#jean martin charcot | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

aresianrepose · 2 years ago

Text

Before the semester kicks off and murders me, @disniq asked for my essay on Jason Todd and hysteria. So, without further ado, here is an actual essay (fucking dissertation) because I refuse brevity. It is extremely long. I’ve split it into sections so you can find the section header and read what you want. This does not encompass all the narrative trauma themes and lived experiences that this boy holds, just specifically hysteria.

Jason Todd, The Hysteric & Bruce Wayne, The Batman

I think it’s a common reading that Jason Todd is girl-coded and the patron saint of victims, at least within the circle that I’ve fallen into within this fandom. There are plenty of meta discussions on why those readings stand, so I’m not going to reiterate them. A pillar of him being girl-coded and someone trauma survivors have latched onto as one of our own has to do with being written in the context of hysterical femininity. And let me just say, I don’t think that writing was done in a way that he was intentionally coded as hysterical, but it is a function of our patriarchal society that this coding was used on him albeit without the explicit purpose of writing a hysteric story.

For the purpose of this post: the word woman includes ciswomen, transwomen, and any person who is socially positioned as a woman regardless of gender identity. I include the positionality here because anyone can experience misogyny and sexism depending on the perception of the perpetrators either interpersonally or systemically.

The History and Context of Hysteria

To understand the context, we have to look at the history and oppression of hysteria. Hysteria (in the modern context of psychology) emerged in the nineteenth century and is difficult to define by design and often applied to traumatized, unruly, and broken women. The main patriarchs who contributed to hysterical study were Jean-Martin Charcot and Sigmund Freud. I only mention this because it’s important to know their names moving forward for any of this to make sense. The beginning of this started with Charcot literally putting women whose lives had been marked by rape, abuse, exploitation, and poverty on display in his Tuesday lectures (which were open to the public) to show his findings on hysteria. This was actually seen as restoring dignity (fucking yikes) to the women because before Charcot these hysterical women were cast aside and not treated at all. In Charcot’s work, the women’s speech was seen as simply “vocalization” and their inner lives, their stories, their words, were silenced. After hearing a woman cry for her mother during one of the public sessions Charcot remarked, “Again, note these screams. You could say it’s a lot of noise over nothing” (Herman).

This led to Freud, Charcot’s student, wanting to surpass his teacher by discovering the cause of hysteria. This was disastrous. Freud started with listening to the hysterics. In doing so, he learned and believed them about the abuse, rape, and exploitation of their pasts. He then published his work and gave a lecture on it. The work rivals even contemporary psychological work on trauma in it’s level of compassion, understanding, and treatment of survivors. However, he was then labeled a feminist (this was all happening during the first wave of feminism) and professionally ostracized. How in the world could these aristocratic French men be sexually abusing their wives, sisters, and daughters??? Insanity, truly. And... This always fucking gets me. He recanted his work and then told his patients they all imagined it because they wanted to be sexually abused by their husbands, brothers, and fathers. This set back the study of trauma by literally a century. One colleague called his work “a scientific fairy-tale” simply because he had the audacity to believe victims. Also, I want to point out that the famous hysteria case during this time was the case of Anna O and she was ultimately villainized by the entire psychological community for going into crisis after her care provider abruptly ended their therapeutic relationship after two years of DAILY sessions.

Anyway. We can see how the power of these men over vulnerable women silenced, pathologized, villainized, infantilized, and used male ‘logic’ to completely destroy their credibility and lives under the guise of care and hysteria. Even when credible men lend their expertise and voices to the victims, their voices are silenced. This particular iteration of hysteria lasted over a century, and we are still dealing with the consequences of these actions and ideas within our social construction, medical and mental health care, interpersonal relationships, and more. Patriarchal pillars such as hysteria don’t die. We saw it move from hysteria to schizophrenia (which used to have the same symptoms of hysteria before the diagnosis changed in more contemporary psychology) after this which led to widespread lobotomies and electroshock therapy (my least favorite case of a lobotomy being done is on a woman who was diagnosed with LITERALLY ‘narcissist husband’) to depression in the 40s-50s with the over prescription of benzodiazepines to house wives to keep them in a zombie state (these prescriptions were sometimes double and triple what we take today with the intent of medical catatonia). In my opinion, as well as other counselors within the feminist therapy theoretical orientation, we are currently seeing it with the emergence of borderline-personality disorder. Think about how BPD is treated and demonized for a second. I professionally know therapists who refuse to work with BPD clients due to this villainization and just fucking gross perception of victims.

These are just the highlights, but it shows the history of hysteria. There have been centuries of women being marked as hysterical and the cures have ranged from lobotomy to bed rest (which sounds not so bad but read the Yellow Wallpaper and get back to me on that one). While the Yellow Wallpaper is fictional, the life behind it was not. After the traumatic birth of her child the author, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, was remanded to bed rest by the authority of her husband and doctor. Within the sphere of medical control, hysterical women are often treated as children while their doctors make decisions for their mental well-being without consulting them, or they hide the truth of their procedures for “the woman’s own good” and because “she’s hysterical and wouldn’t comprehend the logical need for this.” She then had a mental break due to the treatment. Again, we see hysterical women being silenced, infantilized, discredited from their own experiences, and under the narrative control of male logic and voices.

Hysterical women have often historically been seen as beneath men, except for when they’re dangerous. Listening to victims is inherently threatening to the status quo because all trauma comes from a systemic framework. The framework that upholds patriarchal power. It’s easy to see why that would be seen as dangerous to powerful men. We saw this with the European witch genocide in which oppressed women were targeted and wiped out under the excuse of what was considered women’s work. (Before this time, witchcraft wasn’t tied to any religion and was mostly just seen as women’s work. It was targeted specifically to have an excuse to persecute widows, homeless, disabled, and vulnerable women who no longer had men to reign over them during a time of political unrest and scarce resources). This time period saw hysterical and traumatized women demonized as dangerous, evil, immoral, hypersexual, and supernaturally wily. A threat to the moral fabric of society.

(Interesting history side note: this caused the view of women’s base traits we have today. It stemmed from the Victorian era that came after this time period in which women learned if they behaved a certain way, they would be spared the stake. For example, before the witch trials, women were actually seen as the ones with unsatiable sexual appetites, something we culturally prescribe to men now.)

Notice how none of this has to do with the actual abuse that happens to the women, but instead the labeling and treatment of women when they are already showing the symptoms of abuse, trauma, control, exploitation, and rape.

Jason Todd, The Hysteric

So, how does this relate to Jason Todd? To say that Jason has experienced trauma would be an understatement. Extreme poverty, loss of parent to death and addiction, loss of parent to the justice system, parental abuse, manipulation, witnessing violent crimes, witnessing the aftermath of sexual abuse and assault, arguably (not explicit in the text) his own sexual trauma, witnessing the dead bodies of victims, a violent death, and subsequently a violent resurrection. There’s also an argument to be made for being a child soldier and how that is romanticized up until he dies, but the text does not treat this as traumatizing.

Now, I’m not going to dive into the trauma he experienced. The purpose of this is only to look at how he’s framed as hysterical in the narrative, and as I stated, hysteria was a word slapped on women after they tried to talk about their trauma or exhibited symptoms (or were just unruly women). Jason does embody many facets of the victim experience and this is just one of them.

