Silence of the Lambs analysis - part 4: Hannibal Lecter

[Darksido]

When he says to Clarice: "your problem is you need to get more fun out of life." That's the shadow talking. That doesn't make him an extroverted individual; on the contrary, it proves how introverted he is. He is actually my favorite fictional character. Well, those are my two cents. Ta-ta. J.

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido You make some interesting observations. However, as indicated in the video, the shadow represents the repressed primitive instinct. That's the basic reason for believing Gumb represents Lecter's shadow. The fact that he hasn't sufficiently encountered his own shadow (he has never actually met Gumb or dealt directly with him) is an indication of a problem with his (Lecter's) psychological development.

They don't need to have similar childhood backgrounds for one to be the others shadow.

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst Lecter's shadow emerges, especially in the second and third books: the cannibalization, the attack on the nurse, kills the guards and paramedics, his dreams, Pazzi's and Krendler's deaths, the emotionless man who walked through the killer pigs, etc). I'm doing jungian analysis as we do in psychotherapy. Unless you are trying to do some sort of amplification -unnecessary- through Gump's character. Childhood experiences are fundamental in the emergence/development of the shadow.

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido I'm not saying the two mens' shadows are the same, I'm saying Gumb represents Lecter's shadow. If Lecter's shadow does 'emerge' later, that doesn't really contradict my theory.

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido actually on second thought, if Lecter's shadow does emerge later, that *supports* my theory, because he has partially 'assimilated' Starling (and therefore Gumb) into himself. This is after Starling assimilates her 'negative', Gumb, when she defeats him.

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst Is not like the shadow emerges "later". The shadow emerges since infancy and accompanies you through life. The less involve your shadow is with your conciseness the darker. in the majority of the cases (depending on the shadow) the ego is able to create balance mechanisms (how consciousness integrates the shadow). From the person who is compulsive with sanitation and washes his hands 10 times a day to a 'Mr. Hyde' (radical example of the shadow totally overtaking conciseness).

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido Yeah, Lecter is only indirectly involved with Gumb (see the 'hidden plot' video) - this indicates Lecter is not 'in touch' with his shadow, so it's darker.

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst Maybe there is assimilation in the persona if Starling. Concerning the acceptance of love, an intellectual counterpart; and someone at last taking Micha's place (affection). But I don't see why you think he assimilates Gump. I believe he is quite ok with that part of his own shadow. Makes me remember how his pulse never when out of the normal rate parameter; even when he attacked the nurse -in The Silence of the Lambs- bite her eye off, disassemble her jaw, and ate her tongue.

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst By the way. I can be quite social (but I do appreciate my privacy) and I'm quite empathic. Really enjoy the so called "secondary senses": smell and taste. Smell more than anything. Again without smell there's no taste really. And well, I am indubitably INTJ. ^_^

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido That's fine, but to determine the psychological types of movie characters, we have to go on what's presented to us in the movie. Lecter's cannibalism, sense of smell, etc. is obviously being stressed. HIs intuition is not.

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst Not with a character such as Hannibal Lecter. He is a profound psychological character; and you need to treat him as such. Don't take this the wrong way, but If you lack the knowledge and/or inside to grasp into his mind you'll never pass beyond what you think to be the "obvious" (senses and mere quantification).

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido Thus far, you haven't really given me a firm justification for believing that he's oriented by intuition over sensation, or that he's introverted instead of extroverted. What's your evidence? All I'm really hearing you say is things in response to my own analysis, such as "well, we can't be sure - what if...?" and the like.

It's very easy to be mislead into believing he's introverted simply because he's locked up in solitude.

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst I'll be more concrete. Cannibalism is not what really get's stressed. Cannibalism is incidental to what really causes him stress: apathy (Benjamin Raspel), corruption (Mason), disloyalty (Pazzi), rudeness (Dr. Chilton). And for the fun of it there's probably somehow connection with the capital sins: Asedia (Raspel), Luxuria (Mason), Avaritia (Pazzi), and Invidia (Dr. Chilton). Again, some of this characters can reclaim two or three of this conditions.

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido So how does all that make him intuitive vice sensation-oriented?

It seems to me his cannibalism is 'stressed' in Memphis, and in Baltimore as well when he says "I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti".

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido An indication that Lecter's not an NTJ is that he has a strong sensation function (his cannibalism, 'fava beans and a nice chianti', his keen sense of smell). Thus he's an STJ, not an NTJ. He's not an introvert, but he does go through 'periods' or states of introversion...see my replies to the other commenters on this topic.

Harris and the movie-makers have placed some red herrings, which sometimes lead people to incorrectly conclude that Starling and Lecter are both INTJ's.

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst Introversion and extroversion are no simple matters of mere nature and demeanor based on the common misconception of extroverted as "sociable and sympathetic" and the introverted as "asocial and cold". In jungian analysis is more complex than that. The introverted is interested in the subject; while the extroverted is interested in the object. Objects for an introvert are private matters (like the cannibalization). No matter how tasty and enjoyable it is ;)

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido I agree they're not as simple as you mention. Lecter is 'object-oriented' - that's why he's gotten to know Miggs well enough to make him swallow his own tongue.

