The Ego Ghost: Existence within the Screen Universe

The Ego Ghost: Existence within the Screen Universe

“If dreams are like movies, then memories are films about ghosts” - Counting Crows.

“I had my dream all ready for you, but while I was lying here looking at it, it began to move in circles far from me, wrapped up on itself, again and again, like two acrobats” (2009: p. 181) this utterance from a woman in psychoanalysis as outlined in Jean-Louis Baudry’s “The Apparatus” lends itself to Lewin’s hypothesis of a dream screen. Her statement describes a projection of the unconscious dream, that she is incapable of sustaining, it fades and inverts upon itself as it withdraws into her subconscious. While comparison of dreams and the cinema effect have been both related and refuted, it remains undeniable that a certain metamorphosis, similar to the dream, occurs in the sutured spectator. In exploring this phenomenon, I will hypothesis the existence of a psychic entity which will be termed the Ego-Ghost. This essay seeks to define the Ego-Ghost, from its inception in plastic arts to its cinematic manifestation in the modern era. Further consideration of the modus operando of the Ego-Ghost in the film viewer and supporting evidence will be presented. The essay is theoretical in nature and thus offers only to pose questions to the researcher rooted in empirical knowledge.As a premise to the discussion, a differentiation between perspective and perception should be recognized. Pre-cinematic plastic arts and most notably the art of painting are rooted in perspective. According to “Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematic Apparatus”, Baudry explains that “Painting is nothing more than the intersection of the visual pyramid following a given distance, a fixed center, and certain lighting” (p. 41). A viewer’s perspective is then based upon the recognition and misrecognition and coded material conditions. In contrast, perception has been defined as a single unified awareness derived from sensory processes while a stimulus is present. The perception of a painting entails the viewer psychically positioning their self into the perspective field presented. This concept as first identified in western painting is outlined in the Daniel Dayan article, “The Tudor Code Of Classical Cinema”, which states,“When I occupy the place of the subject, the codes which led me to occupythis place become invisible to me. The signifiers of the presence of thesubject disappear from my consciousness because they are the signifiersof my presence, what I perceive is their signified: myself”(p. 112).The codes which Dayan references would include the frame, surface tension of the paint on canvas and the perspective of the composition. In similarity to the fading dream this static self-projection within painting or the photographic still frame is only sustained for a momentary duration. Yet, it is the capacity to produce the self-projection, in and of its self, which provides a foundational model for suture in cinema. If the self has been projected beyond the senses through the presented stimulus, then where exactly has it gone? Noel Carroll, one of Baudry’s staunchest critics, argues exhaustively in “Jean-Louis Baudry and The Apparatus” against “The Apparatus”. The critical essay provides a deconstruction of Baudry’s work in the tradition of analytical philosophy and cognitive psychology. Carroll’s essay, however, reveals a well-disguised chink it’s criticism armor,“Baudry has in mind that the viewer lacks the ability to test reality within theworld of the film. That is, the movie viewer cannot enter the visual array on-screen in order to ascertain whether the buildings in Siegfried are concrete ormerely cardboard” (p. 198).This acknowledgment of the existence of a “world of the film” or what will be termed the Screen Universe is never posited by Carroll. In restricting the argument to the real world and ignoring the perceptive self within the Screen Universe, Carroll creates a single sided dialectic. The concrete analysis provided of the real world side of the screen is equivalent to a cardboard tiger beyond which lies the other half of the argument. The inception of Ego-Ghost theory will address both sides of the screen and shall demonstrate the process which creates the single unified awareness that is present in perception.The term Ego-Ghost reflects the Ego as the enduring conscious element that knows experience and the Ghost as a disembodied spirit imagined. The Ego-Ghost possesses a spiritous attribute that transcends the fourth wall of cinema and enters the Screen Universe. Within the Screen Universe it has the freedom to experiment with sexual fantasy, murder, taboo, gender reversal, crime and societal deviations that are not permitted by the