Feelings vs “logic” - Firstly, it is really hard to talk calmly about things that you carry, your experiences, your trauma, and things that specifically harm you. It is easy to talk calmly about things that don’t. This is why there is an abuse tactic of gaslighting or silencing victims by framing their very real reactions to harm or their triggers as abuse, this is known as “reactive abuse.” This tactic is also employed in oppressive settings where the privileged group will often default to ‘winning’ a debate by being able to remain calm while the marginalized group whose life, personhood, etc is being harmed by the things being discussed and are unable to have a sterilized, emotionless debate.

Both of these settings fit Jason nicely within the moral context of vigilante comics. He fought back, he didn’t lay down, and he will do what he deems as necessary to protect himself and others from his fate. This, however, is framed by Bruce and others as being just as bad as his murderer or even just as bad as Joe fucking Chill. To put this in perspective of a real world equivalent. Combine every billionaire on this planet into one person and instead of their shitty business practices murdering people, they did it with their own two hands. And due to their resources and political power, they would never, ever stop killing or be reasonably contained. More people would die with absolute 100% certainty. Would killing that one person make you equally bad as that person or violating the sanctity of life? That’s the moral question that Bruce puts onto Jason. While the moral question inherent to Jason is actually, is there a line worth crossing to provide reasonable safety (for yourself or the nameless community)? There is actually a difference between those two questions and the reactive abuse framing is certainly a choice. Also, it is funny to me that a man with the amount of power Bruce has (and frequently misuses) can lecture a murder victim on the misuse of power and morality. Are we supposed to be agree with his stoic, philosophical lecturing to a marginalized, abused, murder victim? (yes, we are). Bruce leverages (personal) philosophy against victim’s voice for their own safety, and take a wild guess which one is framed as logical and reasonable.

Jason’s morals come secondary to Bruce’s philosophy in a universe where there is still harm being done (but it’s an acceptable harm). Why is killing the line? Bruce is regularly destroying families and lives by feeding them into the prison industrial complex while supporting it with his whole chest. Or he’s disabling and seriously maiming people with the level of violence he uses.

Crying - Throughout the entire story of Under the Red Hood, we never once see Bruce emote while interacting with Jason outside of tight grimaces. With the exception of the shock he shows at the Joker’s life being threatened, which... Okay, suuure. We never see him cry during any of their interactions, but we do see Jason cry. Specifically, we see him crying when he’s at his most emotionally vulnerable and physically dangerous to the toxic male power fantasy. This kind of vulnerability is rarely shown by male characters, and when it is, it’s usually done with a mist of a tear in their eyes or their face is hidden. There are a few narrative devices that allow men to cry, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Usually, it’s to play for laughs, infantilize, or emasculate. Here, we see Jason combine the violence of a bad victim, bucking the system of power, and fully crying. Just slide right into that hysterical coding like a glove. Jason often shows his feelings entirely. Time and time again, the readers have seen Jason have breakdowns, cry, and be overcome with grief. This is tied to his portrayal as hysterical and unstable in the narrative, but in actuality it shows his capacity for love and how vastly impactful his death was.

This fits nicely with the next point that Jason fits into the hysterical box. Love is framed as one of his key faults. A son reaching for his father.

Love - One of Jason’s defining features is the amount of love and compassion he holds. He’s willing to put up with any treatment, shoulder blame, and sacrifice himself for others to almost an unhealthy degree. However, this doesn’t extend to what he defines as his baseline safety. This one line of safety is the one thing that can’t be crossed, even with all of the love he feels for his father. He desperately wants to feel connection, have a family, and be loved in return with the same unwavering ferocity love that he gives. This is such a fucking key part of the victim experience, especially victims of childhood trauma. The desperation to just be chosen. He’s raw and honest with his reasonable expectation for love to provide safety for him and that is framed as hysterical, needy, unstable, naive, and fucking childish. Victims know what they need to have safety, and this framing as Bruce knowing what’s best for Jason and literally giving a cold shoulder to his needs is disgusting.

Less than - Jason is portrayed as less powerful than Bruce even though they have similar expertise. There are so many instances of this that if you just open any media they both appear in, you can close your eyes, point, and land on an example. It makes me die laughing every time I remember that the Arkham games made Jason just one inch shorter than Bruce. Like, they can’t even be the same fucking height, that’s the level of insecure masculinity surrounding this relationship. Jason cannot and will never be able to be on par with Bruce because of his hysterical femininity and the power of Bruce being the self insert for the toxic male power fantasy. This power dynamic applies to the other batkids as well, but specifically in Jason’s case there is an element of hysteria. The reasons change because he’s so inconsistently written but usually he can’t surpass or even meet a stalemate with Bruce because he’s too emotional, he’s unstable, traumatized, and simply Bad. It’s even explicitly stated by Alfred in Under the Red Hood.

Victim blaming - Jason deserved to die because he didn’t follow orders. Jason deserved to die for not following his training. Jason deserved to die because he was an angry Robin (oh no a child had an appropriate reaction to sexual violence). Jason deserved to die for being human.

Infantilization - Jason is repeatedly infantilized in contrast to Bruce. When given the ultimatum at the end of UtRH, Bruce speaks to Jason like a child, or a bad dog. Ordering him to do things like, “enough!” or “stop this now.” Bruce knows what’s best for Jason (and for everyone in the entire world), we should really just take his word for it and not the victim’s. Imagine staring at a 6 foot wall of a man and scolding him like a child. Beyond that, as mentioned above, his views of love and safety are framed as childish. Even though they are actually leaning more toward collectivism rather than the rampant individualism that Bruce so strongly defers to. (also, just a side note, collectivistic methods in healing from trauma is actually the only scientifically reliable way to heal. Every other method has absolutely abysmal results and higher rates of relapses.)

Silenced and Safety Villainized - Jason is silenced in his own story, acceptable and honored when he was dead and met with vitriol in life. All of the love given to him as Robin turns to ash as soon as he collides with Bruce’s power and morals. I think any survivor can relate to the experience of being told that what happened to them was a long time ago and it’s time to move on. Or even that they’re leveraging their own safety to get what they want in a manipulative way. Regardless of whether or not there was any accountability or justice for the harm done to them. Alfred asks Bruce if he should remove Jason’s memorial in the cave like two seconds after learning of his resurrection because Jason’s methods of securing safety for himself and using his own voice to define his story. Bruce was able to tell Jason’s story when he died. He was able to memorialize, grieve, and ultimately define Jason’s story because Jason wasn’t there to speak for himself. When Jason does speak for himself, he is villainized and literally stripped of his past significance as Robin (or a good victim) by Alfred within seconds. This is reflected in real life with adoptee advocates speaking about how adoption is unethical/harmful/traumatizing and subsequently being framed as ungrateful, selfish, etc. They were little perfect victims without voices before they grew up and could speak for themselves.

Erased - Gestures at the entirety of how Jason is either talked about or completely erased during the 90s Tim Robin run. He wasn’t convenient to talk about, as victims rarely are. This also ties into how Steph’s death was erased and Babs was written like she “won” at trauma by simply... beating it???

