Blood and Flesh

Considering that pressure and stress and tension is everything in a splay or story, looking at characterization this way has really helped me over some rough spots when writing.
[Brief qualifying statement: I was a Psych major in a division called Awareness and Reasoning, which more than 'touched' upon senses, mind/brain dichotomy, phenomonology - the study of the experiential 'human condition', and sex thrown in for good measure.]

In Jim's email, quoted in part above, he questioned Mr. Barker's use of skin, or "lust of the skin" (to be metapohorical, or literal in this case) in his "Hellraiser" film series and other works.

First of all, our skin is our main contact to the outside world. It is guarenteed to us no matter what else we have, or don't have, save for special examples that tend to not count (e.g., if you have a condition wherein you cannot feel; which would be rare enough to not be included, unless it was a horror story *grin*). Skin relates to the sense of "touch" which is interesting, as it is how people relate to others (e.g., "I felt "touched" by her generousity").

Simple phenomenology states that we can only know our universe through our sensory apparatus, and the data that is supplied to us; we perceive what is delivered to us via our senses, then we conceive what that means via our personal history, or our individual catalog of, experiences.

A good study in lack of sensory input other than touch (pressure, vibrations, heat, cold, intuitive impressions, etc.), is Dalton Trumbo's film, Johhny Got His Gun (a one time blacklisted writer that tried to get the film made since the fifties, but was considered too "anti-war"). Don't watch it alone and be prepared for an intense (and no, I won't say, "touching") experience. :)

As for our Senses:
Try looking at all senses as subsets of the sense of Touch: sight, hearing, smell, taste; all are pressure sensitive (of different sorts).

A less brief extrapolation on Senses:
Initially, as a fetus, we have Touch. From that basic sense (skipping the correct order of development), we have the other 'impression' senses (all essentially relating to translations of pressure into a conceptual framework). At very least, I would say all senses 'developed from' the initial sense of Touch. A one cell organism requires at very least that one sense (i.e., an amoeba will touch something, then move to the left).

-TOUCH, the translation of pressure upon the skin surface; the impression of heat is the direct electrical translation of one form of energy to another and similar in nature to the mechanism of sight. Intense heat, the melting of skin cells initiates the higher energy state leading to intracellular chemical reactions); cold is the absence of heat, or a type of experiential vacuum; a negative impression of pressure.

-HEARING, the translation of sound waves through mechanical means, via the ear drum (vibratory impressions) to the hammer and anvil in the ear, to Electro-Chemical impulses to the brain.

-SMELL, is the translation of molecule chains into the same said Electro-Chemical impulses via chemical reaction and similar to taste in mechanism. I would argue smell and taste as very highly specialized forms of touch.

-SIGHT, the translation of light waves into E-C impluses via the impression of energy upon the rods and cones of the optic nerve. Light touches the rods and cones, and the fluid purpurea drains from the structures and a corresponding 'feel' (set of impulses) is related to the brain which interprets this sensation, eliciting the firing of a set of neurons in the brain which give off a feeling of a particular nature which envoke a subset of historical experiential relationships (which is typical of our ability to translate sensory input into usable data).

-TASTE (similar to smell), cataloging descrete units of flavors via the interaction of those chemicals upon several tastebuds in triangulatory matrices.

Basically, all senses are an admixture of translating different forms of pressure upon organic sensory mechanisms. This is a simplification, but the more one studies the structure of the senses, the more this fundemental feature of 'pressure' becomes relevant (or appears common).

Now, there is no emotive affect in this, that comes later. Through childhood we all learn certain basic and common associations related to the human experience and our society. We learn to tie them to more esoteric behaviors.

Individuals that eliminate these emotive affects from their lives (that are normally tied up intricately from childhood with their sensory data), become closer to socioopathy, seeking pure pleasure (by their own definition) at all costs.

There begins, as I see it, the 'sense' of a good horror story. :)

Take these basic concepts and twist them, see where they go; where they would lead an individual if some part of this process breaks down. Whether it is due to some abnormal functioning of the senses, or due to something quite outside of normal reality, stepping into the sensual arena.

We can only understand by way of what we know. We can synthesize experience, but if something happens too far outside of our experience, reality breaks down. When something outside that realm of understanding occurs, we shut down, act irrationally, or ignore it.

