Eyes! Birds! Walnuts! Pennies! Writing Psychosis
Erin Soros – University of East Anglia
My essay explores the formal challenge involved in using words to describe the experience of trauma-induced psychosis, or ‘brief reactive psychosis.’ This specific type of madness—intense, discrete, short-lived—can occur when an experience such as rape or military combat literally overwhelms conceptual understanding and psychological containment. The essay will weave back and forth between a psychoanalytic reading of trauma, a philosophical analysis of language, and an exploration of literary and clinical representations. Through this interplay, I will elucidate the debilitating free-fall that occurs when one slips from linguistic frames. I argue that psychosis takes place as a formidable moment of ‘unjoining’—to turn inside-out one of Martin Heidegger’s terms—in which the systems of associations that give our world meaning suddenly begin to tear apart.
Yet in this fall, psychosis itself becomes a form of creative container. If no one can accompany you in your journey to madness, you must invent your own witness. The light is watching me! When meaning begins to slip, we grasp at anything—Eyes! Birds! Walnuts! Pennies!—in hope of finding some trace of communication. In madness we fall on the other side of words, on the animals’ side, with their unspeaking God. Ultimately, the essay will elucidate its own impossibility by examining the paradox of trying to capture in language an experience that occurs at and as its threshold.
Psychosis, as a moment of communicative failure, might tell us something fundamental about the structure of language itself. In grave states of mental illness, one can experience what is clinically called ‘word salad’—a floundering that is alternatively jubilance and terror, in which language fails to make sense because its associations become indefinite and out of control. Sounds and meanings echo, syllables shimmering like water, becoming everything, becoming nothing. ‘We are just going to the hospital.’ We are just. Just. Justice. Jest. Jess, do I know someone named Jess? Jessica, jester, adjust her. Judd. JJJJ. Udd udd udder. Other. Other other other otter otter. O O O. On the other extreme, one can also experience ‘errors of reference,’ moments when it seems as if language were speaking its secret hidden self directly to us. The poster at the bus stop is a message from my beloved! The music video tells me, in code, how to find him! So: on the one hand, the sliding arbitrary play of the signifier. On the other hand, a sign that is magically sutured to the speaker alone. To make language work—to function sanely within our daily alphabet—we must constantly be negotiating a realm of meaning between these two poles: we use a word by limiting its association, and then we direct words at each other, even though we know we can never really hold them or make them hold.
Composite Characters in Autobiographical & Ethnographic Writing: Unethical or Honest?
Katie Karneham – Indiana Wesleyan University
Combining the Creative and the Critical: the letter and the academic essay
Rhiannon Marks – University of Aberystwyth
From Legislative to Interpretive Modes of Travel: Baudrillard in ‘America'
Dr Gillian Jein - University of Stirling
Travel writing reveals a desire for legibility of the Other. Between the act of travel and the writing of the journey we perceive the need for a bridge to reach from the confrontation of the signs of difference to the communication of those signs, necessitating a transition into language. This language, however, risks sedimentation; the settling of difference into the dust of sameness, and the hermeneutic challenge to solve cultural illegibility often leads to the imposition of conventional oppositions that eradicate alterity. Extending Zygmunt Bauman’s distinction between the ‘legislative’ and ‘interpretive’ intellectual discourse to modalities of travel writing, such an imposition may be considered a legislative mode of travel writing, and one that is in constant jeopardy of lapsing into culturally imperialist attitudes. Travel writing’s non-fictional status, therefore, entails a position on the broader horizon of ethical debate, and implicates it in representational strategies enabling the persistence of cultural hegemonies.
Taking these risks into account, and engaging with the ethical debate surrounding the aesthetics of travel writing, this paper puts forward a response to criticisms of Jean Baudrillard’s America, which have described the travelogue variously as neo-imperialist, Eurocentric, anti-humanist, perverse, and worst of all, conservative. These critiques, stemming from the urgency of postcolonial ethical stances, position the travelogue as an aesthetic form of legislation for the Other, thus enabling a dismissal of the text as the culmination of an imperialist, Eurocentric gaze. Alternatively, I suggest that Baudrillard’s America is indicative of a still problematic, reflexive mode of writing that falls beyond the reach of the conventional ethics of travel criticism. Read as an interpretive, nomadic form of travel writing, America demonstrates not only an awareness of the artificial or constructed relationship between sign and object, but also, through its dislocation of signifiers, plays with the extremities of legislative discourse so as to reveal the very impossibility of such legislation. Rather than an Other, what emerges from this travel account, therefore, is an alterity of signscapes, an auto-reflexive and culturally critical space, that raises the question of whether it is ever, or will ever, be possible to travel write ethically. In reading Baudrillard’s travelogue in this way, I engage with the challenge its aesthetic modalities pose to the frameworks of travel studies criticism, and in so doing hope to nuance postmodernist travel writing’s ethical legacy to the shape of current critical strategies.