The psychology of the grotesque

[jcs]

Go watch a decapitation video. Ok, now you're ready for some discussion.

we like to see horror and other such grusome images because we're all insane and derive some sort of pleasure from morbidity. I say: we get pleasure from our sadism, and also from our empathy with the victims. Think about it: what do you feel when watching a decapitation? What do you think? "Gee, it would be cool to cut off someone's head!"? or: "God, what would I do in that situation? How would I cope with the pain and my own death?"? We are sado-masochists.
But there is something behind this sado-masochism. It is a reassurance brought about by the knowledge that we're not getting our heads chopped off. It is also a stroking of the ego: we indulge our sadism a little, then think to ourselves how righteous we are for not chopping off people's heads, for condemning those who do.
and, of course, the more we indulge that sado-masochism, the more reassurance and righteousness we long to feel. so, in watching these little videos, the sickness worsens. But perhaps it must? Perhaps we should face our diseases, even nurture them, in order to better understand ourselves?

I think atrocity videos are useful because it dispels illusions and myths which infect minds which have been softened by pleasure, luxury,lies, and civilisation.
agreed. on another level, the viewing of such things is an awakening to the harshness of reality as opposed to the escapism favored so often by those trapped in the complacent lull of bourgeois-life.
But could this perhaps be just another type of escape--from the reality of this complacency? The comfort in which we live, this 'illusion of security,' is all a facade; but to what extent are we, in destroying the facade, running from it. Is a 'lukewarm' life too unbearable?
So the horrible and grotesque are little indulgences, little self-righteous affirmations of our own sick virtues, and little escapes which grow and grow the more we affirm them through denial.
Which sickness is more sick: the sado-masochism or the complacency? Which plays a greater role in our culture? Most importantly: which is the cause, and which the effect? I would say complacency is the AIDS of modernity, our other diseases just viruses that could harm our bodies which have been already weakened by the former sickness. The root-problem is a greater threat to our health than our escapisms and other viral problems; but these more minor issues present a greater immediate threat.

[OVERWATCH]

The complacency is definitely worse. The 'sado-masochism' which you describe as being the mental undercurrents one experiences when watching atrocities are normal and healthy responses, in my opinion. They have no ill effect. Complacency's ill effect is well known; complacency levels empires and civilisations from within, into ruin, because it allows the gentle inhabitants to be overrun by a ruthless world.

[jcs]

The 'sado-masochism' which you describe as being the mental undercurrents one experiences when watching atrocities are normal and healthy responses, in my opinion.
Well, I think people enjoy this sado-masochism for a three-fold reason: it makes them feel guilty (because they know someone suffered, and they get pleasure from watching suffering), it allows them to fantasize about inflicting pain upon others, and it creates a feeling of self-righteousness. Self-indulgent ressentiment, all of it, and this is certainly the norm, though whether it is normal (let alone healthy), I wonder... To some degree, though, even the healthiest of men, being a man, probably feels this sado-masochism on some level, though. I'd say it's unhealthy, but universal to varying degrees, and quite 'normal.'

The desire for this seems to be intensified by complacency. We yearn for the illusion of feeling, be it pleasure or pain or happiness or misery, and find these false-feelings of sado-masochism unsatisfactory, and so we yearn for more.
To what extent is all feeling illusory? Could this be why complacency is so unbearable--because it is the most harsh reality one could face?

[OVERWATCH]

Well, I think people enjoy this sado-masochism for a three-fold reason: it makes them feel guilty (because they know someone suffered, and they get pleasure from watching suffering), it allows them to fantasize about inflicting pain upon others, and it creates a feeling of self-righteousness. Self-indulgent ressentiment, all of it, and this is certainly the norm, though whether it is normal (let alone healthy), I wonder... To some degree, though, even the healthiest of men, being a man, probably feels this sado-masochism on some level, though. I'd say it's unhealthy, but universal to varying degrees, and quite 'normal.'

The desire for this seems to be intensified by complacency. We yearn for the illusion of feeling, be it pleasure or pain or happiness or misery, and find these false-feelings of sado-masochism unsatisfactory, and so we yearn for more.
To what extent is all feeling illusory? Could this be why complacency is so unbearable--because it is the most harsh reality one could face?

The self-righteous variation of the sadomasochism you speak of is normal, and therefore might not fall within the scope of sadomasochism. The other ones, the more cruel ones, are not so normal. Viewers are more inclined to feel sympathy for the victim followed by righteous anger, then they are to revel in suffering for suffering's sake.

