Home » 2010

Archive for 2010:


Interview with NHRS: The Uncanny in Popular Horror Fiction

A former grad student of mine, WD Prescott, is running an interesting website bluntly called The Non-Horror Reader Survey that is studying what today’s readers think about the modern horror genre. It features interviews with various readers, writers, and scholars, along with a research questionnaire you can fill out, if you want to participate. It’s an interesting idea.

Yesterday, NHRS kindly (and extensively) interviewed me — see “Winter Chills with Mike Arnzen” — and I thought readers of The Popular Uncanny might find it of interest. Here’s an excerpt related to the uncanny, from the top of the interview:

NHRS: You have a section of your website that is about the instances of the “uncanny,” or “unheimlich,” in popular culture. What are your thoughts on Freud’s theory of the “uncanny” and its relationship to Horror fiction?

MA: Since horror is the genre most associated with fear, it’s a natural that its authors and film directors would draw inspiration from the field of psychology. (There would be no Psycho without psychology!) Whether concerned with the twisted motives of gritty serial killers or the nightmare creatures of the supernatural, horror stories not only try to prick the “fight vs. flight” response of their readers, but also go exploring “the dark side” of the mind for material.

The “uncanny” is a part of that realm of fear. Only it’s less about abject dread and more about the frisson one feels when caught off-guard — it’s that surprising recognition we feel dawning on us, akin to déjà vu, that strange sense of “I have been here before” or that “life is but a dream.” Freud was the first to contemplate what it is that accounts for these disturbing feelings. In fiction, he suggests the “strangely familiar” is present not only in gothic tales of haunting, but also appears in the form of a whole series of icons that we find even in the present day in the horror genre: inanimate objects that move on their own accord, dolls that look back at you or speak with a human voice, dismembered limbs or possessed beings that seem to have minds of their own, the living dead, bizarre ominous symbols (666) that seem to be harbingers of doom, and so forth. He ultimately argues that these are all manifestations of secret childhood wishes we repressed, which shockingly “return” to us as adults with such intensity that we believe — if only for a moment — that our primitive instincts were right all along and that the reasonable, civilized world of adulthood has really been nothing more than a charade, a fiction.
[pullquote]
To me, the Pillsbury Doughboy might as well be a Chucky doll. To me, the Doublemint Twins are doppelgangers. The Michelin Man is a monster. I am enthralled by the way the uncanny is used to fetishize commodities and sell us things we otherwise wouldn’t see a need to buy.[/pullquote]
Horror stories conjure those disturbing feelings and represent the “secret wishes” of characters in endlessly fascinating ways. One can study these stories for what they tell us not only about our animal or primitive beliefs, but also our social belief systems. This is what makes the uncanny a rich form of literary criticism, despite the way Freud’s work otherwise seems to serve some of the more problematic aspects of his psychoanalytical theories about castration anxiety and the Oedipal complex.

Nowadays, a possessed doll isn’t as scary as it used to be. Yet if told (or shown) right, it can still “getcha” when you least expect it. Or the doll has become something else: an android, an artificial intelligence, a computer. It’s all the same principle. That’s because we all still dream, we all still are a little uncertain about the universe, and we’re never as smart or in control as we think we are. In fact, that’s probably how I ultimately define horror literature: as the you’re not so smart as you thought you were, are you? genre. It bursts the bubbles of mankind, especially when it comes to our pretenses toward mastery over various domains. Perhaps this sounds like anti-intellectualism at work, but it’s the exact opposite. It questions and challenges what we take for granted. I love that edge of horror fiction, and I think the humorous audacity of it all has a lot to do with this.

Maybe I’m a little obsessed with it, but I see the same uncanny tropes from horror fiction evident everywhere in popular culture, particularly in advertising. To me, the Pillsbury Doughboy might as well be a Chucky doll. To me, the Doublemint Twins are doppelgangers. The Michelin Man is a monster. I am enthralled by the way the uncanny is used to fetishize commodities and sell us things we otherwise wouldn’t see a need to buy. I explored these ideas in my doctoral dissertation, which I’m currently revising into an academic book called The Popular Uncanny, which hopefully will be available from Guide Dog Books in 2011. For now, folks can visit my website to read my continuing notebook on the subject.


Read the entire interview, where I field questions on teaching horror in college, horror’s relationship with humor and poetry, and the cautionary tale.



