Top Banner
DISCOVERING FREUD AND HIS CONCEPTS IN THE CINEMA OF Luis Buñuel, Jan Švankmajer and Pier Paolo Pasolini
45

Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

Dec 28, 2022

Download

Documents

Suzanne Bakkum
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

DISCOVERING FREUD

A N D H I S C O N C E P T S I N T H E C I N E M A O F

Luis Buñuel,Jan Švankmajer and Pier Paolo Pasolini

Page 2: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini
Page 3: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

END EXAM THESIS KONINKLIJKE ACADEMIE DEN HAAG

Written by: Milan Anais GrootGuided by: Winnie Koekelbergh

Fine Arts, Graphics

2013

Page 4: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

Table of content 3.

Preface 5.

1 Sigmund Freud 7. 1.1 Biography 8. 1.2 Theories 9. 2 Luis Buñuel 13. 2.1 Biography 14. 2.2 Belle du Jour 15. 2.3 Analysis 16. 2.4 Cet Obscur Objet de Desir 18. 2.5 Analysis 19.

3 Jan Švankmajer 23. 3.1 Biography 24. 3.2 Lunacy 25. 3.3 Analysis 26.

4 Pier Paolo Pasolini 31. 4.1 Biography 32. 4.2 Teorema 33. 4.3 Analysis 35. 5 Conclusion 39. Book list 43.

Content

3

Page 5: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

4

Page 6: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

5

In my Thesis i want to deepen my view on the directors I so much admire in

combination with the theories of Freud, who have been a great inspiration for

me. I myself have been trying to use and visualize those applied theories for

quite a while, using the inventive imagery of the tree great directors. I want

to go delve deeper into their motives and creative solutions of visualization

and imagery. I want to find out in what way their past has influenced them

in making their decisions and what are common subjects and pictures that

we can find in these tree completely different men. Because as all of them

seem to be connected while all coming from a different country, background

and era. They all work together with a similar subject or inspiration and all

manage to create their own unique style. I will first explain the Freudian the-

ories as they are known for and, after a small biographical introduction of the

director, attempt to show those theories inside the movies I selected.

I hope with this to discover for myself a way or method to use the literature

that inspires me. And hopefully understand how one can translate something

so inspirational into an image that strong.

I want to see connections and differences and hope to find out where they

come from and how they start to exist. But most of all I’d like to see the pas-

sion that all these men had and find a way to honor them simultaneously in a

simple attempt to penetrate their ways and thoughts.

Preface

Page 7: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

6

Page 8: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

7

Sigmund Freud

“No other technique for the conduct of life attaches the individual so firmly to reality as laying emphasis on work: for his work at least gives him a secure place in a portion of reality, in the human community.

The possibility it offers of displacing a large amount of libidinal components, whether narcissistic, aggressive or even erotic,

on the professional work and on the human relations connected with it lends it a value by no means second to what it enjoys as something indispensable to the preservation and justification of existence in society.

Professional activity is a source of a special satisfaction if it is a freely chosen one – if, that is to say, by means of subli-mation, it makes possible the use of existing inclinations, of persisting or constitutionally reinforced instinctual im-

pulses.

And yet, as a path to happiness, work is not highly prized by men. They do not strive after it as they do other possibili-ties of satisfaction. The great majority of people only work under the stress of necessity, and this natural human aver-

sion to work raises most difficult social problems.”

-Sigmund Freud-

P a r t 1

Page 9: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

8

The world famous psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud (1856, Freiberg, current Czech republic) was born in a reasonably wealthy Jewish family from Austria. At a young age his family went bankrupt and they moved to Vienna where he started to study medicine. After returning from a project in Triëst he started a study Neurology on the psychological institute in Vienna.Together with Josef Breuer he started investigating subjects such as Hysteria. Followed by other subjects which would later become the famous theories of Freud. His interests where mostly focused on the subconscious, a topic which in those times was hardly investigated because of its difficulties of finding actual proof/evidence. With the help of for instance Hypnotists he searched for ‘hidden’ thoughts that might cause psychiatric illnesses. Breur quit working with Freud after discussions about the somewhat extreme statements Freud was making. Something similar happened later on with his later apprentice Gustav Jung, who also didn’t agree on the daring thoughts Freud was developing1. Especially for his time Freud had made some uncom-mon ‘open’ statements about sexuality. It is well known that Freud was indeed a big admirer of Nietzsche, which might explain where he might got his inspirations from. Some of his teach-ings refer strongly to the concepts of Dionysian and Apollonian. In Freud’s studies he touched upon delicate subjects such as his now well known Oedipus complex, Infantile sexuality and his revolutionary dream theory. Near the end of his live he moved to England, escaping the second world war. This is where he spends his last years in practice. In today’s Psychology studies hes is being put aside as a perverted cocaine addict, but we should not forget he is in fact the founder of modern psychology/psychoanalysis. The first man to acknowledge the power of the sub-conscious and giving meaning to hidden thoughts manifesting in dreams and showing a great insight in the human mind.

1 Brown, J.A.C., Freud and the Post Freudians, 1961, pp. 40-52

Biography

Page 10: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

9

Theories

Subconscious and dream explanation

2 Freud, Sigmund, Inleiding tot de Psycho-analyse, 1940, pp. 73- 270.

The theory of the libido is a very wide spread subject, as Freud explains it very extensive. It all starts with what he calls the Infantile stages of sexuality. These so called stages occur between the age of 0 and 6 year old, and can according to Freud, if not finished, or passed in a ‘healthy’ way cause problems during the adult life.

First stage is the oral phase, happening between the age 0-1, and is the age where the child is still unaware of its surroundings,we call him completely narcissistic. There he considers the mothers breast as part of his own. It is only at the end of this stage he discovers that his mother is indeed another entity. When problems occur during this stage a person can develop an ‘oral-character’.

According to Freud we can only ‘see’ or reveal 1/10th of human behavior, the remaining 9 or 10 lies deep in the subconscious. This subconscious mostly exists of primal, animal instincts, that manifest itself in our behavior in a manipulated way (more explanation in the part about the Id, Ego and Super Ego). This pro-cess happening in our mind is according to Freud also the reason why we dream. Just as our normal behavior is controlled, our dreams are also being manipulated. But we can use the dreams to seek deep in our mind to see our hidden desires. This process where the dreams are being transformed into a less direct image of desire is called ‘dream censorship’. This makes the human mind its unacceptable lusts and and desires come out to the conscious level in a more acceptable manner. This dream censorship is one of the basic elements of his theories. From this point on we can translate them into its original essence.

Freud encouraged his patients by using free associa-tion techniques to reread as it where their own dreams and find a different interpretation of the images that occurred. By looking at the smallest details in the dream and then by dissecting them carefully, patients could see the true reason of their dream. And with

Which would manifest itself in a lust for oral pleasure; smoking, kissing, drinking, here the fixation will be all about receiving, not giving.

Anal phase: 1-3 is the age when the child discov-ers anal pleasure and power when it receives potty training. It sees the power between being rewarded for doing well or punishment for not behaving. This makes it recognize the power of a certain ‘gift’ it has. A person not developing well during this stage may undergo issues with cleanliness and miserly behavior.

that, the real fantasies and lusts they where subcon-sciously experiencing. On this he based his (in)famous dream theory: a guide explaining visual symbols occurring in dreams via some by him determined subjects. Most of this explanation refers back to sexual thoughts and instincts. For example all weapons (guns, knifes, bats, cannons, whips etc) where repre-senting the male genitals. Whereas the female privates would appear as hollow (sometimes wet) spaces, such as cups, vases, grails, caves and so on. Les obvious ex-amples would be the appearance of stairs in a dream, suggesting a hunger for sexual intercourse, or a dream visualizing loosing ones teeth, a symbol for a fear of impotence2. This theory has been highly criticized because of its sexual focus, but should be seen mostly as an honorable attempt to make sense of our shadow like mind in a time where sex was a great taboo.

Libido

Page 11: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

10

Id, Ego, Super ego

These three concepts are a big part of the subconscious theory of Freud. They are the main explanation of the how and why we act as we do. Most of these described subjects are unconscious, and only a few parts of the Ego and Super ego show, where as the Id is completely subconscious

The first, ‘Id’ represents our primal instinctive energy. This power only wants to satisfy its desires and needs as fast as possible without any way of holding back. The Id stands for two types of primal powers: sexual energy (Eros) and anger/aggression (Tanatos). When Id becomes more vivid during our dreams we get an insight in our true animal instincts and desires. This is the reason why Freud had such an interest in dreams, because in our normal behavior these desires never show, and through these interpretations we can discover the most hidden ‘true’ part of a human being5.