Regarding complacency and feeding the need to shock one'sself out of that complacency, if one's existence is all 'pleasure' and no pain, the pleasure becomes so commonplace that there is nothing to contrast it with, and it loses it's luster. So various means can be consciously, or subconsciously, used to restore the necessary dichotomy; whether that is hypochondria, anxiety, suffering the visions of atrocity, or other forms of inducing pain within ones'self.

[Starr]

For the most part when I watch shit like that I am mostly just feeling like I am glad it isn't me.:p

I remember hearing about a teacher who aired one of those videos in class and ordered pizza for the students while they watched and discussed it.:eek:

Like the idea about people passing a violent and bloody car accident. It is almost like people may feel somehow that they shouldn't want to look, or watch,etc. yet presented with a situation we are curious and will. Morbid fascination for sure. When there was a cable channel that aired 24 hours of nothing but surgery I found myself drawn to it all the damn time, even though I didn't want to look at it. Odd it was. I am sure we can all figure out if there was a channel on tv that showed nothing but real life murders 24/7, it would be one of the most popular channels on the TV.

[Atlas]

http://www.thenausea.com/elements/Chechenya/Ofex8.jpg

[Felix the Cat]

Decapitation used to be considered an honorable way to die, but nowadays most people would prefer to be hanged or shot

[Banat]

Decapitation used to be considered an honorable way to die, but nowadays most people would prefer to be hanged or shot

Well, it certainly was the least painful way to die by sword, not much deep philosophy into it. Today it's mostly done either to horrify the enemy or out of pure sadism.

I remember hearing about a teacher who aired one of those videos in class and ordered pizza for the students while they watched and discussed it.

Such casual attitude to the issue can only be resulted by boredom combined with both emotional emptiness and lack of empathy. Even lack of intelligence. I wonder if he would've done that if by any chance a person close to him had died that way. Or how he would react if a student of his had someone close lost that way and reacted dramatically in any way to the videos presented.

Like those sick jokes about funerals, certain diseases or black humor in general, that one instantly becomes repulsed by when faced with actual events of the same kind in his close environment.

[Starr]

Such casual attitude to the issue can only be resulted by boredom combined with both emotional emptiness and lack of empathy. Even lack of intelligence. I wonder if he would've done that if by any chance a person close to him had died that way. Or how he would react if a student of his had someone close lost that way and reacted dramatically in any way to the videos presented.

I do think that most people do have something in them(for lack of a better way to put it) that draws their attention and interest in these things. But yes, they probably will have a different reaction if it somehow hits close to home, but only because it will remind them of their personal experience or of the person they know who died in this way,etc. I don't think they would be feeling all that much sorrow for the actual victim who is unknown to them.

[Anarch]

While we're on the topic of horror aesthetics, was anyone else as fascinated with the movie Saw as I was? I'm going to see the sequal tomorrow. I'm quite sure some will find this particularly morbid, but there's something 'artistic' about destruction. Far from seeing the world as becoming more and more morbid, disgusting, sick etc., I think civilization has become more and more 'uptight' about it. Compare any scene in American Psycho with the grand destruction meted out by Genghis Khan, Vlad the Impaler and Julius Caeser. A plane flies into a building and three thousand people die, the world is horrified and it's seen as the greatest evil event since perhaps the holocaust. The vikings rape, pillage, murder and burn through northern Europe, Tamerlane annihilates entire cities at a time, and Vlad Tepes strikes below the belt at the Turks by impaling thousands of prisoners of war. These are seen as facts of life. Let's imagine the moral reaction if Texans decided to pull out machetes and guns and play headhunters with illegal immigrants. If Tony Blair openly proposed to detonate a 500 kiloton nuclear warhead over Mecca in response to, say, the London bombings. If John Howard (Australian Prime Minister) advocated drowning convicted terrorists in pigs blood on international television. If Le Pen advocated deploying the French Foreign Legion into Paris with orders to shoot dead any rioter witnessed comitting murder, arson, vandalism or theft. But yes, jcs, I definetly agree. Horror aesthetics, particular sado-masochism as you've put it, certainly serves a 'moral' purpose.

[Banat]

But yes, they probably will have a different reaction if it somehow hits close to home, but only because it will remind them of their personal experience or of the person they know who died in this way,etc. I don't think they would be feeling all that much sorrow for the actual victim who is unknown to them.