Kung Shoe

This Fall 2010 television commercial, Kung Shoe DSW (also archived on their corporate site), uses a clever pastiche of contemporary action and martial arts cinema to advertise Designer Shoe Warehouse‘s “Killer Boots.” It’s cute and funny and obviously an effective, eye-grabbing advertisement for the company, as artfully made as any Jan Svankmajer film. It is also a great example of the domestication of the popular uncanny in commercial culture.
[pullquote]It doesn’t matter that DSW is a shoe warehouse, and that they surely don’t want one type or brand to be a “killer” of everything else they offer for sale. They probably also don’t want you to associate every shoe box with a coffin, either. [/pullquote]
First, the ad does what all stop motion animation does: it gives “life” to inanimate objects through an artistic application of cinematic technology. This method is so familiar to us now in the 21st century that we take for granted the strangeness of it all: the boot can literally “kick bootie” as if it were not only a living character with motives and a life to protect, but also high skill in self-defense. No small matter, too, that this object is a boot — obviously the best fashion accessory to show a “kick” — but more importantly, it functions in the orthodox sense of the Freudian uncanny: it operates like a dismembered limb acting on its own accord, since all these acrobatics are imitations of human appendages. [Indeed, this suggestion is obliquely made when our protagonist -- a "single" amputee, separated from its other partner foot -- first meets up with a pair of villainous boots which are shot from "boot level" when they step casually in front of the character, spaced apart like two human legs between our position and the "killer boot's" -- implying a human body standing above, off frame.]

The Foe Steps In

On another level, the uncanniness of this humorous advertisement floats invisibly in the context of its consumption. This ad, while clever, wouldn’t make any sense in a world without genre films. Immediately, the whole scene feels strangely familiar in that it not only uses the generic “trope” of a parking garage ambush to explain the scenario, but it also references any number of post-Matrix action films that use “bullet time” techniques which essentially freeze a moment and spin the camera around in a 360 degree effect to fetishize the moment of impact in a spectacular way: a filmmaker’s attempt to make the fight all the more real because we’re invited to visualize the actual force of the violence, despite the entire artifice of the enterprise. This is the “magic” of camerawork applied to very real physical acting, generating spectator awe because the cinema technology (ergo the spectator’s experience) has power that supercedes the “physics” of the time and space in the universe we are ostensibly being shown. It is a supernaturalized “special effect.”

In the broad scheme of things, to imagine a single boot taking on an army of ninja shoes in a dark parking garage is simply ludicrous — but it is hilarious precisely because it is so fantastically imaginary yet hauntingly familiar. The shoes all are given squeaky voices — delivering high pitched “hi-yahs!” as they “attack” the protagonist, who — after dealing the final death blow to a foe who ultimately knocks over a crate of shoe horns — emits a deep and somewhat smug little chuckle.

It is at this moment — when the video takes a moment to laugh at itself before delivering its advertorial message — that the emotional effect is felt as particularly uncanny. For it is not simply that the boot/limb is “possessed” with a soul but the visual medium itself presumes a sort of hyper-self-awareness that up to that point is not really acknowledged within the text proper. This sort of slippage into meta-commentary is a peculiar element of popular culture, which frequently relies on intertextual nods and winks to appeal to the viewer’s sense of media savvy…and reflecting it back with a knowingness that implies that the medium itself is what has this magical power to give life to lifeless objects. There is always a sense of death underpinning such phenomena when we experience it, which we acknowledge with laughter — just like we do with a yelp of terror or even that swimming sensation of dislocation we feel — when we experience the uncanny.

Indeed, the humorous tag line (“Boots Kick Bootie”) and the anonymous female voiceover that subsequently kicks in provides a reassuring sense of comfort that this was “only” an ad, and communicates a sense of relief that the weirdness of it all is fully explainable in the context of the mass market (since there is no context given for what is shown until the very end). The uncanniness is domesticated in the framework of advertising culture. When the rapidly edited images of shoes being placed into the shipping crate in the very final moment appears, one might miss the fact that what is being dramatized is a sort of coffining of the victims of the battle. It is subtly disturbing that the ad ends on that final “ting” as a shuriken flies from off screen space (our space?) and thunks into the coffin-like shoe box, an empty space infinitely replaceable with any sort of body/shoe.

Death sells.

It doesn’t matter that DSW is a shoe warehouse, and that they surely don’t want one type or brand to be a “killer” of everything else they offer for sale. They probably also don’t want you to associate every shoe box with a coffin, either. While this all could suggest a sublimated guilt over the dead animal skins that sometimes go into the shoes on our feet, or even some anxiety about imports and labor, these deeper feelings are really not as important as the fetishism of the commodity that TV commercials like these seek to promulgate. The emotional appeal that underpins the silly humor in this ad overrides all reason: if you want power (and desire survival) then you want one of these “magical” boots.



