DAVID CRONENBERG AS MYTHMAKER: AN ARCHETYPAL INTERPRETATION OF HIS FILMS, 1975 TO 1991 By JAMES YATES Bachelor of Arts Ouachita Baptist University Arkadelphia, Arkansas 1983 Master of Arts Arkansas State university Jonesboro, Arkansas 1985 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May, 1995 COPYRIGHT By James Newton Yates May 1995 DAVID CRONENBERG AS MYTHMAKER: AN ARCHETYPAL INTERPRETATION OF HIS FILMS, 1975 TO 1991 Dissertation Approved: Dissertatlbn Advisor ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my sincere appreciation to my major advisor, Dr. Leonard Leff, for his expertise, his intelligent supervision, constructive guidance, and friendship. I would equally like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr. Peter Rollins for his invaluable encouragement, advisement, wisdom, and friendship. My sincere appreciation extends to my other committee members, Dr. Linda Leavell and Dr. Edward Lawry, whose assistance and guidance are also invaluable. I wish to express very special appreciation to my wife, Maggie, for her strong encouragement during times of diffi­ culty, and for her love, patience, and understanding during the entire process. I would like to dedicate this project to the memory of my grandmother, Eunice Barnett, whose love, support, encouragement, and sacrifices paved the way for any successes I might enjoy. Thanks to all of my colleagues, friends, and students at Northwestern Oklahoma State Univer­ sity and Oklahoma State University for their encouragement over the past seven years. Finally, I would like to thank the Department of English for its support during my seven years of study. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. THE CRONENBERG MYTHOS 1 Introduction .. : .. 1. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Biography .................................... 4 Genre, Myth, and Cronenberg .................. 6 >Critical and Philosophical Contexts .......... 11 The Cronenberg Mythos '" ..................... 24 Methodology .................................. 26 Conc 1 us ion ................................... 28 Notes ........................................ 30 I I. THE COSMIC TRILOGY , ............................... 32 Introduct ion ................................. 32 They Came From Within ........................ 35 Rabi d ........................................ 44 The Brood .................................... 53 Conclusion ................................... 69 Notes ........................................ 73 III. THE HERO TRILOGY 75 Introduction 75 Scanners .................................... 79 Vi deodrome .................................. 92 The Dead Zone ............................... 106 Conclusion .................................. 121 IV. THE JOURNEY TRILOGY .............................. 127 Introduction ................................. 127 The Fl~ ................................ : ..... 130 Dead R~ngers ................................. 142 Naked Lunch ....................•............. 154 Conc 1 us ion ................................... 170 V. CRONENBERG'S EXISTENTIAL AND ARTISTIC VISIONS 174 Cronenberg's Existential Vision .............. 174 Cronenberg's Artistic Vision ................. 182 Conclusion ................................... 187 WORKS CITED 189 iv CHAPTER I: THE CRONENBERG MYTHOS Introduction At its basic level, myth refers both to the elements which constitute a narrative and the complex of meanings behind the narrative. As such a form of narration, the cinema is one of the most recent manifestations of myth in human experience. As with the ancient oral tradition and later with written literature, visual literature now serves as the vehicle of transmission of a culture's concerns, anxieties, and self-image, i.e. its myths. Myth and mythology now moves into the cinematic realm and reaches a broader audience. In essence, the cinema has become for the modern world of the late twentieth century the collective cathedral of primitive participation mystique and the tribal dream house of modern civilization (Hill 4). Cinema, whether secular or religious in itself, promotes collective ideologies and can serve an essentially spiritual purpose. In a secular society, media (including film and television), rather than traditionally recognized religious institutions, often fulfill the functions of religion. In this sense, myth provides a cumulative cultural expression of the sacred mass consciousness. From this standpoint, myth and film are intertwined in terms of presentation and operate on a deeply numinous level. One fundamental expression of this interconnectedness rests in the area of genre. Genre films often rely on unimaginative depictions of formula plots and stereotypes; in so