Dangerous - Jason is framed as threatening the basic fabric of society (in a story with vigilantes this is hard to do, so they have him oppose the no-kill rule, and then doubled down on Bruce’s characterization of no-killing). Anything that bucks the status-quo is usually marked as villainous in mainstream vigilante/superhero comics, but this is a step beyond that into the interpersonal and political sphere. Hysterical women are often framed as dangerous, villains, snakes, and treacherous (the other side of this coin is weak, pathetic, and pitiable) because they are victimized and then have the audacity to do something to the system about it. Whether that be the system of their immediate families or the political sphere. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Jason was paired with Talia in Lost Days to hammer this point home to the reader. It could’ve just as easily been anyone with access to the Pit that rescued him, but no, we had DC’s favorite brown, treacherous, venomous, female punching bag.

Bruce Wayne, The Batman

Bruce fits well into the father, enforcer, and logical man slot in Jason’s hysterical story. There is a history of ownership throughout women’s history when it comes to their subjugation to men. Women actually couldn’t be put on trial before the witchcraft genocide because they weren’t seen as legally a person. Their male owner would be put on trial instead. Women would go from being owned by their fathers to their husbands after entering marriage, the most dangerous woman being one who isn’t owned (orphaned, widowed). Bruce does treat (and even thinks) about Jason like he’s something that he owns. He’s his protege, his son, and his responsibility.

The narrative function of Bruce as a perpetrator in Jason’s story.

“The perpetrator asks the bystander (reader) to do nothing. He appeals to the universal desire to see, hear, and speak no evil. The victim, on the contrary, asks the bystander (reader) to share the burden of pain. The victim demands action, engagement and remembering” (Herman).

Bruce does remember what happened to Jason. He keeps a permanent memorial to his dead son. However, this doesn’t translate into any kind of tangible action. He doesn’t do anything to actually stop the murderer who took his son’s life and he continues to throw child soldiers at the problem of crime (how many children have died for the sake of his no-kill rule at this point?). When met with the reality of his inaction, he fits into the perpetrator’s role like a glove:

“In order to escape accountability for his crimes, the perpetrator does everything in his power to promote forgetting. Secrecy and silence are the first line of defense... If secrecy fails, the perpetrator attacks the credibility of his victim. If he cannot silence her absolutely, he tries to make sure that no one listens... From the most blatant denial to the most sophisticated and elegant rationalization... One can expect to hear the same predictable apologies: it never happened; the victim exaggerates; the victim brought it upon herself; and in any case it’s time to forget the past and move on. The more powerful the perpetrator, the greater his prerogative to name and define reality, the more completely his arguments prevail” (Herman).

I think it is simply fact at this point that Bruce is the head patriarch in Gotham if not, arguably, in the entirety of DC. That level of power in the narrative cannot be ignored, especially when faced with the very real, screaming voice of a victim that Bruce uses all of that power to silence. Bruce, because of his status as patriarch, default protagonist, and self-insert for the toxic male power fantasy, has the ultimate power to name and define reality. Especially to the reader. Bruce doesn’t deny what happened to Jason, because that’s physically impossible to do. But what he does do is ensure that no one listens to Jason, discredits him, and rationalizes his own inaction, actions of violence towards Jason, and victim blames.

Here’s Bruce using the most base form of denial and victim blaming:

After this panel, Bruce also revokes Dick’s access to his childhood home simply for asking a question.

This theme extends to other members of the batfam because of Bruce’s narrative power over them. It’s why we can’t have Dick, Steph, Babs, or even Damian step in and relate to Jason’s trauma or vindicate him. Even when we, the readers, can see parallels and wonder why these conversations or bonds aren’t forming. Jason HAS to be a lone wolf because he is hysterical and a threat to the system of power. This also shows why most of his runs in group settings outside of the batfam fall apart or fall flat. If he was humanized by any other character or had his trauma validated in any actionable way, it would be recognizing the failure of the toxic male power fantasy. The readers are not supposed to see the flaw in this system that allows the bodies of children to pile up and sympathize with one of their voices. It would be a crack in the system of power that exists not only in the source material, but very much within our real world.

Side note: Jason is allowed to interact with others in a wholesome and validating way when he no longer threatens the systemic power of Bruce. When he is silenced by the writers and plays the “nice victim” (like Babs does), he is allowed connection. Only when his healing is done in a way that doesn’t demand action and is only his personal responsibility (gotta love the rampant individualism). If he is hysterical, demands action, and asks for someone to be held accountable for his death, he is shoved away into a lone wolf box. Examples: Gotham Knights (from my very basic understanding, I haven’t played the game, only seen play throughs) and WFA. Victims are acceptable if they do their healing in a neat little box and stay there, but hysterics are the ones who step outside of that box.

Red Hood, The Political Voice of Hysteria and Trauma

Red Hood is deeply political in terms of hysteria and trauma. Herman stated that victims and those that authentically care for them or listen to them intently (whether that be interpersonally, clinically, or professionally) are silenced, ostracized, and discredited. Survivors need a social context that supports the victim and that joins the victim and witness in a common alliance. On an interpersonal level this looks like family, friends, and loved ones. However, trauma is systemic and the social context mentioned above must also be given on a wider social scale. For this to be done, there had to be systemic change and political action. Jason had the interpersonal social support and witnesses to his trauma ripped from him by Bruce. So, we see him move onto a systemic level of addressing trauma in his own political way. He literally cannot escape Bruce and this constant trigger because of Bruce’s philosophy and just... fucking power to define reality... being re-enforced constantly in DC no matter where he tries to go. So, he tries to heal by taking the systemic issue of perpetrators who cannot be held accountable or have fallen through the cracks of accountability into his own hands in a very personal way. A one man political movement.

Whether his methods are moral or ethical doesn’t really matter in the overall framing him as hysteric. He simply has to be opposed by the male power fantasy in some significant way. This shows that the goals, needs, and work towards victim’s and the marginalized’s freedom is dangerous, doomed to fail, and ultimately unethical if the victim is framed in a villain light instead of the more pathetic/pitiable iteration of hysteria.

You can see how this is not only problematic but also reflects the real world values instilled in arguments against human rights movements (which are intrinsically tied to victims rights). Defunding the police is dangerous, the MeToo movement is dangerous, abolition is dangerous, trans rights are dangerous, etc etc etc. Think of the victims voices tied to each of these movements and how they are integral to the real change offered by these political movements. You can’t have human rights violations without creating victims. And you can’t have political movements surrounding human rights without listening to victims.

We can also see how the individuals within these movements are ostracized, villianized, and often silenced (sometimes ultimately silenced with death) because they rally against the systems of power that victimized them. The framing of traumatized, vulnerable people as hysterical is integral to upholding the system of power that traumatizes and harms them.

A popular comic book movie adaptation that highlights the importance of Jason’s hysterical framing and how it impacts the political narrative/how he is written is V for Vendetta. To be fair, it received an insane amount of backlash by conservatives (not within leftist or liberal spaces) for V’s methods in over throwing fascism, but only because of the movie’s release date being so close to 9/11. V and Jason have many parallels, it’s only the lack of hysterical framing that makes V more palatable to the viewer. We are told, not shown through behavior, that V is traumatized by his past and he does not pick a fight with the protagonist that functions as a toxic male power fantasy. He is the protag, with his version of Bruce being men who are not framed in a sympathetic, heroic, or relatable light.

