 |
| Rene Magritte, Not to Be Reproduced |
We have noted that The Double can be read productively in light of Freud's theory of the uncanny. We have also discussed the ways in which the text can be understood as more than just a "descent into madness" narrative, that is, as an exploration of the relationship between the individual and the social body and as a social critique of imperial Russian culture in particular. How do these two strains relate? Is it possible to argue that the insights embedded in Dostoevsky's text can only be accessed through the uncanny?
In Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s “The Double”, the protagonist Golyadkin Sr. is an antisocial, passive individual. He is a titular councilor, which is rank 9 in the Table of Ranks. This means that Golyadkin Sr. is not quite considered part of the “upper class” but is the closest level to the “upper class”. Golyadkin’s rank is portrayed clearly through his single servant, Petrushka. Although Golyadkin Sr. has a single servant, he does many questionable things early on in the text that seem to be outside of his rank. One of these actions that particularly stands out to me is the fact that Golyadkin finds it necessary to take a carriage to see the doctor. This form of transportation is not common of a man of his rank and exemplifies that fact that Golyadkin Sr. consistently acts outside of his social order throughout the text.
ReplyDeleteIt is not until later in the text that Golydkin Jr. is introduced, the protagonist’s double. This particular character seems to be an exact replica of Golyadkin Sr., yet he is a much more confident and extroverted individual. This difference in personality traits sets the two as binary opposites. As we discussed in class, what is uncanny is that which converges with its opposite. The moment that Golyadkin Sr. meets his double, it becomes clear as a reader that the text can now be accessed through the uncanny.
I believe that The Double can be read with or without taking into account Freud’s The Uncanny. However, when The Uncanny is not applied to The Double I find that there is not as much depth to the novel. When the reader links The Uncanny to The Double, the depth of the novel increases. In class we discussed how the most frightening part about The Uncanny is that opposites converge and that the familiar can be the most frightening thing. I feel that this frequently happens in The Double. The fact that Golyadkin meets his double, who is like him in almost every way is unnerving. The thought of meeting someone who is like you in every way is extremely frightening. What makes it worse it thinking that someone could share or have experience the same exact things as you have experienced. I find this more frightening than just meeting someone who looks like me. Identical twins for example look the same but they are obviously not, and that is not particularly scary.
ReplyDeleteDostoyevsky’s The Double is, on the surface level, a documentation of a man’s struggle with his social standing. This struggle led to the deterioration of his mental health, which is how the two strains are interconnected; they are fed by each other, similar to the feedback loop, which we have talked about in class. Mr. Golyadkin obviously had an obsession with social hierarchy, imagining himself as a wealthy, respectable man. On the other hand, he saw the reality; he was aware of his social insignificance, thus his spiral into delirium and battle against himself—the double.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that Freud’s interpretation of the uncanny is necessary for the understanding Dostoyevsky’s insights. However, Mr. Golyadkin’s problem is something familiar to us all and feared by us all. At his already fragile state of being, Mr. Golyadkin Jr showed up and absolutely wrecked whatever reputation Mr. Golyadkin Sr had. However, if the reader knows that uncanny is something frightening long lost familiar to us, one is able to understand the uncanniness of this text on a deeper level.
As a class we have discussed how societal norm and codes of conduct rely entirely on the laws put in place by imperial Russia. One’s place in society, the opportunities open to them, and how they act and interact with one another is entirely dependent on their status and how they stand in the Table of Ranks. Golyadkin Sr., who holds a rank of 9, has difficulty in understanding how he fits into society and struggles to balance how he feels he should act with what is socially (and legally) acceptable. While Golyadkin knows how he should not act (for example, he gets extremely uncomfortable and anxious when clerks from his office see him dressed above his rank), he cannot grasp how to integrate what he knows with his actions. The original Golyadkin’s inability to assimilate into the social body stems directly from imperial Russian culture.
ReplyDeleteThis can relate to Sigmund Freud’s “The Uncanny” when we look at the differences between the two men called Golyadkin. The original (Golyadkin Sr.) sees how the double (Golyadkin Jr.) acts and envies the ease in which he becomes accustomed to the strict environment. The men are described as being so similar that it may feel uncomfortable and strange to see how drastically different their approaches to society are. It makes the audience think about how the same exact societal situations can affect two people with such a drastic difference. The societal pressures expressed in this novella by Dostoyevsky are extremely relatable and, though extreme, resonate at least a little with the audience’s own feelings of alienation within their own home, giving this a sense of the uncanny because of the familiarity in an otherwise new and strange situation.
The uncanny plays a significant role in understanding the insights within The Double, and, in my opinion, it is the best way to access Dostoyevsky’s insights about the rank system in imperial Russia. Without the use of the uncanny, this text would lack a lot of the meaning and insights the uncanny adds to it. Mr. Golyadkin experienced feelings of insignificance about his inability to rise in the Table of Ranks. It was technically possible for him to rise to the eighth rank, but it was highly improbable. This feeling of insignificance was highlighted when he met his double, who “seemed to him now somehow familiar” (Dostoyevsky, 36). The uncanny is the return of that which was once familiar, and Dostoyevsky frequently utilizes this description of the double. The double of Mr. Golyadkin is exactly the same in appearance and name, but he differs from Mr. Golyadkin in his manner. This contrast allows Dostoyevsky to compare two seemingly familiar people to show the madness Mr. Golyadkin experienced as a result of his inability to adjust to the strict and unnatural social system in Russia. It emphasizes the difficulties that Mr. Golyadkin experiences by showing his double’s ability to fit into this system with ease. The uncanny is also utilized through Mr. Golyadkin’s mechanical movements. At one point Mr. Golyadkin “was mechanically and unconsciously moving the pen over the paper” during his job at work (Dostoyevsky, 43). This particular movement is often repeated when Mr. Golyadkin is experiencing dissatisfaction with his job and life in the rank system. The repetition relays an uncanny feeling that the reader eventually associates with the dissatisfaction of his life within the rank system.
ReplyDelete