It's not much the matter of compassion for anonymous victims (I wonder it it is possible at all), but more of a feeling of repulsion to the very idea of such things performed to any living person. It doesn't take much of an intelligence, nor it needs any personal experience to realize that it's actual men suffering there, and that watching such atrocities for fun or to 'spend some time' is at least a bit perverted, if not totally sick.

But the example I gave is still good. Even if they had no true feelings for the actual victims, their reaction would still be dramatic, for associating what happened to them to what happened to the ones they knew. And how dramatic their reaction might be if they did fully empathize with them.

[OVERWATCH]

This is somewhat related to the topic:

Viewing or hearing about atrocities and gross injustices provokes a primal urge within me.

Although I'm a fair and reasonably kind person, when I learn of someone who has committed a greivous atrocity against decency, I yearn to become what many people would consider to be a thoroughly evil revenant, possessed by a desire to inflict searing pain upon subhumans who are of no worth whatsoever.

Let's consider the case of some serial murderer who tortures, rapes, and murders young women...Or the stupid jackass kids who set cats on fire for fun... Or the three niggers who raped and killed the whites in that famous case in Wichita (http://www.vdare.com/fulford/wichita.htm).

I seriously have the capacity to flay sons of bitches like that alive, slowly with a razor, and pour methyl alcohol onto their exposed fascia. I would burn their eyes out with hot pokers and make them eat their own testicles. I would practice live brain surgery on them. I would run hot needles into their kidneys.Furthermore, I would force bleeding-heart wimps who lobby for "rights" of murderous scum to view the scum's handiwork, I would slap them with the leather glove of challenge and have them paraded through the streets to face the derision and rotten fruit of a citizenry exhalting in the fact that the reign of the fussy baby has finally ended.

Some may say that I am just as demented as the killers, but I disagree. I volunteer my services in the name of punitive justice and deterrence. In my regime, scum would not be given a life sentence at a homosexual love-in(i.e., prison). Instead, their lives would be short and excruciatingly painful.

It is what is necessary.

[jcs]

It is what is necessary.
Those are your feelings, not necessaries.
Come, now, if you feel so much contempt for such depraved actions, and would like to requite depravity with depravity (kind of resentful, but so are all emotions...)--then say, "It is what I desire," rather than dressing up your feelings under this pretense of some great necessity. Justifications are self-delusions.

"Know thyself!"

[OVERWATCH]

Those are your feelings, not necessaries.
Come, now, if you feel so much contempt for such depraved actions, and would like to requite depravity with depravity (kind of resentful, but so are all emotions...)--then say, "It is what I desire," rather than dressing up your feelings under this pretense of some great necessity. Justifications are self-delusions.

"Know thyself!"

A decent argument;but what I desire, and what is necessary, sometimes correlate. Sometimes they do not.

In this instance they do correlate; in a similar fashion, a trash picker might enjoy his trade, and his trade is also necessary, because it keeps useful things out of landfills, and helps recycling.

Exacting terrible retribution in form of torture is not the same as unprovoked atrocity; it is utilitarian, because it is deterrent.

[jcs]

A decent argument;but what I desire, and what is necessary, sometimes correlate. Sometimes they do not.

In this instance they do correlate; in a similar fashion, a trash picker might enjoy his trade, and his trade is also necessary, because it keeps useful things out of landfills, and helps recycling.
But the necessity of an action has nothing to do with one's choice to pursue that action. We invent necessaries to make ourselves feel significant, to lend credence to our work, and to get others to jerk us off. Most often, one says, "such-and-such is necessary," because they want to get other people to do 'such-and-such' as well. Seems silly.

[OVERWATCH]

But the necessity of an action has nothing to do with one's choice to pursue that action. We invent necessaries to make ourselves feel significant, to lend credence to our work, and to get others to jerk us off. Most often, one says, "such-and-such is necessary," because they want to get other people to do 'such-and-such' as well. Seems silly.

LOL.

Is strong deterrence to subhuman crime necessary or not?

Sure, I would volunteer for such duty. However, I'd just settle knowing that someone was taking care of business, even if I wasn't privy to the details.

See, I've really got everyone's best interest in mind; not to say that I won't derive satisfaction from it; but feeling good about something doesn't preclude it's necessity, nor does it mean that the motive is entirely, or even mostly, selfish.

