Schizoid: The Word 'Schizoid' is said to have originated in 1925, meaning a tendency or resembling a condition of schizophrenia.... mental condition, first diagnosed in 1912. Well that doesn't read much like ‘The Schizoid Man’ of ‘The Prisoner,’ does it? Because 'Schizoid' is a mental condition, and although that's what is suggested in the episode, No.6 is actually physically confronted by his doppelganger!
‘The Schizoid Man’ was an early episode. After September 1966 location shoot at Portmeirion {for the first four episodes plus stock footage} the crew began filming at Elstree. ‘The Schizoid Man’ was in production, according to the Daily Cinema, the week commencing 21st of December 1966, and 4th of January 1967, and Portmeirion only appears in the episode through stock film footage.
No.6 was out of circulation for about a month or more, that being about the length of time it would take No.6 to grow a full beard. So he missed the Village Festival, or did he? Because while No.6 was out of circulation, his doppelganger No.12 was living the life of No.6 in the Village. Mind you I wonder if Curtis would have captured No.6’s whole character? He was wearing a cream blazer with black piping, when No.6 always wore a dark blazer with off-white piping. But I suppose anyone is entitled to a change. But then that would not have come into question, seeing as the original script called for both No.6’s to wear identical dark blazers. But then how about the fact that No.6 is seen going about wearing his numbered badge, No.6 never wears his badge, Curtis should have read that in No.6’s file, and No.2 should have known that as well! I expect when citizens ws No.6 wearing his bage they might have thought "What's up with him then?" Or perhaps to be pelased that No.6 is finally accepting his number, his identity!
Today is the beginning of ‘The Schizoid Man,’ I may watch the episode tonight.
Be seeing you
There is a correspondence in contrariness of the "Schizoid" episode and "Forsake". In "Schizoid" Number Six' person and personality are doubled, or duplicated. They are split in "Forsake". But there is a contradicton: Number Six' double/duplicated personality causes a split personality or, at least, identity crisis. On the other hand, the split personality of Number Six (in "Forsake") causes the existence of a doppelganger, a second entity of his partial identity. As the English expression double in connection with personality means split personality. A mind-boggling - schizoid and schizophrenic - thing that is. Thanks to Michael for this observation. - BCNU!
ReplyDeleteHello Arno,
DeleteWith all due respect, I find I cannot agree. In 'Schizoid' No.6's physical appearence might have been duplicated in his doppelganger Curtis, but not so No.6's personality, there is no question of a "split" personality. All Curtis could do was to impersonate No.6, to mimic him, he did not phycially have No.6's personality. The question of identity crisis in 'Schizoid' has been brought about because No.6's mind has been conditioned to believe he is someone else. Nor in 'Forsake' is No.6's personality "split," it is his mind that has been parted from his body, and placed in another. There is no question of a "split" personality in 'Forsake.'
Very kind regards
David
BCNU
Well noted, David! And yet, I think I can see what Michael is up to. Because it's about a more abstract layer here, the conception of the existence of such things like "unity/individuality". In "Schizoid" No. 6 is - virtually - split into 2 halves, factually there are 2 instances/entities of himself, one is who we call the doppelganger. In "Forsake" Nigel Stock's impersonation is actually a doppelgänger but not physically, of course. One could maintain that one part of No. 6's personality has been separated from his "other self" (his body and, perhaps, a bit more). In the history of film and the cinema we can find a number of examples of "split personalitie", like THE STUDENT OF PRAGUE or the Dorian Gray motive where one oart of the indivudual is "split" and the soul sold to the Devil. - BCNU!
ReplyDeleteHello Arno,
DeleteThis is deep, and I'll have to give it some more thought. Perhaps to speak to Michael about it, ask him if he cares to enlarge on the subject. Certainly it is an interesting topic, if rather vexing for me at the moment.
Very kind regards
David
BCNU