The Uncanny

by Sigmund Freud, Adam Phillips (Editor), David McLintock (Translator)

Freud was fascinated by the mysteries of creativity and the imagination. The groundbreaking works that comprise The Uncanny present some of his most influential explorations of the mind. In these pieces Freud investigates the vivid but seemingly trivial childhood memories that often "screen" deeply uncomfortable desires; the links between literature and daydreaming; and our intensely mixed feelings about things we experience as "uncanny." Also included is Freud's celebrated study of Leonardo Da Vinci-his first exercise in psychobiography.

Genres: Psychology, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Psychoanalysis, Classics, Theory, Essays

240 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1919

About the author

Dr. Sigismund Freud (later changed to Sigmund) was a neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis, who created an entirely new approach to the understanding of the human personality. He is regarded as one of the most influential—and controversial—minds of the 20th century.

In 1873, Freud began to study medicine at the University of Vienna. After graduating, he worked at the Vienna General Hospital. He collaborated with Josef Breuer in treating hysteria by the recall of painful experiences under hypnosis. In 1885, Freud went to Paris as a student of the neurologist Jean Charcot. On his return to Vienna the following year, Freud set up in private practice, specialising in nervous and brain disorders. The same year he married Martha Bernays, with whom he had six children.

Freud developed the theory that humans have an unconscious in which sexual and aggressive impulses are in perpetual conflict for supremacy with the defences against them. In 1897, he began an intensive analysis of himself. In 1900, his major work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was published in which Freud analysed dreams in terms of unconscious desires and experiences.

In 1902, Freud was appointed Professor of Neuropathology at the University of Vienna, a post he held until 1938. Although the medical establishment disagreed with many of his theories, a group of pupils and followers began to gather around Freud. In 1910, the International Psychoanalytic Association was founded with Carl Jung, a close associate of Freud's, as the president. Jung later broke with Freud and developed his own theories.

After World War One, Freud spent less time in clinical observation and concentrated on the application of his theories to history, art, literature and anthropology. In 1923, he published 'The Ego and the Id', which suggested a new structural model of the mind, divided into the 'id, the 'ego' and the 'superego'.

In 1933, the Nazis publicly burnt a number of Freud's books. In 1938, shortly after the Nazis annexed Austria, Freud left Vienna for London with his wife and daughter Anna.

Freud had been diagnosed with cancer of the jaw in 1923, and underwent more than 30 operations. He died of cancer on 23 September 1939.

Reviews

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this brilliant essay the most famous psychologist ever explains the uncanny to the kind reader. He says where it comes from, puts broad focus on E.T.A. Hoffmann's The Sandman (one of the scariest tales I ever came across)and refers to everything he's well known for: Oedipus complex, castration complex, the wish to get back into mother's womb and many more. These theories give you deep insight into human mind and explain inner fears. What is the doppelganger? Why are fairy tales different and not regarded as uncanny? With Freud as a guide you begin to understand. Highly recommended!

[Sean Barrs · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love exploring elements of the uncanny in gothic literature. It is directly linked with the transgressive nature of such writing. This has been epitomised in many novels and short stories of the nineteenth century. The Gothic and uncanny reinforce each other; they stand side by side in the dark shadows of such writing. To show this I’m going to give the example of two of my favourite gothic novels: Dracula and The Strange Case of Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde.

To transgress is to break a limit or a boundary; both works contain characters, Dracula and Jekyll/Hyde, which have undergone a transgressive transformation; they have gone from a normal sate of being to something paranormal: they have broken a boundary. This transgression has resulted in an uncanny existence for them both, which arouses more fear towards them. The uncanny, according to Freud, evokes fear and dread. The gothic novel creates a heightened level of fear because the uncanny creates something strangely familiar at the heart of the unfamiliar.

Firstly, this can be seen with Dracula. The Count’s death like sleep is eerily familiar. Harker finds the Count at rest in a coffin “he was either dead or asleep, I could not say which.”



This sense of unfamiliarity with the familiar, someone who is seemingly dead when they should be alive, evokes dread within Harker “I fled from the place.” The vampire’s uncanny nature is created by his transgressive undead state, which makes him evocative of more fear. Dracula’s uncanny existence is unexplainable with what governs normal life; he has no reflection in the mirror; he “sleeps” in a coffin and scales walls. Harker is disturbed by this strange nature of the familiar. Dracula has undergone an extensive transformation, which breaks the boundaries of mortality and sets him in the realm of the paranormal as a member of the undead. This can be seen when the Count attests to his immortality "My revenge has just begun! I spread it over centuries and time is on my side" This signifies that he is now an undying creature and can span his goals over the ages; he has transgressed the rules of mortality with his uncanny existence. The same is true for Jekyll/Hyde.

Indeed, the development of a doppelganger, a counter part for a person, can be seen as fear inducing, and resides in the uncanny transgression of Jekyll. This is because Jekyll was “radically both.” With Jekyll/Hyde the uncanniness of the doppelganger is increased because both of the doppelgangers are one person, and the familiarity evoked in the unfamiliar character (Hyde) is stronger. The repetition is key; it causes a strange feeling, of fear and dread, in the face of such an abnormality.



Doctor Jekyll has transgressed the role he has in society and the one his personality has created for him. This is because the potion that results in Hyde allows Jekyll to break free of his restrictions; he becomes something paranormal through the use of a doppelganger that is both him and not him. He is now free to act in a reckless way that will not directly be associated with his original persona; he now has according to Jekyll “a greater boldness, a contempt of danger, a solution of the bonds of obligation.” He has transgressed his original role and, like Dracula, has become something paranormal and uncanny, which is something to be greatly feared.

Freud’s ideas on the uncanny are perceptive and far reaching. They can be applied to literature so easily. There are many wonderful essays out there linking the ideas to Jane Eyre and Great Expectations, amongst others too. There is much more to this work than its applications on gothic literature, but for me, as an English student, and lover of the gothic, that’s the main piece of knowledge I take from this work. This is compelling stuff.

