Stewart 2

 

At its end, the film suggests that it is possible to interpret what Norman Bates did, and at this point Hitchcock truly begins to tell a horror story. Much more shocking than some fatal knifings committed in a shower is not so much the idea that "person" and "body" do not necessarily come in 1-1 ratios, but further that it is possible to be denied access to and awareness of some other consciousness going on in your head and having a relationship with the actions of your body. This is the wildest attack of first-person authority possible while still affirming its basic premises: Sure, you and only you have direct access to your thoughts and feelings, but what if there are times when the Cartesian projector is running, but "you" are not in the theatre?

To explain what specific Cartesian inheritance I mean, let's examine how the audience is invited to accept a particular story of Norman Bates, a story that is faithful to the Cartesian-style picture I just mentioned. [Note] The final scene of Psycho, the "explanation," is given through none other than a representative of the institution of psychiatry. The scene begins with all the characters (who are still alive) waiting in a room. The Sheriff notes, "Well if anyone can get any answers, it will be the psychiatrist. Even I couldn't get to Norman, and he knows me." At that point, right on cue, the psychiatrist enters the room. "Did he talk to you?" someone asks. "No" is his reply. Following a pause, the psychiatrist continues:

I got the whole story. But not from Norman. I got it … from his mother. Norman Bates no longer exists. He only half-existed to begin with. And now, the other half has taken over … probably for all time. (emphasis mine)

What follows is the testimony of this expert as to the profound state of Norman's mental confusion. He explains how Norman Bates came to commit matricide (which the psychiatrist claims is "the most unbearable crime of them all. Most unbearable to the son who commits it"), develop a seriously paranoid and disturbed manifestation of dual personality, and murder at least three other women and two men. As we are told by the psychiatrist, Norman's story unfolds according to the following kind of pattern. It begins with a certain type of environment: A dysfunctional relationship with his mother (she is highly manipulative and demanding) and pronounced isolation (he lives entirely alone with his small family). Next, a specific kind of event: One that is highly shocking and traumatic (the sudden death of his father). This event intensifies the dysfunctional nature of his environment, for now he is entirely alone with his overbearing mother in complete isolation. (The psychiatrist takes care to note with emphasized disdain: "His mother was a clinging, demanding woman. And for years, the two of them lived as if there was no one else in the world. Then, she met a man….") Their relationship is degenerate enough for Norman to be highly disturbed at this point, and when his mother takes a lover, his intertwined existence with her is dangerously threatened. It proves to be the catalyst of a series of fatal intrusions upon this isolated world that shapes Norman's highly fragile psyche. As the psychiatrist continues,

He was simply doing everything possible to keep alive the illusion that his mother was alive. And when reality came too close … when danger or desire threatened that illusion … he dressed up. Even used a cheap wig he bought. He'd walk about the house, sit in her chair, speak in her voice. He tried to be his mother. And aah … now he is. Now that's what I meant when I said I got the story from the mother. You see, when the mind houses two personalities, there's always a conflict. A battle. In Norman's case, the battle is over. And the dominant personality has won. (emphasis mine)

This explanation gets off the ground only if Norman Bates is straightforwardly a Cartesian subject with respect to constitutive self-knowledge.3 That is, unless we understand that the ability to access his innermost thoughts, feelings, and memories is necessarily a privileged ability constitutive of Norman as an agent, then it could not make sense to say that his mind "houses" a personality, let alone more than one. Norman's personality is itself understood as that self-contained set of memories, feelings, and intentional states to which Norman has introspective access. Norman is positioned as a self-knowing subject insofar as his knowledge is grounded in certainties about access to his mental states.

______________________

3 Not to mention some kind of psychoanalytic example of degenerate attachment to unstable parental figures.


return to top | previous page | next page