To these he adds the uncanny effect of epileptic fits, and of manifestations of insanity, because

these excite in the spectator the impression of automatic, mechanical processes at work behind the
ordinary appearance of mental activity.

“The somewhat paradoxical result is that in the first place a great deal that is not uncanny in fiction
would be so if it happened in real life; and in the second place that there are many more means of
creating uncanny effects in fiction than there are in real life (Freud [1919] 1955, 248).

The German word ' unheimlich ' is obviously the opposite of ' heimlich' [' homely'] , 'heimlich' ['
native ']- the opposite of what is familiar ; and we are tempted to conclude that what is ' uncanny' is
frightening precisely because it is not known and familiar . Naturally not everything that is new and
unfamiliar is frightening , however ; the relation is not capable of inversion. (220)

the uncanny is that class of the frightening which leads back to what is known of old and long familiar.

This relation is accentuated by mental processes leaping from one of these characters to another —by
what we should call telepathy—, so that the one possesses knowledge, feelings and experience in
common with the other.

Or it is marked by the fact that the subject identifies himself with someone else, so that he is in doubt as
to which his self is, or substitutes the extraneous self for his own. In other words, there is a doubling,
dividing and interchanging of the self. And finally there is the constant recurrence of the same thing —
the repetition of the same features or character-traits or vicissitudes, of the same crimes, or even the
same names through several consecutive generations.

They are a harkingback to particular phases in the evolution of the self-regarding feeling, a regression to
a time when the ego had not yet marked itself off sharply from the external world and from other
people.

Other situations which have in common with my adventure an unintended recurrence of the same
situation, but which differ radically from it in other respects, also result in the same feeling of
helplessness and of uncanniness. So, for instance, when, caught in a mist perhaps, one has lost one's
way in a mountain forest, every attempt to find the marked or familiar path may bring one back again
and again to one and the same spot, which one can identify by some particular landmark.
Our analysis of instances of the uncanny has led us back to the old, animistic conception of the universe.
This was characterized by the idea that the world was peopled with the spirits of human beings; by the
subject's narcissistic overvaluation of his own mental processes; by the belief in the omnipotence of
thoughts and the technique of magic based on that belief; by the attribution to various outside persons
and things of carefully graded magical powers, or ‘mana’ as well as by all the other creations with the
help of which man, in the unrestricted narcissism of that stage of development, strove to fend off the
manifest prohibitions of reality.

At this point I will put forward two considerations which, I think, contain the gist of this short study. [In
the first place, if psycho-analytic theory is correct in maintaining that every affect belonging to an
emotional impulse, whatever its kind, is transformed, if it is repressed, into anxiety, then among
instances of frightening things there must be one class in which the frightening element can be shown to
be something repressed which recurs. This class of frightening things would then constitute the uncanny;
and it must be a matter of indifference whether what is uncanny was itself originally frightening or
whether it carried some other affect. In the second place, if this is indeed the secret nature of the
uncanny, we can understand why linguistic usage has extended das Heimliche [‘homely’] into its
opposite, das Unheimliche (p. 226); for this uncanny is in reality nothing new or alien, but something
which is familiar and old-established in the mind and which has become alienated from it only through
the process of repression. This reference to the factor of repression enables us, furthermore, to
understand Schelling's definition [p. 224] of the uncanny as something which ought to have remained
hidden but has come to light.] It only remains for us to test our new hypothesis on one or two more
examples of the uncanny.

We can also speak of a living person as uncanny, and we do so when we ascribe evil intentions to him.
But that is not all; in addition to this we must feel that his intentions to harm us are going to be carried
out with the help of special powers.

The uncanny effect of epilepsy and of madness has the same origin.

This is that an uncanny effect is often and easily produced when the distinction between imagination and
reality is effaced, as when something that we have hitherto regarded as imaginary appears before us in
reality, or when a symbol takes over the full functions of the thing it symbolizes, and so on. It is this
factor which contributes not a little to the uncanny effect attaching to magical practices.

It may be true that the uncanny [unheimlich] is something which is secretly familiar [heimlich-heimisch],
which has undergone repression and then returned from it, and that everything that is uncanny fulfils
this condition.
At this point I will put forward two considerations which, I think, contain the gist of this short study. [In
the first place, if psycho-analytic theory is correct in maintaining that every affect belonging to an
emotional impulse, whatever its kind, is transformed, if it is repressed, into anxiety, then among
instances of frightening things there must be one class.

In the second place, if this is indeed the secret nature of the uncanny, we can understand why linguistic
usage has extended das Heimliche [‘homely’] into its opposite, das Unheimliche (p. 226); for this
uncanny is in reality nothing new or alien, but something which is familiar and old-established in the
mind and which has become alienated from it only through the process of repression. This reference to
the factor of repression enables us, furthermore, to understand Schelling's definition [p. 224] of the
uncanny as something which ought to have remained hidden but has come to light.]