[Negar Afsharmanesh · Rating 5 out of 5]

این کتاب، خیلی نکات جالب و خوبی از روانکاوی و روانشناختی رو در خودش جای داده که مثال های بینظیری رو هم فروید برای این نکات زده.
کتاب شامل ۷ گفتار که در ابتدا درباره تخیلات هست و بعد وارد شخصیت افراد میشه و کتاب در بعد شخصیت و روانکاوی پیش میره.
اون گفتاری هم که درباره مجسمه هست جالب هست واقعا از طرز نشستن ، طرز قرار گرفتن دست حالت چهره و… حدس میزنه این موسی عصبانی بوده یا نه یا چه احساساتی داشته.
درباره افسانه هایی که به حوزه روانشناسی و روانشناختی ربط داره گاهی توضیح داده مثل افسانه انتخاب سه صندوق یا سه زن که من برام این گفتار خیلی جذاب بود.

[Keith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Anyone with even the most basic understanding of logic will probably be bothered by the way Freud draws his conclusions here, particularly in the "celebrated" Da Vinci essay that makes up the bulk of this volume. Even the goddam translator can't help but point out some of Freud's more glaring mistakes, though he does so in the most laudatory way possible. I'd say that logically speaking, most of the book is about on par with the following conversation from the 1966 Batman movie:

Commissioner Gordon: It could be any one of them... But which one? Which ones?
Batman: Pretty fishy what happened to me on that ladder...
Commissioner Gordon: You mean where there's a fish there could be a penguin?
Robin: But wait! It happened at sea... Sea. C for Catwoman!
Batman: Yet, an exploding shark was pulling my leg...
Commissioner Gordon: The Joker!
Chief O'Hara: All adds up to a sinister riddle... Riddle-R. Riddler!
Commissioner Gordon: A thought strikes me... So dreadful I scarcely dare give it utterance...
Batman: The four of them... Their forces combined...
Robin: Holy nightmare!

But obvious fallacies aside, I really enjoyed The Uncanny. The titular final essay in particular was fun, and will of course be useful for thesis type stuff. Plus there's a sweet Max Ernst cover to look at when you're done reading.

[H.A. Leuschel · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a short but intricate essay where Freud looks closely at what could be called the uncanny feeling, the spooked out sensation that something is not quite how it should be. He describes it at times as a shift from the familiar to the eerie or estranged, a space where doubt, fear and danger unsettle the individual. At other times he suggests that the experience of loneliness, darkness and the lack of noise are the basis of childhood fears, able to rear its head during one's lifetime. It's thought-provoking!

[Amanda · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars

This is a series of 5 essays. The title one The Uncanny is the most interesting but there is also one on childhood memories which I found fascinating. I'm very intrigued by what we remember. If you can get past the fact that Freud thinks everything is about sex and all women are hysterical he had some pretty interesting ideas.

[Evoli · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was the perfect (although certainly not an easy) read for me, since I love exploring elements of the uncanny in gothic literature as well as deep diving into the subconscious and psychoanalyze (I do these way too frequently lmao).

