Freud for Beginners / The Uncanny - Leandra Bourdot

Freud has his place, certainly, as a poster child of the classes of the Victorian era privileged enough to indulge in the time's self-absorption in - simultaneously - pretense, vanity and repression. I find no validity in his over-arching theory that sexuality is the the prime motivating factor in human behavior beyond its application to Freud himself; it's a limited and reductive view of the mass of the remainder of humanity. Certainly, I don't think that it's an invalid or reprehensible drive for Freud himself, and it is definitely a lens through which the mind can be examined - but only one of many. In projecting this drive - which he concluded as the primary as based on his own mind - onto other people, he severely limited his scope for further exploration of the psyche.
Likewise, I find his theory of the id, ego, and super-ego to be similarly limited. It's not a bad compartmentalization of the human mind, but it is only that, and there are countless other lines along which divisions of the mind can be constructed. Once again, in limiting himself to the single view he hit upon, he precludes himself from exploring the array of other possibilities. In the field of dream interpretation, he once again hits on something interesting but can only take it so far, as dictated by his own limited parameters; and in general I tend to find Jung's views on dreams to be rather more lucid and open to further exploration and interpretation.
I found his writing on the Sand-man to be interesting with regards to the story itself, but somewhat abysmal as to his interpretation - the loss of eyes is as metaphoric for castration as castration is metaphoric for the loss of eyes, and these metaphors can be carried on exponentially. The story of the Sand-man itself, derived, I assume, from the ballet Coppelia, fascinates me (and strikes a particularly personal note, in that my own story does dwell on loss of eyes, though in a rather different light.) The tension created by the synthesis of the boy's recurring mythology with his everyday life, of "real" and unreal, of something other - which, in the case of the Sand-man story, are catalysts for an atmosphere of fear and loathing - is one which I find intriguing and compelling as an inspirational force.

Jess Adamitis Reading 6 Response

Ruis wasn’t kidding when he said that it was hard to understand and even harder to summarize Marx, this book was definitely difficult to get through. The first half went on to explain the history of philosophy which was something I could follow especially after taking a morals class. I recognized some of the names like Kant, Hume, and Locke and of course the big names of Plato and Socrates. It was really interesting to read about the continual battle between the Idealists and the Materialists. As different versions of philosophy came out I recognized how it follows a similar pattern to the history of art. It’s fascinating how radical art plays off the radical ideas of the thinkers. As far as art that can use these ideas I can only think of political art, but I know for a fact that it is not limited to this. All art reflects the ideas of the society.

Then the book went into Marx’s actual ideas and I began to get overwhelmed. The small amount that I could understand definitely was interesting. Marx is a figure I was never familiar with and did not know he helped form the idea of Unions, one of which I work in. As for the actual layout of the book I do not believe it is well thought through. Most of the time it hurts more than it helps. Because of the pictures in some areas very small cramped text had to be supplemented, which made it very hard to want to read it. The handwritten text at times was even worse. The style of it made things rather unreadable at times. The images were useful in depicting people and events but for the most part were unnecessary. Overall I appreciate the author’s vast task that he set himself to do and I believe it was a valiant effort. For the most part I found this book more difficult to read than some textbooks.

Marx for Beginners(Jeff Barnard)

In this book, it talks about the life of Karl Marx and the various things that came up during his journey to becoming a philosopher. One such thing was religion and the idea that God was an idea and not real as established religion had preached. Marx and other philosophers supported the idea that God wasn’t in heaven but was on earth and that we as a people created God. Many of the people who believed this were shunned by their communities for believing in such things that originated from the philosopher Frederick Hegel. Personally, I’m not sure where I lie on the issue because on the hand, I do believe in a higher power, but on the other, I’m not so sure it’s the one that religion is talking about.

After he died in 1883 his words became famous throughout the entire world and his influence fueled many social movements. It all started in 1917 when Lenin conquered Russia and the rise of Marxism followed soon after. In this, it is stated the Marx believes that the idea of God began after the extinction of the dinosaurs and that caveman thought it was a higher being that did this and kept them alive. This would the lead to people exploiting the “divinity” of these events and made themselves “delegates” of his powers. I don’t think that this is completely true because there were genuine people that helped other people through what they believed like feeding the poor. I think because there was no solid idea of god throughout history, it left openings for people to get the greedy hands into for power over people.