The ‘Ego’ its job is to control the raw energy and lusts of the Id. The ego is therefore the rational and controlling behavior that makes us resist the Id and lets us function in the way we know it. It prevents mutiny of the in-stincts and nuances them before becoming conscious. Preventing horrible acts of lusts to sex such as rape.

The ‘Super Ego’ is our conscience, is represents the general norms and values as we accept and handle them. It also carries the ideals we cherish, and can operate on both conscious and subconscious levels. As seemingly the most pure and idealistic of all, it hides a dark side as well. Where as the Super ego can be excessively demand-ing, by creating high expectations that are sometimes almost impossible to comply to. Super ego can be just as unrealistic to satisfy as the Id itself6.

3 Berg, J.H. Van den, Dieptepyschologie, 1970, pp.81- 105

4 Berg, J.H. Van den, Dieptepsychologie, 1970, pp. 111 -115

5 Freud, Sigmund, Inleiding tot de Psychoanalyse, 1940, pp. 122-132

6 Berg, J.H. Van den, Dieptepsychologie, 1970, pp. 55-64

The Utheral phase is one happening on the age of 3, where as boys learn how to handle their tools and pee in specific places, destroying objects with their beams. Girls discover their lack of a penis and develop a terrible shame feeling and become envious of boys genitals. One who would finish this phase damaged would develop a character easily ashamed and with unreachable high ambitions3.

Last is the phallic phase: happening between 4 and 6. The boys discover lust when their penis is touched, either by themselves or when washed by the mother. Being aware the female figure in them live also causes this, they quickly turn to the other sex, developing the well known Oedipus-complex. Girls get more envious of the penis and develop the shameful thoughts of being castrated in the past. Adult Men with a phallic complex carry out an ex-treme care for their appearance. As if they where treating their body as a penis. While adult woman will develop some sort of a ‘penis-envy’, this bitterness could turn them into man haters.

All these together form just the beginning of adult sexuality, with all its perversity and com-plexes. But we do have to take in notice, that not every time Freud mentions the libido he is referring to sexuality. Where the Latin explanation of Libido mean lust. He divides them into not only sexual lust, but any type of lust that can get satisfied in any sort of way. Somewhat similar to the oral character mentioned above, he/she who satisfies him/herself through oral pleasures do not necessary deal with sex4.

Page 12: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

11

The concepts in applied in Cinema

7 Žižek, Slavoi, Pertverts Guide to Cinema, 2006.

In cinematography these Freudian theories are mixed in the story via visual presences. Just as in Freud’s Dream theory there are objects, decors and actions that, just as in a dream, play an important role in the continuation of the story. They demonstrate, just as the dream symbols, a subconscious storyline hidden under the obvious visible one. The way directors handle this process it comparable with the one of the dream censorship/manipulation, and is also gratefully used by directors to hide statements in their films. This was for some a way to criticize their government without being arrested, or prevent hysteria because of daring statements. To stick to the Theories of Freud one could use this visual language that followers or admirers of Freud would understand.

Slavoi Žižek explains in his documentary ‘The pervert’s guide through cinema’ how we can find some beauti-ful Freudian theories in Hitchcock s ‘Psycho’. By just exploring the the floor levels the movie is navigating through.

“What’s so interesting is that the very disposition of mother’s house...Events took place in it at three levels, first floor, ground floor, basement. It is as if they reproduce the three levels of human subjectivity. Ground floor is ego. Norman behaves there as a nor-mal son, whatever remains of his normal ego taking over. Up there, it’s the superego. Maternal superego, because the dead mother is basically a figure of super-ego. And down in the cellar, it’s the id,the reservoir of these illicit drives. So we can then interpret the event in the middle of the film, when Norman carries the mother or, as we learn at the end, mother’s mummy, corpse, skeleton, from the first floor to the cellar. It’s as if he is transposing her in his own mind as the psychic agency from superego to id.

Of course, the lesson of it is the old lesson elaborat-ed already by Freud, that superego and id are deeply connected. The mother complains first, as a figure of authority, “How can you be doing this to me?, Aren’t you ashamed?, “This is a fruit cellar.” And then, mother immediately turns into obscenity, “Do you think I’m fruity?” Superego is not an ethical agency. Superego is an obscene agency, bombarding us with

impossible orders, laughing at us, when, of course, we cannot ever fulfill its demand. The more we obey it, the more it makes us guilty. There is always some aspect of an obscene madman in the agency of the superego.”7

We can see a very clear description of the previously explained Freudian concepts and how to recognize them in the movies I am going to dissect in the next chapters.

Page 13: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

12

Page 14: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

13

P a r t 2

Luis Buñuel

“All my life I’ve been harassed by questions: Why is something this way and not another? How do you account for that? This rage to understand, to fill in the blanks, only makes life more banal. If we could only find the courage to leave our destiny to chance, to accept the fundamental mystery of our lives, then we might be closer to the sort of happiness that

comes with innocence.“Fortunately, somewhere between chance and mystery lies imagination, the only thing that protects our freedom,

despite the fact that people keep trying to reduce it or kill it off altogether. I suppose that’s why Christianity invented the notion of intentional sin. When I was younger, my so-called conscience forbade me to entertain certain images—

like fratricide, for instance, or incest. I’d tell myself these were hideous ideas and push them out of my mind. But when I reached the age of sixty, I finally understood the perfect innocence of the imagination. It took that long for me to

admit that whatever entered my head was my business and mine alone. The concepts of sin or evil simply didn’t apply; I was free to let my imagination go wherever it chose, even if it produced bloody images and hopelessly decadent ideas.

When I realized that, I suddenly accepted everything.”

-Luis Buñuel-

Page 15: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

14

Biography

8 Edward, Gwynne, The discreet charm of Luis Buñuel, 2009,

9 Burvenich, Jos, Film als Levensexpressie, 1978, pp. 115-118

The famous director Luis Buñuel was born on February 22th 1900 in Calanda, Spain. At a young age the family moves to Zaragoza where he follows a strict Jesuit education. Buñuel was in fact a deeply religious boy until the age of 16 when he turned on the church in disgust because of their illogical rules, wealth and power. At the age of 17 the enrolls on the university in Madrid to study a major in Science. It was here that he first met (later co-director and artist) Salvador Dali and poet Frederico Garcia Lorca. His passion for cinema got fired up by his new two friends and he moves to Paris to study cinema in times of avant-garde experimental films. Later on he becomes to assistant of Jean Epstein, a very famous and successful director of his time, but this mostly teaches Buñuel how he does not want to make movies.

In 1928 he pares up with Salvador Dali to make their (in)famous Un Chien Andalou. It was a scandalous movie, based on the collected dreams of Dali and Buñuel bundled in a movie via the dream symbol theory of Freud. Not much later Buñuel again provoked the audience with his L’age D’or in 1930, this movie was also the last collaboration between Buñuel and Dali, as Dali didn’t agree on Buñuel’s strong criticism on the Catholic church. Shortly after this he moves back to Spain to continue to work on a documentary called Las Hurdas. He gets noticed by larg-er production companies and starts doing small jobs for Warner brothers and Paramount. This later gives him the opportunity to flee from Spain during the Civil War and to start working in Hollywood. He stays in Hollywood from 1938 till 1945 working on big MGM or governmental productions, but leaves to Mexico, where he starts making autonomous works again. Here he makes a series of films like Los Olivados (1950), El (1952) and his more famous Criminal life of Archibaldo de la Cruz (1955). This is where Buñuel, according to many, truly developed his style of cinema he is so well known for. Combining a subtle documentary style together with the surrealist qualities of the director.8 He returns to France in 1955 where he continues to shoot many of the works he is so well known for, such as Viridiana (1961), Belle de Jour (1967), Tristana (1970) and Le Charme Discret de la Bourgeoisie (1972). Ever since Phantom of Liber-ty (1974) he starts announcing his retirement, but he still makes two movies afterwords, his last being Cet obscur Objet de Desir in 1977. After that he stops making movies, only to produce an autobiography named Mon Dernier Soupir in 1982. Luis Buñuel dies in Mexico city in 1983.9