[Erika · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sul racconto di Hoffmann "Der Sandmann" si basa interamente il suo saggio sul perturbante Freud. Questo saggio di Freud è scritto nel 1919 ed è quindi tangente all’elaborazione, da parte di Freud, delle sue teorie psicanalitiche. È un saggio molto ampio, e Freud parte per capire e definire cosa sia il perturbante dal saggio di Jentsch e soprattutto da una questione linguistica, cioè Freud fa proprio una ricerca linguistica tra il dizionario della lingua tedesca e in altri dizionari delle lingue europee del termine “unheimlich”. Parte da questo termine per tracciarne la storia all’interno della lingua tedesca e poi arriva anche a verificarne le eventuali traduzioni in altre lingue, mostrando come nelle altre lingue non vi sia un termine analogo, di tale ricchezza e profondità di significato. L’inizio di questo saggio di Freud è di fatti un saggio che si basa su un’analisi di tipo linguistico, la definizione del termine in lingua tedesca e la comparazione del significato in altre lingue. Freud va addirittura a cercare nel dizionario latino, in latino corrisponde al “locus suspectus”, in un’ora “unheimlich” della notte, “intempesta nocte”. Addirittura prova a dare della definizioni in latino, ma non sono uguali al tedesco. Prova anche in greco, in inglese “uneasy”, “gloomy”, “uncanny”, è chiaro che tutte queste parole hanno tutte una sfumatura diversa, fantasmico, che non si dà immediatamente, strano e così via. Sono tutti termini che non sono sovrapponibili, anche nel francese “inquietante, sinistro e lugubre” che appartengono all’area semantica del perturbante ma non vogliono dir proprio la stessa cosa. Anche nello spagnolo, si avvicinano ma non sono. Prenderà anche in considerazione l’arabo e l’ebraico. E farà un lungo cammino di storia del significato dell’“unheimlich” e, in particolare, dimostra come all’interno della parola “heimlich” sia già compreso il suo opposto, il suo significato. Poi Freud passa a riconsiderare alcuni tratti del saggio di Jentsch, soprattutto quello dell’incertezza intellettuale dell’automa e lo collega in maniera esplicita a Hoffman. Quando Jentsch si riferisce alla questione dell’automa e poi cita Hoffman non lo dice esplicitamente ma è chiaro il riferimento alla bambola Olimpia. Freud riprende la frase di Jentsch relativa ad Hoffman, ed aggiunge “Questa osservazione, senza dubbio esatta, si riferisce soprattutto al racconto Il mago sabbiolino, che fa parte della raccolta dei Notturni, dal quale la figura della bambola Olimpia è passato nel primo atto dell’opera di Offenbach I racconti di Hoffman” Secondo Freud questo motivo della bambola in Hoffman non è centrale, ve ne sono altri che per lui sono più centrali e che impiega per condurre la sua analisi e per farci capire cos’è questo perturbante, cioè questo familiare tenuto nascosto e celato e che, ad un certo punto, ritorna. Ci dà un’interpretazione psicanalitica del racconto di Hoffman, la questione centrale per lui è quella del mago sabbiolino che strappa gli occhi ai bambini. Ed effettivamente questo è un nucleo tematico che torna più volte nel racconto, quando nella lettera a Lotario/Clara Nathaniel racconta l’evento tragico che secondo lui si è svolto nella sua infanzia, cioè il momento in cui l’avvocato Coppelius e il padre scoprono la sua presenza nella stanza in cui si era introdotto per spiare e l’avvocato Coppelius tenta di strappargli gli occhi, così come nei racconti della madre e della governante faceva il mago sabbiolino. Poi questo discorso degli occhi lo ritroviamo collegato a Coppola, che vende occhiali, vende binocoli e strumenti ottici, lo troviamo collegato alla bambola Olimpia perché ad un certo punto viene contesa tra il professor Spallanzani e Coppola, le cadono a terra gli occhi che Spallanzani tira addosso a Nathaniel. Dunque si capisce bene che questo motivo degli occhi è centrale. C’è anche un riassunto, a modo suo, del racconto di Hoffman. In questo riassunto, mette in evidenza un punto centrale. Lui muove quest’analisi su due livelli: una più propriamente psicoanalitica, che utilizza anche il romanzo alla stregua di un esempio psicoanalitico e nella seconda parte si occupa un po’ di più della finzione letteraria. “Questo breve riassunto non lascia certo sussistere alcun dubbio sul fatto che il senso del perturbante è legato direttamente alla figura del mago sabbiolino, ossia all’idea di vedersi sottratti gli occhi, e che un’incertezza intellettuale nel senso dichiarato da Jentsch non ha niente a che vedere con questo effetto.” Jentsch che invece si concentrava sulla questione dell’automa. A Freud interessa la teoria psicanalitica e comincia a tirare le fila di quanto ha detto e osserva che l’esperienza psicanalitica ci avverte che siamo di fronte ad una tremenda angoscia infantile causata dalla prospettiva di danneggiare o perdere gli occhi. Nella vita di Nathaniel c’è un trauma infantile connesso a quest’idea di danneggiare o perdere gli occhi. Il mago sabbiolino, secondo l’analisi di Freud, si sostituisce al padre temuto dal quale ci si aspetta l’evirazione. Per Freud, il rapporto infantile tra padre e bambino, è caratterizzato anche da questo aspetto di competizione ed ostilità, e secondo Freud, questo è particolarmente evidente nel racconto, dove la figura del padre viene scissa in due: il padre buono che la sera gli racconta le favole ed episodi della sua vita, con cui il bambino vuole sempre trattenersi e, dall’altra Coppelius, che dà un’altra immagine della figura paterna, quella terribile, connessa alla paura dell’evirazione. Freud si concentra ed è anche un punto cardine da un punto di vista tematico del racconto fantastico: il sosia e la scissione dell’io. L’immagine del padre e l’immagine di Coppelius sono un doppio, entrambi rappresentano l’immagine paterna. Questo motivo del sosia e del doppio che percorre tutta la letteratura, dalla gotica alla fantastica, come Dottor Jekyll e Mister Hyde. Freud collega, in termini psicanalitici, la figura del doppio alla questione del narcisismo primario, che può avere una degenerazione psicologica nel narcisismo secondario. Freud parte sempre nella definizione di questi concetti dalla mitologia, dai miti greci, come Narciso che si specchia nell’acqua e si innamora del suo riflesso. Questa fase interessa un momento della crescita del bambino, in cui il bambino riconosce la sua immagine, in qualche modo come altro da sé, ed ha bisogno di questa fase del narcisismo come processo di riconoscimento della sua individualità e quindi crescita. Chiaramente, se questa fase di narcisismo primario, non viene superata e si trasforma in narcisismo secondario, allora diventa una patologia di tipo psicanalitico. Ma il complesso edipico e il narcisismo primario sono fasi della vita evolutiva. Secondo Freud, solo se non superati, portano a degenerazione di tipo psicologico. L’heimlich è qualcosa che è stato tenuto nascosto, celato e che, ad un certo punto, ritorna e diventa perturbante. Qua si tratta di un fatto vissuto come angoscioso e terribile nell’infanzia di Nathaniel, che ad un certo punto, con la vista di Coppola, ritorna. È qualcosa che apparteneva alla sua infanzia che ritorna e che, quando ritorna, genera angoscia. Non è tanto il trauma in sé ad essere considerato perturbante, quanto il fatto che sia stato rimosso, quindi non affrontato, sepolto nella coscienza, quando poi ritorna prende delle forme strane, angosciose, perturbanti. “Può essere esatto che l’unheimliche sia lo Heimliche-Heimische che ha subito una rimozione e poi è ritornato, e che tutto il perturbante risponda a questa condizione” qualcosa di rimosso che poi ritorna, e quando ritorna si camuffa, torna in modo simbolico con uno spostamento.

[Talie · Rating 3 out of 5]

رندی نوشتن فروید این است که از قبل به نتایج دلخواهش رسیده ولی موقع نوشتن خواننده را از مسیر مارپیچی رد می‌کند
که مثلن پروسه‌ی فکر کردن خود را نشان دهد .
فروید بر شانه‌ی بزرگان ایستاده.در این مقاله هم از مطالعه‌ای که دیگری انجام داده استفاده کرده و آن را بسط داده. 
Uncanny
ترجمه انگلیسی واژه آلمانی
Unheimlich
انتخاب شده.
به فارسی غیرطبیعی، عجیب، غریب، مرموز
فروید نتیجه میگیرد که دو منبع برای این احساس می توان برشمرد:
۱. چیزی که قبلن سرکوب شده،بر اثر تاثراتی با احساس امر عجیب و مرموز بر می‌گردد.
۲.  تایید اعتقادات بدوی، مانند دیدگاه جان دار پنداشتن اشیا، با احساس امر عجیب و مرموز  بر‌میگردد.

دو مثالی که فروید برای امر غریب و مرموز می‌آورد، همزاد و تکرار در حالتی رویا گون، هر دو در بوف کور دیده می‌شود.

[MistyMoon]

look, I am already 6 books behind and if I have to get through godawful hours of reading academic texts they better serve their purpose and count on goodreads.

[Nicolai Alexander · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sigmund Freud had, for a very long time, been a mythical figure for me. I heard his name mentioned here and there when topics of psychology presented themselves, like subconsciousness, repressed memories, repressed or hidden sexual desires (the Freudian slip), degrees or levels of identity and personality. I never researched him properly, nor did anyone I met or anything I read elaborated on his theories, so by various sources I simply gathered that he was very important to the field of psychology. I also assumed he was part of an intelligentsia far removed from all other aspects of society. I mean, I didn’t know when he lived, but figured it was a very long time ago and that a lot must have changed since then.