Additionally, there is literally an unemoting mask standing between the viewer and V, whereas Jason takes off his helmet to allow the reader to see every aspect of his trauma and pain. V readily dehumanizes himself into an idea, rather than a person. Whereas Jason screams to be seen as a person in a very hysterical way. So, we can see how the framing of Jason as hysteric against the logical, heroic man greatly impacts how the audience reads him when contrasted by a very similar political story/character who uses similar (and arguably more violent) methods to meet his ends. (This just made me realize that I would die for a Jason adaptation written by the Wachowski sisters).

Jason’s work as Red Hood is seeped in leftist, victim, and community centered politics. His portrayal as a hysterical antagonist (at best an anti-hero) is rooted in misogyny and upholding patriarchal, capitalist, and the prison industrial complex systems of power. He is the righteous embodiment of “the personal is political” for victims. Even his Robin run draws attention to and shows correct, angry reactions to the system of patriarchal power in sexual violence.

Patriarchal Writing and Enforcement

Jason is girl-coded and hysterical because he’s supposed to be emasculated, discredited, and disliked by the reader. He serves the narrative function of boosting the toxic male power fantasy of Bruce and in doing so, the writers use one of the oldest tropes in the book (one that we have all subconsciously been taught since birth) to get the reader on their side. Make him a hysterical woman.

References: for anyone interested in furthering their understanding of any of the concepts mentioned above and to, you know, use sources for my own writing.

Barstow, A. Witchcraze

Bondi, L., Burman. E. Women and Mental Health: A Feminist Review

Freud, S. The Aietology of Hysteria

Gilman, C. P. The Yellow Wallpaper

Herman, J. Trauma and Recovery

Ussher, J. The Madness of Women.

Van der Kolk, B. The Body Keeps the Score

Wilkin, L., Hillock, S. Enhancing MSW Students’ Efficacy in Working with Trauma, Violence, and Oppression: An Integrated Feminist-Trauma Framework for Social Work Education

#jason todd #bruce wayne #hysteria #dc #meta #clovis writes #listen I regularly have to write 20-30 page research papers on therapy theory and mental health #I'm so sorry this is so long but it is actually impossible to shorten it #one of my profs once said I write in a way that's academic but still readable and know the meaning of brevity #and I was like: sir I've never been accused of brevity before #this took 3 days to write and get my thoughts straight on it #remember: you asked for this lol #holy fuck the word count on this is nearly 5k I'm so sorry #I literally can't proof read this because my brain has shut off from reading this post #there's probably some stuff misspelled and also missing from this but I'm done with it lol

479 notes · View notes

teresawilson1 · 2 years ago

Text

The Uncanny in Art

Giving Fear A Face: The Anxious Mind

A Personal Overview of the Theories around the Concept of the Uncanny in Art

Paula Rego, Little Brides with Their Mother, 2009-10

The Uncanny is a type of anxiety, experienced by the viewer and triggered by the artist’s personal experience.

Elena Crippa

It may seem to be a paradox that the type of art that can be labelled ‘Uncanny’ and appears to be unreal, bizarre, incomplete, grotesque or in an 'in-between state', nevertheless conjures up feelings in the viewer that seem very 'real'. As Francis Bacon (1909 – 1992) described, during an interview with the art critic David Sylvester in 1950, reality, to him, was nothing else but a ‘series of sensations and ideas that occur in the consciousness of each individual’. (Crippa, p83)

Paula Rego (1935-2022) was another artist who had lived through the period of post-World War II Europe marked by the anxiety that followed the war - concentration camps, suffocating dictator regimes and threat of nuclear war (Crippa). She also produced paintings which have the uncanny elements that she has described as being an attempt to ‘give fear a face’ (Warner). Marina Warner has written that Rego ‘expresses her own ambiguous states of uncertainties, mysteries and doubts into that territory, desisting from offering explanations or asking for any’.

Rego and Bacon are two examples of important 20th century artists whose work incorporated elements of the concept of the uncanny, a thread which works its way in and out of the work of figurative and non-figurative art. I will go on to discuss many others in further posts, including my own practice and show how the uncanny reveals itself - its strange identity. I will focus on the idea of the uncanny as it is revealed in the subject (and object) of the human body.

But first, the question could be asked - how can this elusive concept of the uncanny be defined? Did it emerge only in the 1920’s in Europe, or has it always existed in the world?

It is nowadays the norm to hold the view that anxiety, fear, and concepts such as the uncanny (which express anxiety in a visual form) are experiences that occur to human beings in the site of the psyche (the mind). However, it was not until the late 19th century that Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) came to believe that the symptoms of his patients were caused by conflict in the unconscious mind and with the ‘failure to deal with invisible, unconscious and primarily sexual psychological desires’ and not as had been thought previously, symptoms of a disease of the physical nervous system. (Freeman, p15)

Freud had come to Paris in 1885 to study ‘hysterics’ under Jean-Martin Charcot and became interested in the connection between the mind and body (Tomley,pviii). It is largely a legacy of Freud’s work that anxiety has become so important in today’s psychological and psychiatric thinking (Freeman, p4). Freud continues to be relevant today as more and more of his insights become proved by neuroscientific discoveries. For example, as Eric Kandel has pointed out in ‘The Age of Insight’ (2012), ‘most of our mental life, including most of our emotional life, is unconscious at any given moment’. Research also suggests that ‘images exert a much more powerful influence on emotions than do thoughts (Freeman, p27), which explains the power and effect on the viewer of uncanny art.

It is important to remember that although the uncanny did not exist as a theory until being written about by Freud in his essay ‘das Unheimlich’ in 1919, uncanny-like images had appeared in art through the centuries in both European and non-European cultures. Connected with the supernatural, magic and religion it shows up in ‘primitive art’ for instance and through the history of the art of Catholicism. Jane Neal, writing in ‘Uncanny Tales’, says that Freud tells us that ‘apparent death and re-animation of the dead have been represented as most uncanny themes. She talks about the otherworldliness od Ana Maria Pacheco’s work which comes from the primitive ‘magic’ cultures of Brazil as well as the ritual and superstition running through the Catholicism that she experienced growing up. The doll is the perfect example of an uncanny art form, connected as it is with ideas of witchcraft, religious statuary, and as an imaginative plaything/doll.

Thus, the uncanny has always been with us, just as dreams, imagination and fears have been expressed by humans in art. In her essay ‘Dream Realism’, Marina Warner (Warner,p31) describes Paula Rego’s approach to art making as a ‘beautiful grotesque’ because she reflects the powerful mixed feelings she inspires, looking within herself as a site of ‘collective memory nourished by legends and fairy tales’.

The Jungian feminist psychologist and ‘teller of the old stories’ Clarissa Pinkola Estes wrote in ‘Women Who run With the Wolves’ that in ‘…a single human being there are many other beings, all with their own value, motives, and desires…there is also within the psyche an innate contra naturam aspect, an ‘against nature’ force. The contra naturam aspect opposes the positive: it is against development, against harmony…it is a derisive and murderous antagonist that is born within us.’ (Estes,p35,). The first chapter of Este’s seminal work is devoted to recognizing this predator in the psyche for what it is, and from recognition comes the instinctive building of intuitive ‘muscle’ so that we learn to instinctively know when something ‘is not right’. The uncanny lives in the realm of ‘not quite right’ and although its presence may leave the viewer with a sense of unease, it is a clue to a truth revealed or danger thwarted, a mirror reflecting something we may not want to look at too closely, but we must examine and take on board, or we cannot move on in our lives.