Page 16: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

15

Belle de Jour

The movie circles around Severine, a young 23 year old woman, married to Pierre. Even though Pierre is being a exemplary husband she cannot convince herself to engage into sexual acts with him, and re-mains acting cold and distant to him. He respects this and doesn’t push her to engage in such acts until she regains her feelings for him. But as later explained in the movie, her acts of distancing and asexuality might be the result of early childhood abuse. Though Sever-ine refrains from any sexual and/or loving acts to her husband, she does experience dreams in which she is being violently abused by Pierre. In the first scenes of the movie we are introduced to a dream/fantasy of Severine where she and her husband are riding a carriage through the park. As she seems to react rather cold to his sweet acts he suddenly turns aggressive, instructs his drivers to take her out of the carriage and tie her to a tree. That is where he makes them hit her with a horsewhip and later on allows them to have their way with her. With these dreams she sets a distance between her conscious and subcon-scious side, separating the lust/hunger for deep sexual aggression, and her bourgeois way of life, with all the rules this society gave her, and judges her for. As a family friend tells her about a whorehouse in the city, owned by Madame Anais, she seems intrigued by the idea of women degrading themselves in such a way. She visits the house and makes an appointment

to start working and picks up the name ‘belle de jour’ (as she will only works on daytime, in the afternoons). She starts to engage in a game of sexual acts with several clients, becoming more and more comfortable. The result of all is that, even though she still refuses to get intimate with Pierre, she does start to appreciate his sweet acts of patience for her. But still her extreme fantasies and dreams keep continuing. A second dream depicts Pierre and the family friend together on a prairie landscape, he sips the soup, stating “its cold, it never warms up”. When they ask what time it is, he copies Severine’s words :”between 2 and 5 o’clock, never later than 5” (refer-ring to her working times at madame Anais). They then proceed to collect mud, and dirt in a bucket. Then we see Severine tight up to a pole, where they start to throw mud at her and verbally abuse her. She continues working at the whorehouse, feeling more in control over the situation. When a new customer a young thug named Marcel arrives. They have an im-mediate click, and he keeps coming back for her. Now she is the experienced one, the one in power, and he is the mere student, the ‘dependent’. He falls in love with her, and she develops some sort of feelings for him as well. But she clearly separates it from the love Pierre provides her.

Everything escalates when one day the family friend visits the whorehouse and discovers her secret, she is afraid of being exposed, but he won’t tell Pierre as long as she will receive some of his friends. The young thug become jealous, impatient and aggressive, demanding her to be with him, so she stops working to run away from him. Unfortunately the thug finds out where she lives, and he confronts her. She demands him to leave, and as he does he shoots Pierre in front of the house. Marcel is later on killed in a violent police encounter. Pierre is left handicapped, blind, in a wheelchair. Regardless Severine seems to have found a balance in life, she seems happy now she has to takes care of Pierre.At the end of the film, the family friend returns once again, threatening to expose her actions. While they fight in the living room it does not become clear whether Pierre can hear the entire conversation. The friend leaves and Severine falls asleep on the couch. In her dream, Pierre takes of his glasses and suddenly gets up out of the wheelchair. He proposes to take a few days off, to go to the mountains. Cowbells start ringing, just like in the previous dreams, and as she looks outside the horse carriage from the first scene rides by without anyone in the back.

Page 17: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

16

Analysis

The story is an obvious opportunity for Buñuel, who follows the story of the novel from Joseph Kessel, to explore his Freudian passion inside his cinema. A young woman struggling between her conscious and subconscious, the deep dark lusts lingering inside human beings, and the intrigues it can cause.

The dreams occurring throughout the movie are the main guideline of her subconscious, whereas her life with Pierre is the pressure of morals, values, the bour-geois life, forcing her to create her facade. To be more precise about the dream and to clear things up; in the occurring fantasies, she is at loved and at the same time violated by her husband (or others following his orders). Even though he expresses his love for her, he keeps a certain distance, some kind of calmness in the entire scene, even while violating and abusing her. For Severine, this is necessary to combine her conscious with her subconscious. He needs to become the ulti-mate combination to allow her to be both as well. Her way of responding to the situation, to her urges, is to enter the whorehouse of madame Anais. She feels that Pierre will always be too sweet and caring, but most of all, too restricted to ever be able to give her what she desires. So she separates them by acting out on what so far had been only fantasies and dreams. But only by keeping them in balance, and not loosing one or the other. She wishes to be dominated, she wishes to be humiliated in order to be able engage in sexual acts. But these perverted acts can only be justified, by the angelic way of how she portraits her-self towards her husband.

Then, after reviewing the overall concepts in the story, we can now turn a little into detail of the imagery Buñuel used in this movie. As Buñuel is generally well known for using (quite literary at times) the Freud-ian dream theory in the small details in scenery or gesture. Which at the end also contributes to the style he is so well known for. We can discover the double layers, or extra information he gives us (so called subliminal messages) via certain scenes.

During the scene of the dream sequences we discover the mixed feelings of the conscious and subconscious struggle in the small face expressions portrait by Sev-erine. At every act of exceeding violence and humili-ation (the whipping, the rape, or being abused while mud is thrown at her) she shows double emotions. During her state of mind she seems to balance be-tween disgust and despair while simultaneously por-traying a face of pleasure. Of course during previous analysis we understood that she actually wants both sides of this experience, but especially during the first scenes of the movie it is a very questionable act. Just as much because of the horrible and degenerating acts being performed upon her. The same counts for when she encounters her first client at madame Anais’s brothel, as she first doubts and tries to flee. Madame Anais becomes irritated and angrily obliges her to return to the client. Suddenly Severine’s expression changes, just like she expected or wanted this conflict to happen, and returns tamely to the customer. So in every struggle like these ones and others we see her actually wanting to always stay in an inner conflict between her dark desires (subconscious) and a small struggle of some sort of power figure (conscious) before actually ‘giving in’ into the situation.

Other small details portrayed in a more detailed way where Severine comes from and what made her this way. In one of the scenes we see the feet of a little girl walking up the stairs, followed by the image of a work-er man kneeling down with the little girl and kissing her on the cheek. We understand a history of child-hood abuse, and a reason why Severine could be so re-luctant to be intimate with Pierre or any other man for that reason. In later scenes where she visits the brothel we keep seeing close ups of her feet walking up the stairs; a clear image from Freud’s dream images.

Page 18: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

17

10 Edwards, Gwynne, The discreet charm of Luis Buñuel, 2009, pp. 195- 210

Climbing up stairs is according to this theories a symbolic representations of sexual acts or a desire for it. It is an image Buñuel uses for many of his movies and we can say almost for certain this is exactly what he wanted tell us. As she climbs the stairs, a wish for her fantasies to be satisfied, a wish for intercourse is inhabiting her mind. And this may be as well a way for her to deal with her past of abuse.10

Her struggle between class systems and the moral/immoral act she switches between are told via characters around her. The distancing between her two ‘sided’ struggle are clearly represented via the two men admiring and ador-ing her. First Pierre who is a doctor, an bourgeois man of wealth and class. He respects Severine her troubles and difficulties in order to keep the idea of their perfect marriage intact. The social class is visible all around them and shows nothing but high expectations and achievement. It is very much like the ‘Super Ego’ where they are expected in many ways to appear happy and satisfy the idea of perfect marriage by themselves and society around them. But just as much as in the Freudian concept, Super ego is a cruel agency, just as their situation, where both of them feel lacking in this environment and are unable to reach this level of perfection. The glitter and shine of the bourgeois life is only a way to cover up the dark and unexpected urges inside them. While with her lover, the thug, Marcel it is the opposite way around. He is a street low life, covered in scars, with fake golden tooth. There is a rawness to him that immediately attracts her. His battle scars are like tro-phies to him, and she admires the crude attitude he has. Where his outside is much less polished and the way he acts are much less respectful than Pierre, it is the savageness that exactly represents what Severine is looking for. He is, in what we can observe, the ‘Id’. He chaotic and destroying power, the overwhelming adventure and danger at the same time. He does represent the freedom from all the rules her normal life suppresses her from and offers a way to let go of everything, but also finally to be in charge of everything. But like all, those powers need to be tempered and as he threatens her with a belt during one of their meetings she quits working at the brother. Leaving him in jealousy and despair, making him the violent chaos that he is, and thereby attacking and wounding Pierre severely. The Id is a powerful agency that creates and destroys and leaves in a burst of total chaos. And therefore it is never wise to indulge oneself completely into just this one side of the subconscious. Another reason why Severine was trying throughout the entire movie to balance both lives evenly.

Page 19: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

18

Cet Obscur objet de Désir

We start the movie near the end of the story. In the first scene we see the main character, Mathieu, an older wealthy man, buying tickets to return to Paris. He seems to want to leave as soon as possible. When he returns to his hotel he asks his butler if ‘she’ has left yet. They go to a room left in a mess, with bloodstained pillows, whet female panties and broken vases. He wants to have to room cleaned and objects burned. Upon driving to the train station, a car, similar to Mathieu explodes as result of a terrorist attack, these attacks will keep occurring throughout the entire movie. Once settled in the train, and introduced to his fellow passengers, he sees a young girl, with a black eye trying to find a place in the train. As she tries to get on, when the train is about to leave, Mathieu empties a bucket of water over her head. His fellow passengers are shocked and intrigued by this neat man and his unusual acts, and convince him to explain what has happened before between them.