Consider schizophrenics. Are they crazy? Or merely acting normal while trying to deal with the insane sensory input they are receiving?

> In both [Hellraiser] 1 and 2 there are entrances into other worlds which
> consist of
> tunnels leading into any number of directions. Again the labyrinth in 2 is a > more explicit example. The interconnected maze of the labyrinth is ruled by
> Leviathan. What is Leviathan? Is this an actual occult figure?
> My interpretation of the labyrinth is that it symbolizes the mind and the
> passageways to other worlds which we can only experience by disregarding the
> limited functions of our physical selves.

Perhaps Leviathan is the most easily understandable form of a connection of all these 'worlds' or 'passageways' (of the mind? and what is that? What function does the mind (our mental software) have on the brain (our physiological hardware), or the brain on the mind)?

> My interpretation of the labyrinth is that it symbolizes the mind and the
> passageways to other worlds which we can only experience by disregarding the
> limited functions of our physical selves.

So, is this the opposite of the sociopath mentioned above, who foresakes the seneses for more ethereal experiences?

> I still don't have a good interpretation for what the puzzlebox
> represents. There seems to be a vague connection to the decsions we make
> throughout our life and the impact they have. Especially with respect to the > pleasure/pain scenario. To what extent are we willing to go to experience
> pleasures? The seems to be a direct relationship between the pleasure Frank
> is willing to seek and the pain he indures.

Fundemental of the pain/pleasure dichotomy is that both release hormones similar in nature to a herion-like substance.

Pain merely brings more intense doses of the painkiller hormones, thus, those individuals that can overcome the 'agony' of the pain (for want of a better word), experience the pleasures, which are what is left over.

> What are the religious tie-ins in these movies. There are a few
> references to the worlds being part of hell. Is the idea that these are
> personal hells which each individual experiences separately?

Every person's Reality is a speparate universe. Each person experiences and views (or filters) Reality differently, and as no two individuals can perceive the same Reality, there IS NO ONE sharing your Reality with you. We ARE all alone.

> I am interested in what others think, especially if there is other
> symbolism I may not have mentioned that plays a major part in the overall
> meaning of these movies. Barker seems to have a much deeper meaning and more
> intriguing way of presenting his material that I wish I could fully
> understand.

Read M. Merleau-Ponty on Perception. My university class (Creativity, or was it Perception?) had to read it, and we lost several students that first week. The homework was to read only the first paragraph of his book. Several students nearly had a nervous breakdown that quarter due to that class (all of them business majors, no offense, its just who they were). More than one psych major had serious difficulty, but they HAD to see it through, as it was their major. :)

So, this is how I break things down toward achieving alternate states of a character's consciousness. To the outsider, or reader, it gives a very satisfying 'odd' character, and one that holds together through the story or the character's dementia, or altered Reality, but at the same time, becomes somewhat easier to create.

Sorry this was long, but I spent years trying to understand this stuff, and it is very much more complex to understand than what I have stated above. So, please, be kind and somewhat forgiving. If I offended your sense of biological reality, I only meant to supply an alternate way of viewing Reality, or creating a character for a story.

:) Thank you ... and good night.
Gordon

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 14:17:50 -0500
From: "Christine O."
Subject: Essay
Thank you for forwarding your thoughts to me. I just wanted to let you know that I found your replies very interesting. I am presently studying for a doctorate in Genetics, and so I have a strong background in cellular biology (believe me, this is going somewhere). When I first read your thoughts on how all senses are derivatives of touch, I first thought "Nah, not really." But I then remembered how cells interact-either through a molecule from one touching the receptor of another, or molecules on the surfaces of both touching. This is the way cells "talk" to each other, and is the basis of all of our senses (after all, how will we know what we are seeing if our rods and cones don't tell our brain what is there). I now agree with your point, and appreciate having another point of view clearly illustrated to me. I have a tendency to think on the level of very small molecules too much!

Once again, thanks for the post and for the interesting ideas. I just wanted to let you know that your ideas have gotten me thinking-a hard thing to do today, since the holidays just ended.

Christy

--
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood"-Anonymous
-Christine O
-Graduate Student, Department of Genetics
-Case Western Reserve University