Files/2014 Women and the Big Picture Report.Pdf>, Accessed 6 September 2018
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The neuroscientific uncanny: a filmic investigation of twenty-first century hauntology GENT, Susannah <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0091-2555> Available from the Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/26099/ A Sheffield Hallam University thesis This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Please visit http://shura.shu.ac.uk/26099/ and http://shura.shu.ac.uk/information.html for further details about copyright and re-use permissions. THE NEUROSCIENTIFIC UNCANNY: A FILMIC INVESTIGATION OF TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY HAUNTOLOGY Susannah Gent A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Sheffield Hallam University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy October 2019 Candidate Declaration I hereby declare that: 1. I have not been enrolled for another award of the University, or other academic or professional organisation, whilst undertaking my research degree. 2. None of the material contained in the thesis has been used in any other submission for an academic award. 3. I am aware of and understand the University’s policy on plagiarism and certify that this thesis is my own work. The use of all published or other sources of material consulted have been properly and fully acknowledged. 4. The work undertaken towards the thesis has been conducted in accordance with the SHU Principles of Integrity in Research and the SHU Research Ethics Policy. 5. The word count of the thesis is 39,999. Name Susannah Gent Date October 2019 Award Ph.D. Faculty Science, Technology, and Art Director of Studies Dr Sharon Kivland ABSTRACT The research space of this practice-led Ph.D. invites filmmaking, psychoanalysis, philosophy, and neuroscience to interact towards an expanded understanding of the uncanny and the related concept of hauntology. The three films produced explore methods of spontaneous, creative play. Scanner follows a scientific study that attempts to explore a neurological underpinning of the uncanny through an fMRI brain scan study. The film explains the process, describes the results, and illustrates the uncanny by experimenting with the documentary form. Unhomely Street, made while experiencing post-concussive syndrome, unwittingly acts as a therapeutic project. Through post-hoc reflection the film reveals unconscious aspects of the creative process. Psychotel, a ‘thesis’ film, is informed by psychoanalytic accounts of the uncanny, philosophical, and neuroscientific descriptions of selfhood, and influenced by representations of the uncanny in art work and the supernatural horror genre. In conclusion, following Nicholas Royle’s assertion that the world is uncanny because of the discrepancy between our apparent (self) knowledge and our inability to enact change,1 I reflect upon the potential of filmmaking as research to promote new ways of thinking. Through a neuropsychoanalytic account of the uncanny I show that the evolved brain operates according to primitive and automatic processes. These processes are largely hidden from consciousness and the uncanny occurs when our sense of agency is challenged. While this view is underpinned by neuroscience and cognitive psychology, I demonstrate that it is not at odds with the psychoanalytic account of the ‘return of the repressed’. In short, in the words of Freud, the uncanny arises when the individual understands themself as ‘a temporary and transient appendage to the quasi- immortal germ-plasm’.2 1. Nicholas Royle, The Uncanny, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003, p. 3. 2. Sigmund Freud (1915), ‘Instincts and their Vicissitudes’, On Metapsychology: The Theory of Psychoanalysis, vol. 11, trans. and ed. by James Strachey et al., London: Penguin, 1984, pp. 121‒22. 1 CONTENTS Acknowledgements 3 List of illustrations 5 Endnote: Check in 6 Room plan: structure of the thesis 9 1. Returning to the start: The uncanny and twenty-first century hauntoloy 14 Background to the practice 16 2. Methodological windows: Why neuroscience?: Interdisciplinary research 24 Unconscious / nonconscious: A note 29 Scanner: fMRI study and short film 31 3. Inviting the unconscious to speak: Creative Play: Art practice as research 36 Unhomely Street: filmic intuition 41 4. Pointing the bone: A review of metaphor 53 5. Psychotel, Ground floor: Check-in: The blind narrator and the sexual uncanny 63 The return of the repressed and the uncanny child 74 6. Psychotel, Second floor: Single or double room?: Myself and I: the structure of selfhood 88 The uncanny double: otherness and automaticity 103 I could not sleep with her in the room 106 7. Psychotel, Third floor: Lift going up: The all-seeing narrator and the harbinger of death 110 Spirit level and the quantum uncanny 121 