Eric Herbert Santana
We’re Not So Different
“…The sweetness of their character.” These were the last words to be spoken as
Hitchcock’s film Shadow of a Doubt ended. They were referring to the character Uncle Charlie,
who had just been killed by a train while attempting to murder his niece. These words were
meant to portray him in a positive sense to his sister’s family and the general public, and were
based on his actions and behavior in public. The words were spoken at his funeral by a priest
who was completely unaware Uncle Charlie was a murderer. The priest’s words were based on
an impression Uncle Charlie wanted to give to the general public, an impression he was a good
guy who hadn’t committed any crimes. Uncle Charlie was largely successful in his intentions to
appear as a crime-free good guy to the town he was in up to his death and even afterwards. The
words express how being an individual with free will allows one to shape other’s perceptions of
themselves through their words and actions. Hitchcock’s representation of madness is one
that allows us to identify with the “mad”. As the personalities of Alfred Hitchcock’s
characters would develop during the movies of which they were a part of, some would begin to
lean towards madness while others gradually revealed such a state of being. Some would argue
Alfred Hitchcock poorly represented the insane by making them unrealistic; others would go so
far as saying there is no presence of madness in Hitchcock’s work. However, by looking more
deeply into Hitchcock’s work his representation of madness becomes evident. Often as a viewer
would observe a character involved in the realm of madness they would get a sense of
familiarity; the viewer can imagine themselves in the shoes of the character, potentially even
acting similarly. Characters who had gone mad would evoke thoughts in viewers such as “If that
were me would I act any differently?”
One of Hitchcock’s films that allow us to identify with the “mad” due to its
representation is Shadow of a Doubt. In S.O.A.D. the character of Uncle Charlie is suffering from
madness to the extent where he feels morally obligated to commit murder. As Siamak Movahedi
stated:
If a social identity were constructed for any person based on a biased sample of his life
events, he could easily be portrayed as a villain or as a man of character, as a criminal
or as a man of law and order, as a sinner or as a saint, and as an insane or as a sane
person. (192).
One can easily be sane and appear insane, and vice versa based on how they communicate to
others. Alfred Hitchcock could easily introduce a “mad” character we believe to be sane because
the sane and the mad can appear so similar. The other characters in the story, as well as the
audience themselves, would get a false impression of sanity based on that characters actions and
behavior. The mad character may be aware of the power of deception and use that to their
advantage as well. A mad character may aim to appear sane for his/her own benefit, and they
may or may not succeed in Hitchcock’s work. Also, a sane person can seek to appear insane for
their own benefit and succeed in deceiving others based on their actions and behaviors.
Uncle Charlie’s madness gradually reveals itself as we observe his actions throughout
S.O.A.D. His life experiences as well as his morals have shaped this madness, whether the
madness is permanent or temporary. In his mind he feels there is a guilty party that may be
killed: rich widows. In committing these murders he feels he is representing the widows’
deceased husbands, or at least their supposed intentions to make use of their hard-earned life
savings. We can relate to some of the contributing factors of this madness; such as the idea most
of us as humans will have to work and save money our entire lives. Uncle Charlie expresses the
concept of married men working their entire lives to save up money only to die before they can
enjoy it. He also communicates the idea that those men’s widows then make use of the saved
money for themselves, allowing them to live a more comfortable lifestyle. Uncle Charlie also
expresses anger at the possibility of dying before making use of saved money; death being what
separates people from their hard earned savings. Uncle Charlie expresses these beliefs during the
scene in which he forces his niece Charlie to attend a bar with him. Through this communication
Charlie may appear completely sane if one was unaware of his crimes. These emotions are
shared by most working people, not only men in this day and age, showing us that we’re not so
different from Uncle Charlie. These emotions may have influenced Uncle Charlie’s actions and
behavior just as much as they can influence our own, showing common ground between us. We
can identify with these concepts and communicate them in the same ways, showing both the mad
and the sane share similar thoughts in regards to everyday life. This also shows the sane and mad
can choose the exact same words to communicate their feelings to one another. The frustration of
knowing you must work most of your life in order to survive enjoyably and legally is shared by
Uncle Charlie and ourselves. One could be oblivious to the fact that another expressing a similar
view is mad due to how they communicate with each other; these two would identify with each
other seeing as how they share ideas. Once this connection is established, the mad person can
continue to maintain the false image of sanity if they so desire. The mad person can take
advantage of the sane person once they have identified with the mad because they are unaware of
the others madness. This can be compared to a spider’s web appearing invisible to an insect. The
insect is oblivious to the web’s presence until it is ensnared. The web could be hidden from view
initially to the insect; much like one would be unaware of another’s madness. If madness
becomes undeniable, the sane person has been ensnared in the mad person’s insanity. The
spider’s web would represent madness and the insect would be the sane person. One way
Hitchcock allowed us to identify with Charlie’s uncle was by first having him share a common
viewpoint, then by using it as a pivotal point for a mental problem; one that Uncle Charlie
himself was seemingly unaware of. We can relate to Uncle Charlie’s motivating factor of finding
alternatives to a lifetime of work as well, further allowing us to identify with the madness
afflicting him.
