Download Exploring Animal Interrelations in Fiction: 'Under the Skin' Study and more Assignments Humanities in PDF only on Docsity!
UNDER THE SKIN: THE INFLUENCE OF FICTION AND ITS
MEDIUMS IN ANIMAL INTERRELATIONS
If I can think my way into the existence of a being who has never existed, then I can think my way into the existence of a bat or a chimpanzee or an oyster, any being with^1 Science fiction is a genre that constantly brings humanity into question, and this has grown with the fast development of technology and Artificial Intelligence, as we can see in Delacruzâs work and study on the subject, which proves that AI (Artificial Intelligence) growth has affected the fiction genre in looking for a more animal approach, returning to the roots. As Derrida and Berger claimed, the animalâs gaze is not recognised anymore due to^2 this technification and âevolutionâ which has taken away all sort of real interaction with non-human animals in our daily lives. As Vint argued, âthe use of animals in contemporary society is increasingly invisible: they are hidden.â 3 And thus, fiction becomes the perfect transport for animals to come back to our lives, including ourselves. However, this development not only rises questions of humanity in relation to technology, but also to animality. The fast pace in which technology evolves creates a space (^3) Sherryl Vint, Animal Alterity (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2010), p. 1. (^2) John Berger, âWhy Look At Animals?â in About Looking (UK: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 2009) http://artsites.ucsc.edu/faculty/gustafson/film%20161.f08/readings/berger.animals%202.pdf [Accessed 20 February 2019]. Jacques Derrida and David Wills, âThe Animal That Therefore I Am (More to Follow),â Critical Inquiry , 28.2 (2002), 369-418 https://doi.org/10.1086/449046. (^1) J. M Coetzee and Amy Gutmann, The Lives of Animals (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016).
ESSAY 1. EL45KP
where animals disappear and our animality arises. What we understand as human gets blurred and fiction becomes a crucial space for human exploration, and in an era of technological evolution, fiction becomes a space of humanity exploration in relation to nature and hence, animals. Our concept and understanding of what being a non-human animal and a human entail gets complicated. Being so, a point of exploration is raised, and it becomes enlightening when linked to animality, as is the case of Michel Faberâs novel Under the Skin (2000). However, one may consider Delacruzâs affirmation: âBooks and screenplays are now the foundation of the stories we tell, while televised media and feature films are the hub of our entertainment pleasure.â 4 Therefore, the essay will not only focus on the novel but its film adaptation, directed by Jonathan Glazer (2014). It will analyse both works as fictional and will study the ways in which they succeed in bringing human and non-human animals together to explain why fiction, in its different mediums, is a powerful tool to create awareness and criticism on this relationship. Through an analysis of Michel Faberâs novel and its film adaptation by Jonathan Glazer, this essay will prove Vintâs assertion that fiction -science fiction specifically- can defy Derridaâs philosophical-poetical differences in conceiving the animal, because as she affirms^5 science fiction's âgeneric premises enable us to imagine the animal quite literally looking at and addressing us from a non-anthropocentric perspective.â Hence, it will prove that fiction^6 6 Vint, p. 6. 5 Derrida. (^4) Yvonne A. De La Cruz, âScience Fiction Storytelling And Identity: Seeing The Human Through Android Eyesâ (California State University Stanislaus), p. 1, https://www.csustan.edu/sites/default/files/honors/documents/journals/thresholds/Delacruz.pdf [Accesed 10 February 2019].
ESSAY 1. EL45KP
consciousness is awaken and our perspective is suddenly broaden to that of the human, which becomes an alien for the reader, though not losing our own perspective or that of the author, as Vint argues, âthis voice of the animal in sf is, of course, a voice speaking for the animal.â 10 Hence, we are faced with four different perspectives: the authorâs, oursâ, Eisserleyâs and finally the one from the animals that she takes into the car, which is recurrent in every encounter she has with them. Language is key when talking about fiction, as it is freed from social constructions and reality. However, the authorâs context cannot be disjointed from it completely. Nevertheless, this only happens to a certain degree, and the technique remains effective in altering the readerâs perspective. Dillon study is especially important in this area, as she realises how language changes when referring to the animals and the inanimate nature described in the book: affirming that âof all their body parts, the vodselsâ heads, faces, and facial features are most often linguistically transformedâ 11 into Eisserleyâs viewpoint. Capturing this brings us to change our own perspective of the animal, moving them from our social image of the superior human animal to that of a human animal whose superiority fades into his own concept of animal. Indeed, âthe transference of this species name to the alien animal race of which the main character, Eisserley, is a member, the novel demonstrates that the division between human and nonhuman animals is indeed a question of language;â 12 a question with which Faber plays -consciously or not- when leading us to misjudgement at the start of his book. We believe we are reading through the viewpoint of an animal â just like ourselves. However, we realise later that we are viewing the story from (^12) Dillon, p. 135. 11 Sarah Dillon, ââItâs A Question Of Words, Thereforeâ: Becoming-Animal In Michel Faberâs Under The Skin,â Science Fiction Studies , 38.113 (2011), p. 142, https://www.depauw.edu/sfs/backissues/113/dillon.html [Accessed 19 February 2019]. (^10) Vint, p.179.
