Body As Crisis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CHAPTER II It is monstrosity, not death, that is the counter- value to life Georges Canguilhem, Monstrosity and the Monstrous … In the middle, cadaverous, awful, lay the grey puddle in the courtyard … I came to the puddle. I could not cross it. Identity failed me Virginia Woolf, The Waves Frida Kahlo and Cindy Sherman both present the wounded flesh. But while Kahlo showed chronic pain as a result of tissue damage, Sherman’s art can be read as a symptom of pain, a reflection of a mental state. While Kahlo painted perpetual pain accompanying her all her life, Sherman shows pain as a structural instability, the blurring of the boundaries of stereotyped femininity. Like her own artistic persona, pain in Sherman’s work is de-individualized; it might just as well be the pain of an author, a model, a character or a viewer. Abandoning any claim on notions such as authorship or intentionality, Sherman disowns – but does not disembody – pain. Pain in Sherman’s art changes the body in the same way that emotional crisis watermarks the identity. Sherman never shows her characters as what is widely understood as idealized figures. Her art forms the counterpart to the American cult of the well-functioning, toned-down body, where any memory of pain had been erased. Pain denied elsewhere here becomes pain transformed into monstrosity, nausea, pathology, hysteria, and disguise. Sherman’s photographs force the viewer to acknowledge the amount of pain constituting the female subject. I am interested in the discursive exchange between feminist and psychoanalytic theories and visual images where Sherman’s art is concerned. Sherman’s work has been mostly looked upon through its relevance to postmodern theory and its new aesthetic characterized by pastiche, self-referentiality, fragmentation, hybridization and multiplicity. Embracing main trends of postmodernity, such as the gaze (Mulvey, 1975 and 1991), the abject (Krauss, 1993b), the real (Foster, 1996b), the traumatic (Bryson, 1993), the authorship (Crimp, 1980), 90 and the pastiche (Solomon-Godeau, 1991)114, Sherman has been established as one of the key artists working on the female self and embodiment. The body in her art has been conceptualized as a seat of passions, emotions and desires, the site of sexuality, the site of illness and death in reference to massive AIDS awareness in the 1980s and 1990s, and finally, the space marked as different, as other. Sherman’s art has mostly been connected to psychoanalytic readings, used as a means to identify and to disrupt the production of the current forms of sexual difference. Her work called for a new conceptual approach, influenced by semiotics, the unspoken and unrepresented conditions of signification, and by feminist theory. The major critical writing on the artist consists of a corpus of explicitly feminist texts on difference, gender and sexuality. The images testifying to women’s alienation from their bodies and from their sexuality under the patriarchal order gave ways to theories of Sherman’s photography as symptom and signifier (Mulvey, 1976, 1989 and 1991, Schjeldahl, 1987, Danto, 1990). Her earliest series, Film Stills, has been widely discussed, and remains to this day considered as the most artistically and commercially successful. Film Stills show the artist in a series of clichéd roles from the 1940s and 1950s low-budget melodramas and film noirs: seductress, femme fatale, working girl, housewife, murder victim. Sherman’s latest Clown series, her collaboration with the Nike ID LAB (Sherman takes part in the commercial campaign) and a recent book project with Marc Jacobs and Juergen Teller (Teller, Sherman, Jacobs, 2006) have not had much scholarly attention as yet. Although often regarded in terms of violence, terror, repression, anxiety and psychosis, Sherman’s work has not been directly connected to pain. It is significant that the most aggressive of Sherman’s series have received proportionally the least commentary. Nevertheless, the series made after Film Stills better fit my argument and exemplify the concept of pain more clearly. The concept of pain as one of the most frequent symptoms of bodily crisis is crucial to my understanding of Sherman’s subsequent series: Fashion Pictures, Disaster Pictures, Disgust Pictures and the Clown Series.115 Sherman’s photographs form an account of pain in the female subject; they describe the nature of the relationship between pain and several types of concepts commonly seen as female, such as hysteria, monstrosity, grotesque or bulimia. Cindy Sherman’s art makes one realize that pain, besides being cellular damage, is a reflection of the mental state, and as such can help to read visual accounts of the 114 Those key essays on Sherman’s art have recently been reprinted in the special issue of October Files, 2006 115 Ascribing particular photographs to different series, I am using the classification made by Rosalind Krauss (1993a). 