I’ve now done a little bit of research by reading this book. Sure, there are plenty of childhood sexual desires involved and nonsensical dream symbolism and lots of interpretations that sound utterly ridiculous, but it also seems like Freud’s had far-reaching influence, because he has “uncannily changed the ways in which, for better and worse, we now talk about art, and practice it”. (vii)

I can’t speak to what this all means to the field of psychology today, but when I discovered that his essay on the uncanny provides insight into how and why my favorite literary genres – horror, gothic, weird fiction – work the way they do, I knew I needed to learn more. So, I went and purchased a copy of this Penguin Modern Classic edition of “Sigmund Freud: The Uncanny”, which consists of said essay along with four others of his most famous ones. Most importantly for me here are the ones where Freud talks about aesthetics of reading and writing and tries to engage in literary theory and criticism.

It's a perfect fit, really, psychology and literature. Freud was deeply concerned with the unknown phenomena of the unconscious, where language, behaviors and dreams are all interconnected but also open to interpretation. This connection seems to me fundamental to artistic creation and literature most of all. Naturally, stories are emotionally and intellectually layered and can have a huge impact on our state of mind when we’re fully engaged in them. The beauty in our feelings of the uncanny is frighteningly fascinating. Equally so the literary techniques we use to evoke them.

I’ll go into more detail in each essay later in my review, as I like doing that in order to get the most out of my readings. But if you would like a quick recommendation from me, I would highly recommend reading The Uncanny if you like the same genres as I do. There’s a lot of ground he doesn’t cover about literature, of course, but it’s still very interesting and at times even useful for readers and writers alike.

Now, the introduction by Hugh Haughton goes a long way in explaining Freud’s essays, the significance of them, his findings and what he meant by them. I will provide a brief outline along with some iessential passages and my rating of each essay. Expect for Freud’s essay on Leonardo da Vinci, which I quickly DNFed out of sheer disinterest and boredom.


Screen Memories - (1899) - ★★★

Using a case study of a 38-year-old man’s childhood memories, Freud seems to be trying to prove how we substitute real experiences with retrospective interpretations of them, combining them with fantasies and as such create new memories of what happened. Screen memories are therefore just an amalgamation of fantasies. Or something like that.

"Purporting to be a reflection on an aberrant form of memory, it sketches a theory of memory as such which has vertiginous consequences not only for psychoanalysis but for autobiography, biography, fiction and the whole literature of identity." (xv)

“The piece ends with his apparently innocently remarking that ‘it is perhaps “questionable whether we have any conscious memories from childhood: perhaps we only have memories of childhood’, as they appeared to us at later periods when the memories where aroused. “At these times of arousal the memories of childhood did not emerge, as one is accustomed to saying, they were formed.’ In other words, the ‘raw material’ of analysis, and indeed all autobiographical memory, is always retrospectively shaped.” (xx)

The Creative Writer and Daydreaming – (1907) - ★★★★

In Freud’s first essay on the topic of literature, he seems to take a lot of interest in the poet and our imagination. More specifically, he investigates the connection between art, dream and childhood and sees play of art as an expression of infantile fantasies – or wish-fulfillments – so, our stories are like daydreams: “the literary work; like the daydream, is a continuation of, and a substitute for, the earlier play of childhood” (32)

Also, it seems to me that Freud thinks that a writer shrouds his secrets and shame in a veil of aesthetic pleasure.

“According to Freud, ‘the meaning of our dreams usually remains obscure’ because at night we are ‘visited by desires that we are ashamed of and must conceal from ourselves’. (xxii)

“All Freud’s papers on art trace its origins back to childhood formations […] ‘Should we look at for the beginning of poetic creativity in childhood?’ he asks here. His answer is to say that ‘every child at play behaves like a writer, by creating a world of his own, or to put to more correctly, by imposing a new and more pleasing order on the things that make up the world’. ‘The opposite of play’, he says with challenging seriousness, ‘is not seriousness – it is reality’” (xxi-xxii)

“Now, the creative writer acts no differently from the child at play: he creates a fantasy world, which he takes very seriously; that is to say, he invests large amounts of emotion in it, while marking it off sharply from reality.” (26)

Family romances – 1909 - ★★

In this useless little essay of silly theories, Freud explores the “intimate relationship between childhood fantasies and fiction” (xxv), and he talks about “the separation of the individual, as she grows up, from the authority of her parents”. He says a lot of things here that I don’t agree with, but most importantly:

“The implication of Freud’s story, however, is that the whole extraordinary system of narrative exchange that is involved in our need for fiction, is bound up with a child’s need to re-read itself over and over, in relation to its own family. Every novel offers alternative genealogies, alternative identities and alternative struggles with the family. Freud’s fragment doesn’t tell us how to read such fictions, but it does suggest the ways that they might individually be shaped by, as well as shape, childhood fantasies, past and present. It also suggests a genealogy of our culture’s undiminished romance with the novel.” (xxviii)

“Precise observation of daydreams shows that their purpose is wish-fulfilment and the correction of real life, and that they have two principal aims, one of them erotic and the other ambitious (though behind the latter the erotic aim is usually present too).” (38)

“Indeed, the whole effort to replace the real father by another who is more distinguished is merely an expression of the child’s longing for the happy times gone by, when his father seemed to him the strongest and most distinguished of men, and his mother the dearest and loveliest of women. He turns away from the man he now knows as his father to the one he believed in as a child. The fantasy is actually only an expression of regret for the happy times that have vanished.” (40)

Leonardo da Vinci and a Memory of his Childhood - (1910) – DNF


The Uncanny - ★★★★★

“One of the earliest investigators of the aesthetic, Edmund Burke, opposed the economy of beauty, built up around positive experience of pleasure, to the sublime, built up around the negative experiences of awe, terror and dread. In this essay, Freud, like Burke, moves beyond an idea of aesthetics ‘restricted to the theory of beauty’, as he puts to, to explore an aesthetics of anxiety […] ‘The Uncanny’ is one of Freud’s strangest essays and it is about a particularly intense experience of strangeness” (xli-xlii) and it changed the field of structural analysis of fantastic narratives, rooted in primitive beliefs about the dead and supernatural forces. As such, the uncanny – das unheimlich – has “come back to haunt subsequent commentary on literature, film, photography and art ever since.” (lv)

Interestingly, in the introduction, Hugh Haugthon first finds Freud’s understanding of the uncanny in the OED’s fifth sense:

“partaking of a supernatural character; mysterious, weird, uncomfortably strange or unfamiliar” and notes that he has not found any “examples of ‘uncanny’ in this sense prior to the nineteenth century. It gains its spectral aesthetic currency after 1850, during the period in which the modern ghost story developed. Like the ghost story, born in the era of Poe, Henry James, M. R. James and Vernon lee, the feeling of the uncanny seems to be an experience that postdates belief in the supernatural.” (lix)

I have too many things to say about this essay, and there are too many sections I’d like to quote here, so I’ll definitely keep coming back to this essay many times.