Alexandra Kokoli explores the nature of repression in the realm of domesticity in her book ‘The Feminist Uncanny: In Theory and Art Practice’ (2016). She explains that the starting point for the ‘female uncanny’ is the ‘…deliberate unsettling quality that many cultural artefacts informed by feminism continue to possess…the fraught but fertile relationship between feminism and the uncanny and by extension Freudian psychoanalysis’ (Kokoli,p3).

Louise Bourgeois, Femme Maison, 1982, Plastic doll and clay.

Repression and entrapment in the unhomely domestic environment (‘unhomely’ are a literal translation of Freud’s das Unheimlich) is explored by Louise Bourgeois’ uncanny hybrids of women and house in her series of works entitled ‘Femme Maison’. Her later ‘cells’ are also prison-like structures, within which the viewer is invited to look inside an uncanny alternative domestic room filled with fetishized and emotionally charged collections of objects, doors, and symbols of ‘hysteria’.

As a final note on this overview of the theories surrounding the uncanny, I would like to mention the concept of the ‘Abject’. Connected to both the uncanny and feminism, the theory of ‘abjection’ has been defined by Julia Kristeva in ‘Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection’ (1982) as ‘… a massive and sudden emergence of uncanniness which familiar as it might have been, in an opaque and forgotten life, now harries me as radically separate, loathsome’ (Kristeva, p51). This then, is the uncanny taken to an extreme of the visceral, violent, or disgusting. The repressed memory, the uncanny starting point, can no longer be recognized in the abject. It is closer to the grotesque and is indebted to Surrealism (Kokoli, p53). At the heart of abjection is the in-between, the ambiguous, immoral, a sinister experiment gone wrong.

In the dark halls of the museum that is now what remains of Auschwitz, I see a heap of children’s shoes, or something like that, something I have already seen elsewhere, under a Christmas tree, for instance, dolls I believe. The abjection of Nazi crime reaches its apex when death, which in any case, kills me, interferes with what, in my living universe, is supposed to save me from death: childhood, science, among other things.

Julia Kristeva Powers of Horror, (1982)

References

Crippa, E. ed., (2018). All Too Human: Bacon, Freud and a Century of Painting Life, exh.cat., Text by Elena Crippa. Tate, London.

Estés, C.P. Women who Run With the Wolves: contacting the Power of the Wild Woman. Rider, London. (1992)

Freeman, D and Freeman, J. Anxiety: A Very short Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2012.

Kokoli, A.M. The feminist Uncanny in Theory and Art Practice. Bloomsbury, 2016.

Kristeva, J. Powers of Horror: an Essay on Abjection. Trans. By Leon. S. Roudiez. Colombia University Press. NY. 1982.

Neal, J. (Essay) in Uncanny Tales. Exhibition Catalogue. FWA, Foundation of Women Artists. 2005

Tomley, S. (Introduction) to the Interpretation of Dreams by Sigmund Freud. The Psychology Classic. Capstone. 2020

Warner, M. (Essay) Dream Realism, in Paula Rego, Exhibition Catalogue. Ed. By Elena Crippa. Tate. 2005.

#sculpture #art #uncanny #artist #feminism

14 notes · View notes

silver-stargazing · 1 year ago

Text

[Image ID in alt text]

Epilepticon Movie Marathon 2023

Augustine (2012) dir. Alice Winocour

Summary: An erotic biographical drama film about Louise Augustine Gleizes and her love affair with her neurologist, Jean-Martin Charcot, in the late 1800s.

Representation: Augustine has a violent seizure at her workplace early in the film that results in her being temporarily paralyzed in her right eye. For the rest of the film, she remains a patient at a hospital with little control over her life choices.

Augustine has many seizures throughout the film, including several that are intentionally triggered by Charcot in front of large crowds of onlookers to serve as a demonstration of the science behind seizures.

The framing of these seizures plays heavily into the sexualization of epilepsy, with several of Augustine's seizures filmed similar to how a masturbation scene would be filmed in an erotic film.

No first aid is given to Augustine during any of these seizures as, because of the era she lived in and the medical community's attitude towards people with seizures, she is meant to be viewed as an exhibition and not helped. She is regularly dehumanized, with even her own neurologist describing her as an "animal".

The word "epilepsy" is not used to describe Augustine's disorder and she is instead diagnosed as having "ovarian hysteria". As this film is a partial biography of the real-life Augustine, the use of this diagnosis term is accurate when recounting her particular experience.

Notes: The main plot of the movie follows a romance between a doctor and their patient. The power imbalance is addressed but may still be uncomfortable for some viewers.

There is full-frontal nudity at several points in this film including a sex scene. There are moments of graphic on-screen animal death. A woman has a brief monologue about intentional self harm.

The film is entirely in French. English subtitles were available.

[Image ID: Three screenshots from Augustine (2012):

Image 1: Augustine, a woman with long black hair in a braid, looks off to the right with a concerned expression. Her right eye is closed due to temporary paralysis.

Image 2: Augustine, a woman wearing only undergarments and a loose corset, and Charcot, a man who is fully dressed in a dark suit, embrace in Charcot's office.

Image 3: Augustine is laying down, perched between two chairs with her neck resting on the head of one chair and her feet resting on the head of another further away chair. She is wearing a dress with a striped skirt that drapes down in the space between the chairs.

/end ID]

#epilepticon #epilepticon 2023 #actually epileptic #epilepsy #augustine 2012 #stargazer rambles #epilepticon movie marathon #self harm mention

3 notes · View notes

hazalusi · 11 months ago

Text

HISTRIONIC PERSONALITY DISORDER

Hysteria or histrionic personality disorder, which holds a fundamental place in the fields of psychiatry and clinical psychology, is a condition within the neurotic disorder group. Research on this disorder was initially conducted by researchers such as Jean Martin CHARCOT, Pierre JANET, Josef BREUER, and Sigmund FREUD. Hysteria has contributed to the birth of psychoanalysis.

According to the Freudian perspective, hysteria or histrionic personality disorder is the expression of suppressed feelings, often related to sexuality, residing in the individual's subconscious. The view that negligent parental attitudes in the parent-child relationship are one of the contributing factors to the emergence of hysteria is widely accepted.

The diagnosis of HISTRIONIC PERSONALITY DISORDER indicates a pattern of excessive emotionality and a craving for attention. These individuals feel discomfort when they are not the center of attention. They believe that relationships should be closer than they actually are. Emotional displays, seductiveness, verbal exaggeration, susceptibility to suggestion, manipulative suicide attempts, and inconsistency stand out. The low functionality in directing the actions of a histrionic individual is followed as a reflection of the mental turmoil they experience. The general characteristics of histrionics include self-centeredness, a habit of exaggerating everything, a desire to attract attention, superficiality in interpersonal relationships, and a desire to escape from the existing order through inconsistent emotional states. Additionally, histrionics being seductive and flirtatious, attempting suicide, and being able to be cheerful in the mornings but melancholic in the evenings are established behavioral patterns in those experiencing this disorder.

Generally, the prevalence in society is around 2-3%.