91 struggle to preserve feminine identity. Pain is a deeply psychoanalytic concept. The incapacity to tolerate frustration causes failure of the symbolic function, and the consequent failure of the thinking process, resulting in repression and the occurrence of symptoms. Freud (1961) considered that the chronologically first pain is the pain of helplessness felt by the baby when she/he is separated from the mother, the primordial experience of seeing oneself in the radical absence of the other. He also defined pain as a reaction that is proportional to the loss of the object, corresponding to the traumatic situation. To Freud, pain corresponded to the traumatic effect of absence that can not be imagined, a negative that can not be either represented or recalled, manifesting itself through somatization. Sherman’s photographs present visual cases of such somatization, of communicating emotional distress as bodily symptoms. The symptom is a ciphered message of the body that is positioned on the verge of passing into signification and culture, but is permanently held back. What makes it recognizable is its affect, undermining and threatening the whole notion of personal and cultural intelligibility (Bryson, 1993). It causes discomfort and displeasure, but at the same time it is the only point that gives consistency to the subject, its only way to avoid falling apart. Lacan (1980) claimed that the symptom arises where the word fails; it is a kind of prolongation of communication by other means; the failed, repressed word articulates itself in a coded form. Symptom addresses an Other within, it embraces the blurring of boundaries. It has its locus in the body, but this body is no longer a Foucauldian product of discipline, knowledge and technique. Rather, it is connected to the idea of a dark, hidden monstrosity. Jean-Martin Charcot, the Parisian doctor treating hysteria at the end of nineteenth century, in place of the word symptom used the word stigmata. Referring to the suffering of Christ, that word also appeared in the witch-hunting manuals of the Inquisition; stigmata diaboli marked the body of the witch (in: Gilman, 1993). Canguilhem (1966), establishing the methodology of the normal and the pathological in the history of biology and medicine, saw pain as the ultimate symptom, the process of foreseeing the disease by the organism. In the case of almost any dysfunction, our pain sensitivity increases and pain tolerance decreases. Since the amount and quality of pain one feels is determined by one’s previous experiences, by the way one remembers them, and by one’s ability to understand the cause of pain and its consequences, I understand symptom here as “your own description of your physical or mental impairment” (Cassell, 1991:96), often apparent only to the person affected. The story of the symptom is not linear and it does not move from cause to effect (Ahmed 2002). Reworking pain as a symptom, rather that treating it like an unnecessary affliction, presents the chance for 92 escaping the binary of physical/emotional pain and presenting pain only within the cultural frame. Cindy Sherman’s photographs are the metaphors of painful experiences, with no systematic discourse, but at the same time deeply embedded and continuously inscribed in her art. Sherman’s works illustrate the way in which those experiences have entered into the domain of popular media and culture, re-constructing femininity as present in art, fashion magazines, pornography, cinema and cultural clichés. In visual representation the problem of female embodiment – immaterial, fluid, transcendent, modified - is particularly relevant to the notion of crisis that pain brings along. According to Showalter, women are “human beings who will convert feelings into symptoms when we are unable to speak” (Showalter, 1997:207). Consequently, I think that Sherman presents symptoms that make bodily comfort and well- being impossible. As Bryson (1993) points out, a significant obstacle for understanding the body lies in the issue of pain. Pain makes the body oscillate between being a material, autonomous entity and an object of a scientific study reduced to a piece of flesh. Pain marks the limits of the language and comprehension; there are very few signs one could exchange for his or her pain to push it into representational codes. I would nevertheless argue that pain can be traceable in Sherman’s photographs, but only if one moves beyond the concept of pain as tissue damage. The body in Sherman’s art, manipulated and shattered by the voyeuristic gaze, instrumentality, absence of sexual taboos, and pornographic and advertising practices, can no longer bear any pretence to wholeness and integrity. It has been marked as a symbol of a pathological, disintegrating identity. It has been situated by art historians in visual parallel to the horrifying etches of Francisco Goya: Perhaps for Sherman, as for so many other artists and intellectuals of our own time, the body is the central locus of significant ideas, issues, and images, yet the meanings we attach to its representation as fragmented, decayed, imperfect, and artificial are drastically different from those of earlier times.