doing, genre films make uninspired use of archetypal material. However, when these archetypes are manipulated in an original manner which breaks the 1 2 traditional stereotype, artistry emerges and genre rises to new levels of expression. Since his first feature in 1975, Canadian director David Cronenberg has created a body of filmwork which incorporates this mythic dimension into a unique signature. Cronenberg's films exhibit a firm thematic consistency, vision, and technique in spite of their reputation for visceral explicitness, violence, and sexuality. More importantly, these films display a significant use of mythic elements which construct a foundation on which to hang his various concerns. It is precisely this mythic substructure which infuses Cronenberg's films with creative authority and grounds his existential worldview. However, that is not to say that Cronenberg is a filmmaker on the same level as a Kurosawa or a-Renoir or a thinker more original or equal to a Kant or a Sartre. Cronenberg, regardless of his own artistic intentions and philosophical agenda, is a genre director. As such, he has found a certain modicum of success and acceptability; he has also managed his fair share of derision and contempt. For all of his philosophical posturing, Cronenberg is not a perfect director or artist. He may discuss in numerous interviews his viewpoints regarding biological predestination and free will, the illusion of religion, and the subversive nature of art and how each of his films reflect these and other matters, yet Cronenberg's films are often marked by lethargy, dull photography, weak characterization, and revolting special effects. While Cronenberg also may have a wide variety of literary influences, his philosophical point of view lacks 3 originality and is imbued with a sense of hubris not unlike the scientists in his films. Like the universe created in his features, Cronenberg's worldview is bleak, pessimistic, and devoid of hopefulness. Yet despite these deep flaws, perhaps even because of them, Cronenberg's body of work and his position as a late twentieth century filmmaker calls for examination. This study analyzes the mythic material in Cronenberg's nine genre films. An examination of the first three films will focus on the foundations of his film mythology -- the use of creation myth in the first film, They Came From Within; apocalyptic myth and the Earth Goddess archetype, in Rabid, the second film; and the archetypal first family and the theme of past sins in the third film, The Brood. This analysis will continue through the director's second trilogy of films which collectively depicts the figure of the archetypal hero; in Scanners, the theme of intrafamilial warfare and paternal rebellion is examined; in Videodrome, the use of the Narcissus myth and the three stage heroic process is reviewed; finally, in The Dead Zone, a critique of the Messiah archetype is conducted with a focus on the influence of familial dysfunction. In the third group of films, an investigation into the various uses of the archetypal pattern of the Journey will be undertaken; in The Fly, the Cronenbergian conceit of the Disease of Finitude serves as the focus of inquiry while in Dead Ringers, attention focuses on the mythology of twinship and the quest for complete and autonomous separation of one being from another; finally, in Naked Lunch, the archetypal landscape will be examined. This study will conclude with a 4 brief overview of Cronenberg's existential and artistic vision. While the tone of this study may at times appear intensive, which might be mistaken for enthusiasm, this study does not roll in worship of the filmmaker. In fact, it does not endorse, accept, or agree with Cronenberg's viewpoints and philosophical agenda. Neither does it attempt to elevate the Canadian director into the pantheon of great auteurs such as Alfred Hitchcock, Jean Cocteau, or Francois Truffaut. What this study fundamentally attempts to do is to critically examine how an auteur can create a film mythology and how archetypal material can be utilized in this endeavor. It is an attempt at scholarly criticism, not enthusiastic hero-worship. Biography David P. Cronenberg was born in Toronto, Ontario, on March 15, 1943, to Milton and Esther Cronenberg. Milton was a writer who edited True Canadian Crime Stories and wrote comic books and short stories; Esther was a musician and accompanist for the National Ballet of Canada. As a youth, Cronenberg's chief interests were music, science, literature, and movies, particularly science fiction. He was also intrigued with writing and as an adolescent wrote and submitted several science fiction short stories to various magazines; though none were accepted, Cronenberg