8. Check out: Exit Chance: the magic book shop 133 Reception: creative-practice research 135 Intuition and affect 138 Behind the curtain: the uncanny unconscious 140 Visitor’s book: filmmaking in precarious times 142 Bibliography 150 Appendix 1 fMRI study documentation i Appendix 2 Removed from the Eyes, Editions II lx Appendix 3 Distribution and publication lxxxv Appendix 4 Ethics reports lxxxviii 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS With heartfelt thanks to my supervisory team: Dr Sharon Kivland, Dean Summers, Chloe Brown, to my internal assessors: Dr Chi-Yun Shin, Ian Gwilt, and Virginia Heath, my external assessors: Nicholas Royle and Nicholas Royle, my partner Tom Salmon for technical and other support throughout, the contributors to Unhomely Street: Stephen Bollom, David Kynaston, Lesley Guy, Fay Musselwhite, Mary Musselwhite, Lisa Davison, Mark Cohen, Laure Carnet, Nort Tron, Steve Marles, Jacqui Bellamy, Harvey Gent-Salmon, and Iain Gill, the contributors to Psychotel: Zinnia Gent-Salmon, Hilary Gent, Tom Salmon, Helen Blejerman, Fay Musselwhite, Sharon Kivland, Bernadette O’Toole, Harvey Gent-Salmon, Mark Cohen, Little I, Mark Parkin, the contributors to the science survey: Yael Benn, Iain D. Wilkinson, Julia Bigley, Steve Genn, Helen Fox, Tom Benn, and all the online participants, to Rachel Genn, and the Ph.D. cohort for being an early audience and supportive allies, to MAC, SHU for supporting this Ph.D. 3 The Guest House This being human is a guest house. Every morning a new arrival. A joy, a depression, a meanness, some momentary awareness comes As an unexpected visitor. Welcome and entertain them all! Even if they’re a crowd of sorrows, who violently sweep your house empty of its furniture, still treat each guest honourably. He may be clearing you out for some new delight. The dark thought, the shame, the malice, meet them at the door laughing and invite them in. Be grateful for whoever comes, because each has been sent as a guide from beyond. Rumi, 13th century 4 llustrations Fig. 1. X is very useful, Susannah Gent 19 Fig. 2. Suspension of disbelief, Steve Bishop 20 Fig. 3. Self Portrait as a Matryshka part 2, Wendy Mayer 20 Fig. 4. Twelve Heads, Susannah Gent 20 Fig. 5. Femme Totale Film Festival poster 21 Fig. 6. Pauline Bunny, Sarah Lucas 22 Fig. 7. Blood Portrait, Mark Quinn 22 Fig. 8. Zygotic acceleration,biogenetic, de-sublimated libidinal model, Jake and Dinos Chapman 22 Fig. 9. Deer, Susannah Gent 22 Fig. 10. Sentimental Rabbit Suicide, Susannah Gent 22 Fig. 11. Rabbit Shadow, Susannah Gent 23 Fig. 12. Scanner stills 1, Susannah Gent 33 Fig. 13. Scanner stills 2, Susannah Gent 33 Fig. 14. Walking sketches, stills, Susannah Gent 36 Fig. 15. Unhomely Street, film stills, Susannah Gent 36 Fig. 16. Cognitive neuroscience, Michael Chee 37 Fig. 17. The human brain in cross-section, Medical School 37 Fig. 18. Neurons and synapses based on drawings by Cajal, Robert Stufflebeam 37 Fig. 19. Neurons, Getty images 37 Fig. 20. Ophiodea, Kunstformen der Natur, 61, 70, 85, Ernst Haeckel 37 Fig. 21. Random fractal, Jock Cooper 38 Fig. 22. Mathematical imagery, MathVideos 38 Fig. 23. Romanesco broccoli, G. Tin 39 Fig. 24. Sunflower, istockphoto 39 Fig. 25. Unhomely Street, film still, Susannah Gent 46 Fig. 26. Unhomely Street, film still, Susannah Gent 49 Fig. 27. Unhomely Street, film still, Susannah Gent 52 Fig. 28. Removed from the Eyes, Editions II, pages 8, 12, 18, Susannah Gent 64 Fig. 29. Psychotel, film stills, dir. Susannah Gent 65 Fig. 30. Un Chein Andalou, film still, dir. Luis Buñuel 65 Fig. 31. Coraline, film still, dir. Henry Selick 66 Fig. 32. Before I Wake, film still, dir. Mike Flanagan 66 Fig. 33. Psychotel film still, dir. Susannah Gent 67 Fig. 34. Psychotel film stills, dir. Susannah Gent 70 Fig. 35. Trojeručica, St John Damascene 70 Fig. 36. Three handed Madonna 70 Fig. 37. Poltergeist, film still, dir. Tobe Hooper 71 Fig. 38. Poltergeist, film still, dir. Gil Kenan 71 Fig. 39. Psychotel film still, dir. Susannah Gent 73 Fig. 40. Before I Wake, film still, dir. Mike Flanagan 82 Fig. 41. Poltergeist, film still, dir. Tobe Hooper 82 Fig. 42. Kanaval Vodou, Leah Gordon 85 Fig. 43. Psychotel, film still, dir. Susannah Gent 85 Fig. 44. Babadook, film still, dir. Jennifer Kent 89 Fig. 45. A Nightmare on Elm Street, film still, dir. Wes Craven 89 Fig. 46. Nosferatu, film still, dir. F. W. Murnau 89 Fig. 47. Ring II, film stills, dir. Hideo Nakata, Tartan 89 Fig. 48. Psychotel film stills, dir. Susannah Gent 90 Fig. 49. Psychotel film still, dir. Susannah Gent 92 Fig. 50. Psychotel film stills, dir. Susannah Gent 95 Fig. 51. Ring, film stills, dir. Hideo Nakata 103 Fig. 52. Mirror, film stills, dir. Andrei Tarkovsky 104 Fig. 53. Psychotel, film stills, dir. Susannah Gent 104 Fig. 54. Le Testament d’Orphée, film still, dir. Jean Cocteau 105 Fig. 55. Lost Highway, film still, dir.