**TREATMENT**

First and foremost, patients exhibiting HISTRIONIC PERSONALITY DISORDER are generally not motivated for treatment. They consider their own emotional, cognitive, and behavioral patterns to be normal. They propose changes in external conditions rather than themselves as a solution. According to them, they remain the same, and only the environment changes.

Histrionic Personality Disorder, which is a personality disorder, is usually treated by a psychiatrist and psychologist, with a particular emphasis on psychotherapeutic methods. Group therapy and family therapy are generally not recommended as the first choice for the treatment of histrionic personality disorder. Individuals with this disorder usually do not want environments where they are not the center of attention, leading to a misconception in treatment. In cases where HISTRIONIC PERSONALITY DISORDER patients experience severe symptoms, medications recommended by the relevant psychiatrist can be beneficial.

#histrionic personality disorder

2 notes · View notes

fabiansteinhauer · 1 year ago

Text

zum 13.6.

"Niemand hat die[...] Zeitlichkeit der Kunst so eindrücklich zur Darstellung gebracht wie Georges Didi-Huberman. "Der Anachronismus", schrieb er 1990 in seiner Studie "Vor einem Bild", "ist in der Geschichte nicht etwas, dessen man sich unbedingt zu entledigen hätte, sondern mit dem man sich auseinanderzusetzen hat." Für das Verständnis der Florentiner Fresken Fra Angelicos bedeutete das beispielsweise, nicht nur ihre historische Symbolik zu entschlüsseln, sondern auch jenen Teilen des Bildes Beachtung zu schenken, die im Raster des gesicherten Wissens bedeutungslos erscheinen mussten - ein Stück weißer Wand, eine Zone ungegenständlicher Malerei. Diese Überlegungen führten Didi-Huberman zu den Arbeiten AbyWarburgs, in denen er ein ähnliches Interesse für die nichtlinearen Übertragungswege der Kunst fand. Warburgs "Theorie des Formengedächtnisses", so Didi-Huberman, vollzieht ein Denken in "Sprüngen und Latenzen, überlebenden und anachronistischen Formen". [...]

Dazu gehörte die Einsicht, dass ein am Ideal des Meisterwerks geschulter Kunstbegriff wesentliche Teile der historischen Bildproduktion nicht zu fassen vermochte. Eine Pionierarbeit war daher 1982 die Studie zu den fotografischen Inszenierungen der Hysterie in Jean-Martin Charcots Pariser Nervenheilanstalt Salpêtrière, die zeigte, wie eng auch das vermeintlich objektive Wissen der Naturwissenschaften an das Wirken der Einbildungskraft gebunden war. Die Ausstellung "L'empreinte" im Centre Pompidou brachte die Kunst des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts mit der uralten Technik des Abdrucks zusammen, wie man sie von Siegeln, Reliquien und Totenmasken kannte. Auch hier tauchte das "dialektische Bild" wieder auf: Der durch Berührung entstandene Abdruck ist Zeugnis einer Existenz, erkennbar ist er aber erst, wenn diese Existenz vergangen ist. In einem Punkt jedoch wich Didi-Huberman von den Prämissen der bildwissenschaftlichen Diskussionen ab: An dem überflüssigen Paragone zwischen Bild und Wort, der das eine Medium gegen das andere ausspielen wollte, hat er sich nicht beteiligt. Denn in seiner Arbeit ist die Sprache seit jeher integraler Teil des Denkens, statt bloß Beiwerk und stilistische Ausschmückung zu sein. Eine andere Art des Wissens Als Didi-Huberman 2015 in Berlin den Internationalen Forschungspreis der Max Weber Stiftung erhielt, überraschte er das Publikum mit einer sehr persönlichen Danksagung. Darin kam die Rede auf seine Mutter, Estelle Huberman, die Anfang der Vierzigerjahre neben Versen von Baudelaire und Verlaine auch Gedichte von Goethe, Novalis und Hölderlin in ihr Notizbuch geschrieben hatte - in dem von ihr geliebten Deutsch, das später zur Sprache der Henker wurde, die einen Teil ihrer Familie auslöschten.

Mit der Schoa hat Didi-Huberman sich in seinem Buch "Bilder trotz allem" auf seine Weise auseinandergesetzt. Das Buch handelt von jenen vier Fotografien, die eine Gruppe jüdischer Häftlinge im Sommer 1944 unter Lebensgefahr in Birkenau aufgenommen hat. Der These von der Undarstellbarkeit der Schoa hielt er die Existenz dieser Fotos entgegen: Auch wenn sie das historische Geschehen unmöglich angemessen repräsentieren konnten, so waren sie doch wertvolle Überreste, "Fetzen des Nachlebens". Das Buch war aber auch eine Einladung an Historiker, in Bildern mehr zu sehen als Informationsquellen, nämlich Zugänge zu einer anderen Art des Wissens. Die Unschärfe der Fotos erscheint dann nicht länger als Defizit und Mangel an sachdienlicher Information, sondern als Ausdruck existenzieller Dringlichkeit, als Akt des Widerstands und Botschaft an eine zivilisierte Außenwelt. Georges Didi-Huberman hat sich einmal als "freies Elektron" beschrieben und damit auf seine Umlaufbahn außerhalb der Machtzentren des akademischen Betriebs angespielt. Seine Leser müssen ihm für diese Konzentration auf das Geschäft des Schreibens danken. Ein "freies Elektron" ist kein Forschungsmanager, kein Trendsetter und kein Drittmittelakrobat, sondern Autor und Denker - im Fall von Georges Didi-Huberman: Kunsthistoriker und Philosoph, Schriftsteller und Wissenschaftler, Bote zwischen Wissen und Einbildungskraft. Geschichte wiederholt sich nicht. Aber manchmal erzeugt sie schöne Konstellationen. Heute feiert Georges Didi-Huberman seinen siebzigsten Geburtstag, am gleichen Tag, an dem 1866 AbyWarburg geboren wurde."

Peter Geimar

#Peter Geimer #Georges Didi-Huberman

3 notes · View notes

artful-insanity · 2 years ago

Text

Two paintings of the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris. First painting: "At the very end of the 18th century, the early humanitarian reforms in the treatment of the mentally ill were initiated here by Philippe Pinel (1745–1826), friend of the Encyclopédistes. The iconic image of Pinel as the liberator of the insane was created in 1876 by Tony Robert-Fleury." (wikipedia) Second painting: "The painting [...] depicts the eminent French neurologist Jean-Martin Charcot (1825–1893) delivering a clinical lecture and demonstration" of a "a woman convulsing and assuming the arc-in-circle, "the hysteric's classic posture". (wikipedia)

#insanity #madness #pitie-salpetriere #mental hospital #art #tony robert-fleury #dark academia #1800's

4 notes · View notes

leebird-simmer · 2 years ago

Text

Psychopathology, ch 1 pt. 2

Could you describe the medical model of abnormal behavior?

- German physician Wilhelm Griesinger (1817-1868) argued that abnormal behavior was rooted in diseases of the brain.

- His views influenced another German physician named Emil Kraepelin (1856-1926), who wrote an influential textbook on psychiatry in 1883.

- According to the medical model, people behaving abnormally suffer from mental illnesses or disorders that can be classified (like physical illnesses) according to their distinctive causes and symptoms.