Ego. The Ego-Ghost externally observes the terrain, it sees without being seen through the camera eye of the apparatus. It invades characters internally as the emotive inhabitant of unisexual roles both individually and in groups. Its unbounded capacity to travel through time and space or metamorphose into the point of view of humans, creatures and lend agency to image objects defines it as a transcendental entity. As the article “Identification, Mirror” from Christian Metz’s “The Imaginary Signifier” states,“In other words, the spectator identifies with himself, with himself as a pure actof perception: as the condition of possibility of the perceived and hence as akind of transcendental subject, which comes before every there is” (p. 697).We may now consider how this transcendental subject operates within and outside of the spectator. The Ego-Ghost journeys from the spectator to screen universe and back again, the best example of this is demonstrated through cinema itself. The journey has been repeatedly portrayed in films such as The Wizard of Oz (Fleming, 1939), The Matrix (Wachowski & Wachowski, 1999), Chronicles of Narnia (Adamson, 2005) and Alice in Wonderland, (Burton, 2010). In these film narratives, the character exists in the real world then passes beyond a screen or mirror. The new world is full of impossible realities and magical symbols. Through navigation of the imaginary, unexpected wonderful and sometimes frightening circumstances are revealed. Having completed the adventure, the character then returns to the real world after gaining a psychic insight. The retained insight is often used as a talisman to assist them in the real world. Similarly, the Ego-Ghost exists as a shadow element of the self, which is governed by real world cognition and physicality. It passes beyond the screen barrier and is set free to roam in the dimension of the Screen Universe. Explorations commence in the newly presented imaginary and symbolic planes as information is absorbed or discarded based on continual updated predictions, prediction errors and error adjustments or compensations. Upon exiting the Screen Universe the Ego-Ghost recedes and the Ego retains a psychic imprint to draw upon in its social conformity.The transcendental entity of the spectator within the Screen Universe has been recognized by many film theorists. Identified by Jean-Pierre Oudart in Dayans essay as the “absent one” (p.115). Laura Mulvey in her feminist theory essay on gaze theory, “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema”, acknowledges the presence of the “Invisible Guest” (p.722). In Claire Pitkethly’s essay, “Derrida, Deleuze and a Duck: The Movement of the Circulating Differential in Comic Book Analysis”, application of the centric X is explored within and between the frames of the comic book as follows, “For Deleuze, the presence of object = x is configured in conjunction with the object’s very absence: it is present and absent at once, or present precisely as absent” (p. 284). The above listed theories point to the existence of a third presence or “Other” within the Screen Universe. The primary distinction of Ego-Ghost Theory (EGT) is in its identification of the “Other” which resides within the spectator and in the Screen Universe. The means of identification will be through Jaques Lacan’s psychoanalytic theorem use of the Borromean knot.The knot consists of three conjoined strands or ropes in a mathematical model. The respective strands interweave and overlap one another and act as dependent nodes. Points of contact, intersects and absent spaces or holes perform specific psychic functions. The knot operates as an amalgam synthesis in a triad. To expand the concept for our discussion, we will refer in broad terms to three circles or spheres (Illustration A). Each sphere represents one of the following: Real, Imaginary and Symbolic (RIS). The three spheres encompass our primary human psychic reference points. They are the limitations of enlightened understanding in the expanding conscious and unconscious experience which constitutes the self. The self operates as a conjoined formation of the three spheres, the areas of intersect providing transference. It is important to note that Lacan’s terms of Real, Imaginary and Symbolic differ from the conventional meaning. The Imaginary Sphere operates in the identification or the misrecognition of all subjective experience. The Symbolic Sphere constitutes order and language through the shifting or sliding of identified signifier and signified codes, The Real Sphere differs by its conceptual nature, as explained in Adam Reyes (2010) essay incorporating Andrew Cutrofello (2002) which states,“Lacan relies upon figures such as this knot precisely because he istheorizing a space of subjectivity where