Abstract
When strange forces impose on us and command our attention from the sky or oceanic depths, when they rustle invisibly or naked in the vegetation of a desolate grove, the sciences and humanities have different responses to the alterity of the encounter—the first presupposing a stable object or “content” that it seeks to identify, the latter presupposing an unstable meaning which it seeks to explicate. These complimentary modes of distinguishing phenomena, which epitomize the “two cultures” of academia, abruptly manifest their strengths and weaknesses when confronted by indeterminate forces of a predatory or polymorphic nature. By conducting selective readings of narratives by Edgar Allan Poe, Hermann Melville, Ambrose Bierce and Arthur Machen, the present study retraces the historically problematic explication of forces that breach norms of identity (such as gender, species, and appetite) by exposing protagonists to cosmic obscurities that destabilize visualization and embodiment, and hence, the self-understanding of both the individual and her community. In the late Victorian genre of weird tales, due to the technical difficulties of visualizing unknown forces, these narratives depended less on concrete depictions of objectively identifiable events than of disturbing encounters tinged with erotic, chthonic, and/or mystical sublimity. In its most extreme obscurity, to quote Arthur Machen’s The Great God Pan (1893) a force is “neither man nor beast, neither the living nor the dead, but all things mingled, the form of all things but devoid of all form” (188). Only in the twentieth century does the shapeshifting force of the alien encounter become fully visualized cinematically in horror masterpieces such as John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allison, D. (Ed.). (1985). The new Nietzsche: Contemporary styles of interpretation. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Bierce, A. (1970). The damned thing. In The complete short stories of Ambrose Bierce (pp. 97–105). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Brentano, F. (2002). The distinction between mental and physical phenomena. In D. Moran & T. Mooney (Eds.), The phenomenology reader (pp. 35–50). London: Routledge.
Cairns, D. (1976). Conversations with Husserl and Fink. The Hague: Martinus Nijoff.
Campbell, J. W. (2009). Who goes there? Rocket Ride Books.
De Quincey, T. (1975). Confessions of an English opium eater. New York: Penguin Books.
Deleuze, G. (1990). Expressionism in philosophy: Spinoza. (M. Joughin, Trans.). New York: Zone Books.
Deleuze, G. (1991). Bergsonism. (H. Tomlinson & B. Habberjam, Trans.). New York: Zone Books.
Derrida, J. (1978). Force and signification. In Writing and difference (A. Bass, Trans.) (pp. 3–30). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Fisher, M. (2016). The weird and the eerie. London: Repeater Books.
Green, A. (1999). The fabric of the affect in the psychoanalytic discourse (A. Sheridan, Trans.). New York: Routledge.
Hildesheimer, W. (1986). Why I transformed myself into a nightingale. In D. Halpern (Ed.), The art of the tale (pp. 347–350). New York: Penguin Books.
Husserl, E. (1970). The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology (D. Carr, Trans.). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Kant, I. (1987). Critique of judgment (W. Pluhar, Trans.). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
Luhmann, N. (2002). Theories of distinction (J. O’Neil & E. Schreiber, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Machen, A. (2009). The great god Pan. In R. Lockhurst (Ed.), Late Victorian Gothic tales (pp. 183–233). New York: Oxford University Press.
Melville, H. (1992). Moby-Dick or the whale. New York: Penguin Books.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1968). The visible and the invisible. (A. Lingis, Trans.). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Natanson, M. (1968). Phenomenology and the theory of literature. In Literature, philosophy, and the social sciences (pp. 86–100). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Otto, R. (1958). The idea of the holy (J. H. Harvey, Trans.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Poe, E. A. (1975). The narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket. New York: Penguin.
Poe, E. A. (2003). The pit and the pendulum. In D. Galloway (Ed.), The fall of the house of Usher and other writings (pp. 212–227). New York: Penguin.
Sambursky, S. (1987). Physics of the stoics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Seneca, L. A. (2010). Natural questions (H. M. Hine, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Theunissen, M. (1986). The other: Studies in the social ontology of Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, and Buber (C. Macann, Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Thévenaz, P. (1962). What is phenomenology? Chicago: Quadrangle Books
Toulman, S. (1985). The return to cosmology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Traherne, T. (1952). Centuries of meditations. In H. Read (Ed.), English prose style (pp. 149–150). New York: Pantheon Books.
Trigg, D. (2014). The thing: A phenomenology of horror. Winchester, UK: Zero Books.
Williams, G. D. (2012). The cosmic viewpoint. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wolfe, C. (2010). What is posthumanism? Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schreiner, C.S. (2021). The Force of Things Unknown. In: Hornbuckle, C.A., Smith, J.S., Smith, W.S. (eds) Phenomenology of the Object and Human Positioning. Analecta Husserliana, vol 122. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66437-4_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66437-4_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-66436-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-66437-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)