He tells them the story and this is how we will from then on perceive it as well, via the same position as his fellow train passengers. He met her, Conchita, a beautiful Spanish 18 year old girl,while on her first day as a maid in his home. He from the beginning is mesmerized by her beauty and intrigued by her distance though inviting behavior. He later invites Conchita to his room, she appears, only now played by a different actress. (The switching of actresses will happen throughout the whole movie, on certain moments that I will specify later.) The next day she appears to have left the job, to not return again. Months later on a trip to Switzerland he runs into her again. Her friends stole money from him, and she wants to return it, but he wants to hear no such thing. Just before she leaves he asks for her address. Mathieu goes to visit her, in a shady neighborhood, where he is welcomed by her mother. Seeing their poor living situation he gives them some money.

Over the course of time he comes to visit her more and more bearing gifts and eagerly hoping to kiss her. She plays, she talks, but never allows him to get truly close because as she explains; she is still a virgin. When he gives Conchita’s mother money in hoping to please her enough so that she wants to move in with him, she angrily disappears yet again for months. By now Mathieu doesn’t know what to do anymore and looses hope, when he runs into her again. Her open attitude is back and she soon offers to be his mistress that evening. But upon being together in the room she has locked herself in some sort of chastity pants, acting rejecting about having sex. Also her reasons and excuses for her refusal to have intercourse become vaguer and stranger every time. It is impos-sible to believe her excuses, but it shows even more that Mathieu cannot resist to love her even though his frustration grows rapidly. She moves in with him, still refraining from intimacy other than a simple kiss, whilst using his money. One day she smuggles a male friend in her bedroom, as he finds out he becomes furious and sends her out of the house. Being afraid of his weakness towards her, he finds a way to get Conchita and her mother expelled from France.

Again, a leap in time when we see Mathieu planning a trip to Singapore, but because he cannot forget about Conchita leaving to Spain. Knowing that she used to live there he finds her again, hoping to be able to please her this time. He goes to see her at her job as a flamingo dancer, only to find her dance naked in front of tourists. When he rages on about her previous lies, she bursts into tears saying she has to provide money. And

that she still has never slept with a man before. She implies that the only thing she will need to give herself to him, is a house of her own. Again Mathieu cannot withstand her requests and buys her a beautiful house. She seems so happy and tells him to come back at midnight to make finally make love with her. When he arrives the gate is locked, and Conchita makes fun of how she abused him. Then brings in a young man that she makes love to right in front of Mathieu’s eyes.Then we return to the train compartment. His fellow passengers step back as Conchita walks in and empties a bucket of water over him. He runs after her, and after a small fight they make up again. We again skip in time a little and see them together strolling through Paris. A display in a shop window catches his atten-tion. In it there is a girl sewing together old antique underwear, which has been ripped and covered in bloodstains. He makes a comment to Conchita who walks away irritated, as we hear the dramatic ‘Li-ebestod’ from Wagner coming from the radio. We see them walk away when a giant explosion happens, wiping out everything around it. But we will hear faint footsteps at the end.

Page 20: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

19

Analysis

11 Burvenich, Jos, Film als levensexpressie, 1978, pp. 115- 120

This being Buñuel’s last movie, it was certainly a mas-terpiece to many. Especially the usage of two different actresses for the same role was something that had not been done before. It is well known that the choice to do so was only because Buñuel came to the conclusion that Maria Scheider wouldn’t possibly be able to play the such divers sides in the character of Conchita. When someone jokingly proposed to use two actresses for the role Buñuel was immediately enthusiastic. But not only for the ‘practical’ reasons is this choice inter-esting. Because again we can see this clear distinction or duality of the female character(s). The whore and the virgin, two main concepts of a christian believe or culture are well known ways to portrait women. But here where Buñuel found such a divers character, that shifted from ultimate saint to dangerous temptress, he had no other way but to use them in a different form. The forms are played by Carole Bouquet, who por-traits the innocent french looking version and Angela Molina, the seductive Spanish version. The both two sides obviously also refer or match to the idea of the moral super ego and immoral Id.Why is she the ‘obscure’ object of desire? Because of her ability to keep shifting between forms and there-fore becomes in stressed situations a different persona. She stays until the end a mystery when questioning her motives to be with Mathieu. Because as much as she is rejecting him, she also returns to him even after

the outrageous fight (and possible rape).11

In this movie though, the story line speaks much more for itself, and does not need to be precisely looked at to see what is going on. So I’d rather look at smaller details in the movie, that more relate to Freud’s dream theory that might enable us to ‘foresee’ certain things in the movie or give some things some extra impor-tance. The appearance of the stairs is again a big pres-ence in the movie, as we see Mathieu visit Conchita in her mothers house in Paris. A hopeful look on his face plus a zoom on him walking up the stairs to reach the woman of his desires, and all his fantasies including.

As well as the significance of the dead animals reoccurring in some parts of the movie. For exam-ple: during the scene where Mathieu asks Conchita’s mother if he might be allowed in the future to marry her, we here a click from the corner of the room. He asks the butler to check it and he finds a dead mouse in a mouse trap. Then the transaction is made. We see the so called trap has worked, but we can still question for whom it worked. Is it Mathieu’s mind, thinking he closed the deal and finally caught his object of desire. Or is it the trap of Conchita who is gaining more and more power over him?

Devastated he returns to his hotel, where Conchita shows up the next morning, wondering if he would have killed himself by now. As she joins him into the room and starts ridiculing him, he hits her. She starts apologizing and telling him that all was a fake, and that she now truly understands he loves her. But he leaves, and we are not at the point where the movie initially started. Then we return to the train compartment. His fellow passengers step back as Conchita walks in and empties a bucket of water over him. He runs after her, and after a small fight they make up again. We again skip in time a little and see them together strolling through Paris. A display in a shop window catches his attention. In it there is a girl sewing together old antique underwear, which has been ripped and covered in bloodstains. He makes a comment to Conchita who walks away irritated, as we hear the dramatic ‘Liebestod’ from Wagner coming from the radio. We see them walk away when a giant explosion hap-pens, wiping out everything around it. But we will hear faint footsteps at the end.

Page 21: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

20

Or the scene where Mathieu is meeting his cousin in a restaurant for a drink, only minutes before finding Conchita again. He is talking with his cousin who worries about him, asking him why he won’t leave for a vacation, or find someone else. Mathieu replies: “I have no desire to. I respect love too much to settle for shoddy goods. I’ve rarely possessed a woman I didn’t love passionately. The rest I can count on the fingers of one hand”. Then he discovers a fly floating in his martini. A crucial image explaining that we may now understand Mathieu is completely in the possession of Conchita, and will be as hopeless and defenseless as the fly drowning in his glass.

What can we make of the explosions and terror-ist attacks during the movie? Every time before an attack occurs we see a sack in the image. The sack we first get to see as being Mathieu’s laundry bag. The attacks always seem to have an indirect impact on his situation (the first attack happens to a car very similar to his, another time when he takes Conchita to the outside house and they loose electricity because of an attack nearby). They also come closer and closer, to Mathieu and Conchita every time. Where first the sack’s appear being carried by others, the closer we get to the end of the movie, Mathieu starts to carry the sack’s himself. The bag or sack stands in the Freudian dream symbolism for a Vagina. He keeps returning to the subject, as this becomes more and more the goal of what he wants to reach with Conchita. She offers him anything but this, and while she states being a virgin it gives another extra focus of sacredness to it. So while the story progresses we see him getting closer to this object and starting to carry even the burden of it, and thereby the consequences that soon follow because of his obsession. While in the dream symbolism any act that separates parts or completely disables is represen-tative for castration. And this is exactly what happens every time after witnessing the sack/bag coming into the scene, a few minutes later there will be a moment where all Mathieu’s desires are again turned down in an even more brutal and horrible way. He seems to be castrated over and over again by his love who keeps abusing him but denying him to act out any of his sexual needs and desires.

In the movies of Luis Buñuel we find a lot of referenc-es towards his strong Catholic background. The theme of the two faced woman, inhabiting both the role as Saint and Whore are to be found in many more than just the two movies we have reviewed. But they almost always play a role, just as the criticism on the Bour-geoisie, who keeps being abused and ridiculed during the course of a lot of Buñuel’s movies. The bourgeoisie life that Buñuel often compares with the life’s of wealth and power of the church’s leaders, are his main target of jokes and abuse. In Belle de Jour he does this by making his main-character unhappy and unsatisfied in her life’s dominated by rules of the Super Ego, while the Id is luring Severine to another dangerous side. While in Cet obscur Objet de Desir, Mathieu is being abused, again as a member of the bourgeois class, by the irresistible young girl representing the erotic, though destroying force of the deepest depths of our subconscious, the Id. Bunuel shows all these previously treated subjects via story lines, character development and well and specificity chosen scene’s, pointing and leading us into his world of dreamy Sur-realism and harsh conflicts of our minds.

