Phantasmata - Techniques of the Uncanny

The concept of the ‘uncanny’ is one of the most floating in contemporary aesthetics. The ‘uncanny’ delineates a strange proximity between the known and the unknown, either as something familiar presenting itself under an extraneous shape, or as something extraneous revealing an element of familiarity in its features. Structurally close to other experiences of ‘defamiliarization’ theorized between the 19th and the early 20th centuries (e.g., the Marxist notion of 'alienation', Russian formalists’ definition of ostranenie [Sklovskij], Heidegger’s Unheimlichkeit, Brecht’s ‘A-effect’), it reverberates in 20th century debate, from psychoanalysis (Lacan) to deconstruction (Derrida, Royle), from literary theory (Todorov, Cixous, Kristeva) to philosophy of history (de Certeau), and eventually to architecture (Vidler). In our perspective, the tension individuated by Freud between familiarity/un-familiarity (homely/unhomely, Heimlichkeit/Unheimlichkeit) can still be used as an approximate framework in which to place the manifold aspects of uncanniness. Specifically, the semantic area of the ‘house’ (Heim, intended as the perimeter of familiarity) can be interpreted as a ‘semiotic code’, namely as a constellation of sign relationships defining a horizon of expectation in which interactions, causes, and effects, seem to follow a series of rules. From this point of view, the uncanny is related to scientific paradigms and epistemological practices, insofar as these define what a given cultural context interprets as natural or un-natural, or rather super-natural.

The two keywords of our proposal, ‘techniques’ and ‘uncanny’, are interconnected, since they both refer to a common cultural background, that of Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment western culture.