[Mateo R.]

Según Freud, lo ominoso es la variedad de lo terrorífico que se remonta a lo consabido de antiguo, a lo familiar desde hace largo tiempo.

Realiza un análisis etimológico de las palabras heimlich (familiar, pero también oculto) y unheimlich (no familiar, ominoso). Concluye que heimlich es una palabra que ha desarrollado su significado siguiendo una ambivalencia hasta coincidir al fin con su opuesto, unheimlich.

Luego analiza el cuento “El hombre de arena” de E. T. A. Hoffmann y el efecto ominoso que se construye en él. Disiente con Jentsch en que esta cualidad del relato tenga que ver con la incertidumbre intelectual de si se trata de un cuento realista o fantástico, pues cuando ya se ha revelado como lo segundo, la sensación de lo ominoso permanece.

Afirma que según el psicoanálisis, la angustia de quedar ciego (de perder los ojos o que sufran daño) es un sustituto de la angustia ante la castración. Fundamenta esto con la correspondencia que se da en sueños, fantasías y mitos entre ojo y pene. Lo relaciona también con los acontecimientos del cuento, en los que la intervención del Hombre de Arena (que equivale a la figura del padre temido, de quien se espera la castración) perjudica al protagonista en términos amorosos (como haría una castración).

Resalta la figura del doble en la novela Los elixires del diablo. La duplicación (especialmente del pene) puede ser un mecanismo defensivo ante el miedo a la castración durante el narcisismo infantil. Superada esta etapa, pasa a ser un símbolo ominoso del anuncio de la muerte. Pero la repetición de elementos servirá desde entonces para introducir la sensación de lo ominoso en algunos contextos.

Tras evaluar otros ejemplos de lo ominoso en anécdotas de pacientes y relacionarlo con la concepción animista de otras épocas, llega a dos hipótesis:
Que de los sentimientos que se vuelven angustiosos por culpa de la represión hay un subgrupo en el cual aquello reprimido retorna y provoca el efecto de lo ominoso.
Que lo ominoso no es algo nuevo o ajeno sino lo familiar que retorna pero que no se identifica porque había permanecido reprimido, oculto.

En definitiva, los elementos que vuelven ominoso lo angustioso serían: el animismo, la magia, la omnipotencia de los pensamientos, el nexo con la muerte, la repetición no deliberada y el complejo de castración.

Lo ominoso del vivenciar se da cuando lo reprimido surge por culpa de una impresión, o del retorno de algo que se creía superado. Lo ominoso de la ficción pierde, en algunos casos, parte de su efecto (especialmente en los cuentos tradicionales maravillosos), pero no cuando se trata de algo reprimido que se creía superado.

Personalmente lo que he leído de psicoanálisis de Freud me parece muy arbitrario e inverificable, aunque bastante interesante en sus referencias literarias y mitológicas.

Intertextualidad:

Menciones directas:
* Zur Psychologie des Umheimlichen, de Ernst Jentsch.
* Pequeño diccionario alemán-latino, de K. E. Georges.
* Wörterbuch der Deutschen Sprache, de Daniel Sanders.
* La Biblia, anónimo.
* Deutsches Wörterbuch, de Jacob y Wilhelm Grimm.
* Wilhelm Tell, de Friedrich Schiller.
* El campamento de Wallenstein, de Friedrich Schiller.
* Teatro, de Friedrich Maximilian von Klinger.
* "Der Sandmann" ("El hombre de arena"), de E.T.A. Hoffmann.
* Nachtstücke (Cuentos nocturnos), de E.T.A. Hoffmann.
* Hamlet, de William Shakespeare.
* Macbeth, de William Shakespeare.
* La tempestad, de William Shakespeare.
* Sueño de una noche de verano, de William Shakespeare.
* Los elixires del Diablo, de E.T.A. Hoffmann.
* Der Doppelgänger: Eine psychoanalytische Studie, de Otto Rank.
* Die Götter im Exil (Los dioses en el exilio), de Heinrich Heine.
* El anillo de Polícrates, ópera en un acto con libreto de Leo Feld y música de Erich Korngold.
* "Die Geschichte von der abgehauenen Hand" ("Historia de la mano cortada"), de Wilhelm Hauff.
* "El tesoro de Rhampsenit", de Heródoto.
* "Los tres deseos", cuento popular.
* La Divina Comedia, de Dante Alighieri.
* Julio César, de William Shakespeare.
* "Die Weissagung" ("La profecía"), de Arthur Schnitzler.
* "Der Zerrissene" ("El andrajoso"), de Johann Nestroy.
* "El fantasma de Canterville", de Oscar Wilde.
* Menciona la figura de Edipo, rey mítico de Tebas, cuya referencia más antigua aparece en La Odisea de Homero y que es conocido principalmente por la tragedia Edipo Rey de Sófocles.
* Menciona la figura chipriota de Pigmalión, escultor cuya estatua Galatea cobró vida, conocido principalmente por su aparición en Las metamorfosis de Publio Ovidio Nasón.
* Mención a los escritores Georg Rollenhagen, Adelbert von Chamisso, Karl Leberecht Immermann, Novalis, Friedrich Schlegel, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling, Karl Gutzkow, Mark Twain y Hans Christian Andersen.

Indirecta:
?

[Natalie · Rating 3 out of 5]

The English version can be found below.

-----------
German version:

Freud unternimmt in diesem Aufsatz den Versuch ‚Das Unheimliche‘ zu definieren und den einzigartigen Kern dessen herauszustellen. Zum einen unternimmt er dafür eine Sprachanalyse des Wortes selbst, über das Wort ‚Das Heimliche‘. Zum anderen verwendet er Beispiele, in denen Situationen beschrieben werden, die ein unheimliches Gefühl auslösen. Dafür zieht er viele literarische Werke heran, sowie wenige Fallbeispiele der Psychoanalyse. Besonderes Augenmerk legt er dabei auf E.T.A. Hoffmanns ‚Der Sandmann‘, aber auch vom selbigen ‚Die Elixiere des Teufels‘ oder eines von Wilhelm Hauffs Märchen ‚Die Geschichte von der abgehauenen Hand‘. Auch andere Texte finden hier Anklang, die ich nicht weiter nennen werde.