Through his reviews of the things, events, and humans that evoke a sense of uncanny,

Freud reaches a point where he describes the uncanny as “something which secretly familiar [heimlich-
heimisch], which has undergone repression and then returned from it, and that everything that is
uncanny fulfils this condition” (Freud [1919] 244).

Therefore, the return of the repressed becomes one of the foremost sources of uncanny because the
unconscious fears, desires, and thoughts that are “constantly threatening to return to the conscious level
of the mind” are paradoxically familiar and unfamiliar as Cherry explains: “When they do return they
seem frighteningly strange, but since they are repressed thoughts returning to consciousness, we
recognize them too as disturbing moments from the past” (Cherry 2009, 104).

But that would be to open the door to doubts about the exact value of our general contention that the
uncanny proceeds from something familiar which has been repressed. One thing we may observe which
may help us to resolve these uncertainties: nearly all the instances which contradict our hypothesis are
taken from the realm of fiction and literary productions.

and once more: what is the origin of the uncanny effect of silence, darkness and solitude Do not these
factors point to the part played by danger in the genesis of what is uncanny.

But that would be to open the door to doubts about what exactly is the value of our general contention
that the uncanny proceeds from something familiar which has been repressed.

The uncanny as it is depicted in literature, in stories and imaginative productions, merits in truth a
separate discussion. Above all, it is a much more fertile province than the uncanny in real life, for it
contains the whole of the latter and something more besides, something that cannot be found in real
life. The contrast between what has been repressed and what has been surmounted cannot be
transposed on to the uncanny in fiction without profound modification; for the realm of phantasy
depends for its effect on the fact that its content is not submitted to reality-testing. The somewhat
paradoxical result is that in the first place a great deal that is not uncanny in fiction would be so if it
happened in real life; and in the second place that there are many more means of creating uncanny
effects in fiction than there are in real life. The imaginative writer has this licence among many others,
that he can select his world of representation so that it either coincides with the realities we are familiar
with or departs from them in what particulars he pleases.

In fairy stories feelings of fear—including therefore uncanny feelings—are ruled out altogether. We
understand this, and that is why we ignore any opportunities we find in them for developing such
feelings. Concerning the factors of silence, solitude and darkness [pp. 246-7], we can only say that they
are actually elements in the production of the infantile anxiety from which the majority of human beings
have never become quite free. This problem has been discussed from a psycho-analytic point of view
elsewhere.

In fact, even if the uncanny «is undoubtedly related to what is frightening» (Freud, 1974, p. 219), it also
has its own conceptual core that the research has hitherto failed to identify.

Freud's most concise and effective definition explains the uncanny as «something which is familiar and
old-established in the mind and which has become alienated from it through the process of repression»
(Freud, 1974, p. 241).

As Jacques Derrida observes, in the second part of Das Unheimliche, Freud distinguishes the uncanny
feeling experienced in real life from the one aroused by artistic, mainly literary, productions. Freud
admits that «fiction presents more opportunities for creating uncanny sensations than are possible in
real life» (Freud, 1974, p. 251).

In the concluding paragraphs of his essay Freud explicitly states "that in the first place a great deal that is
not uncanny in fiction would be so if it happened in real life; and in the second place that there are many
more means of creating uncanny effects in fiction than there are in real life." (Freud 1955: 246) This
statement declares that the effect of the uncanny in a particular text depends first and foremost on the
kind of world that is created: since the return of repressed notions is possible only when the conscious is
deceived in some way or other, the events must be situated in an everyday reality that is all of a sudden
invaded by an estranging element. Freud's second condition for the emergence of the uncanny could be
called the rhetoric of doubt: "[the author] can keep us in the dark for a long time about the precise
nature of the presuppositions on which the world he writes about is based, or he can cunningly and
ingeniously avoid any definite information on the point to the last" (Freud 1955: 251). The final factor is
the kind of themes used in the literary text. Freud suggests few themes himself, but we will venture to
approach the thematic core a little closer.
Freud claims that , " the quality of uncanniness can only come from the circumstance of the " double "
being a creation dating back to a very early mental stage , long since left behind, and one , no doubt , in
which it wore a more friendly aspect "( 389). " A creation dating back " means whenever reviewed for
instance in isolation , disagreement or around evening time in our fantasies leads to unheimlich
climate .The saying of " a more friendly aspect" means that Freud alludes to the double as an
anticipation against elimination which along these lines must be viewed as a partner of the acquired fear
from which everyone unknowingly endures ( Reuber 12).

Freud finishes up his discussion of the " uncanny" ; " it may be true that the uncanny is something which
is secretly familiar [heimlich - heimisch ] which has undergone repression and then returned from it , and
that everything that is uncanny fulfills this condition " (7).He makes sense of the uncanny as the polarity
between the " familiar " and " unfamiliar" , adjusting what excites " familiar " through the appearing of
repressed characters ( Hogman 6-7).