Uncanny Beauty and Weird Tales

Uncannily Beautiful Cover Art for Weird Tales #356

Uncannily Beautiful Cover Art for Weird Tales #356



Weird Tales magazine (issue #356) will have “uncanny beauty” as its theme, and I’m excited to see what it has in store. The cover art is gorgeous. Even Jeff Vandermeer’s cat loves it. I highly recommend subscribing to this longstanding genre fiction magazine, which has been around since the pulp era and helped draw attention to the careers of horror writers ranging all the way from HP Lovecraft and Robert Bloch to Ramsey Campbell and Thomas Ligotti. Its contemporary incarnation is doing all sorts of remarkable things to stretch beyond preconceived notions of the fantasy genre, while retaining the spirit of its editorial history. I love Weird Tales.



The Uncanny Impulse to Collect

Freud discusses how dolls, waxworks and other doubles evoke the uncanny, but he was also interested in the uncanny as a fear of being taken over by forces external to the body that could in turn be confused with one’s sense of self. I feel that the impulse to collect, like other compulsions, seems to emanate from outside the self, as if one were controlled by outside forces. Freud quotes Ernst Jentsch not only about statues that appear “alive”, but also the uncanny experience of witnessing an epileptic seizure — that sense of an unknown force taking control of the body. – artist Mike Kelley

The passage above is taken from “I’ve Got This Strange Feeling” — a conversation between artist Mike Kelley and critic Jeffrey Sconce (author of the important book Haunted Media (Duke UP, 2000)), in connection to Kelley’s conference-like exhibition on “The Uncanny” at the Tate Museum in Liverpool, in May 2004. The images and ideas at that exhibit are brilliant, and Kelley provides a virtual tour with commentary that explains how his art engages with theories of the uncanny.

In “Strange Feeling,” Kelley and Sconce talk about a number of fascinating topics (especially the “neo-shamanism” of online media), but I wanted to quickly note this concept about an uncanny “unknown force” compelling a collector of objects like a puppet on a string. Similarly, there’s a degree to which a museum or gallery space feels supernatural in its church-like treatment of sculptures, paintings and other “auratic” artifacts as treasured objects — it is a sacred space of cultural engagement.
[pullquote]Collecting is a form of repetition — a feeling that we are autonomously, robotically compelled to repeat the original pleasure we first experienced with it. This locks us into a strange “living dead” relationship with our own long-gone pasts, in a sense. [/pullquote]
In mass culture, this force is felt in the shopping mall and the arcades of consumerist meccas like Las Vegas. It relates directly to commodity fetishism — where manufactured items (or their avatars via advertising) are represented as if they were also sacred objects — and where consumers are trained by the preachers of cool and the gospel of advertising to worship at their altar.

In psychoanalytic theory, the fetishism of objects is considered neurotic because it substitutes the love for a person with the love for an inanimate object. It is at once an irrational and (usually) obsessive act…and yet in the culture of late capitalism it is also normalized and in evidence everywhere: from the middle class businessman who waxes his fancy automobile every Saturday to the kid with a hundred pop band stickers in her locker. The fetishes of mass culture are persistently repurposed in artful ways as a sort of self-fashioning and identity expression. Walter Benjamin expresses the emotional relationship we have to collected objects in his essay on “The Collector”:

For inside [these objects] there are spirits, or at least little genii, which have seen to it that for a collector — and I mean a real collector, a collector as he ought to be — ownership is the most intimate relationship that one can have to objects. Not that they come alive in him; it is he who lives in them.

This magic act of psychological projection that Benjamin describes requires a little death of the Self (an emptying of the vessel) so that the Other might live (an empty vessel, filled by us –which we “live in”). When we collect the artifacts of mass culture, the uncanny “unknown force” that takes over us is an economic force that we attempt to disavow, triggering an ambiguous relationship between the emptiness of the object and the subjective pleasure of an experience with it. Collecting is a form of repetition — a feeling that we are autonomously, robotically compelled to repeat the original pleasure we first experienced with it. This locks us into a strange “living dead” relationship with our own long-gone pasts, in a sense. The phenomenology of time that undergirds the collector’s relationship with his “owned” artefacts is precisely what is felt as uncanny.

In his reflection on Benjamin in relation to the Pixar Toy Story franchise, “The Trouble With Toys,” Charlie Bergen surmises that the impulse to collect is driven by fear of loss:

Children are afraid of losing their favorite toys. Parents fear this as well. But adults also worry about losing touch with the past in which they had their own favorite toys. And everyone is afraid of being lost in some way, forgotten by loved ones with the passage of time.