Einerseits liegt hier an vielen Stellen eine brillante Analysen zur Ursache der Erzeugung der Unheimlichkeit vor, die aufschlussreich ist und ein tieferes Verständnis vermittelt.

Andererseits ist Freud völlig von der Kastrationsangst besessen, die er in alles rein zu interpretieren versucht, egal wie abwegig es in einem bestimmten Kontext objektiv betrachtet auch ist.

„Wir wissen schon, daß diese Unheimlichkeit von er Annäherung an den Kastrationskomplex herrührt.“ Dies Feststellung kommt gefühlt nach jeder einleuchtenden Interpretation und zerstört diese sogleich wieder, da man wirklich an der Urteilsfähigkeit Freuds zweifelt.

Bei einer Analyse sollte man sich von den Ergebnissen leiten lassen und offen für neue Erkenntnisse sein, egal wie weit sie von den eigenen Ideen abweichen. Und nicht wie Freud das Ergebnis schon vorgeben und seine Analyse so anpassen, dass dabei die gewünschten Ergebnisse herauskommen. Man braucht dann eig. keine Forschung zu betreiben, wenn man eh alle Ergebnisse kennt. Es ist ja immer die Kastrationsangst! 😅 Er bestätigt so nur sein eigenes Ego. 😅

Das Zusammentragen und Verbinden bei der Sprachanalyse finde ich wirklich spannend und auch welche Motive er für das Unheimliche aufzeigt und verantwortlich macht (abgesehen von der Kastrationsangst, die ja eig. nochmals hinter allem steckt😅). Wenn man alle Stellen zum Kastrationskomplex streicht, ist der Text wirklich gut und bietet wichtige Erkenntnisse, die gut an die Thematik heranführen. Allerdings sollte man hier auch nicht mit seiner Recherche stoppen, sondern sich wirklich tiefere einarbeiten, da es definitiv nicht ausreicht, um die Thematik in ihrer Gesamtheit zu überblicken. Dieser Aufsatz bietet wirklich nur Ausgangspunkte und einen kleinen Einblick.

Und an der Stelle, an der er die Angst vor den weiblichen Genitalen beschreibt, die unheimliche Gefühle auslösen, sollte man definitiv Abstand nehmen. Mehr kann man zu diesem Punkt wirklich nicht sagen! 🙆🏻‍♀️🙆🏻‍♀️🙆🏻‍♀️

Gesamt: 3,2🌟

----------
English version:

In this essay, Freud attempts to define 'das Unheimliche/the uncanny' and to highlight its unique core. Firstly, he undertakes a linguistic analysis of the word itself, using the word 'das Heimliche/(the word doen’t exist in English: there are more meanings contained: 1) mysterious or rather secret, 2) familiar, and 3) it can also coincide with the uncanny in the way that something is frigthtening '. Secondly, he uses examples in which situations are described that trigger an uncanny feeling. He draws on many literary works as well as a few case studies from psychoanalysis. He pays particular attention to E.T.A. Hoffmann's 'The Sandman', but also 'The Devil's Elixirs' by the same author or one of Wilhelm Hauff's fairy tales 'The Story of the Cut-Off Hand'. Other texts also find resonance here, which I will not mention further.

On the one hand, in many places there is a brilliant analysis of the cause of the production of uncanniness, which is enlightening and provides a deeper understanding.

On the other hand, Freud is completely obsessed with castration anxiety, which he tries to interpret into everything, no matter how absurd it may be objectively viewed in a certain context.

"We already know that this uncanniness stems from his approach to the castration complex." (translated by myself)
It feels like this statement follows every plausible interpretation and immediately destroys it again, because one really doubts Freud's ability to judge.

In an analysis, you should be guided by the results and be open to new discoveries, no matter how far they differ from your own ideas.
And not, like Freud, predetermine the result and adapt your analysis so that the desired results emerge. You don't really need to do any research if you know all the results anyway. It's always castration anxiety! 😅 He's just confirming his own ego. 😅

I find the collecting and connecting in the language analysis really interesting and also which motives he points out and makes responsible for the uncanny (apart from the fear of castration, which is actually behind everything again😅).

If you remove all the passages on the castration complex, the text is really good and offers important insights that provide a good introduction to the topic. However, you should not stop here with your research, but really dig deeper, as it is definitely not enough to get an overview of the topic in its entirety. This essay really only offers starting points and a small insight.

And at the point where he describes the fear of female genitalia triggering creepy feelings, you should definitely distance yourself. There really isn't much more to say on this point! 🙆🏻‍♀️🙆🏻‍♀️🙆🏻‍♀️

Total: 3.2🌟

[Adriana Scarpin · Rating 3 out of 5]

You're a bloody puppet!

[Ary · Rating 2 out of 5]

He most certainly ate with this but it didn't make it any less dreadful to read

[Danja]

Read this essay for a term paper. Helped me out a lot, but... Sigmund's mental gymnastics to connect everything to sexuality and reproductive organs would earn him a medal at the Olympics.

[Isabella C. · Rating 5 out of 5]

O infamiliar talvez seja um dos conceitos mais interessantes da psicanálise que cruzaram meu caminho até o momento. Um tanto difícil de defini-lo com precisão, se percorre uma estrada sinuosa nesse ensaio, e acho que o segredo é se perder um pouco mesmo, deixar-se ser engolido por certo mistério. A tradução dessa edição é impecável e tudo nela é um primor: alguns textos do Freud além do próprio infamiliar que auxiliam na apreensão de mais ideias, como A negação (1925), os textos extras dos editores que são impecáveis e, por fim, o conto O homem da areia, do Hoffmann, fez valer a pena cada centavo. Trabalho bom demais da autêntica!!!!

[Big Nate · Rating 4 out of 5]

I could be convinced for 5 stars. Freud is on some genuinely wacky shit...but bro's got bars. Undeniable.