Another point that allows us to identify with Uncle Charlie is how he watches out for
himself first. The motivating factor of making sure nothing comes between one and their method
of sustaining an income is something we may all share with Uncle Charlie. One would prefer
little to no obstacles in obtaining financial security. His madness uses this motivating factor to
justify murder, as he eventually feels the life of his niece becomes an obstacle to his financial
stability due to the potential threat of his niece snitching him out. This causes Uncle Charlie to
feel her untimely death would be beneficial to him. According to Movahedi:
… a person in peak experience would take on temporarily many of the characteristics of
self-actualizing individuals. Undoubtedly, we have all had peak experiences and hence
moments of self actualization. But frequent peak experiences do not qualify us as
permanently self-actualized, while a few “bleak experiences” are capable of bestowing
upon us the lasting identity of “deviant,” “criminal,” or “insane.” (193).
Uncle Charlie would be labeled mad for his few bleak experiences involving murder. It
appears that Charlie may have been entirely sane before and right up to those bleak events. The
good experiences of his life would not define him as a good person however. Movahedi’s quote
communicates a person may be sane before and up to the very moment they commit an act of
madness, an act that permanently defines that person thereafter.
Another of Hitchcock’s films to portray identifiable madness is Rear Window. This film
shows madness as a very common and normal state of being, only broken when one is forced out
of their regular ways of living. This madness is like a blindness from reality, where one only
pays attention to immediately relevant things. Within this madness, lesser crimes such as the
death of a neighbor’s dog seem unimportant and not worth a second look. We can relate to the
feeling of being caught up in “the swing of things”, as if to say a change of pace from daily life
can significantly change a person. This change is potentially to the point where communicating
with those still focused on living their daily lives can become extremely difficult. We can
identify with focusing more on our daily routines as opposed to focusing on vague distracting
things. One such distraction would be a neighbor’s behavior inside their own home. The
protagonist’s war-time friend and detective is one who has been caught up in everyday madness.
He is so used to focusing on his daily life that when his friend, the protagonist, tries to convince
him a murder has occurred his initial intention is to discredit the claim due to its uncommon
nature. We can identify with the madness of being skeptical of something just because we would
prefer it to be untrue. This is portrayed even further by the detective as more and more
supporting evidence of murder arises. In the face of new evidence the detective continues to
preferably seek a way to deny murder has occurred, and he is ultimately unsuccessful in those
intentions. He was motivated to deny murder due to its unlikelihood and this can be considered
mad because a detective should seek to disprove murder with evidence, not deny it on blind faith.
The caretaker to the protagonist as well as the protagonist’s girlfriend are also caught up
in their “everyday madness” initially. Their madness can be described as: if you prefer one
course of events to another then your preference is more likely to be true. We can identify with
being in denial of something if it is out of the everyday norm and unlikely to be true. Such
madness is revealed when they both communicate their preference for “the normal flow of
things” by being skeptical of murder at first. Only with evidence mounting do they feel it is
appropriate to change their opinions. We can relate to the concept of how mad we may appear
when we deny or do not believe something so obvious to another. We can also relate to the
thought that people must be “mad” when we find evidence to think a certain way and they do not
share those thoughts, even after being presented the same evidence. We can also identify with
preferring our neighbors to be law abiding citizens as opposed to murderers.
Rope is another Hitchcock movie that contains mad characters with whom we can
identify. According to Joel Cullin: “If a person expects one message and instead receives
something quite different, some degree of confusion results. Since human beings are in the habit
of sense making, confusion usually activates a striving to emerge from this uncomfortable state.”
(195). This quote is applicable to the sane as well as the mad and communicates that we all react
similarly to the unknown. The two murderers in Rope can be viewed as mad for their attitudes
towards killing. They feel murder is a privilege reserved for intellectuals. Their reaction to the
unexpected is the common ground we share with them. The unexpected comes in the form of
their former teacher. He suspects they’ve committed a crime and he seeks to uncover the truth.
When the teacher realizes he’s “left his cigarette box” after leaving one of the murderers is
completely unsure what to do next. The teacher was using the lost item as a way to convince the
murderers to allow him to enter their home once more. We can relate to the feeling of being
unsure what our next move is in the face of an unexpected obstacle. We can also identify with
the feeling of trying to keep something a secret from those who have educated us, whether it’s
our parents or teachers. Both the mad and sane seek to emerge from a state of confusion once it
occurs, further allowing us to identify with them. Hitchcock represented this concept when he
had one of the murderers appear unsure of their next move due to the “lost cigarette box.” The
murderer was in an uncomfortable state brought about by the unexpected and their main desire at
that point was to emerge from that feeling without negative consequences, much like any of us
would want to. The murderer who wanted food served off the dead man’s resting place also
follows concepts we can relate to. He gains satisfaction by having everyone walk around his
crime scene unaware of any crime. We can relate to the excited feeling of getting away with
something we shouldn’t have and the satisfaction of knowing we got away with it. The teacher
who used the cigarette box was also mad to an extent because he suspected he was in the home
of two murderers yet he remained calm and inquisitive. His madness is one that allows him to
knowingly risk his life in the pursuit of knowledge. Specifically that knowledge is “what
happened to the murdered man whom I taught?” We can relate to the feeling of seeking
information above all other concerns when that information is in regards to our loved ones and
their well being.
Alfred Hitchcock represented madness in film in a way that audiences can identify with.
With further research one would be able to determine what factors of daily life would cause a
sane person to go mad. Also through looking more deeply into madness portrayed in Hitchcock’s
movies, one would be able to understand exactly how close Hitchcock himself came to madness
and how that influenced his work. Further research would also determine how he felt the mad
influenced the world, and whether or not any elements of madness were completely absent from
his work. Hitchcock may have felt some elements of madness were inappropriate or unusable for
his work, a possible reason for not including them. Hitchcock’s personal opinion of madness as a
whole may be better understood through further research as well.