This is, of course, a very human feeling — a longing for attachment to the world — and the collector responds to the fear of loss — nay the fear of death — by living the fantasy of permanence through his collection. I do not damn the collector, for I myself collect many things, but there is a way in which this nostalgic fear of loss is tied in with a larger cultural anxiety that is capitalistic in nature — not a desire for gain and profit, but the flip side of its acquisition: a fear of losing what one has acquired. Thus collecting fetishizes the very process of acquisition itself, and this is one way in which the psychological structure of the uncanny is caught up in the economics of mass culture, at once reinforcing its superstructure and enforcing its aura as a permanent “magic” system, diverting our attention from the throwaway society that it requires for renewal.



Living, Breathing…and the Autonomous Movement of Fur

Perfect Petzzz Sales Kennel

Perfect Petzzz Sales Kennel

“These adorable pets offer a real pet ownership experience without the hassles and expense. Say goodbye to feedings and vet bills. Say hello to lots of love and cuddles. Perfect Petzzz – the ultimate pet.” — Perfect Petzzz website

“It is not a toy,” [VP of Marketing] Clarkson says, “but this is the closest you can get to real pet ownership without the hassles or responsibilities of owning a real pet.” — journalgazette.net

“In 2005, Perfect Petzzz® generated more than $20 million in retail sales in its first full year of operation. In fact, the Perfect Petzzz cart program was named the most successful new product concept in 2005. With the overwhelming demand for these lifelike puppies and kittens, we’ve seen other companies try to produce imitations.” — CD3 Press Release to PP Mall Dealers

Perfect Petzzz are stuffed animals that breathe.  The autonomous movement of their fur — controlled by a battery-powered engine you don’t expect to be there — is enough to trick the eye into presuming that the puppy or kitten curled up on the floor is actually a living, breathing, pet.  Cute, and perhaps attractive to your hand’s caress, until you touch it and realize it’s not real.  Then you are startled and the toy enters the already doll-crowded realm of the popular uncanny.

Of course, the Perfect Petzzz (the ”zzz’s” are for snoring)  are plastic.  And therefore the animal it represents is literally as dead as it looks, with its eyes closed and body stiffened into a disturbing fetal curl.  It should not move, but it does, and it is this representation of death-stirred-to-life — of the presumed inanimate object surprising us with its animation — that gets our reaction.  The tricky switcheroo of statuses between familiar and unfamiliar spin the roulette wheel of certainty:  the domesticated animal is rendered un-familiar (stuffed, inanimate) then restored to a heimish (cozy) status of sleeping and napping..

It is surely cute, and there is little difference between a breathing stuffed animal and a toy doll that burps or blinks.  Of course, even the cutest of dolls are inherently uncanny in the way they are semblances, pale imitations of life…but the creepy thing in this case is not so much its status as automaton, as the fact that this “sleeper” never wakes up.  These are comatose pets…and that, perhaps, is what makes them so “perfect.” Like the commodities these organic creatures have become, our domesticated pets are “perfect” when they are behaved, controlled, and easily replaceable after they expire.  Even more, these plastic pals are simulacratic forms of taxidermy (and surely a savvy taxidermist has already borrowed the motor or at least the concept for an experiment or two).  Another form of death, fantastically alive through the magic show of animism, nostalgia and fantasy.  Living, breathing, death.

Petzzz Adoption Center

Petzzz Adoption Center



Lomography and the Uncanny

“Archaeological Photography, the Uncanny Valley, and Lomography” by Colleen Morgan touches on the way documentary images of archaeological sites use particular photographic techniques to produce an uncanny effect (whether consciously or not).  I hadn’t heard of “lomography” before, which Morgan describes:

“lomography…employs low-quality toy cameras for an intentionally “bad” photograph that is blurry, off-color with light leaks.  These photos are more atmospheric but obviously not as accurate.  They contribute to an aesthetic of decay that compliments the subject.  HDR is too precious to me, too bejewelled and fantastic.  Lomography represents a more “accurate” view of the past in that it is hazy, hard to discern, never quite all there”

I’m reminded of horrorshow gimmicks, of course.  But looking at the images on this site got me thinking about the way that these photographs not only represent an eerie scene, but how the camera lense substitutes for the healthy eye of the viewer; our very perception is “decayed”…ergo the specter of death is felt as interior, subjective, and what the ph0tograph captures is not a haunted space, but a space which we inhabit and haunt, if only for the the momentary duration of the initial affect of uncanny.  (The HDR photographs, too, could be said to similarly introject the subjectivity of the cyborg).

Related, but different:  lomography is a nostalgia fetish for toy and archaic/outmoded cameras and film technology of the past.  Lomography.com reveals this fascination with toy cameras in all its glory.

In the digital and mobile millennium, we are seeing a shift in the ground of the uncanny, away from the home to the experience of being in the world through its representations of time and place.  Analog has become the Other.