[Maya roo · Rating 5 out of 5]

גם מאוד יפה גם עשה לי סיוט לילה משמעותי מה עוד אפשר לבקש מספר

[ᴅᴀʟᴜ · Rating 4 out of 5]

4 ✩ - Hoffmann's Sandman book essay/analysis alone makes this four stars for me, that's a story you call uncanny

[Yentl de Jong · Rating 2 out of 5]

Dit boek bestaat uit 5 essays en er zitten delen in die essays die interessant zijn, maar er zit ook vrij veel herhaling en vage informatie in.

Wel interessant om eens een non-fictie te lezen over psychologie dus miss dat ik dat nog eens ga doen.

Ik ben heel benieuwd hoe ik dit boek in een essay ga verwerken.. wish me luck!!

[Zadignose]

Freud presents us with some rather interesting thoughts, reflections, and meditations on what is "uncanny" (actually language is pretty important in this, so "unheimlich" is more to the point). He's also rather guarded in his approach to the topic, which is a nice thing. My impression of Freud, as always, is that I love and hate him and his ideas. The thing is, his ideas are very fascinating, compelling, groundbreaking, appealing... and usually also overblown, not really fully convincing or supported, and... tend show what's good and bad about being analytical. (Of course analysis is what one generally expects from analysts.) The analytical mind--it seems to me--when confronted by the nebulous, the emotional, the difficult-to-grapple-with concepts, is forced to one extreme or another: either it must throw up its hands (a mind with hands? how uncanny!) and say "I don't know"; or else it must rather bullishly insist "I know", even where knowing is not really possible. Spirits flee from the piercing gaze of the analyst. Anyway, Freud often seems to prefer the assertion "I know!" which sometimes leads him to extremes (e.g. in Interpretation of Dreams, it's not enough to have the amazing insight that dreams are often wish fulfillment even when they don't appear to be; no! Dreams must always be wish fulfillment, and if they ever are NOT wish-fulfillment, then they are second-level wish-fulfillment of a patient whose "wish" is to prove Freud wrong!). Happily, if you approach this book from the right angle, you can come away with some rather convincing arguments which you don't have to announce you are 100% in agreement with all the time. So, as I said to begin with (Deja vu, that's spooky!) he gives you something to think about.

By the way, if you want to cut to the chase, the uncanny is generally a renewed experience of something familiar and repressed, particularly if it relates to infantile complexes such as castration-complex, infantile-narcissism, obsessive repetition, etc.; or else it arises from the appearance that in real life we are confronting a juvenile belief which has since been surmounted, such as magical thinking, the omnipotence of thought, etc. And certain elements such as darkness and solitude which are often fear triggers in infancy also uncannily return and can be part of an uncanny experience. But Freud said it better and I probably made some gross error in my summary.

OH YEAH, WARNING RE: KINDLE VERSION. Don't buy it unless you know you're only getting the essay "The Uncanny." Even though it's linked, on Amazon, to the Penguin book of the same title which contains FIVE essays. You ain't gettin' those.

[Daniël Zevenhuizen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Freud heeft een ongekend intellectueel repertoire waardoor hij zelfs zo'n ongrijpbaar fenomeen als het unheimliche bij de horens kan vatten. Het fenomeen wordt immers door een paradox gevoed: het unheimliche is iets herkenbaars dat plotseling alle aanknopingspunten verliest, en dat vervolgens in de schemerzone tussen natuurlijk en onnatuurlijk blijft zweven (Jentsch).

Maar slechts "angst voor het onbestemde" is het niet. Het unheimliche is 'een geheim dat nooit aan het licht had mogen komen', om met Schiller te spreken: een verdrongen angst of aandrang, onbewust weggestopt om het leven niet te hinderen, maar door tekens en provocatieve signalen weer komen bovendrijven als een demonische kracht. Het ontstemmende déja-vu dat je overvalt als je weer dezelfde fout hebt gemaakt (weer een verkeerde vriend, weer te vroeg dronken, weer klunzig het glas omvergestoten, etc.); als je vrienden een tic bij je herkennen, die je dan voor het eerst bij jezelf gewaarwordt, maar wel herkent als een vergeten vijand. Maar ook de angst dat, als de persoon voor je in de rij zich plots omdraait, juist wanneer je hen aan het vervloeken was om een pietluttigheid, je gedachten uitstraalden - waarbij een ontstegen wereldbeeld van duistere magie en vloeken zich onverhoopt aandient, de abstract gekende wereld van natuurwetten ten spijt.

Hoewel de goden goeddeels gevlucht zijn en lang niet iedereen het lot van traumatische neurose ten deel valt, kennen we allen de spookachtige realiteit van het bekende-onbestemde. Dat reikt van karakterkwalen die zich onverhoopt aandienen ten koste van een minder rafelig zelfbeeld, tot de overledenen die met hun spookachtige aanwezigheid eerbied afdwingen, ondanks onze zelfverzekerde attitude dat van de doden niets rest dan botten in de grond.

De grote verscheidenheid aan fenomenale eigenschappen van het onbestemde komt Freuds presentatie niet altijd ten goede. Desalniettemin wisselen etymologische, klinische en kunstkritische beslommeringen zich vruchtbaar af, als elkaar wederzijds belichtende perspectieven.

[tea, boginja opste prakse]

procitala sam frojda od korice do korice (da, nazalost sam that kind of girl) ali i dalje se iznerviram kad taman pomislim da cu da procitam nesto zanimljivo i krene zabavno i onda razocara objasnjenjem. tipa kaze otkinuti udovi, obezglavljenost itd su izuzetno jezoviti posebno kad samostalno djeluju (stvarno zabavno realno) i onda se taman zalaufam pa mi kaze TO JE LJUDIMA JEZOVITO ZBOG KOMPLEKSA KASTRACIJE daj brate ne zajebavaj vise. to i ja licno implementiram u svakodnevnom zivotu ALI NE MOZE SE TOLIKO REDUKOVATI COVJEK NA NAGONE UVIJEK bryyy. i onda se zapitam sto ja ovo njega citiram u seminarskom i svjesna sam da mogu da mi seru zbog toga ali jasno vam je valjda do sad da ja tako zivim

[Emilija Palionyte]

nesitikėjau kad patiks man froidas, bet ištikrųjų gera pagaliau paskaityt kažką kas MAKES SENSE ir nevaro į galvą man kad tu durna ir nesupranti mano pretentious yap:||||| tai kudos (išskyrus už kastracijos jumpscare out of NOWHERE??? ir apskritai pritempimo prie sexual fears ir desires, like its nooooot that deep, nebent falas yra tavo kompasas gyvenime tada gal jo...)

