sets a precedence for later movies to follow. The enigmas posed in the movie vary and shift in emphasis about forty minutes into the movie, after Marion, our perceived protagonist, is brutally murdered. One could interpret the primary enigmas of Psycho in a couple of different ways. One could say that the preposed enigma is what will happen to Marion and the stolen $40,000. However, for the intents of this blog, I will focus on another enigma that the film imposes. This enigma is that of the relationship between Norman Bates and his mother. We, as the audience, deduce that Norman's mother, Mrs. Bates, killed Marion that fateful night, and therefore, she becomes a perceived antagonist. We are intrigued by this character because we know so little of her. The syuzhet is created in a way that reveals little pieces at a time about this character. We know that she is ill, but not how ill. We know that she is a murderer but do not know her motivations. Eventually, as the plot unfolds, we learn more and more puzzling information about Mrs. Bates. We learn, for one, that Mrs. Bates died seven years ago, but are again confused when we see Norman carrying the body of his mother to the fruit cellar. We do not know the real answers to the enigma until the very end, when we discover that Norman Bates and Mrs. Bates are one and the same. The delay of information about this relationship indicate that this is an enigma, but the lighting techniques and dialogue also serve this purpose. Psycho contains many scenes that are veiled in shadow. For example, we never completely see the face of Mrs. Bates until the very end. The dialogue also directs us to ask questions. One scene that remains the most poignant in my mind when it comes to this specific enigma is the scene where Marion and Norman talk in the parlor. This scene is a delay that both positions and formulates the enigma of the mother-son relationship for the rest of the movie. The conversation between Marion and Norman starts out as pleasant, but we get the feeling that there is a disturbing attribute to some of Norman's remarks. He talks of taxidermy, stating, "I don't like the look of beasts when they're stuffed... I think only birds look well stuffed, because they're kinda passive to begin with." This quote seems innocent on the surface, but after the fabula is revealed at the end, we realize that the line also alludes to Norman's passive disposition that contributes to his downfall. Perhaps the most telling line about the enigma is a line about his mother in the same scene. "A boy's best friend is his mother," quips Norman. This line forces us to evaluate this relationship. We gather that Norman is fully invested in this mysterious character, and we wonder how this relationship will play out, because it is clearly important. We also note Norman's behavior during this scene. At some points, particularly at the beginning of the scene, Norman seems interested in Marion romantically, but at other points, particularly when he is being questioned about his mother, Norman appears defensive and hostile. This behavior entices the audience to think about what secrets Norman is hiding. In my opinion, Psycho is a bit of a mix between a readerly and a writterly text. There is one definite answer to some questions. It is clear that Norman and his "mother" are the same person, and that Norman, under the influence of his alternative personality, was the killer. However, there are certain aspects that are also left up to interpretation. The psychological aspect of Norman's condition, are not as black and white. Did Norman do this to himself? Is Norman's passive and awkward nature at least, in part, to blame? We don't know why his alternative personality was so polar opposite from both himself and a typical nature of a mother. All of these theories and questions are left up to the audience to think through and interpret for themselves.
I agree with your conclusion that the main enigma of this film is the relationship between Norman Bates and his mother. Men have always been known as “mama’s boys” and girls as “daddy’s little girl” but this film took “mama’s boy” to a whole new level. I think you hit the nail on the head when you talked about “A boy’s best friend is his mother” because it shows his real feeling towards his mother, which he can never leave her on matter how rude she may be. Another good scene in which that is revealed is when Norman is being questioned about the money by Sam and Norman tell him how he has always been there, just him and mother and always been happy. That I feel that was another clue because he failed to mention his mother’s lover, although he previously had stated to Marion about how he got the motel (mother’s lover). I also enjoyed how the protagonist and antagonist were not who we thought they were, since Marion died and Mrs. Bates had been dead for years. I feel the statement in which you said that the audience is drawn to Mrs. Bates because of the fact that we know so little of here is an accurate remark because that was the main factor in which most (including myself) people began to pay more attention, trying to get any clue as to what had really happened to Norman’s mother, and for that we became invested into the characters as well.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the movie is a writerly text because the viewer is constantly trying to piece facts together to come to conclusion before the characters in the movies themselves do. The fact that you only see shadows (as you previously stated) also adds to the viewer being active in the plot of the movie and not just watching what was occurring. Not knowing EXACTLY who did it made the viewer wonder and look for more clues.
I agree with your statement that Norman’s condition was “not as black and white” as some viewers would have wanted to. But I believe that it was written that was to leave the view coming up with his/her own conclusions about the finale of the movie. For that reason I think that the movie was sole a writerly text and not both.