The Uncanny - Irene

I'm confused by Freud's point in this article. In The Uncanny, Freud seems to emphasize how "uncertainty whether an object is living or inanimate" is but only one of the ways to evoke feelings of the uncanny. He even recalls a story that disproves the "theory of intellectual uncertainty" as the source of the uncanny but he still goes into detail explaining how this uncertainty can apply to the experience. By uncanny, I think he means something that resonates with us, but disturbingly so.

Art itself is an uncanny thing because since the beginning of cave drawings, art has attempted to imitate life directly, up to photo-realism and the invention of photography. No matter how much art attempts or doesn't attempt to reflect real life, art will always more so be a representation of the artist's ideas or objectives. It is uncanny, not because we are uncertain if it is animate or not or because we fear castration, but because we see it for what it is, physically and visually, and at the same time, there is hidden dimension of meaning and intent behind it to be recognized.