Me, myself, and the viewer

So, I'm going to go out on a limb here and try for a psychoanalytic approach to this piece. Keep your fingers crossed.

Let's begin with the notion of "scopophilia" (the pleasure of looking), and who is looking at whom. Here we have at least two layers of viewing. First there is the person, presumably "Alison," who is looking at a drawing of a person; as the viewer of this picture, I am looking at both of them; the eyes of the drawing appear to be closed indicating a desire or inability to look at Alison. This last relationship brings up the next point from psychoanalysis, the unconscious.

Rose says that, "the unconscious is created when a very young child's drives and instincts start to be disciplined by cultural rules and values" (110). Immediately obvious is that the Alison and the drawing are wearing almost the same clothes and hairstyles. Wikipedia says that the artist is Alison Bechdel and she is a lesbian. I bring this up because when I first saw the picture I thought she was a he. Both Alison and the drawing appear androgynous at first blush. However, an examination of the drawing, which because its orientation to the viewer is in profile, highlights some elements that mark it as feminine: breasts, the style the pants are drawn in (very tight), and the small frame of the body. This is important because Alison orientation to the viewer eliminates any of these gender-defining elements in color of her shirt and the bagginess of her pants.

It is notable that although Alison's body is facing front, her head in turn in profile to face the drawing. So, if we are to assume that the drawing does indeed represent Alison's unconscious in this instance, it is interesting that she is turning to face it since Rose says that "the unconscious remains beyond the self-consciousness" (110). And yet, it appears to be the unconscious, drawn self that is unaware of the conscious, physical self as noted by the drawing's apparent speed and attempt to push past Alison with its upraised hand. Perhaps this actions symbolizes the unconscious forcing its way past the conscious self despite any and all efforts of the conscious; even though in the picture Alison's resistance amounts to little more that blocking the way through passive immobility.

What is to be made of the fact that the forceful and hurried unconscious in only a drawing? Give the medium (photography) Alison could easily have inserted another photographic image of herself that would have been an "equal" at least on medium-based terms. As mentioned before, both Alison and the drawing are androgynous, as opposed to one of them being more masculine or feminine. Together this could suggest that her conscious and unconscious selves are in some form of agreement on her projection of her sexuality.

Thinking back to other psychoanalysis I've read, everyone focuses on the "castration complex." I'm not sold on this idea, and Rose brings up that this theory breaks down quite fast when applied to women. However, given the ambiguity of the piece, I'll throw this in because "psycho-analyzers" always mention it: Notice how in the picture and the drawing a hand is covering the groin. The picture is less noticeable because it is walking, but when compared to the picture, it could be a consistent element. In the picture Alison is striking a decidedly formed pose with her hands crossed in front of her. Her left hand is also in front of her groin. Does this cover the "lack" that psychoanalysis is so fascinated with? I'm not convinced of this, but it interesting in lieu of the other elements already discussed.

Finally, how does this work position me? I feel left out. Alison is having a relationship with her drawing as demonstrated by her turned head. This is further emphasized by the fact that her body is facing me (the viewer) but her head is turned away, effectively excluding me. This image is about her, and as a viewer I am not told not to not view, but I am visibly ignored.

I would be interested to be in a room with Alison and to view her view this picture. I wonder how the physical Alison would interact with these two reductions of herself. Perhaps that is a question for semiology.