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst That's how important the subject in Clarice is represented. Is priestly through the subject that Lecter makes Miggs to swallow his own tongue. Again, you don't entirely focalize on the object or the subject. Every individual possesses both tendencies, but one is usually stronger than the other. Gump was an object oriented person who made clothes out of people. And he intents to merge with the shadow (through the custom).

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst The consumption still concerns the subject (Misha). Clarice comes to fill that space. He desires to know her, exchange (quid pro quo). He sees promise (she endured degradation, someone who can be strong). We know it through his dialogs with her and through Barney's inside (dialog with Mason); and when he ridicules Doemling for portraying her as mere object.

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Darksido I think you might be confusing 'subject' with 'subjective'. An introvert is more oriented by the inner world than the outer. The point is that even during his 'period' of introversion, i.e. his imprisonment, we see signs of his extroversion ("get more fun out of life", has gotten to know Miggs, etc.). Clarice is definitely the object for him, and he's focused on her.

[Darksido]

@MrMovieAnalyst This relation evolves beyond degradation, cannibalism, or pupil status. Into partnership, trust and love (profound aspects of his introversion). Lecter's darkest elements of his shadow. Don't forget, in a character such as Lecter the shadow does not only represents his primitive being; but also his weaknesses.

[Darksido]

In opposition to Lecter who had a positive relation with his parents. So different types of shadows. He is quite comfortable with part of his shadow (being a cannibal and eating the rude). His darker side deals with the pleasure in degradation, fear, vanity, and the care free ways of a child when dealing with his victims (no good or evil). And even darker parts that deal with the consumption of his sister, being unable to save her, the hopes for her to be whole again, and affective relations.

[Darksido]

I beg to differ Dr. Lecter is an INTJ. But is always nice to see more people using the Myers-Briggs Indicator. Now, concerning your jungian analysis, it needs a good amount of work. Let's take the concept of the shadow for instance. Dr. Lecter is a psychopath. In that sense is somehow difficult to grasp his shadow; and he is way too sophisticated and complex to be represented by Gump. Not to mention Gump was abused his entire childhood by his foster parents and later on by his grandparents.

[delune56]

Disagree. Hannibal is all about the rebellion against God, the acts of violence being affronts.

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@delune56 You mean you disagree that he is trying to become Mecurius or Abraxas? If he were to become Abraxas, this would go 'against' the Christian God. I'm not saying Lecter isn't evil, quite the contrary, since he represents the Antichrist after his 'resurrection' in Memphis.

[scRaTcHvsWU]

I don't mean to be rude or anything, but this "religious metaphores" interpretation seems like a lot of bullshit to me.

Also the movie is based on a book, in which there are many more small details...

Silence of the Lambs is an awesome classic horror movie, where evil is not interpreted by "the Unnatural" or "the Devil"¨, but by our fellow men. It is based on the authors fascination with serial killers and tries to decipher what drives this primal kind of behaviour (serial killing). Just sayin

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@scRaTcHvsWU Yes, the movie is based on a book by Thomas Harris, and Harris is known to use ideas from religion.

SOTL is more of a thriller than it is a horror movie.

[blackdice23]

@scRaTcHvsWU Dead right, there's a lot more to the characters of the books than simplistic movie symbology.

[Kdemer01]

I remember learning about deeper interpretation in English, but in reality I believe we can only speculate what the writers intent was..if any. What if Jesus would of never of revealed what his parables meant? It could of been interpreted in so many ways.

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@Kdemer01 It's doubtful that Thomas Harris or the movie-makers themselves will ever outright reveal much of the underlying meaning of SOTL or any of the other Lecter movies. But some interpretations are bound to be more "educated" than others, and hence, probably closer to the truth.

[riverlioness]

No. Hannibal Lector is an INTJ. He is an introvert.

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@riverlioness It seems that way because Harris and the movie-makers have layed down a few red herrings.

The fact that Lecter's able to occupy himself while in prison doesn't in and of itself make him an introvert. Recall that he seems to have gotten to know Miggs fairly well, whereas an introvert would tend to shy away from getting to know other prisoners. Also recall that he tells Clarice she needs to "get more fun out of life"...(continued)...

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@riverlioness Since Lecter represents the historical Jews, his periods (or states) of introversion represent times when the biblical Israelites were in exile or in the wilderness. Also, Lecter wants to be reborn (as explained on the blog), and one of the things Jung talks about is the relationship of states of introversion to rebirth.

Lecter obviously thrives on sensation over intuition: his cannibalism, his keen sense of smell, "fava beans and a nice chianti"...etc.

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@riverlioness Finally, Lecter wants to alchemically unite with his Jungian opposite - Clarice, an INFP - and thus become Mercurius, who was known as the union of all opposites. Also, Abraxas was union of all opposites.

[YaleBreaker]

How is Clarice the Trinity?

[MrMovieAnalyst]

@YaleBreaker It's "explained" (visually) in my "Silence of the Lambs Analysis - Introduciton" video. The visual cues are, for example, that when Starling is wearing a white robe, I think in the dorm room scene, she represents Jesus ('God the Son' of the Trinity). Actually in total Starling represents a quaternity, since she also represents the virgin Mary ("University of Virginia", etc.). Carl Jung was big on trinities/triads and quaternities.