the Real and reality do notcoincide necessarily. It is where the subject cannot be pinned to apoint in physical space but, instead, exists in a liminal dimension ofshared language, meanings, and inter-corporeality found in the spheresof Symbolic and Imaginary existence: "it literally requires us to assumethat all of phenomenal 'reality' has the character of a dream whose hiddenground-the real-can only 'appear' as a problematic x, as a signifier, as astain within aisthesis"” (Cutrofello 2002, p.163).The Real Sphere (RS) in the Ego or conscious self asserts a primacy over the Imaginary Sphere (IS) and Symbolic Sphere (SS). In the Maria De Gras (2006) essay Le Synthome she describes the importance Lacan attributed to the Real Sphere,“This emphasis stems from the highly fuel-efficient primacy given byhim (Lacan) to the real, at the end of his work, which leads to the choiceof knot theory, beyond the imaginary model.” (p. 94) and,“Recourse to node topology, cryptic reference to psychoanalysis, in anattempt to include the space in its three dimensions, thus surpassingthe inadequacy of the imaginary (IS) and the effects of binary speculate (SS)and allowing impossible reciprocity between subject and object (RS) causeof desire.” (p. 95).The theoretical spheres are conjoined within a three dimensional space. The spheres have a centralized conjoined space or centric space where all three interact. Additionally, three spaces exist around the centric where each of the two spheres overlaps. The spaces are separated by non-tangible permeable membranes that allow the transference of information. The centric space is identified as A in Illustration A as 2 dimensional form. The entirety of the spherical model is the shell that is the Ego and the centric space as the conception point of the Ego-Ghost. When the perception of the spectator passes beyond the perspective or screen barrier the Ego-Ghost is born. If the (RIS) Spheres are directed onto the composition a psychic phenomenological occurrence within the centric space begins. The transference of information from all three spheres is directed to the centric space and a replicated sphere model emerges. The Stain, X, Other, signifier-signified self or Ego-Ghost within the perspective field, in actuality, exists within, and is projected from, the concentric space of the (RIS) Spheres. Something of significance happens to the newly formed Ego-Ghost once it is projected into the Screen Universe.The screen barrier acts as a lens in the tradition of the Camera Obscura by inverting the perceptive spectator’s newly formed (RIS) model. This projected Ego-Ghost gives rise to both the (SS) and the (IS) which, in tandem asserts primacy over the (RS). The (RS) of the Ego-Ghost is relegated to processing new imaginary and symbolic plane information acquired by the (IS) and (SS). Consider that the Ego-Ghost exists within the centric space of the spheres as a sub-replica of the (RIS) model and operates as an inverted psychic model of the Ego within the Screen Universe.The inverted inner (RIS) model that is projected beyond the outer (RIS) shell enjoys the privilege of a non-physically threatened environment. Within the Screen Universe the operation of the projected (RIS) model serves as an external neural-processor. Cinema provides an opportunity for the Ego-Ghost to sustain perception durational levels through elected passivity and spontaneous voyeurism. It is the image-object motion and spatial dimension presented in cinema that permits the inner (SS) and (IS) to retain dominance over the (RS). The outer shell (RIS) enters a relaxed state thereby permitting the projected inverted (RIS) full authority as the spectator willingly accepts the submissive physicality of the cinema environment. Carroll is correct that we may choose to electively disengage the screen universe or only partially engage the spectacle. It is the “invisible chains” that we place upon ourselves which permit full immersion or suture into the Screen Universe. Through passive restraint of the Ego and unfettered free exploration of the Ego-Ghost the language of cinema has been developed.Complete cinematic language has eluded the structural semiotic film theorists as has the notion that the screen images are a reflection of the Ego. Resistance of cinema suture is the active state that film theorists and critics attempt to maintain when screening and analyzing film. Mirroring of the surface text by the spectator would require a resistance of suture or the ability to prevent the inner (RIS) function. The fundamental model of film language is a uni-directional form as recognized by the communicative arts. The source of the message being the writer, director and produced film. It is the film presented and projected that is the channel, the message