2. The Postmodern Monster:
“The postmodern monster is no longer the
other storming the gates of the human
citadel , he has already disrupted the careful
geography of self and other ,and he makes
the peripheral and marginal part of the
center.
3. :
Monsters within postmodernism are already
inside the house, the body ,the head ,
the skin, the nation – and they work their
way out. Accordingly, it is the human , the
facade of the normal ,which tends to
become the place of terror within
Postmodern Gothic “
(Halberstam,1995)
4. Queries which have triggered
the present research
How does cinema function as a
signifying practice?
How do cultures conceptualize and
metaphorize monstrous alterity ?
How do the iconic and linguistic signifiers
interact in order to create meaning
within an audio-visual-verbal text such
as a film ?
5. Queries which have triggered
the present research
What is the importance of the intradiegetic
gaze within a cinematic text?
How are fictional epistemic worlds
constructed?
What is the connection between alterity and
fictional monstrosity ?
What kind of links may be established
between human cognition processes and
cinematic film practice?
6. Structure of the present paper
A-Theoretical Framework : Multidisciplinay
approach in order to deal with a multicodal
text .Several perspectives should be taken
into account .
B- Analysis : Corpus .The Silence of the
Lambs .The Epistemic World of the film and
the construction of fictional subjectivitiy The
serial killer as Gothic monster
7. A-The Process of Cinematic-
Discursive construction of the
monstrous serial murderer
1-The Cinematic Perspective
2-The Construct of Monstrosity : possible
views
3-The Literary Perspective
4-The Linguistic Perspective
8. 1-Historical Reception
Studies(Staiger,1993)
No immanent textual meaning
No free readers
Interpretation strategies determined by socio-
cultural conditions
No unified reading
Best means of interpretation is multidisciplinary.
(Staiger,1993)
9. The Movie Thriller as Metagenre
(Rubin,2002)
A genre might be defined as a series of syntactic
and semantic conventions which interact with
spectatorial interpretive strategies and
expectations.
Labyrinthine nature of the thriller
Ambiguity of narrative structure
These two characteristics are part of the
epistemic world of the film.
10. Safe vs. Paranoid Horror (Tudor,1989):
Safe Horror (1920-1950)
Narrative closure
Monsters seen as external threats
Efficient human agency
Faith in institutitons
Clear boundary order/ chaos
Monster expelled,(ab)jected
11. Paranoid Horror(1950-the present)
No narrative closure
Monstrous threat within psyche or society
Institutions are the site of danger
Fuzzy boundaries between order/chaos
Ineffectual human agency
The Silence of the Lambs is located within
this patadigm .
13. The construct of
Monstrosity:Views II
1-The monster as an impure, hybrid entity
2- Abjection: that which respects no
(b)orders and pushes against the Symbolic
order
3-The Gothic fin-de –siecle (ab)human
subject
4-The monster as the cognitive-metaphorical
embodiment of repressed childhood fears
14. The Construct of
Monstrosity:Views III
5--The monster as the link between
the Symbolic and the Lacanian Real
6-The monster as a culturally and
historically contingent discursive
construct. Difference made flesh
7-The monster as the oppressed
Other
15. The Serial Killer (SK) as
Contemporary
Monster(Jenkins,1994)
Compulsive
Obssessive and Repetitive
Rootless
Irrational
Lustful
Violent
Predatory
The Cannibal Other
Wound Culture (Seltzer,1998)
16. 3-The Literary-Generic
Perspective (Gomel ,2003
-Simpson 2000)
Generic Origins of SK Narratives
The Gothic Genre: (Ab)human Subjectivity
is not fully human .Deployment fo the
construct of monstrosity in Gothic
narratives .
19th Century Detective Fiction: Cartesian
Subjectivity.The embodied subject . Skin as
signifier of embodied humanity.
17. Discourse :Formalist and Functionalist
approaches .The suittabiity of the
Functionalist paradigm.
Interactions in Institutitonal Settings
4-The Linguistic Perspective
18. Interactions in Institutitonal
Settings (Drew and Leena-
Sorjensesn , 1997)
Focus of this approach : interaction
between participants in order to achieve
institutitonal goals .
Linguistic and paralinguistic resources
are equally crucial .Crucial importance of
the gaze foregrounded by CA .
Both text and (con)text are taken into
consideration . Erving Goffman’s
concept of Framing .
19. B-Analysis
How does film articulate the visual and
linguistic signifiers in narrative terms ?
The importance of mise-en-scene and
editing as contextualizing cues
Relation between language and image in
narrative film. Barthes: anchorage,relay
The roles played by the intradiegetic gaze
20. Relationship Gaze –Utterance in
film texts (Poggi-Pelechaud ,2000)
The comunicative meanings of the gaze
as a paralinguistic feature
Poggi and Pelechaud’s taxonomy :
Information conveyed about the world
Information on the Sender’s Mind
22. Information on the Sender’s
Mind :
Certainty eyes
Metacognitive eyes
Performative eyes
Topic-comment eyes
Meta –discursive eyes
Meta- conversational eyes
Affective eyes
23. Analysis I :The Interview at the
FBI Headquarters
The linguistic component is analysed .
