THE QUESTION OF ART VS SCIENCE

...I'd like to discuss something which I've noticed working in several of our readings thus far...[A] technique wherein the author, via estrangement, forces the reader into a more sophisticated mode of awareness. For instance, Deirdre is a good example of a character who in her un-human qualities highlights for the reader what is specially human Ð the experience of smelling roses, stale cigarettes,etc., feeling cold steel upon ones palms, tasting a fine chianti with lingiuni and pesto, etc. The point is that what makes us all human and common is that we have the same kinds of experiences through our corporeal beings, and through these senses we experience similiar feelings: melancholy, glee, excitement, love, hate, etc. It is through these shared experiences and feelings that we are united in our humanity (of course this is my definition only). Therefore, Deirdre, only having the senses of sight and hearing cannot completely be considered human because she cannot partake of all that unites humans. I know what you are proabably thinking, "does that make Helen Keller sub-human?" I don't know how to reconcile these differences, but Deirdre is certainly the portrayal of a creature who is only partially human.

Although I will concede that Deirdre is no longer a "common human," I cannot consider her to be less than human. If you accept the hierarchy of senses in which smell, taste, and touch are considered primitive and the abilities to see and hear are more advanced, then Dierdre is beyond human. She has become incedentally elevated from the baser human qualities, and now resides in a plane beyond "common human" capacity to understand or attain. Literal removal of sight or hearing is a relatively simple procedure; however, the removal of sensations of smell and taste are more difficult, and the elimination of the ability to feel is even more difficult to do without inhibiting mobility. Deirdre's body has become a sensory deprivation chamber of sorts. Her mind functions within a world of only sight and sound.  

[Dierdre] also brings up an interesting debate concerning the western ideal of the body and the mind being separate entities. Western thought has often considered the body nothing more than a dwelling for the mind (which is supposedly transcendent, while the body is mere clay). However, there is much thought on this subject, and Moore (the author) seems to be directly confronting this issue with Deirdre. If the body is not important beyond the function of carrying the mind through the world then it doesn't matter if one's body is completely replaced by another. (The latest Anne Rice vampire chronicle, "The Body Thief," deals with this as well.)

I personally tend to see the body as a vessel for one's conciousness as well, but I'm interested to know more about the "much thought on this issue" Art mentions. And is this separation necessarily a Western ideal? I must take issue with the concept of the body being unimportant beyond its function as a vessel. For humans, our body is a means of identifying who we are. It is the outward expression of our Self, physically manipulable but genetically unalterable (at this stage of the game anyway). In _The Tale of the Body Theif_, Lestat's out-of-body experience is a nightmare for the most part. Having been inhuman (or superhuman) for so long, he has forgotten the feeling of being human. The sensual experiences of being human disgust him for the most part, and he is acutely aware of the differnences between his vampiric vessel and the borrowed vessel of a natural human. The Body Theif who has taken over Lestat's true form revels in the possesion of superhuman powers and causes havoc wherever he goes, abusing his borrowed abilities and tarnishing Lestat's reputation. Lestat seems a somehow inadequate parallel to Dierdre, but at the same time the contrast between the two is intriguing. Lestat still posesses many of the sensual abilities of a human, yet he is clearly beyond human. Deirdre is further removed from human sensuality, yet seems somehow more human than Lestat. What exactly makes me feel this way is eluding me at the moment...but worth investigating sometime.

Deirdre's new body is not only adequate for her needs, but it is superior. Her new body affords her all kinds of autonomy and power. This is a clear indication that Moore sees the body as simply a vehicle for the mind. However, I'd like to contradict myself and say that Deirdre portrays a double character: she is both superhuman and subhuman. She is superhuman in the sense that her new body gives her more ability than ever to transport her brain through the physical world. However, she is subhuman in that she has been reduced to a mind only, which cuts her off from sensuous/sensational/sensual/sensatory experience. Thus, Deirdre makes us question our own mind/body relationship. In this way she makes us more aware of ourselves through the estrangement of her character.

I agree that Deirdre makes us question and makes us more aware of ourselves, but I don't believe she has been reduced to a mind only. Her mind cannot apparently exist without containment in her new corporeal form. Although we do not know what happened to Dierdre's brain or consciousness in transit from one form to another, she would not be Dierdre without connection to a vessel. Perhaps her powers are somehow limited, but if her mind was not connected to the vessel then she, like Lestat, should be able to transfer her consciousness into another human form or exist without that form if she so desired.

In "Death Among the Stars" the question of conciousness transfer and cohabitation in a vessel arises. (This idea has also been played with in the film _All of Me_ with Steve Martin and that dark haired woman who was in some flicks with Bette Midler.. argh.. i cant remember her name) Sorry for the tangent...where was I? Oh yes, Death... The question of what happens to our consciousness after death is a slippery one. In the case of the Flabby Alien, there is a consistent transfer to new vessels, and apparently the consiousness already inhabiting the new vessel merges with the incoming conciousness yet still retains some thread of itself. Reminds me of Lieutenant Dax on Deep Space Nine...except that the transfer is physical though the little critter absorbs the conciousness of the new host and the resulting conciousness is a melange of all hosts. In the case of Lestat in _Body Theif_, there is not room enough for two. Clive Barker treats a similar issue in _The Damnation Game_ with a mysterious soul-eating stranger who has the power to revitalise corpses with the same souls he consumes. Strange strange tale, but interesting naetheless. In this case, the stranger uses a similar means of astral projection and temporarily inhabits a host body in order to experience the sensuality he craves yet is personally repulsed by. Multiple consciousnesses can inhabit one form, and apparently one consciousness can somehow dole itself out into many vessels. Another logistical quandry...worth investigating. But, I have droned on enough. Thanks for an interesting and thought-provoking Spec, Art.