
Sherlock Holmes: I know it's fine.
Dr John Watson: So you got a boyfriend?
Sherlock Holmes: No.
Dr John Watson: Right. Okay. You're unattached. Like me. Fine. Good.
Sherlock Holmes: John, erm... I think you should know that I consider myself married to my work, and while I'm flattered by your interest, I'm really not looking for any...
Dr John Watson: No. I'm... not asking. No. I'm just saying, it's all fine.
Sherlock Holmes: Good. Thank you. (“Sherlock”)
Watson is obviously curious about his new friend, but uncomfortable asking him about his sexual orientation. After reassuring Holmes that he’s “fine” with whatever it is that is going on, he mentions that they are both unattached. This could be a subconscious confession on the part of Watson that they are two single people and there are no barriers to keep them from getting together. However, Holmes seems to pick up on Watson’s meaning and says that he’s “married to his work,” neither denying nor confirming his attraction to Watson.
In the rest of the episode, Holmes reintroduces some excitement into Watson’s life and proves that his limp is purely psychosomatic, while Watson saves Holmes’s life by shooting the serial killer. Though they have not known each other long in this episode, Watson has already formed a deep and unwavering loyalty to Holmes, and Holmes has come to rely on Watson for this very quality. Watson provides the support that Holmes needs and Holmes gives Watson the adventure and livelihood that he yearns for. By the end, they are both so filled with joy that they run away laughing, to which Watson says, “We can't giggle, it's a crime scene. Stop it.” By this point, the relationship has been initiated and yet the terms remain ambiguous (“Sherlock”).
Work Cited
""Sherlock" A Study in Pink (2010) - Memorable Quotes." The Internet Movie Database (IMDb). Amazon.com. Web. 12 Feb. 2012.
A Psychological Analysis of Himura Kenshin
ReplyDeleteThe manga series Rurouni Kenshin, by Nobuhiro Watsuki, is the story of a man with a murderous inner demon. Himura Kenshin, the main character, is afflicted with a condition called Dissociative Identity Disorder, or split-personality disorder. Through the critical method known as psychological criticism, one that examines the author’s or a character’s state of mind and looks for evidence in the work of this mentality, I will delve into Kenshin’s mind and bring to light the evidence of his condition. I will explain specifically what DID is; analyze Kenshin’s psychological state through his behavior before, during, and after the switch to his “alter”; and talk about certain symbols that appear in the manga that symbolize his disorder.
Dissociative Identity Disorder is a mental illness usually caused by childhood trauma, such as any kind of abuse (Chakraburtty). This easily applies to Kenshin, as his parents were killed when he was young. He found himself in the care of a master swordsman who basically beat him with his techniques until Kenshin also mastered his art. Some symptoms of DID include, most obviously, the presence of an “alter,” or a second personality that emerges under certain circumstances (Chakraburtty). This also quite obviously applies to Kenshin, since he switches to the killer he was during the Bakumatsu—the time of violent conflict between patriots and imperials in Japan in the mid-1800s—when his loved ones are threatened. Other symptoms include mood swings, depression, anxiety, flashbacks, reactions to stimuli, and certain compulsions; Kenshin displays most of these symptoms throughout the series (Chakraburtty). There are two descriptions of this disorder that describe Kenshin’s condition perfectly: “Two or more distinct identities or personality states are present, each with its own relatively enduring pattern of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about the environment and self” and “At least two of these identities or personality states recurrently take control of the person’s behavior” (Chakraburtty).
In the manga, Himura Kenshin’s past is a mystery that is gradually revealed halfway through the series. It is revealed that Kenshin lost his parents at a young age and was taken in by Hiko Seijūrō, master swordsman of Hiten Mitsurugi-ryū, a sword art that requires unbelievable speed and dexterity to master (Watsuki). Kenshin learned this art through experiencing the techniques being used on his own body. The trauma, though he does not view it as trauma, of losing his parents and basically being beaten into a killer set him on his way to DID. He did not fully develop this split in personality until much later, however; during the war, “Battosai the Manslayer,” as he was known, was his only personality. It wasn’t until he got married and, during an ambush meant for him, accidentally killed his wife that he fully split into the rurouni and the battosai. His grief following the incident pushed the battosai into a place deep within his mind and the wandering swordsman who would never again take a life emerged.