The visual narrative is addressed taking
editng and mise-en-scene into
consideration.
The interaction gaze -utterance is
explored since this is the genesis of
fictional subjectivity .The interaction
between linguistic and paralinguistic
features is addressed in the analysis of
the selected scene .
24. Analysis II
The chart illustartes the interrelation
between camera shots , gaze and
utterance .
Cinematic fictional subjectivity is partly
the result of this interactive process.
The deitic /Symbolic gaze is focussed on
the abject work of the monstrous
Other,thus acknowledging the prescence
of monstrous abhumanness within the
habitat of the human liberal subject.
25. Cognitive Linguistics:Conceptual
Metaphors :The Experientialist
Model (Lakoff and Johnson in
Rash,2005)
Target Domain (abstract notions )
Source Domain (concrete experiences )
Conceptual Mappings : They underlie
the epistemic world of the film and thus
contribute to the creation of fictional
selfhood.
26. The Epistemic World of
the Film (Stockwell, 2002)
1-Mappings which structure the
cinematic-discursive construction of
Cartesian subjectivity (Kilgour,1998).
2-Mappings which are the conceptual
basis for the construction of the
monstrous Other .
3-Mappings which destabilize the
binarism upon which the text is built .
27. The Epistemic World of the
Film :Conceptual Mappings I
EVIL IS DOWN
GOOD IS UP
CRIME FIGHTING IS WAR
THE MIND IS UNDER SIEGE
ABJECTION IS A MURDERED BODY
THE BODY IS A BATTLEGROUND
KNOWING IS SEEING.
28. Conceptual Mappings II :
MURDERED BODIES ARE BLOOD PALIMPSESTS
MURDERED BODIES ARE SPECTACLES
GORE IS DEATH
THE SKIN IS A (B)ORDER
THE SELF IS A BOUNDED SPACE
THE USE OF THE FORENSIC GAZE ON A
MURDERED BODY IS READING
29. Conceptual Mappings III :
BODILY WOUNDS ARE SIGNS
THE DETECTIVE OR CRIMINAL PROFILER IS
A SEMIOTICIAN
SERIAL KILLERS ARE WRITERS
MURDER IS AN ACT OF COMMUNICATION
THE BODY IS A TERRITORY
30. Conceptual Mappings IV:
THE HEAD IS A ROOM
INSTITUTIONS ARE FAMILIES
SERIAL KILLERS ARE PREDATORS
SERIAL KILLING IS HUNTING
LAW ABIDING BEHAVIOUR IS MOVEMENT IN A
STRAIGHT LINE
SERIAL KILLERS ARE MONSTERS
31. Conceptual Mappings V:
THE CORPSE OF THE FLAYED VICTIM IS
MONSTROUS ABHUMANNESS
CANNIBALISM IS CROSSING (B)ORDERS
VICTIMS ARE PREY
VICTIMS ARE FOOD
PAIN IS FOOD
THE MINDS OF SERIAL KILLERS ARE DARK
CELLS
32. Conceptual Mappings VI:
DEVIANT OFFENDERS ARE OBJECTS OF
STUDY AND CATEGORIZATION
TOTAL OR SEMI-TOTAL INSTITUTIONS ARE
LABYRINTHS
SERIAL KILLERS ARE REVERSE
COLONIZERS OF BODIES AND MINDS
STATE SURVELLIANCE IS SYMBOLIC
CANNIBALISM
34. Constraints and weaknesses
of the present paper
No auditory metaphors were analysed
Choice of limited but representative corpus
No exploration of cognitive audio-spectatorial
processes
No systematic analysis of gender roles and
the gendered Gaze was implemented
Functionalist multidisciplinary perspective
was followed
35. Cinematic narratives play a crucial role
in the construction of cultural
stereotypes.
Fictional selfhood is the result of both
generic narrativization and cognitive
cinematic –discursive elaboration
processes.
An interdisciplinary approach is best
suited to the interpretive analysis of film
texts .
Conclusions I
Have the initial queries been
addressed?
36. Conclusions II
The intradiegetic gaze is a crucial
componenet of fictional cinematic
subjectivity .
The importance of mise-en-scene and
editing as a contextualization cues
cannot be underestimated .
Cognitive Linguistics offers the invaluble
opportunity to delve into the way in
which fictional minds are constructed .
37. ConclusionsIII
Metaphorization is ideologically loaded and
as such it may serve diverse political
agendas.
Monstrosity functions as an epistemic-
organizational device which both
endorses and undermines the subjectivity
of the liberal Cartesian subject .
Canibalisation is a powerful deconstructive
force which effectively blurrs boundaries
between Self and Other .