Page 22: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

21

Page 23: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

22

Page 24: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

23

P a r t 3

Jan Švankmajer

“I am unable to assess whether psychoanalysis works as a type of therapy. I have never been to a psychoanalyst. For me, psychoanalysis is, most of all, an amazing system for the interpretation of man and the world that works with tradition-

al symbols – therefore, I consider it trustworthy. Freud says that dreams fulfill our most secret wishes. I could perhaps agree with that. But what definitely happens to me is that when my demons do not haunt me, I do not have dreams. But also my creative works steals my dreams.”

-Jan Švankmajer-

Page 25: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

24

12 Hames, Peter, Dark Alchemy, the films of Jan Švankmajer, 1995, pp. 7-30

13 Stafford, Mark, interview with Jan Švankmajer, Electric Sheep magazine, june 4, 2011.

Biography

the famous Czech filmmaker Jan Švankmajer was born in 1934 in the city of Prague. At a young age he got a Puppetry set, which ended up influencing quite a bit. He went to study at the Insti-tute of Applied arts at the Department of puppetry between 1950 and 1954. Obsessed with the art and magic surrounding eastern European puppetry he continued with this passion of his. He went to work at the Semafor Theatre where he worked collaborated with Emil Radok (Czech film director). His avant-garde style of theater encountered difficulties with convincing its audi-ence and because of Radok’s influence he resorted to cinema. He changed his idea’s and theories, going from mannerism towards classic surrealism and created the movie ‘the Guardian’ in 1968. He joined the Czechoslovakian Surrealist Group that same year.12

He kept producing a lot of movies throughout the years, but always with very little funding. His work and that of many others from the surrealist group where not wanted by the govern-ment and therefore had a hard time finding money to sustain their artwork. Švankmajer mostly produced short video works, filled with the stop motion techniques he is so well known for. The communist regimen actually banned his work in 1972, and even later on the communist party kept suppressing his work. His work never became known outside the Czech borders until the 1980’s when the New York times published a review, stating ‘while his films are the rife with cul-tural and scientific allusions, his unusual imagery possesses an accessibility that feels anchored in the shared language of the subconscious, making his films equally rewarding to the culturally hyper literate and to those who simply enjoy visual stimulation.’ His first well known movie, also his first feature lengths film, was Neco z Alenky (Alice, 1988). It was well received all over film festivals. He kept producing more feature films such as Lecke Faust (Faust, 1994), Spiklenci slasti (Conspirators of Pleasure, 1996) and his most famous one Otenasek (Little Otik, 2000). He was able to finally create these movies because of international film funds that he received from the United Kingdom as well as France. His last movies Sileni (Lunacy, 2005) and Prezit svuj Zivot (Surviving Life, 2010) have been trav-eling all over the world to big renowned international Film festivals, and have truly placed him between the famous directors he belongs to be compared with. During the presentation of his last movie he has announced that he will release a new movie in

2015 ,of an old script he wrote himself, called Hmyz (Insects).13

Page 26: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

25

The movie is introduced by the director himself giving us a small speech about his reasons and motives for this movie, as well as what we should expect from it. His short introduction is anything but positive. He explains his inspirations: Edgar Allen Poe and Mar-quis de Sade, when being interrupted by a cow tongue sliding by. He continues and tells how this movie is a ideological debate about how to run a lunatic asylum, a criticism, as we already live in the worst option possible.

Then we are being introduced to the main character Jean Berlot, who encounters a nightmarish sequence in which he is being threatened by two male nurses with a straightjacket in his room. As he fights of the two men, the hotel he stays at has been woken by his screaming. The open the door, only to find him having a violent nightmare. One of the hotel guests slaps Jean and leaves him astonished about the mess he made. The next morning the same man who woke Jean is sits, dramatically dressed with wig and baroque clothes like royalty, on his breakfast table and invites Jean to join. He introduces himself as the ‘Marquis’. Jean explains he recently lost and buried his mother, and now he is terribly afraid to loose his mind just like his mother did before him. The the curious Marquis offers him a ride home. As we see a group of people who also stayed at the hotel leave in a bus, the marquis has his own decadent horse carriage,with which they leave. The Marquis convinces

Jean to stay over at his mansion, where they enjoy a dinner. That night he wakes up and follows a strange sound from outside, where he sees the horse carriage arrive. Men and women in long capes get out and go in a church-like building. He goes to investigate and witnesses a black mass / orgy ritual where we see the Marquis hammering nails in a crucifix while the other men eat chocolate cake during which they are being fellated by the women. Another woman present is locked to the bed and struggling to get loose. As she manages to escape and runs out she catches Jean spying and looks violated at him. She is captured and brought back in.

The next day Jean gets incredibly mad at the Marquis for what he witnessed, calling it blasphemy and bring-ing up subjects of it being unnatural and religious morals. The marquis in his turn gets angry, explaining him how mother nature is the cruelest of them all and that religion is for the weak ones. When the Marquis sits down again and continues his breakfast he chokes on a banana. Jean warns the servant (or more or less slave) Domi-nique, but they don’t manage to save him. According to the Will of the Marquis he must be buried in the family tomb, and Jean must help. Together with the mute Dominique they carry the Marquis his coffin to the tomb. Then they wait the entire night outside, Jean under gunpoint by Dominique. The next morning the bell of the tomb starts ringing violently, and they run in to lift the heavy tombstone. There we see the Marquis frivolously jerking the rope of the bell whilst sitting at a dinner table.Jean, now even more upset than he already was, demands and explanation for the Marquis his grue-some joke. The Marquis explains him how his mother died, and how they buried her in a tomb just like this. Only years later when they opened the tomb to find her corpse outside of the coffin, nails broken off while she apparently tried to scratch her way from under-neath the tomb stone. She had gotten in a coma and was buried alive. And as the Marquis had started to get into these small coma’s himself more regularly he had developed a fear of being buried alive as well. The whole scene Jean had been part of was nothing more but a fire drill. He explains Jean that he also wants to help him with his violent dream sequences and offers to join him to his Psychiatrist, who also advices this ‘burying treatment’.

Lunacy

Page 27: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

26

14 Hames, Peter, Dark Alchemy, the films of Jan Švankmajer, 1995, pp. 119- 168

They leave in the carriage to a insane asylum, where they find one of the most chaotic scenes one could ever witness. Patients sledging down the stairs and throwing feathers through the air. There they meet Dr. Murloppe, who explains that the best way of curing is letting the patient confront what they fear or cannot handle. Then he sees the girl from the orgy, now intro-duced as the daughter of Dr. Murloppe, Charlota. The lunatics, she claims, have mutinied and taken over the asylum. The true director, Dr Coulmiere, is locked up in the cellars covered in tar and feathers. Jean decides to stay and see if he can help Charlota. The Marquis warns him several times about her treacherous behav-ior and that it is all one big fetish she is acting out on him. For honoring liberty and freedom (as a thought as well as within the asylum) the Marquis creates some festivities with as the highpoint a real life tableau vivant in recreating the ‘liberty leading the people’. At the end Dr. Murloppe and the Marquis take Charlota with them to another of their orgies, which gives Jean the time to free the real director of the asylum. In the festive mood among all the patients sudden-ly the in tar and feathers covered nurses storm in, aggressively beating the patients back into their rooms and taking over the asylum once again. The next day the nurses have captured the Marquis and Dr. Murloppe and brought back to the asylum. Here we are introduced to the strict and brutal ways to cure mental illnesses according to Dr. Coulmiere. This doctor states that the balance between body and soul is distorted and therefore the body has taken over. The solution is to weaken the body, and his methods are grim mutilation on his patients to cure them. The same faith awaits the Marquis, Dr. Murloppe and Dominique. Murloppe is being blinded, and the faith of the Marquis is never revealed though it is unmis-takably the most horrific and gruesome one.After all these horrors Jean just wants leave, but Coul-miere insists that he stays for the night, as protocol dictates. At night as he waits and searches for Charlota he finds he in a very intimate conversation and act with Coulmiere. Troubled he goes back to bed, only to encounter another of his haunting and violent nightmares. As he smashes the room while sleeping, hes being waken by Coulmiere, who tells him Jean’s mind has obviously weakened and therefore they must start treatment. The end of the movie is the realization of Jean’s nightmare, as this time he really is being constrained in a straightjacket by the nurses. The main theme or Freudian subject we can find not only here

but in mostly any Švankmajer movie is the uncan-ny. Švankmajer has a passion for collection objects and bringing them to live. Like he says himself about this: “I like things that have passed through human hands. Things that have been touched. Such things are charged with emotions that are capable of revealing themselves under certain, extremely sensitive cir-cumstances. I collect such objects, surround myself with them and in the end I cast such ‘fetishes’ in my films. That’s also the reason why I don’t like computer animation. Virtual reality doesn’t have a tactile dimen-sion. Objects and figures created on a computer have no past.” Something is Uncanny when something can be familiar, yet foreign at the same time, a rather suitable subject for Švankmajer to engage with. Especially in Lunacy he creates a sometimes dictating, sometimes accommodating second story line. The tongues, eyes, brains, pieces of meat give another subliminal view point upon the story as they rattle through and in between the scenes. Giving it a scary and undefinable presence. 14

