Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Use this forum to have philosophical discussions about aesthetics and art. What is art? What is beauty? What makes art good? You can also use this forum to discuss philosophy in the arts, namely to discuss the philosophical points in any particular movie, TV show, book or story.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 2912
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Sculptor1 » October 16th, 2020, 11:25 am

Hitchcock was not an itellectual. Hitchcock was a visionary.
He never made the slightest move to study ANY psychological texts, let alone Freud.
And he treated psychoanalysis with scorn.
This intellectualising of Hitchcock is just a misunderstanding.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4388
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Terrapin Station » October 16th, 2020, 11:34 am

Arjen wrote:
October 12th, 2020, 7:53 am
He did, it is well known. In fact, Zizek writes about it in "how to read Lacan", but if you want, you can find it here:
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... nconscious
There are actually many sources.
What we'd need would be statements from Hitchcock about it.

User avatar
Arjen
Posts: 466
Joined: January 16th, 2019, 4:53 am
Favorite Philosopher: Immanuel Kant

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Arjen » October 16th, 2020, 11:46 am

That iams what it states.
In fact, there are intervieuws with Hitcock on youtube as well.
The saying that what is true in theory is not always true in practice, means that the theory is wrong!
~Immanuel Kant

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4388
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Terrapin Station » October 16th, 2020, 11:48 am

Well, when someone locates a more specific reference they can post it in this thread. ;-)

User avatar
Arjen
Posts: 466
Joined: January 16th, 2019, 4:53 am
Favorite Philosopher: Immanuel Kant

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Arjen » October 16th, 2020, 11:58 am

You could read the article, or it's description...
The saying that what is true in theory is not always true in practice, means that the theory is wrong!
~Immanuel Kant

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4388
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Terrapin Station » October 16th, 2020, 12:04 pm

Arjen wrote:
October 16th, 2020, 11:58 am
You could read the article, or it's description...
As if I didn't. There are no quotes from Hitchcock there.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4388
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Terrapin Station » October 16th, 2020, 12:09 pm

(I mean no quotes from Hitchcock that he had anything about Freud in mind with his work.)

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 2912
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Sculptor1 » October 16th, 2020, 12:43 pm

Terrapin Station wrote:
October 16th, 2020, 11:34 am
Arjen wrote:
October 12th, 2020, 7:53 am
He did, it is well known. In fact, Zizek writes about it in "how to read Lacan", but if you want, you can find it here:
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... nconscious
There are actually many sources.
What we'd need would be statements from Hitchcock about it.
I've listened to enough Hitchcock to know this thread is way off the mark.
There's lots of "academic" stuff in which Freudian claims, intentional and non intentional are discussed, but Hitchcock was a man with a sense of humour, and not at all into intellectualising. He was a genius visual thinker, and cared very little for psycho-babble.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COa0b-blVyc

User avatar
Steve3007
Posts: 8160
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes of Cyrene
Location: UK

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Steve3007 » October 19th, 2020, 5:49 am

I still choose to believe this little theory about Psycho, and enjoy it, even if my only ally on this particular topic is a communism-obsessed Dutchman. I think Hitchcock gave many interviews confirming the theory but they were all suppressed by the CCP. I bet if I looked hard enough, using the power of the internet, I could find someone to cite who agrees with me (other than the communism-obsessed Dutchman).

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4388
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Terrapin Station » October 19th, 2020, 9:15 am

I think that criticism that forwards interpretations that the author didn't actually have in mind can be valuable. They give you another way to look at the work that can provide both enhanced appreciation and insight. And there can also be merit to it in that it can touch on things that are there due to the "collective unconscious"--simply ways that our brains tend to work due to ancestral, genetic commonalities. But we should still be aware that the author might not have had the interpretation in mind. It's just another way of looking at it, a way that tells us at least as much about the critic.

User avatar
Steve3007
Posts: 8160
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes of Cyrene
Location: UK

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Steve3007 » October 19th, 2020, 9:56 am

OK. I'll settle for that.

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 2912
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Sculptor1 » October 19th, 2020, 10:18 am

Steve3007 wrote:
October 19th, 2020, 5:49 am
I still choose to believe this little theory about Psycho, and enjoy it, even if my only ally on this particular topic is a communism-obsessed Dutchman. I think Hitchcock gave many interviews confirming the theory but they were all suppressed by the CCP. I bet if I looked hard enough, using the power of the internet, I could find someone to cite who agrees with me (other than the communism-obsessed Dutchman).
Hitchcock has no interest in psychology.
This video is a complete and utter misunderstanding of a visionary genius. What he did with film set the standard for others to follow. Most of his ideas were so good; his practice so unique; and his techniques so groundbraking that they became the future cliches of film. He had no need or use for hidden meanings. He never intellectualised his films and his aim was to make visual representations of emotional reactions, to reach into a character so the audience could see with their eyes. His main technique was to build tension by telling the audience everything before hand as they anticipated the shock that was to come. He hated mystery and hid nothing.

Most houses have a basement a ground floor and a first floor. Does that mean every designer is a dupe resonding to a universal idea of Id, Ego, and Superego; ideas I might add the are completely unfalsifiable and about as useful as Tarot cards or astrology.
Even if the concepts of uncanny and doppleganger were meaningful, they just DON'T FIT the film characters. They do not mirror each other in ANY sense.
It is complete BS from start to finish.

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 2912
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Psycho and the the uncanny doppelgänger

Post by Sculptor1 » October 19th, 2020, 10:19 am

Terrapin Station wrote:
October 16th, 2020, 12:09 pm
(I mean no quotes from Hitchcock that he had anything about Freud in mind with his work.)
NOTHING

Post Reply