The weird and the Eerie (maps and networks)
The
weird and the Eerie by Mark Fisher read through
INTRODUCTION The Weird and the Eerie
(Beyond the Unheimlich)
He begins
by noting that the weird and the eerie are not necessarily scary, although it
is often associated with horror. It is also the first thing that I thought of
when thinking about the weird and the eerie.
What the weird and the eerie have in
common is a preoccupation with the strange. The strange — not the horrific. The
allure that the weird and the eerie possess is not captured by the idea that we
“enjoy what scares us”. It has, rather, to do with a fascination for the
outside, for that which lies beyond standard perception, cognition and
experience. This fascination usually involves a certain apprehension, perhaps
even dread — but it would be wrong to say that the weird and the eerie are
necessarily terrifying
Unheimlich:
Freud uses this word to describe the uncanny or better yet the Unhomely.
Freud’s unheimlich is about the strange
within the familiar, the strangely familiar, the familiar as strange — about
the way in which the domestic world does not coincide with itself. All of the
ambivalences of Freud’s psychoanalysis are caught up in this concept
The weird
and the eerie are both on the outside.
The weird and the eerie make the opposite
move: they allow us to see the inside from the perspective of the outside. As
we shall see, the weird is that which does not belong. The weird brings to the
familiar something which ordinarily lies beyond it, and which cannot be
reconciled with the “homely” (even as its negation). The form that is perhaps
most appropriate to the weird is montage — the conjoining of two or more things
which do not belong together.
like the weird, the eerie is also
fundamentally to do with the outside, and here we can understand the outside in
a straightforwardly empirical as well as a more abstract transcendental sense.
A sense of the eerie seldom clings to enclosed and inhabited domestic spaces;
we find the eerie more readily in landscapes partially emptied of the human. What
happened to produce these ruins, this disappearance? What kind of entity was
involved? What kind of thing was it that emitted such an eerie cry? As we can
see from these examples, the eerie is fundamentally tied up with questions of
agency.
This leads me
to the conclusion that what I am trying to create is eeriness. The absence of the
natural land and the presence of the dead.
The eerie concerns the most fundamental
metaphysical questions one could pose, questions to do with existence and
non-existence: Why is there something here when there should be nothing? Why is
there nothing here when there should be something? The unseeing eyes of the
dead; the bewildered eyes of an amnesiac — these provoke a sense of the eerie,
just as surely as an abandoned village or a stone circle do.
The abandoned
land asks the question; what exactly happened here? Why? How did the life here
die? And the ghosts still haunting the place: Why? What do they want? Are they
aware their land has been destroyed? I think they would want to make us feel
guilty.
So far, we are still left with the impression
that the weird and the eerie have primarily to do with what is distressing or
terrifying. So let us end these preliminary remarks by pointing to examples of
the weird and the eerie that produce a different set of affects. Modernist and
experimental work often strikes us as weird when we first encounter it. The
sense of wrongness associated with the weird — the conviction that this does
not belong — is often a sign that we are in the presence of the new.
Strange
work of art is not usually scary. It can sometimes be something we enjoy,
seeing, perhaps something familiar changed into something unfamiliar. I´m not
trying to create anything scary, at least I don´t think. I only want it to seem
not right. To say it shouldn’t be like this.
The eerie also entails a disengagement
from our current attachments. But, with the eerie, this disengagement does not
usually have the quality of shock that is typically a feature of the weird. The
serenity that is often associated with the eerie — think of the phrase eerie
calm — has to do with detachment from the urgencies of the everyday.
My mind immediately
jumped to the cover of this book; the lake looks so eerily calm. I think I would want my animals to look calm, as if they hadnt even noticed the destruction, or that they are dead.
The perspective of the eerie can give
us access to the forces which govern mundane reality but which are ordinarily
obscured, just as it can give us access to spaces beyond mundane reality
altogether. It is this release from the mundane, this escape from the confines
of what is ordinarily taken for reality, which goes some way to account for the
peculiar appeal that the eerie possesses.
The next
chapters I did not have time to read (just skim through) I just wanted to make
a note on them so I can go back and read on them. These were the chapters that
really interested me:
Simulations and Unworlding: Rainer
Werner Fassbinder and Philip K. Dick
Curtains and Holes: David Lynch
After skim reading this chapter I really want to watch Th Mullholland drive, which was used as an example. It seems really interesting.Approaching the Eerie
Something Where There Should Be
Nothing: Nothing Where There Should Be Something: Daphne du Maurier and
Christopher Priest

I also want to watch the Birds as it also was used as an example of the eerie
On Vanishing Land: M.R. James and
Eno
Inside Out: Outside In: Margaret
Atwood and Jonathan Glazer
Alien Traces: Stanley Kubrick,
Andrei Tarkovsky, Christopher Nolan





Comments
Post a Comment