Analysis

Page 28: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

27

15 Dodds, Jospeph, The Monstrous Brain: A neuropsychoanalitic Aesthetics of Horror, 2009.

The Charlota figure is a quite one curious during the entire movie, as we have hardly seen any characters like her in any of Švankmajer’s other movies. The two faced seductress who plays with the main character is somewhat similar and recognizable from Buñuel’s Conchita in ‘Cet Obscur objet the Desir’. Švankmajer has written the plot for Lunacy himself, and we know that he was very much inspired by Buñuel’s work, but I cannot find any interview in which he makes the connection between the two. I see a strong resem-blance between the betraying characters, though the difference is the personality being abused. Where in Buñuel’s movies the Bourgeois is the victim, here Švankmajer has chosen an ordinary, slightly religious man to be abused. This is likely to have some sort political background (the focus point for critique of Švankmajer). As the director explained in his preface, ‘the worst kind of institution is the one we live in’, could explain the choice for Jean. Him as the victim of the modern day society.

One of the most basic stories in the movie is mostly about the maternal/mother issues of the main char-acter Jean Berlot is suffering from. He feels an intense adoration for his mother who he misses and loved very much, but as well has a terrible fear towards her position in his life. A fear to undergo the same destiny as his mother. His fears manifest themselves in his nightmarish violent attacks. During the entire movie he is being confronted with many so called symbols or signs that sort of show us that in fact he is heading in that direction. The base of the fear is, that right after he buried his mother who stayed in a insane asylum, he started having nightmarish visions about going mad and ending up in such an institution as well. A weight the mother has left upon him in the process of giving birth to him. 15

The Marquis recognizes this and offers him a place to sleep, only to confront him with these fears of him. Firstly when Jean witnesses the orgy in the church, and sees Charlota struggling to escape. She represents the reality, the safety, the sane life. She looks like innocence itself, with morals, a true religious symbol almost. The next day as the Marquis chokes and has to be buried we see the second ‘hint’ reveal itself. When the Marquis who has gotten into his temporary comatose state and is being buried as a therapeutic confronta-tion with his fears, we see a very Freudian symbol. One could consider the tomb/grave as being the

female womb. And therefore the fear of the Marquis to undergo the same faith as his mother, is representative for the fear of ‘returning’ (in)to the mother again. The same obviously counts for Jean who’s fear it is to go to an asylum.

Once in the asylum (as the Marquis suggests Jean to confront his fears so he can solve them) Jean is again confronted with the innocent Charlota who tells him of the conspiracy within the institution.She becomes his caretaker and he becomes hers, and together they stay strong within the asylum. She be-comes the trustable mother figure that he falls in love with. She is again between all the chaos, the sanity he is looking for. As a true Oedipus complex we see him develop back into a little boy who tries to impress and protect his mother. After all the warnings of the Mar-quis about her disturbed lies he still follows her. During the festivities they plan to release the impris-oned staff, but the Marquis demands Charlota to come to the orgy with them. Jean will have to do it now all by himself as Charlota leaves in the carriage. There she shows her double face when suddenly she turns to Murloppe saying how she cannot wait any longer and jumps him. This all while Jean releases Dr. Coulmiere and his staff and giving the power to the authoritarian regime. When all seems solved and he cannot wait to fall in the arms of Charlota, and feel save again. He finds her in Coulmiere’s office while he is handing her some sort of sexual object/toy as a present. They start mak-ing love very loudly and Jean flees to his room. Like a little boy, a son who has seen his parents make love for the first time. Who hears his mother scream in agony and pleasure at the same time. The stressed caused by the betrayal of Charlota ,who represented his feeling of safety and reality, is to much for Jean and he returns to his nightmares. This time unfortunately with the consequence of his fear being realized this time.

Page 29: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

28

The last theme I want to touch upon before continuing would be Marquis de Sade. Jan Švankmajer made sure that we all know that the movie/story is based upon Edgar Allen Poe and Marquis de Sade. As I will later again refer to de Sade I want to take a short look at his ‘influence’. Next to the obvious reference that one of the main characters is named after him, we find a very strong presence of the Sade in the story and visualization. The gruesome chaos that Švankmajer uses from the Sade are extremely fitting to what he is trying to portray. The scene of the orgy at the Marquis his house could have been an identical copy out of one of de Sade’s stories. For example the freedom that the Libertines in 120 days of Sodom seek, to satisfy their boredom and test their power is something that the Marquis and Dr. Murloppe also search in their lifes. In 120 days of Sodom the main characters abduct and keep young boys and girls of the the most beautiful kind (representing the pious but naive society). In the scenes within the Asylum the Marquis and Murloppe actually share their freedoms with the patients, who also need and search for a satisfaction. The only ones being captured and locked are the ones who

try to oppress them with the strict and authoritarian thoughts (the Edgar Allen Poe reference). Švankmajer makes us first horrified by the ways of the Marquis and Dr. Murloppe, but once introduced to the theories of Coulmiere he leaves the viewer with an ethical question which one was actually worse? He makes us even consider a Sadean point of view, something anyone who would have read de Sade’s books would never imagine. Now I want to question as well, what is it about de Sade that attracts Surrealists so much? How does it combine so well with the Freudian theo-ries that Surrealists get so inspired by. It might be the Infantile, or definitely childlike, looking for ways to satisfy their desires, desires that sprung almost directly from the ID. Showing the gruesome reality of human libido and their perversity.

Page 30: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

29

Page 31: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

30

Page 32: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

31

P a r t 4

Pier Paolo Pasolini

“The sexual freedom of today for most people is really only a convention, an obligation, a social duty, a social anxiety, a necessary feature of the consumer’s way of life.”

-Pier Paolo Pasolini-

Page 33: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

32

16 Greene, Naomi, Pier Paolo Pasolini, Cinema as Heresy, 1990.

Biography

Pier Paolo Pasolini was born on the 5th of March 1922 in Bologna, Italy. His father was a lieutenant in the army and his mother an elementary school teacher. During the early years of his life the family traveled a lot from place to place. Pasolini had a difficult time adjusting to the constantly shifting surroundings but found comfort in reading and writing poetry from the age of 7. In 1937 he returns to Bologna to study art history and literature at the university of Bolo-gna. This is where he for the first time starts writing articles for the local school paper. He publishes his first collection of poems in 1942 at his own costs. They are full of nostalgia to the places he lived as a child, especially to the local ‘tongue’ spoken in certain places. He connected himself to the local communist initiatives, and later on joined the Communist party. Only to be expelled two years later because of his openness about his homosexuality. After publishing a few scandalous books and thereby causing quite a stir, he got his first introduction as a director in 1961. He made the movie Accatone after one of his own novels Una Vita Violenta which he had written in 1959.Soon other movies followed, such as Mamma Roma (1962) and the stunning Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo (1964), surprisingly funded by the catholic church.16

In 1968 he caused another ‘shock’ when his movie Teorema was first presented. The movie, a coming-apart of a bourgeois family, depicted blasphemous ideas of homosexual interactions, violence and sex. Pasolini’s statement hereby made him supporter and part of the gay liberation movement together with other international intellectuals.His films grew, just like his opinions, increasingly controversial, with the movie Porcile (1969) but especially with his last, Saló O Le 120 Giornate di Sodoma in 1975. This movie, based on the book 120 days of Sodom by Marquis de Sade, was combined with more modern elements of facism from Italian backgrounds. The movie caused such a controversy that it was banned in Italy and many other countries for several years.On November 2 1975, Pasolini was found dead on a waste ground near Ostia, Italy. A young male prostitute was convicted for the murder, the reason was never known.

Page 34: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

33

In the first shots of the movie we see a documentary type of recording of a factory. The laborers are being interviewed and asked about their opinion concerning the fact that the owner has given the factory to them. They all refrain from giving clear answers while the interviewer tries to unleash some anger in them. This shot is followed by a short scene of deserted black mountains.Then we see the scenes turn black and white for a while, when we get introduced to the main charac-ters of the story. We see the family members of a rich bourgeois household from Milano. The personalities are shortly introduced while we spy on them in their daily privileged lives. The maid opens up the door of their house as the young mailman sort of dances upon the premises, waving his arms. He brings a letter with the mysterious message “Arriving Tomorrow’.