- Proponents of the medical model don’t necessarily believe that every mental disorder is a product of “defective” biology, but they do maintain that it’s useful to classify patterns of abnormal behavior as disorders that can be identified on the basis of their distinctive features or symptoms.

- Kraepelin specified two main groups of mental disorders:

dementia praecox (from roots meaning “precocious [premature] insanity”) which we now call schizophrenia. Kraepelin believed this was caused by a biochemical imbalance.

manic-depressive insanity, which we now call bipolar disorder. Kraepelin believed this was caused by an abnormality in the body’s metabolism.

- The medical model gained support in the late 19th century with the discovery that advanced syphilis (in which the bacterium that causes the disease directly invades the brain) led to a form of disturbed behavior called general paresis.

- General paresis is associated with physical symptoms and psychological impairment, including personality and mood changes, and with progressive deterioration of memory and judgment. Now that we have antibiotics to treat syphilis, this disorder has become extremely uncommon.

- The discovery of this connection between general paresis and syphilis inspired optimism in the scientific community, who believed that other biological causes would soon be discovered for many types of disturbed behavior. When Alzheimer’s was discovered, that lent further support to the medical model. However, an overwhelming majority of psychological disorders are more complex than scientists once thought, and we are still struggling to understand what factors are relevant, how influential they are, etc.

syndromes: clusters of symptoms that may be indicative of a particular disease or condition.

What is the major psychological model of abnormal behavior?

- Even as the medical model was gaining influence in the 19th century, some scientists argued that abnormal behavior could not have completely biological origins.

- In Paris, respected neurologist Jean-Martin Charcot (1825-1893) experimented with hypnosis as a treatment for hysteria, a condition characterized by paralysis or numbness that cannot be explained by any underlying physical cause. Hysteria was a common diagnosis in the Victorian era, but it’s quite rare today.

- Charcot’s teaching clinic was attended by a young Austrian physician named Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). Freud reasoned that if hysterical symptoms could be made to disappear or appear through hypnosis - the mere “suggestion of ideas” - then they must be psychological, not biological, in origin.

- Freud was also influenced by Viennese physician Joseph Breuer (1842-19125). He had used hypnosis to treat a 21 yr. old woman (Anna O.) for hysterical complaints which had no apparent medical basis. He encouraged her to talk about her symptoms, sometimes under hypnosis. The hysterical symptoms were taken to represent the transformation of these blocked-up emotions - forgotten but not lost - into physical complaints.

- In Anna’s case, the symptoms disappeared once the emotions were brought to the surface. Breuer labeled the therapeutic effect catharsis, or emotional discharge of feelings.

psychodynamic model: the theoretical model of Freud and his followers, in which abnormal behavior is viewed as the product of clashing forces within the personality.

What is the sociocultural perspective on abnormal behavior?

- Sociocultural theorists believe the causes of abnormal behavior may be found in the failures of society, rather than in the person. Psychological problems may be rooted in poverty, unemployment, ignorance, injustice, and lack of opportunity.

- Sociocultural theorists also focus on relationships between mental health and social factors such as gender, social class, ethnicity, and lifestyle. The social consequences of being labeled as a “mental patient” are emphasized.

- Sociocultural theorists argue that people with long-term mental health problems should have access to meaningful societal roles, rather than being stigmatized and marginalized.

What is the biopsychosocial perspective on abnormal behavior?

- Many mental health professionals take the view that abnormal behavior patterns are too complex to be understand from any single perspective, so they take into account biological, psychological, AND sociocultural causes. This is known as the biopsychosocial model or interactionist model.

What are the four major objectives of science?

Description

Explanation

Prediction

Control

theory: a formulation of the relationships underlying observed events.

What are the four major steps in the scientific method?

Formulating a research question

Framing the research question in the form of a hypothesis

Testing the hypothesis

Drawing conclusions about the hypothesis

What are the ethical principles that guide psychology research?

informed consent: research participants should receive enough information about an experiment beforehand to decide freely whether or not to participate.

confidentiality: protection of research participants by keeping records secure and not disclosing their identities.

What is the role of naturalistic research and what are its key features?

naturalistic observation method: researcher observes behavior in the field, where it happens.

- Scientists try to minimize interference with the behavior they observe, but the mere presence of an observer can cause distortion, and this must be taken into consideration.

- Naturalistic observation tells us *how* people behave, but doesn’t explain *why* people behave a certain way. Cause-and-effect is better determined through controlled experiments.

What is the role of correlational research and what are its key features?

correlational method: the use of statistical methods to examine relationships between two or more variables.

correlational coefficient: a statistical measure of the strength of the relationship between two variables expressed along a continuum that ranges between -1.00 and +1.00.

CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSALITY!

longitudinal study: a type of correlational study in which individuals are periodically tested or evaluated over lengthy periods of time.

What is the role of experimental research and what are its key features?

experimental method: allows scientists to demonstrate causal relationships by manipulating the (suspected) causal variable and measuring its effects under controlled conditions that minimize the risk of other variables explaining the results.

independent variables: factors hypothesized to play a causal role; manipulated or controlled by the investigator.

dependent variables: factors observed in order to determine the effects of manipulating the independent variable; measured but not manipulated by the experimenter.

experimental group: in an experiment, the group that receives the experimental treatment.

control group: in an experiment, a group that does not receive the experimental treatment.

random assignment: a method of assigning research subjects at random to experimental or control groups to balance the characteristics of people who comprise them.

selection factor: differences in the types of people who would select to be in one group or the other.

blind: research participants are uninformed about the treatments they are receiving in order to control for their expectations.

placebo: an inert drug that physically resembles the active drug.

- In a single-blind placebo-control study, research participants are randomly assigned to treatment conditions in which they receive either an active drug or an inert placebo, but are not told which drug they receive.

- In a double-blind placebo control design, neither the researcher nor the subject knows who is receiving the active drug or the placebo.

internal validity: the degree to which manipulation of the independent variables can be causally related to changes in the dependent variables.

external validity: the degree to which experimental results can be generalized to other settings and conditions.

construct validity: (1) in experimentation, the degree to which treatment effects can be accounted for by the theoretical mechanisms (constructs) represented in the independent variables; (2) in measurement, the degree to which a test measures the hypothetical construct that it purports to measure.

What is the role of epidemiological research and what are its key features?

epidemiological method: examines rates of occurrence of abnormal behavior in various settings or population groups.

survey method: a research method in which samples of people are questioned by means of a survey instrument such as a questionnaire or interview protocol.

incidence: the number of new cases occurring during a specific period of time.

prevalence: the overall number of cases of a disorder existing in the population during a given period of time.

random sample: a sample that is drawn in such a way that every member of a population has an equal chance of being included.

- Random sampling refers to the process of randomly choosing individuals within a target population to participate in a survey or research study.

- Random assignment refers to the process by which members of a research sample are assigned at random to different experimental conditions or treatments.

What is the role of kinship studies? What are their key features?

- Kinship studies attempt to disentangle the roles of heredity and environment in determining behavior.

genotype: set of traits specified by our genetic code.

People who possess genotypes for particular psychological disorders have a genetic predisposition that makes them more likely to develop the disorders in response to stressful life events, physical or psychological trauma, or other environmental factors.

phenotype: constellation of observable or expressed traits.

represents the interaction of genetic and environmental influences

proband, AKA index case: the case first diagnosed with a given disorder.

concordance rate: percentage of cases in which both twins have the same trait or disorder.