and intended vision of the source. This message is conveyed to the receiver as individual spectator who then reads and interprets the message. In a standardized model this would occur by distorting, generalizing or rejecting its surface content by the outer shell (RIS). The distinction in cinema lies in the receiver’s autonomous activation of the Ego-Ghost and ability to become sutured or grafted into the channel. The communication model presented provides no opportunity for bi-directional feedback. Stephen Prince in his essay “The Discourse of Pictures: Iconicity and Film Studies,” comments:,“Christian Metz also noted some of these fundamental distinctionsbetween linguistic and pictorial modes of communication. He pointedout that cinema lacked the double level of structure in language and isa one way system of communication, unlike language, where sendersand receivers are interchangeable, and that the concept of a languageis probably not applicable to film” (p.94).Metz asserted in his analysis that the receiver cannot provide direct feedback to the source. The crucial point in (EGT) is that any feedback the receiver might send to the source is directed from the inner (RIS) within the channel. The subjugated (RS) continually provides feedback through its ancillary (IS) and (SS) through prediction and prediction error compensation. The Ego-Ghost (IS) and (SS) in their dominant mode cross reference potential solutions and present the thought language to the (RS) in synthesis. It is through the inner (IS) that pure optic-sound images are read and (SS) that signifier-signified codes of cinematic language are recognized. The oscillation continues between the Ego-Ghost (RIS) Spheres as sustained duration enables reading of a complete cinematic language. The double level communication structure exists between the Ego-Ghost and the Screen Universe itself. Complete cinematic language as interpreted by the Ego-Ghost is provided in transference as a psychic imprint to the outer (RIS) Spheres of the Ego. As previously stated, retraction from suture causes the Ego-Ghost to recede and be subjugated by conscious logic of outer shell (RIS) until presented with the opportunity for re-immersion. Each occurrence with the screen universe provides a learning experience for the Ego-Ghost and these lessons are carried back to the real world in the subconscious. The most simplistic evidence of this would be utterances of film goers who relate a real world experience by saying, “It’s just like in that movie... (Fill in the blank)”.Cinema has intertwined the Real with the Imaginary and Symbolic from its inception. The objective realism of everyday depictions in life presented by the Lumiere brothers and the imaginary fantastic dream creations found in the films of George Melies melded into narrative cinema. The Ego-Ghost, while nurtured by these early cinema forms, quickly developed an appetite for the narrative film that became the predominant form of entertainment. Evolution of the Ego-Ghost can be pointed to in the essays of Gilles Deleuze, “The Origin Of The Crisis” and “Beyond The Movement Image”, wherein he states “The soul of the cinema demands increasing thought, even if thought begins by undoing the system of actions, perceptions and affections on which cinema has fed up to that point” (p.219). This is also exemplified in Deleuze’s account of Andre Bazin and Italian neo-realism, “it was a new form of reality, said to be dispersive, elliptical, errant or wavering, working in blocs, with deliberately weak connections and floating events” (p.227). The Ego-Ghost eagerly consumed these new cinematic structural blocs as its language developed in an ever increasing method of efficiency. The progression can be shown to continue in Orlando (Sally Potter, 1992) which presents an extreme example of time-image shifting that far exceeds what the Ego encounters in the real world, and consequently the Ego-Ghost adjusts and compensates for the time-image continuum.Future trends of the Ego-Ghost in Cinema are observed in The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, (Fincher, 2011). The Ego-Ghost as inhabitant of the characters of Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara), and Mickael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig), moves beyond the primary level of Screen Universe. While Lisbeth and Mickael seek to solve the mystery, they, and we as the inhabitants, are drawn into the spectacle of multi frame still images, computer video media and audio-visual evidence. This presented spectacle within the spectacle may produce an additional model of (RIS). The centric space of the Ego-Ghost would essentially be projecting and inverting the model again and the producing a belief that the events and evidence are in effect real.