The image returns to color again and we see the fam-ily all together in the living room during some party. One man in particularly captures the eye of the family, their friends, and the camera. He is a beautiful and in-tense looking man, with deep staring eyes, seemingly untouched by what is going on around him. He has a calmness and serenity covered in mystery that attracts people to him. It is the mystery visitor whose name we will not get to know throughout the movie. He spends his days within the family home seemingly not bothered by any restrictions. We see him sit in the garden reading a book while smoking while the maid (Emilia) is cleaning the garden. She stares at him and the camera stares along with her. Looking at his ciga-ret, we also get a very clear shot on his loin. The ashes drop on his pants, and the maid rushes to him to clean it off. After that she continues her work, in a con-fused and regretful manner.. Only to run off shortly afterwords to the kitchen area, where she undoes the gas and tries to commit suicide. The visitor runs after her and stops her from doing so, and brings her to her bedroom. The maid is unable to react in her attraction towards him and lifts up her skirt. He pulls it down and kisses her.

That night he stays in the same room as the son of the family, Pietro. They undo their clothes, Pietro gets into his sleeping garment, as the guest undresses fully to go to sleep. When the lights are off the son is both-ered and nervous, he gets up and curiously lifts up the sheets of the visitor. He wakes up and Pietro runs to his bed, horrified and full of shame, repeating his apologies. The visitor gets up and sits on his bed, holds Pietro’s shoulder in an almost saintlike calmness and gets into bed with him.

Also the mother (Lucia) doesn’t seem to be able to resist the visitors presence. One morning she finds his clothes all over the floor. When the camera looks along with her we, again, get a long and intense look on the crotch of the pants. She goes outside, sees him running with the dog in nothing but his underwear and tries to figure out a way to respond to her intense desire. Hesitantly she undresses, throws her clothes away, and lies down in front of the door, waiting uncomfortably for him to return to the house. As he finds her there she is overwhelmed by shame, and apologizes. The guest looks at her in complete calm-ness and embraces her. The next family member is the father (Paolo), who wakes up early one morning and takes a stroll around the house. When he returns he sees his son Pietro and the visitor sleeping in the same bed. Somewhat jealous or triggered he wants to act upon his wife but she pushes him away, this leaves them both in an awkward mood. The father turns ill, and the guest comes to visit him on his bed. He takes away the father’s pillow and puts Paolo’s feet on his shoulders, as a relieve of pain and relaxation. Again, he gives the thankful father nothing else but an intense and mysterious look. The next day Paolo and the visitor are reading in the garden as the daughter (Odetta) approaches. She runs into the house to take her camera, to capture the moment. The visitor seems more than eager to make some poses for her and excitedly she takes his hand and guides him into the house. She takes him to her room where he sits on her bed. She sits between his knees and shows him her picture book.

Teorema

Page 35: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

34

She naively sits close to his loin (again presented very much centered in the scene) and carelessly flips through the pictures. The visitor is the serene viewer, until she looks up at him and he starts to undo her dress while kissing her. We now see the father and the guest in a car, driving off into the forest. They joke and fool around like men do and proceed walking into na-ture. The visitor runs of jokingly and lies down in the high grass/bushes. We see the father calmly approach, implying on a sexual act that will follow.

Again, a long shot of the black mountain, followed by the mailman who arrives to the house again. He bares dramatic news, as this letter to the visitor says he has to leave the next morning. The family is shocked and horrified by the idea of his departure and all take some time with the visitor to explain how confused and scared they are.The son, Pietro, questions his identity, saying he has lost the personality that he had always used to get around: ‘I understand it now that you’re leaving, and the awareness of losing you has become the awareness of me being different. What will become of me from now on? The future will be like living with a self that has nothing to do with me.’ Also the mother explains her transformation, telling him that she never had any of her own interests. She seems amazed how she could have lived without them for so long, but is afraid of losing them again now he will leave. ‘You have filled my life with a total, real interest,So, by leaving,you’re not destroying anything that was in me before,except the reputation of a chaste bourgeois housewife.’The daughters idea’s and morals have been shattered by the divine love of the visitor. She tells him how she used to be a family loving girl, with no interest in boys. How her innocence kept her family bound and somewhat distracted. Now she has seen her family/father issues and is faced with her problems. ‘I’ve become a normal girl because of you,You’ve given me the right solution for my life. Before I did not know men, I was even afraid of them, I only loved my father. But now, by leaving me,you’re letting me plunge to even further back to where I was before.’Paolo, the father is troubled about the identity he has build over the years, the certainties he had taken for granted in his life. He feels as if the visitor has com-pletely destroyed him and does not understand what

he can do to solve himself again. ‘You certainly came here to destroy, The destruction you caused in me couldn’t have been more complete, You’ve simply de-stroyed the idea I’ve always had of myself, now I can’t see anything that would give me back my identity.’

Emilia is silent and humbly carries the visitors bag together with him to the waiting taxi. That next morning Emilia leaves and travels back to the pro-letariat life where she came from. A small almost medieval looking community on the country side. Arriving there she sits silently on a bench, not moving or talking anymore. Odetta, is terribly confused by the departure of the guest and tries to find her normal ways back into her life. When she fails, she panicky looks back at the pictures she took of the visitor. After which she starts squeezing her hand and laying down on bed, not moving anymore, paralyzed by the loss and inability to handle the pain and confusement. She doesn’t recover and is taken to a mental hospital.

Pietro, leaves the house and goes to an atelier, where he desperately searches for values, ethics and purpose. He ends up creating nothing but entirely blue paint-ings. The mother, Lucia, looks for a substitute of her awak-ened interest and unsatisfied feeling to be desired. She starts picking up young good looking boys to have sex with. Only to be left with a shameful and confused feeling at the end. She ends up outside of Milano, in a small religious village where she condemns herself in guilt. Emilia turns into some sort of messiah, bringing miracles to the village she came from. She cures the scared skin of a young boy, and later on levitates far above the ground with her arms spread. Paolo, the father, wonders around the factory, in-decisive about who he is and what he has/owns. As we know he gives away the factory he owns to his workers.

Page 36: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

35

The movie contains an interesting storyline to interpret with Freudian theories. Each of the family members looses themselves in a overwhelming at-traction towards the mysterious visitor. Each of these family members can represent an interesting Freudian theory.

The easiest, or most obvious, of all might be the so called Alexis complex (the female version of the Oedipus complex) that is being uttered in the movie. The daughter has a long ongoing issue, protecting and hiding within the family life, but mostly the life with her father. Her father is her ultimate idol and protec-tor, and she is not interested in having any other male character playing any role in her life. In one of the earliest scenes of the movie where the family members are being introduced one by one, we see her rejecting the avances of a young boy. As the visitor enters the family she, for the first time, becomes interested in an-other man than her father. Especially when the guest comes and nurtures the sick father, she looks at him with full admiration, as he appears the first other man in her life to portray the nurturing qualities of a father figure. Him leaving leaves her with an inability to reconnect with the father as she has sort of ‘betrayed’ him. She feels guilt to return to him but an irresistible attraction towards the visitor, and therefore the only thing she can do is to to lay down in eternal doubt as a passive act.

The father and son have very different though some-what similar response towards the departure of the mysterious guest. First of all they both had some sort of sexual revelation. They both had an interest in women and their guest came and changed this completely. Where the boy is unable to deal with this radical change because he hasn’t found himself yet and therefore goes on some sort of creative quest of creation. The father, who has yet lived an established life, is being confronted with a complete destruction of all the values he has always considered a certainty. The base of a sexual certainty for men is according to Freud the first step in shaping their personality. At least according to his theories a small step in their childhood, can already have a big effect on their personality in later age/rest of their lives. The son shows some sort of reaction to the visitor as that of one of a girl. Whereas in Freud’s theory (as explained in the chapter 1), a girls response in the ‘phallic phase’ would be to become aware of the fact they don’t have a penis. Their response in this regretful moment was to engage in some sort of penis-envy. Pietro seems to do a similar thing. He wants to explore the body of an-other male as if he has never seen another one before. Upon being caught he receives acceptance from the guest. But his actions develop in a realization of being ‘different’. The act of the interest in the other, affects him very much. He encounters for the first time the idea that he might not be the person he thought he was, and now has to deal with this new mindset full of new values. And upon the visitor’s departure Pietro feels as if the acceptance he received for him being different will never be found in another man/person. So he leaves to an atelier, and starts (for the first time in his life) making art. Trying to find ways to define differences of maybe even to conceal them. Eventually he ends up blindly covering the entire canvas in blue to conceal any change/differences it might have as being individual. He is unable to deal with the sudden change, the sudden realization, and the shame that accompanies it.