[Emma Louise]

Freud er helt klart nemmere at læse, end jeg havde forestillet mig.

Og nej, jeg har ikke læst den på tysk. Jeg har selvrespekt 😚

[Alex · Rating 4 out of 5]

Uncanny, Holmes! is the word's most familiar context, and there Watson means beyond natural explanation. In The Uncanny Freud digs deeper into the word. Explaining uncanny by its synonyms: supernatural, preternatural, weird, mysterious, isn't adequate. The word has its origins in the German word for hidden or concealed, heimlich, but a secondary meaning of heimlich is “familiar," and so the word contains its near opposite. Unheimlich (uncanny) then gives us something like the familiar/concealed unconcealed. This leads Freud to repressed sexual impulses (the familiar and concealed) that unconceal themselves symbolically through dreams and neurotic behavior. But then Freud makes a leap: “...the unconscious mechanisms familiar to us in ‘dream-work’ [psychoanalyzing dreams] also operate in the process of imaginative writing. The familiar/concealed unconceals itself in fiction. Uncanny as applied to aesthetics.

What would be an example of the "uncanny" in literature? Freud Freud quotes E. Jentsh: “One of the surest devices for producing slightly uncanny effects through story-telling is to leave the reader wondering whether a particular figure is real person or an automaton." [tk]

According to Jentsh, E. T. A. Hoffmann frequently used a similar psychological maneuver in his fiction. One of Hoffmann’s stories was called “The Sand Man,” and concerns that familiar figure who puts children to sleep. In Hoffmann’s story a nursemaid cloaks the boy's innocent (common) version of the sandman with a sinister version. She tells the little boy that the Sand Man is a bad man who throws sand in children’s eye, which makes them pop out all bloody. The Sand Man scoops up the eyes and takes them to the moon to feed his children. The comforting familiar is transformed into mysterious horror, or something uncanny. Freud argues that the uncanny events in the story represent a boy child’s fear of physical castration by his father. The little boy's emotional reaction in the story is not just to the evil sandman but to his psychological dread of what his father might be planning for him. For the story to be effective, the reader too must get what the boy gets (at some level). Was this Hoffmann's intent in writing the story or was Hoffmann himself unaware of exactly what he was doing?

Freud offers several other examples of the uncanny in literature: evil eyes, doubles, dead bodies, revenants, etc. and examines how they function in the stories. Unfortunately Freud doesn’t spend as much time with writers as I would have hoped, but moves on to Leonardo da Vinci. Most of the book is Freud’s psychohistory of the artist. He attempts to explain the uncanny elements in Leonardo’s art (unfinished paintings) from Leonardo’s childhood traumatic experiences and repressed sexual drives. It’s easy to get impatient with Freud when he makes connections that are little more than guesswork. I’d argue that Freud knows he’s creating something of a fiction. “Should my exposition prompt the judgment even among friends of psychoanalysis ... that I have done no more than write a psychoanalytical novel, I would certainly not overrate the reliability of my findings. I have yielded, like others, to the fascination of this great and enigmatic figure, in whose nature one senses powerful instinctual passions, which can nevertheless express themselves only a strangely subdued fashion.”

So if you’re interested in how a vulture inspired Mona Lisa, The Uncanny provides the answer. Well, a possible answer.

[Zadignose]

I have previously reviewed the essay "The Uncanny," and the review is attached to another edition of the work. Now I address the complete collection of essays by the same title in the paperback Penguin edition.

To put it briefly, the collection is an assortment of fascinating, sometimes compelling, thoughts, observations, reflections, and unscientific speculations, that may challenge your ideas about the nature of memories, repression, and fear. For me, they also unfortunately forced me to confront new doubts about the legitimacy of Freud's conclusions.

Here, he appears to have brushed upon the truth without necessarily revealing it, and perhaps also to have distorted the truth by forcing his evidence to conform to his absolute notions of what really goes on within the human psyche. He often acknowledges some of the limitations to his approach, but that also seems to be reluctant and half-hearted acknowledgment, compelled by the awareness of how critics are sure to view his most extreme assertions. But he never really retreats, he only notes that he has foreseen our objections, as though to suggest that by anticipating our thoughts he has kept one step ahead and thus overcome those objections.

To me, the most appealing and successful essays are the first and last, "Screen Memories," and "The Uncanny." "The Creative Writer and Daydreaming" has some interesting thoughts, though it is rather... light. "Family Romances" is more provocative but also more far-fetched. And finally, "Leonardo da Vinci and a Memory of his Childhood" is simply insane. All of them are worth reading, but to various degrees one must maintain a healthy skepticism when doing so.

[Ashton · Rating 2 out of 5]

Freud has a few rhetorical tics that make his stuff endearing in a fireside-chat-with-grandpa kind of way, but equally frustrating because they so totally confound anything like logical progression.

For instance, he does this thing when he has clearly painted himself into a corner where instead of saying something like so any conclusions I draw must be qualified with this unknown or so let's dig deeper into why this contradiction exists and maybe, I don't know, revise our original thesis depending on what we find, he doubles down and makes these seem like they're actually the strongest and most obvious points in his arguments. That's why readers end up with a bunch of paragraphs whose concluding remarks look something like but everyone already knows enough about how hysterical women are, am I right fellas?, so I'm not going to waste ink on it no matter how vital it is to the larger point I'm trying to make.

Did I mention this book is very dated?

Another tic especially prominent in The Uncanny is partially consequent to the one above. That is, Freud's works build a sense of momentum by plowing through obstacles a lesser psychoanalyst might feel obligated to stop and address, a momentum whose trajectory promises a certain kind of intensely satisfying conclusion that is never fulfilled. Instead, he ends all his longer pieces pretty much the same way, which is effectively the written version of finishing a 2-hour dissertation by shrugging and shuffling out the door before the Q&A begins.

[Julie ~ thecaffeinatedreader · Rating 2 out of 5]

What is it with Freud and his need to trace every single thing back to the castration complex?! This text contains some very interesting thoughts on the derivation of the uncanny but I find it more than unnecessary and – on top of that – fruitless to bring the Oedipus complex and castration anxiety into play – again! In my opinion he could've arrived at an explanation without reverting to those more than questionable concepts but he took the easy way out.