[Starr]

It's not much the matter of compassion for anonymous victims (I wonder it it is possible at all), but more of a feeling of repulsion to the very idea of such things performed to any living person. It doesn't take much of an intelligence, nor it needs any personal experience to realize that it's actual men suffering there, and that watching such atrocities for fun or to 'spend some time' is at least a bit perverted, if not totally sick

You can realize it is a real person, though but still remain very detached and free of any strong emotions if you do not know the person. I don't know if it can be said that anyone is truly watching for fun, but just more out of curiosity. Negativity(or whatever it could be called) is always more interesting. A different, but somewhat similar scenerio. If you were flipping through the TV, which type of story would be more likely to hold your interest, a story of a suicide bombing with many casualities and pictures of blood in the street,etc. or a nice story about someone helping out some homeless people in their community? I think most people would choose the former.

[jcs]

Is strong deterrence to subhuman crime necessary or not?
It is unnecessary. What do I care about crime, so long as it doesn't bother me and those I know? My interest in deterring crime only extends to areas in which such crimes come into contact with my life. My ideal of justice extends only so far. I am no messiah.

See, I've really got everyone's best interest in mind; not to say that I won't derive satisfaction from it; but feeling good about something doesn't preclude it's necessity, nor does it mean that the motive is entirely, or even mostly, selfish.
All humans are entirely selfish. All of reality is filtered through our own perceptions, through our ideas and so forth as well, and our behavior is a willing based upon this. I cannot will anothers' will (though for whatever selfish reasons I choose an ideology, we might share a common goal).

As morality is rendered base when we barter with it, I think our values are rendered base when we create 'necessaries' and attempt to construct justifications. If my morality promises no reward--better, if my actions promise nothing but the opposite of that which my intent seeks to better--, my morals are tested. If I really am moral, I will stick with my morals in the face of inevitable failure. So too with values. If my values have no basis, my valuing itself is tested.
And, ultimately, what is the basis of all these values? Why do people desperately cling to these senses of entitlement and justification and so forth? Why can't we stop rationalizing ourselves so much?--all that just leads to an unknowing of self as we get caught up in our thought-constructions, our delusions.

[OVERWATCH]

It is unnecessary. What do I care about crime, so long as it doesn't bother me and those I know? My interest in deterring crime only extends to areas in which such crimes come into contact with my life. My ideal of justice extends only so far. I am no messiah.


All humans are entirely selfish. All of reality is filtered through our own perceptions, through our ideas and so forth as well, and our behavior is a willing based upon this. I cannot will anothers' will (though for whatever selfish reasons I choose an ideology, we might share a common goal).


It is true that everything that people do has some selfish component to it, to some extent or another; that is no secret, to most intelligent folks.

However, that matters little when utility is involved.

Introspection is mandatory, however, so that things which are in essence entirely motived by selfishness aren't justified when they don't have significant utility.

No great civilisation will be built by people who only concern themselves with their own tiny enclave(s). Justice and order is necessary. Subhuman criminals must be punished severely, so that others are deterred by blood-curdling fear.

[jcs]

However, that matters little when utility is involved.

Introspection is mandatory, however, so that things which are in essence entirely motived by selfishness aren't justified when they don't have significant utility.
The utility toward what, though?--the self. When we gauge utility in terms of something other than the self, it is in terms of some self's ideals, which we agree with because it is of benefit to our selves.

No great civilisation will be built by people who only concern themselves with their own tiny enclave(s). Justice and order is necessary. Subhuman criminals must be punished severely, so that others are deterred by blood-curdling fear.
I wonder: what is the ideal here? Justice and order?--nope. Civilization is the ideal.
But we're rationalizing too much, justifying too much--and we learn nothing about ourselves through this. The greatest minds in most civilizations didn't belong to the civilization and could care less about the civilization. Leave utility to political thinkers; they will learn of civilizations and societies. I'd rather learn about myself, for that is more useful to me.
What matters civilization in and of itself, as an ideal without an ideologue?

[Vindex]

I say let the punishment fit the crime. If it was not for a strong desire for justice there could be no decent, just societies. This is why I feel that there is a inborn morality in most people, most people just know that murdering old ladies for kicks is bad, and not murdering old ladies for kicks is good. I really do feel there is a inborn moral code writen in the heart of many people, social programming aside.




This is somewhat related to the topic:

Viewing or hearing about atrocities and gross injustices provokes a primal urge within me.

Although I'm a fair and reasonably kind person, when I learn of someone who has committed a greivous atrocity against decency, I yearn to become what many people would consider to be a thoroughly evil revenant, possessed by a desire to inflict searing pain upon subhumans who are of no worth whatsoever.

Let's consider the case of some serial murderer who tortures, rapes, and murders young women...Or the stupid jackass kids who set cats on fire for fun... Or the three niggers who raped and killed the whites in that famous case in Wichita (http://www.vdare.com/fulford/wichita.htm).