He then proceeds to the central train station of Milano where he catches a young man, resembling the mysterious visitor. After a shot where we look to his crotch when the boy gives him an intense look, Paolo follows him until he disappears. He then strips naked in the middle of the station to then walk of. We see Emilia with an older woman leave the prem-ises of the village, going to a construction site. She buries herself leaving only her eyes free from dirt. There she says: ‘Don’t be afraid, I didn’t come here to die, but to cry and mine are not tears of pain,no, they’ll be a spring, but not a spring of pain.’At the end we see the father wandering the plain black mountains that have been appearing throughout the movie. He wonders lost, and naked. We see him scream savagely, complete lost in identity and thought.

Analysis

Page 37: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

36

The father is a quite different case. Where also he is being ‘transformed’ and therefore has to let go of some values he took for certain. He himself becomes victim of some sort of Oedipus complex. Ironically, the jealousy at the basis of the Oedipus complex is reversed, since it is the father’s jealousy of his son that deeply effects the father’s identity and leads to its ultimate revelation, and not the other way around (the male child coming to a certain ‘understanding’ of sexuality/attraction).

The father’s (and son’s) transformation can also be related to yet another theme: shame. The shame they both encounter because of their sudden change/realization causes them to feel filled with regret and embarrassment. This shame can be linked to the anal phase as explained in the first chapter. Because shame is a clear trade mark for this phase, as well as the fact that it is mostly related to men. During this phase one can gain some sort of power, defecating and all related things to it can become a gift, a special thing. A fixation can start to exist when parents would put too much emphasis and pressure on the kid’s toilet training. This could manifest itself on a later age in a continuation of some sort of pleasure in defecation. This is where the homo-sexual encounter in Teorema comes in the picture. A great way how Pasolini makes the connection to this Freudian theory is by emphasizing on where one of these encounters ‘could’ happen. He portraits homosexuality as a sexual urge that one needs to take care of in silence in the restroom of a movie theater or a train station, as we see close to the end of the movie. The father sees a young man, with whom he shares intense eye contact, suggestively retreat in a public bathroom at the train station. So, like defecating , a homosexual encounter takes place where human society does its defecating, where ‘normal’ society hides its shame. Shame of defecation and pleasure in homosexual encounters meet each other in the very same room, and show the perfect example of how Freud’s Anal phase could end in to very different ways.17

17 Maggi, Armando, The Ressurection of the Body, Pier Paolo Pasolini from Saint Paul to de Sade, 2009, p.138.

Page 38: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

37

Page 39: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

38

Page 40: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

39

Conclusion

The main question in this thesis research was to see the similarities in solutions to incorporate the Freudian Theories inside the movies of the selected directors. We can see a clear representation of the theories I have explained in the first chapter and were able to recognize and define them.

The dream theories and symbols have been used mostly in a quite literary way. The theory itself is already supposed to be a suggestion of the subconscious in the mind therefore the interpretation cannot be too freely otherwise the entire suggestion will be lost in translation. So we have seen very literal emphasis on for example scenes concerning ascending stairs, implying a desire for sexual intercourse. As well as any other suggestive and symbolic scene in the movie, we recognize them either by the dream theory or otherwise because of the usage of conventional symbols that imply on us the eery, uncanny feeling to suggest certain ideas. The conventional sym-bols are ones that are rather common in use by surrealists in general. As the directors all claim to be inspired by one of the others (exception for Bunuel, but he worked in company of many surrealist artists) and therefore we understand that they together inspired each other and therefore also used each others visual language and creative solutions.

Theme’s such as the Oedipus and Alexis Complex have been found in the movies of all three directors, just as well as references to the three layers of the (sub)consciousness. They have mostly been represented in the story line rather than through visual language. The (main) characters mostly struggled with balancing the levels of the (sub)consciousness in their daily life and therefore managed to get into the situations depicted. As well as the Oedipus and Alexis Complex that have been shown within character changes throughout the story. Most significant being that the role of the secretly adored mother/father figure was rarely in the movie itself and mostly shown by some abusive and deceiving despotic character. Only in Teorema we see the father figure as the subject of adoration of the daughter, but he will soon be replaced by the visitor. In the film of Švankmajer we see a female character (in Lunacy) that bears a resemblance to, a some sort of main-character, his mother. He trusts her only to be betrayed by her, and his real mother, who left him with the Psychological illness she suffered from.

Buñuel shows more or less the women in a christian concept. The female characters in both Belle de Jour and Cet Obscur Objet de Desir are both representations of the Id and the Super Ego at the same time. They switch skillfully between character changes and adopt what they need to be to reach their needs. The way they switch between these is significant for Buñuel his work, as the female characters portray both the whore and the virgin. A strong catholic icon, and reference to the related culture.

Švankmajer, who admitted to be a big fan of Buñuel also incorporates this concept in his movie. Where as character Charlota is both innocent and despotic in the movie. Her actions predicting the betrayal she will play on Jean Berlot later in the movie. Also Pasolini managed to insert a less present version of this woman, because she only transforms ones within the movie. In Teorema the mother figure changes from sweet caring housewife with hardly any personality to a lustful woman craving for casual sex with younger men. The change is smaller and less comparable to the other directors tough still significant. These women portrayed in this almost classical way, a fight between Dionysus and Apollo, will always remain the mysterious presence that lies and deceives but brings beauty and pleasure at the same time. That is the reason why they keep reappearing as in the movies of great directors as those mentioned before.

Page 41: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

40

We can find many differences ins style and visualization, as all directors come

from a different background, time and culture. Story wise we can define big

differences as well, as some of these movies such as Lunacy and Teorema have

been written by the directors themselves and Buñuel’s movies Belle de Jour and

Cet Obscur Objet de Desir where inspired directly on books. The choice one

makes to use a story written by another can be just as safe or dangerous as using

ones own scripts. The influence on the story is again an matter of the quality the

director has, as well as the quality he has as a story/scriptwriter. Many reasons

can be given and found why these movies are either different or similar. But

the subject I wanted to see, show and prove with this research is whether these

movies/directors resemble each other and in some sort of way and what lay the

ground for this resemblance. The one simplest conclusion one can make is that

they all used Freud and his theories in a clever way, all for their own purposes.

And to ‘translate’ these subliminal messages within their movies, they used

these theories and dream symbols quite literary so in that way a Surrealist or

Freud enthusiast would/could recognize the message given. They searched for

the depths of the human consciousness and presented us with deep character

developments and suggestive scenes that lead us into the minds of some inter-

esting personalities.

Page 42: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

41

Page 43: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini
Page 44: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

43

- Freud, Sigmund, Inleiding tot de psychoanalyse, -Wereldbibliotheek B.V. Amsterdam, 1940.

- Berg, J.H. Van den, Dieptepsychologie, -uitgeverij C.F. Callenbach N.V., Nijkerk, 1970.

- Brown, J.A.C., Freud and the Post-Freudians, -Pelican Books, 1961

- Edwards, Gwynne, The discreet Art of Luis Buñuel, A reading of his Films, - Marion Boyars Publishers, 2009.

- Burvenich, Jos, Film als Levensexpressie, essays over Antonioni, Bergman, Buñuel, Dreyer, Fellini, Pasolini, Sjöman, Visconti, Widerberg, e.a., Universa Wetteren, 1978.

- Hames, Peter, Dark alchemy, The films of Jan Švankmajer, Flicks Books, 1995.

- Greene, Naomi, Pier Paolo Pasolini, Cinema as Heresy, Princeton University Press, 1990.

- Maggi, Armando, The Resurrection of the Body: Pier Paolo Pasolini from Saint Paul to De Sade, University of Chicago Press, 2009.

- Bandist, Dr Craig & Berg, Henk de, Freud’s introductory concepts in Bunuel’s Belle de Jour, Paper presented at University of Sheffield, 2011

- Dodd’s Joseph, The Monstrous Brain: A Neuropsychoanalitic Aesthetics of Horror, uni-versity of New York in Prague, 2009.

- Stafford, Mark, Interview with Jan Švankmajer, Electric Sheep Magazine, 4th June 2011

- Wendy Jackson, The surrealist Conspirator, Animated World Press, 1997.

- Pryor, John-Paul, Jan Švankmajer on Surviving Life, AnOther Magazine, November 30 2011.

- Žižek, Slavoi, The perverts Guide to Cinema, 2006.

- Buñuel, Luis, Belle de Jour, 1967.

- Buñuel, Luis, Cet Obscur objet de Désir, 1977.

- Švankmajer, Jan, Sílení / Lunacy, 2005.

- Pasolini, Pier Paolo, Teorema, 1968.

Book list

Page 45: Discovering Freud in the Cinema of Bunuel, Svankmajer and Pasolini

44