As much as Kenshin wishes he could kill off the violent part of him, the battosai still lives within. As the wanderer, Kenshin refuses to kill, carrying a sakabatō—a reverse-blade sword that, if used correctly, cannot take a life (Watsuki). The sword is a symbol of Kenshin’s vow never to kill, but it is also a representation of his state of mind. It is obvious when Kenshin is in the rurouni mindset; his reverse-blade sword is held cutting edge away from his opponent, towards himself. This could represent his hatred for the person he used to be and his desperation to protect others from that person. When he transforms, he turns the sword over, representing his violence toward his opponent and his apathy towards his own murderous tendencies.
ReplyDeleteAnother symbol that is frequently mentioned throughout the series is Kenshin’s “cross-shaped” scar on his left cheek. His wife, Tomoe, gave one cut of the scar to him at the time of her murder while the first was given by her previous fiancé, whom Kenshin killed. The scar is a symbol of the burden he carries and his vow not to kill. The scar is a reminder of how many people he hurt when he killed; it is something that keeps him in control of the battosai at certain points in the story. At the end of the series, when he has defeated his demons and can move on from his grief and regret, the scar begins to fade.
Himura Kenshin is a tragic character who is constantly struggling with his mind and the demons from his past. He is a softspoken yet strong and wise person as the rurouni; when his loved ones are threatened he reverts to the personality of the battosai, a killing machine that will stop at nothing to see his enemies vanquished. This change is an obvious sign of Dissociative Identity Disorder, a mental illness characterized by the appearance of multiple personalities in one person. Because of different traumatic events throughout his life, Kenshin eventually developed full-blown DID, which is symbolized in the story by things such as his sword and his scar. It is this disorder, however, that makes Kenshin such a well-loved and classic character in the eyes of the manga community.
Chakraburtty, Amal. “Dissociative Identity Disorder (Multiple Personality Disorder).” WebMD.com. WebMD, 16 Sept. 2009. Web. 13 February 2012. .
Watsuki, Nobuhiro. Rurouni Kenshin. 28 vols. Chiyoda: Shueisha, 1994.
Psychological Criticism: “1408”
ReplyDeleteIn Stephen King’s short story “1408”, a haunted house writer Mike Enslin attempts to spend a night in the haunted room 1408 in the Dolphin Hotel. However, the happenings in the room cause Mike to only spend about seventy minutes in the room, exiting with his shirt burning and horrible memories that he can’t recall. An interesting element that King plays with is almost giving the room its actual persona, treating it as an entity with personified characteristics. In doing so, King’s story reveals that the room exhibits the same behaviors as a person who suffers from technophobia, intermittent explosive disorder, and autophobia.
Technophobia is “the fear or severe dislike of technology or electronic complex devices” (Peacher 451). Before Mike enters the room, the hotel’s manager Mr. Olin tries to warn him of the dangers of 1408 in attempts to convince Mike to not enter the room. He describes, “Digital wristwatches don’t work in room 1408… The same is true of pocket calculators and cellphones” (King 470-1). Mike uses a mini-recorder to record his voice as he explores 1408, and although it was in his shirt pocket as his shirt caught flames before his escape from the room, it is barely touched and only slightly charred. The fact that the room’s evil did not touch the device and that even in later analysis of his burns shows that his skin wasn’t burned in the exact location where the recorder was in his pocket shows that it was avoidant to the device. The one piece of technology already in the room, the telephone, does not work for Mike as well.
In fact, when Mike tries to use the telephone, a voice that “was not a machine-generated voice, but…wasn’t a human voice, either” (King 499) answers the phone. The voice on the phone is revealed to be the voice of the room, screaming, “This is nine! Nine! This is nine! Nine! This is ten! Ten! We have killed your friends! Your friends are now dead! This is six! Six!” after Mike had tried to dial 0 for the operator (499). This outburst amongst other symptoms is part of the room’s intermittent explosive disorder.