Researchers prefer to use monozygotic twins, but they also study dizygotic twins.

adoptee studies: studies that compare the traits and behavior patterns of adopted children to those of their biological parents and their adoptive parents.

What is the role of case studies? What are their limitations?

case studies: intensive studies of individuals.

can be based on historical material and involve subjects who passed long ago

More commonly, case studies reflect an in-depth analysis of an individual’s course of treatment. They typically include detailed histories of the subject’s background and response to treatment.

Unfortunately, they can’t be generalized, and the accuracy of the material varies.

single-case experimental design: a type of case study in which the subject is used as their own control.

reversal design: an experimental design that consists of repeated measurement of a subject’s behavior through a sequence of alternating baseline and treatment phases.

critical thinking: adoption of a questioning attitude and careful scrutiny of claims and arguments in light of evidence.

Maintain a skeptical attitude.

Consider the definitions of terms.

Weigh the assumptions or premises on which arguments are based.

Bear in mind that correlation is not causation.

Consider the kinds of evidence on which conclusions are based.

Do not oversimplify.

Do not overgeneralize.

#psychopathology #abnormal psychology #psychology #my notes #study blog

4 notes · View notes

la-salpetriere · 2 months ago

Text

Blanche Wittman and PNES (Psychogenic Non-Epileptic Seizures)

Blanche Wittman, famed La Salpêtrière hysteric is the pinnacle of what the modern-day public thinks of when they imagine "female hysteria" that being young women institutionalized and used as entertainment. In fact, most of our modern understanding of what hysteria was comes from Jean-Martin Charcot's work on La Salpêtrière's hysterics, one of the most notable examples being Blanche Whittman, forever immortalized in photographs and of course the famous André Brouillet painting "Une leçon clinique à la Salpêtrière"

Her dramatized and public portrayal of hysteria has led to an increase in awareness of neurological and psychiatric conditions primarily effecting women, PNES (Psychogenic Non-Epileptic Seizures) which falls somewhere between psychiatric and neurological being one of these conditions, which seems a likely diagnosis for her if Blanche were to visit a modern neurology clinic.

What is PNES? PNES (Psychogenic Non-Epileptic Seizures) are seizure episodes that highly resemble that of an epileptic seizure, though no brain activity resembling epilepsy is present. These seizures have a psychological basis, instead of a neurological one, though neurological imaging may be used in diagnosis before treatment is turned over to a psychologist or psychiatrist.

Blanche Wittman's symptoms present in her public case information across volumes of "Iconographie photographique de la Salpêtrière" line up very well with the current diagnostic criteria of PNES.

When Blanche was first admitted into La Salpêtrière in 1877, she was 18 years old, 1.62 meters tall (considered above average in this period) and weighing in at 70kg. Being raised in a troublesome and poor family, she was never taught to read and her intelligence was labeled as being below average by the hospital.

As stated before, Blanche was raised in a troublesome family, having nine siblings, including five who died in childhood from epilepsy and convulsions. Her father was prone to "fits of rage" and physically abused the young Blanche in many instances, and her mother died when Blanche was young, though the exact age varies from source to source.

She began a sexual relationship with her employer, a furrier, by force at the age of 15. She then admitted herself to a hospital (unclear exactly where) to escape the abuse eight months after it began. A while later she reported another sexual relationship with a boy called Alphonse. It seems to be unclear whether this relationship was consented to by Blanche, or another example of sexual abuse against her.

Abuse, especially sexual is an extremely common background in those with PNES. A diagnosis of PTSD or C-PTSD with PNES is quite common. It seems extremely likely that her abuse she went through played a role in these "hysterical attacks"

After some time taking refuge at a convent (Blanche seems to have been a devout Catholic, wearing a scapular and collecting various pieces of Christian iconography) she began working as a servant at La Salpêtrière, thinking this would make it easier for her to be eventually admitted into the hospital after they see her attacks.

Blanche eventually succeeded in her goal of being admitted to La Salpêtrière in 1877, at the age of 18. Her time there coincided with the peak of Jean-Martin Charcot's studies on hysteria, and she quickly became one of his star patients. Charcot’s research focused on hysteria as a neurological disorder, and his methods of public "demonstrations" of hysterical patients, including Blanche, led to increased attention to the condition. These public displays, often featuring dramatic reenactments of symptoms, cast a long shadow over how hysteria and by extension, women’s health was perceived for decades.

Blanche’s displays of hysteria to the public were not only attended by a medical crowd, but was also popular among a non-medical crowd, including that of actors, who would come to study Blanche’s intense displays of emotion under hypnosis.

Hypnosis was frequently used on Blanche during these displays, often to achieve the state of somnambulism, or extreme suggestibility, where the hypnotist could make her to believe just about anything they so desired, the effects sometimes even lasting long after the trance.

While the primary purpose of these displays was supposedly to educate on hysteria, they often came off as more entertaining stage hypnosis than anything. Some of this was mindless entertainment, though some was clearly intended to use Blanche’s fear and distress for laughs, whether to the audience or the hospital staff themselves, often young male medical students, finding it hilarious to sexualize and upset her.

During her intense states of somnambulism, she was often made to hallucinate snakes and rats at her feet. She would hike up her skirt and squeal, prompting voyeuristic laughs from the audience.

Unlike the many “wandering womb” theories we often associate with hysteria today, Charcot was among the first who believed hysteria had a neurological origin, attributing symptoms like convulsions, paralysis, and loss of consciousness to issues within the brain. This makes sense as Charcot was most certainly extremely knowledgeable about neuroscience. In fact, he was the first to identify and name multiple sclerosis as it’s own distinct condition, pioneered much amyotrophic lateral sclerosis research (the disease even being known as Charcot’s disease in parts of the world) and is associated with at least 15 different diseases named after him. For this reason, it only makes sense that a condition with invisible physical pathology must be caused by nervous system abnormalities, this being even more apparent when remembering this was a time before complex brain imaging and EEG technology was in use, it was nearly impossible to know whether something was psychological or neurological, and Charcot believed the latter.

However, many of these symptoms would align more closely with what we now understand as psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES), a condition rooted in psychological trauma rather than physical abnormalities in the brain. Today, PNES is understood as a dissociative disorder, often linked to past trauma, which manifests in seizure episodes without the electrical disruptions seen in epilepsy.

Before her time institutionalized, Blanche's life was full of trauma and abuse, often seen in PNES patients. Not only that but Blanche also demonstrated a good example of "the teddy bear sign" a frequent pattern in PNES patients and an aid in diagnosis. A majority of PNES patients show up to EEG monitoring appointments with a comfort item, most often a stuffed animal. While we don't know exactly what Blanche would have done in the modern day, we do know she was an avid collector of stuffed animals and various little trinkets. This was common behavior among hysterics, suggesting what in the modern day we would call PNES was common among hysterics.

The "hysterical attacks" that made her a spectacle were, in all likelihood, trauma responses—demonstrations of a mind and body deeply affected by abuse. While these days are long gone, it's important to see just how much this outdated understanding of the brain both holds back and progresses our knowledge of the connection between body and brain.

#la salpetriere #la pitie salpetriere #hysteria #blanche whittman #photographs

3 notes · View notes