ESSAY 1. EL45KP
the point of view of an alien, which is named to us as a human. Hence, after bringing us to think of the story as that of what we understand as a human and having us trapped in her body as such, we are shocked when realising we have been emphasising an understanding what we understand as an alien, which is then named human. And indeed, as we see in the description below, this human has non-human animal features, but still we understand what she is feeling. While Eisserley is becoming an animal, we are becoming human. Which as Vint clearly pointed out, affirms that âanimals in sf can return to us a face-to-face encounter with another being whom we regard as a fellow subject.â 13 An encounter which is located in between these two processes described by Deleuze. A situation than turn the afflicter into the afflicted.^14 On the other hand, we have Glazerâs adaptation, which as he asserted did not want to make the book a film but rather make a film about the book. This gives the reader a clue of how the recreation of the original story is changed and altered in this cinematographic version. Glazer not only takes away the steading and the group controlling Eisserley, but also their nonhuman animal shape, that similar to a dog/cat in the novel. However, even though the original story is reinvented, fiction remains present, and is indeed creating âa vision of communicating with a non-human species.â 15 Even though words are clearly not the base of the work, the essence of the story remains the same: a nonhuman animal is changed into the shape of a woman who kills men. But all the background for this is only hinted in the film. And indeed, there is only reference to human-like animals. However, this constant need (^15) Vint, p. 22. (^14) Anat Pick, Creaturely Poetics: Animality And Vulnerability in Literature and Film (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011). (^13) Vint, p. 11.
ESSAY 1. EL45KP
looking is constantly being referred to in the film, and the scene in which Eisserley is exploring herself int eh mirror is especially relevant in this matter, as it resembles Derridaâs explanation of his catâs gaze. Eisserley is looking at the naked body of an animal from her human perspective. However, she is part of the animal herself, she is both animal and human. But she is using her human gaze. Here, the roles are switched again, and Derridaâs story is repeated with exchanged gazes, making a clear statement through visuality: is there a difference to be made? What makes us different? In conclusion, fiction must not be simplified to literature but must be understood with a wider lens that conveys different mediums, as in this case film and literature. While fiction in literature can, as Vint argued, âconvey some sense of the animalâs experience,â^18 with film it can literally situate the viewer in the alien perspective. This does not aim to undermine literatureâs power to engage with the reader, but it does want to bring filmâs power into attention as a medium which defies language, and hence becomes successful in fighting what Derrida tries to deconstruct in his study. Such as Vint argued, âanimals have long served as a foil for how humans define themselves,â 19 but in this case, the roles are interchanged, it is an animal who is wearing a human foil, and doing so is opening a new space that counterbalances the differences between nonhuman and human animals in using fiction to change positions and hence let the audience understand what it is to be human from the outside, which will lead to breaking of the fake imposed borders between creatures. As the essay has shown, different fictional techniques can be used in order to do so, and indeed, as one can acknowledge from 19 Vint, p. 17. (^18) Vint, p. 5.
ESSAY 1. EL45KP
the short analysis, fiction is especially successful in its multidisciplinary field, creating not only one point of view, but various ones, which not only aims to awaken our mind through words, but also through images, sounds, smells and textures: through kinetic imagination.^20 Imagination that is enabled by the use of fiction to break the âtragically restrictive.â^21 Having studied a literary and a cinematic work, one may wonder, what if we create one work that conveys both techniques? Would comics or graphic novels become a more successful space in liaising human and nonhuman animal relationships? Would them as Chute argued, be the perfect option?^22 (^22) Hillary Chute, âComics as Literature? Reading Graphic Narrative,â PMLA, 123.2 (2008), 452- https://doi.org/10.1632/pmla.2008.123.2. (^21) Pick. (^20) Pick.
ESSAY 1. EL45KP
Pick, Anat, Creaturely Poetics: Animality And Vulnerability in Literature and Film (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011) âUnder The Skin: Book Vs. Film,â The Readhead , 2015 https://thereadheadblog.wordpress.com/2015/02/13/under-the-skin-book-vs-film/ [Accessed 19 February 2019] Valdez, Gabriel Diego, âAn Interview With Michel Faber, Author Of âUnder The Skinâ,â Gabriel Diego Valdez , 2014 https://basilmarinerchase.wordpress.com/2014/06/06/an-interview-with-michel-faber-auth or-of-under-the-skin/ [Accessed 19 February 2019] Vint, Sherryl, Animal Alterity (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2010) WORD COUNT: 2330