According to Manfred Peacher, intermittent explosive disorder is, “a behavioral disorder characterized by extreme expressions and outbursts of anger, often to the point of violence” (401). The quick and violent impulses the room forces upon its visitors show its extreme and unnecessary angry and violent actions. In 1408, there have been “twelve suicides in twenty-eight years…[and] thirty [natural deaths]” (King 475-8). Olin also tells the story of a maid:
She was dusting the top of the television, and all at once she began to scream. I asked her what was wrong. She dropped her dustrag and put her hands over her eyes and screamed that she was blind…but that she could see the most awful colors. They went away almost as soon as I got her out through the door, and by the time I got her down the hallway to the elevator, her sight had begun to come back. (474-5)
The quick violent and angry outbursts of the room are just like the characteristics shown by people with intermittent explosive disorder. During the screams on the phone, the room blurts: “Even if you leave this room, you can never leave this room!” (501). Through its intermittent explosive disorder, the room reveals something below that: autophobia.
“Autophobia is the specific phobia of isolation” (Peacher 455). Although the room is known for its violent attacks and suggestions to its guests, it shows that it collects its guests and those who enter 1408. When Mike first enters the room, he analyses a picture on the wall of a ship, and later discovers that the picture has changed.
At the rail of the sailing ship, the tars had been replaced by a line of pallid men and women. The man on the far left…[was] Kevin O’Malley, this room’s first occupant…who had jumped from this room in October of 1910. To O’Malley’s left were the others who had died here, all with that vacant, shocked expression. (King 496-7)
ReplyDeleteOlin also speaks of how the room “collects” its visitors and guests so as to not be vacant. He speaks of how many maids who have turned the room have experienced health problems and a healthy maintenance man who entered the room to fix something and died the next day of a hemorrhage (479).
In focusing on the humanlike psychological qualities of 1408 rather than those who enter it, the characteristics of technophobia, intermittent explosive disorder, and autophobia are revealed. The angry and violently explosive qualities of 1408 along with its avoidance of technology and desire to not lose its guest and visitor companions are all personification tools making the room an observable psychological being.
Mini Critique of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man Using Psychological Criticism
ReplyDeleteWhen one reads A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce, one finds a lot of inner conflicts and agonizing struggles that are experienced by the protagonist, Stephen Dedalus. Stephen is in a Jesuit boarding school experiencing a great many struggles with regards to authority, tradition, faith, and the various meanings of life. From a psychological perspective, it can be argued that a host of Stephen’s problems are caused by repression of feelings he has. The fact that he is placed in an all-male boarding school does not help matters for him in the least.
Stephen struggles with authority figures in the school. The fact that the authority figures in the school are male priests under the title of “Father” makes things all the more interesting (and meaningful in a Freudian sense). Stephen often engages in quarrels with his male teachers, from having “heresy in his essay” (79) to being late for class and arguing about that. Stephen problems stem from his dissatisfaction with the lifestyle imposed upon him by the boarding school. As he participates in the church rituals, for instance, the third-person omniscient narrators states that Stephen engages in “a disjointed lifeless thing [that] … seemed now to play itself, he and his fellow actors aiding it with their parts” (85). Stephen’s detestation of the priests stems from the organized, dull and ritualistic lifestyle of the order he is in. Therefore, Stephen expresses that he does not even feel like a boy. The narrator notices that “He had known neither the pleasure of companionship with others nor the vigour of rude male health nor filial piety” (96). Elsewhere, it is explained that “For one rare moment he seemed to be clothed in the real apparel of boyhood” (85). Evidently, then, the male-dominated order of “Fathers” is repressing Stephen’s intense desire to subjugate and conquer mother-figures. Stephen tries to deal with his repressed feelings, though, by visiting prostitutes. But “He cared little that he was in mortal sin, that his life had grown to be a tissue of subterfuge and falsehood” (98) because “His blood was in revolt” (99), leading him to want “to sin with another of his kind, to force another being to sin with him and to exult with her in sin” (100). These are images of inner turmoil being experienced by the artist, Stephen. The turmoil is caused by the priests, though, who are emblems of fatherhood. Stephen detests the excessive repression of emotion, and even ill feelings, encouraged by the priests – “His [Father Arnall’s] commands, to hoodwink one’s fellow men, to commit sin after sin after sin after sin and to hide one’s corruption from the sight of men” (112). This is the true nature of Stephen’s contempt for the father-figures in the book. The spirit of hypocrisy is present because men like the priests want to appear pious and godly. However, there is clear irony in that appearing before men as godly, while hiding innate desires and sins, only makes men (in a sense) dead.