I seriously have the capacity to flay sons of bitches like that alive, slowly with a razor, and pour methyl alcohol onto their exposed fascia. I would burn their eyes out with hot pokers and make them eat their own testicles. I would practice live brain surgery on them. I would run hot needles into their kidneys.Furthermore, I would force bleeding-heart wimps who lobby for "rights" of murderous scum to view the scum's handiwork, I would slap them with the leather glove of challenge and have them paraded through the streets to face the derision and rotten fruit of a citizenry exhalting in the fact that the reign of the fussy baby has finally ended.

Some may say that I am just as demented as the killers, but I disagree. I volunteer my services in the name of punitive justice and deterrence. In my regime, scum would not be given a life sentence at a homosexual love-in(i.e., prison). Instead, their lives would be short and excruciatingly painful.

It is what is necessary.

[OVERWATCH]

I say let the punishment fit the crime. If it was not for a strong desire for justice there could be no decent, just societies. This is why I feel that there is a inborn morality in most people, most people just know that murdering old ladies for kicks is bad, and not murdering old ladies for kicks is good. I really do feel there is a inborn moral code writen in the heart of many people, social programming aside.

It could be argued that such inborn moral code is there for the purpose of fostering co-operation and civilisation infact.

I find it interesting to posit that while some may believe that everything is rooted in selfishness,and what may appear after some insight to be merely selfish motivation, may infact have a much deeper purpose of serving a greater good, but has a selfish lure to it by some grand design.

[jcs]

I find it interesting to posit that while some may believe that everything is rooted in selfishness,and what may appear after some insight to be merely selfish motivation, may infact have a much deeper purpose of serving a greater good, but has a selfish lure to it by some grand design.
This inborn morality which leads to rationalized concepts such as justice and altruism, civilized notions, serves some selfish purpose in the 'grand design' (sounds teleological). When everyone is willing to fight for everyone, the survival rate of each individual is increased.
Take modern individualism and collectivism, for example. With the individual, we see pure selfishness, but this pure selfishness only works if the individual is of exceptional ability and applies their ability to materialistic good. Capitalism is the survival-strategy of the talented whore.
With collectivism, on the other hand, we see a group of atoms unifying together in a whole to protect their individual good. Socialism is the survival-strategy of the inept and/or the masses.

When looking at inborn traits, we need to look at what serves what. Any collectivist strategy serves--individuals. An individualist strategy serves the individual. Thus altruism is the evolutionary mechanism for selfishness. Quite obviously, the only reason altruistic behavior would exist on an 'inborn' level is because it keeps those with that trait alive.

Don't get me wrong, though. I like good old idealism, which holds some noble value above the individual. The idea that there is something more valuable than mere survival just seems so goddamn Romantic (as in the era, of course). I think we'd be hard-pressed to find any real justification for that idea, though. But that is one of my values, and my valuations require no justification. ;)

[daisy]

what do you feel when watching a decapitation? What do you think?i am so jaded it might not faze me too much to see decapitations.
sometimes i have had alot of esp. no one would believe it.
at one time i had it so bad from intensive concentration on one of my boyfriends when he called me on the telephone i would say stuff that i should not have known. he would say how did you know that?
i would just tell him i seen it in my dream last night.
i dislike esp and have tried to force it to go away since i seen a person get killed (auto wreck) in my dreams and then i flipped myself out trying to decide if i should tell them. i couldn't bring myself to tell them. then they got killed in the auto wreck within 30 days exactly the same as in my dream.
i just had an esp dream the other night where i saw a girl get run over with some kind of gardening electric tiller. i forced myself to wake up before i knew if it killed her and i tried to make her face go away so i didn't know who she was.
i woke up telling God oh no don't start this again. i don't want esp if i have to see people getting killed in my dreams 30 days before they die again.

[Scales]

People enjoy it because everything we like has an evolutionary origin, even if it's obscure or warped by excess. We get a rush from it for a good reason.

I think we probably like to see death because those early humans who understood death were the ones most likely to survive when faced with a life-or-death situation.

Seeing death reduces its power to psychologically paralyse you, and could inform you of potential strategic get-outs. This is probably also why it's most commonly men who are entertained by death -it's a simulation of threat that would once (and still is, in some cases) have been an important preparatory experience for survival in conflict.

We're programmed, for this reason, to be intrigued by it. Enjoyment from viewing video executions is a distortion of that evolved psychological instinct.