In conclusion, Marx was a poor man with a unique perspective on God through his various studies of religion and philosophers. Some preached that God wasn’t some higher being but something that man created to give themselves something to believe in and live by. Others used Marx’s words as an influence as they took power in various parts of the world such as Russia and China. I think that Marx was a good idea about the origin of how religion got started but not necessarily the relation of people to God. I say this because you can’t really have a generic idea about god because we do not know if it is true and could be sending out the wrong message that if you don’t go to church you don’t believe in god. In the end, all that matters is what we as individuals believe and not what a community believes.

The Uncanny - Amy Lu

The Uncanny article, other than summarizing the story of the Sandman, also mentions this theme of the ‘double.’ This is something that I have been contemplating on since seeing the Dan Graham show. The gallery with the mirror installations not only had doubles of an image or more, but the reflections had this ability to keep a viewer entertained and interested. How does Freud’s uncanny – aka the concept where something or someone can be familiar and strange at the same time resulting in an uncomfortably strange feeling – apply to this theme? I do not think that this just has to do with vanity, but the want for the ability to last beyond our human lives, even through the form of repetition is an explanation that might bear some truth, especially if we are as narcissistic as psychoanalytic psychologists and philosophers think we are. The familiarity comes from the image being identical or even similar, and the feeling of seeing something identical yet cannot be the same thoughts or feelings fulfills the strange aspect.

Dan Graham, Beyond - Kevin Keane

The Whitney in New York City had a Dan Graham exhibit on display titled, Beyond. The exhibit had several pieces that created a distorted sense of space through his use of mirrors. From different angles the viewers line of sight was distorted. His pieces require the audience to be part of them; this is what makes his pieces so effective. One piece was designed with four separate cubicles, when viewing the adjacent stalls from inside one of them we get a false sense of where they are in space. In other words, if some one were in the stall to the left the person would seem as though he/she was in the cubicle two spaces away. Another piece use cameras to project video of the viewer on two separate mirrors across from each other and on televisions that faced the mirrors on separate sides. The piece made it difficult to comprehend which video was projected where because on of the videos had a lag, which added to the distorted space.
I found his work influenced by his interest in the music scene very relatable. After understanding where his interests were, it made his artwork very intriguing. The gallery as a whole had a very industrialized aesthetic. Each piece had a very clean design and was constructed with steel. In his exhibit, every aspect worked together to create a shift in the world as we see it through our eyes.

Freud_ Uncanny-Phil Grasso

Growing up as a child can be a very imaginative process. This is a time when a child's brain is encoding and storing an infinite amount of information. The act of manifesting these thoughts or information is quite common. Everyone grows up either knowing what it is like to have an imaginary friend, or to at least heard of the occurrence of them. Along with the production of such images are the ones that cause fear when a child is alone, or in the dark. They begin to look around turning simple shapes and shadows into figures who ultimately are out for their demise. The Sandman was just that; he came to visit those children who would not sleep and then pull out their eyes. Naturally a story of this caliber would entice any growing child to go to sleep a their bed time.

Traumatic experiences when growing can unconsciously alter your perception of what is real later in life. Like in this story when the older gentleman believes the doll is real. not knowing the difference between the real and "unreal" can be very difficult and it all cycles back to the same concept of "what is real". if you believe wholeheartedly in something and others tell you different, they become the crazy one; because there is no way you could be that insane. He uses analogies and stretched relationships to connect what is actually occurring. Freud attaches meaning to everything and then explains his thoughts in an intelligent accurate way. The problem in my opinion, is that there are more things associated to latching on to material things than just his connotations. Insecurities in oneself which usually develop suring childhood are definately a main source. Having the option of choosing what the other half of the conversation states can be very comforting for people. Sensibly so they can feel more comfortable in the act of speaking to others. When engaged in a particular situation where the outcome is undecided tends to be what these kind of people stray away from. It almost appears that they need something solid and stable, since they cannot find it in others they look into their imagination.

Brandon - Uncanny

Freud discusses an important concept for artists in this reading, but I was not particularly amused by the sandman story. I never really knew much about the "sandman" or the actual bedtime story, but I had no idea it was so violent and grotesque!

In any event, the idea that anything we perceive can become "real" if we perceive it as being such, is important. It is a tool we can use as artists to evoke emotion or reaction from our viewers, and one that we ourselves can use when sourcing inspiration.