For Royle , " one uncanny thing keeps leading to another . Every attempt to isolate and analyse a specific
case of the uncanny seems to generate at least minor epidemic " ( qtd in Reffett 19). He argues that the
uncanny will continuously avoid accurate definition since someone considers one has typified it , it
reaches and strengths the definition to alter. The term evades definition , and in such a way the
elusiveness characterizes it ( Reffett 19). Royle argues that :

The uncanny is destined to elude mastery , it is what can not be pinned down or

Controlled .The uncanny is never simply a question of a statement , description:

or definition , but always engages a performative dimension , a maddening

supplement , something unpredictable and additionally strange happening in

and to what is being stated , defined or described. ( qtd in Reffet 19)

It means that it is possible to define or describe the concept of the uncanny in which the attempt to
accomplish it is a fundamental , characterizing the uncanny's features , the " logic of the supplement "
destructing any achieved definition for uncanny itself at the core of interpreting of the uncanny ( Reffett
19).

Furthermore , the critic Helene Cixous states that , " Frued considers the unheimlich as , at the same
time , a " domain" and " a " concept " , and classic designation " (528). She explained that the " domain "
is unlimited and the " concept " is with practically no core : the uncanny introduces itself . Feud states
that the unheimlich detailed to different terms which look like it horror , dread and misery ; it considers
as an entity in the " family " .Yet it is not exactly an individual from the " family" .

She argues that the practice of the uncanny is ambiguous. This ambiguity considers as a part of the"
concept" Freud contending for the presence of the uncanny , hopes to hold the " sense , the real , the
reality of the sense of things " .In such a way , she comes upon the fundamental impression . So , the
search is solid in which is implied and it is an issue of the idea whose whole indication is implication
( Cixous 528).
Jentcsh

Without a doubt, this word appears to express that someone to whom something ‘uncanny’ happens is
not quite ‘at home’ or ‘at ease’ in the situation concerned, that the thing is or at least seems to be
foreign to him. In brief, the word suggests that a lack of orientation is bound up with the impression of
the uncanniness of a thing or incident. No attempt will be made here to define the essence of the
uncanny. Such a conceptual explanation would have very little value.

So if one wants to come closer to the essence of the uncanny, it is better not to ask what it is, but rather
to investigate how the affective excitement of the uncanny arises in psychological terms, how the
psychical conditions must be constituted so that the ‘uncanny’ sensation emerges.
The uncanny serves as a lens through which the researcher examines how these themes evoke a sense
of the familiar becoming unfamiliar, contributing to an eerie and disquieting atmosphere in the
narratives. The uncanny, according to Freud, involves the revelation of what is hidden or repressed, and
in the context of the novels, it helps shed light on the unsettling nature of the chosen themes.

Essentially, the uncanny acts as a guiding principle that enhances the understanding of the chosen
themes and their impact on the psychological and emotional dimensions of the reader. It provides a tool
for analyzing how supernatural elements, isolation, madness, religion, revenge, and the double work
together to create an atmosphere that is both fascinating and discomforting, aligning with Freud's
conceptualization of the uncanny in literature and art.

DOUBLE

According to Freud, the doubles in literature can be encountered in many forms, from characters

sharing mental processes from the one person to the other, so that the one possesses knowledge,
feeling and experience in common with the other, identifies himself with another person, so that his self
becomes confounded, or the foreign self is substituted for his own—in other words, by doubling,
dividing and interchanging the self. And finally the constant recurrence of similar situations, a same face,
or character-trait, or twist of fortune, or a same crime, or even a same name recurring throughout
several consecutive generations (9).

What is meant here is that there is a chance that the created self can replace the real identity if it is
dominant enough and thus destroy it, therefore causing a crisis of identity.

Literary representations of the doppelgängers or the double can serve various purposes such as
portraying the “other” side of a character, their desires or repressed feelings, their darker or lighter
sides, idealized or feared aspects of the same thing, reemergence of past traumas or secrets. This effect
is achieved through some duplicity in the story; evil or secret twins, mirrors and reflections, ghosts and
spirits, clones, automatons that look identical to the character, different people with similar pasts or the
same name, or the same character’s different versions through its timeline. In literature, the feeling of
uncanny most often and prominently arises when a character encounters this ‘other self’, whether it is in
the form of a reflection, a ghost or a twin. When all these forms and their nature is considered, one can
deduce that these doubles 20 must have a specific visual representation to create such an effect. These
doubles in literature, therefore, usually have an evident similarity to a character, sometimes they are
even identical physically or sometimes they have this resemblance in terms of some personality features,
or the situation they are in. The duplicity in literature is often portrayed as a result of a repression
caused by the society or as a traumatic incident’s psychological effect. This form of representation in a
story, undoubtedly, adds depth and complexity to the plot, while also strengthening the portrayal of the
characters’ inner turmoils.
Madness

Freud also mentions “the omnipotence of thought, dread of the evil eye, animism, and fulfilment of
irrational wishes and silence, darkness and solitude” (17) as other elements of the uncanny.