The Why of Simon in “Session 9″
It should be noted beforehand that this post contains so many fuckin’ spoilers your face will melt.
When asked what my favorite horror film I always say without missing a beat, “Session 9″ (review). There was a brief period a couple of months ago where Paranormal Activity (review) took the top spot, but careful reflection brought me back to Earth and to peddling the Brad Anderson-directed psychological thriller starring David fucking Caruso to anyone foolish enough to engage me in a discussion on horror movies.
It should be known that my love of this film borders on the extreme. The banner of I Love Horror is modeled after it (for now), and in addition to owning the DVD (natch) and a poster (true dat), I almost when so far as to buy a t-shirt featuring the film’s box art and final line of the movie, but was stopped when it was confirmed whoever made the shirt is lazy and printed them all with a crooked image.
But I digress.
When I first saw the film, I was confused. While not egregiously convoluted (like Primer), the confluence of events that lead up to the final line of the movie, which attempts to reveal why everything happened, does make one tend to scratch their head. There are little nuances and subtleties that have a tendency to be overlooked and picked up on only during second viewing. One of the aspects of the film that kept people guessing was Simon. Who is he? First some background.
In Session 9, a crew of asbestos abatement professionals are hired to clean out the Danvers State Mental Hospital. Gordon, the Scottish and likable leader of the crew, is showing signs of stress, brought about by the birth of his daughter Emma and the apparent lack of work he and his team has been receiving. Once inside, the cracks begin to show, and the building’s horrific past begins to reflect on the actions of the crew. One of the workers eventually discovers a set of tapes that reveal a series of interviews between a psychologist and a patient, Mary Hobbes. Committed to the hospital for killing her brother and parents, it is revealed that Mary suffers from multiple personality disorder. In addition to the Princess and Billy, one of the personalities is Simon, who is revealed to have introduced herself to Mary when she fell upon a china doll she received as a gift, cutting her chest up and leaving her horrifically scarred. Simon tells Mary to kill, resulting in her incarceration.
Several theories have been put forth concerning Simon’s nature and his relationship to the events of the film, one of which I would like to discuss in greater detail. Ellen Datlow, in a book co-written by Terri Windling, postulates that Simon is a “malignant genius loci,” as opposed to Mary’s alternate personality. For those who didn’t waste $45,000 on Classics degree, a genius loci is a spirit from Roman mythology that dwells within a specific place, often serving as a protector. If used in a contemporary manner, it is often considered the atmosphere of a location as opposed to an incorporeal being, serving as a major principle of the New Rationalism architectural movement. Placed within the context of what happens to Gordon, this place is clearly the human mind.
<sidenote> When writing this article I took Datlow’s interpretation of “genius loci” to refer to the hospital itself. When watching the film again and coming up with my argument, it became clear the place she was referring to is the human mind. However, if my initial assumptions are indeed true, then Datlow’s interpretation is very, very wrong. </sidenote>
Throughout the film Simon’s voice is heard, typically in situations where Gordon’s sanity is revealed to be on shaky ground. The first instance occurs when Simon and Phil are making their initial inspections of Danvers. In an intensely creepy scene that sets the mood for the film, Simon introduces himself to Gordon by simply saying “Hello, Gordon” and forgoing any pleasantries. It should be known that at this point the audience is completely unaware of who – or what – Simon is.
Later that evening Gordon heads home to celebrate the winning bid with his wife and inadvertently causes a pot of boiling water to spill on his leg. Now, any normal individual, that is, one not affected by a failing career, the stress of a new daughter, and internal strife among his close friends and employees, would simply deal with the excruciating pain and move on. As we come to learn, it is this event that allowed Simon to exert his influence upon the already weakened Gordon (”Do it, Gordon”), resulting in the death of his wife, daughter, and dog (fucker wouldn’t stop barking).
The argument that Simon can be considered an alternate personality is given ample evidence with his appearance through the mouth of Mary following the utter breakdown of her other two personalities. With Gordon, we’re never given any indication that he is in any way apart of him. However, one of Mary’s alternate’s, Princess, claims to be unaware of Simon’s presence, something that is not entirely common in cases of multiple personality disorder. Billy, however, is perfectly aware of Simon, and at one point in the film states that he is “asleep” and that he would not wake him for Mary’s sake.
From this it can be rationalized that Simon is indeed a malevolent force that lies dormant in the mind waiting for the opportunity to introduce himself and exert his influence over the individual. Billy’s awareness of Simon, as well as Simon’s introduction via Mary may lend credence to the notion that he is an alternate, though given the events that surround his introduction to Mary and Gordon this argument loses a modicum of credibility. To reconcile this, I posit that Simon is an inherent personality trait, or to extend this even further a distinct emotion, that manifested itself as an alternate personality in Mary, and although not expressly stated, an alternate of Gordon whose presence is kept secret and seen only when Gordon enters his dissociative state. I would thus agree with Datlow’s principle argument, though feel the dismissal of Simon as an alternate fails to take into account several key aspects of the film.
Although Mary and Gordon are similar, their primary difference lies in the fact that Mary, as far as we know, exhibited no signs of stress, anxiety or mental weakness before falling on the China doll. Simon utilized Gordon’s weakness by introducing himself earlier on (”Hello Gordon, do you know who I am?”), whereas with Mary he waited for an opportunity, though perhaps her other multiple personalities presented themselves before Simon made his appearance.
Any confusion regarding Simon’s true nature is summed up in the final line of the film: “I live in the weak and the wounded, doc.”
RSS Feed
Ummmm… I think I have your copy of Session 9.
I watched it last night, so no, you don’t.
Well I think it WAS yours and maybe you bought another one because I didn’t buy it. My reasoning for this is I still have your burned copy of Oldboy too.
I haven’t seen this movie since it came out, so I’m going on memory here…
But what about the possibility that Simon is indeed this spirit that inhabits all of us, but lies dormant until needed. It might be away of reconciling the genius loci of the mind and that of Danvers.
That’s a good interpretation, but I’ve always thought of Simon as a demon (or malicious force, if you want to avoid specifics) who latches onto people when they’re at their weakest psychologically – I’d assumed that Mary was already having psychological problems when she was injured and Simon took over. Then it uses the moment of madness that follows severe pain and takes over.
Much like the demon possession in Paranormal Activity, it’s a force that can only infect the stressed.
Man, I’ve got to watch this movie again.
I don’t like the idea of Simon being a demon, as I think Anderson tried to keep the film as grounded in reality as possible.
hi http://www.youtube.com/user/DohanBermann this is a free horror on youtube
I loved reading everyone’s input…however I don’t think that it is one of the best fear inspiring movies of all time although it was very well done…there are many movies with the theme of insane asylums which I found to be much more frightening…and not because of gore or cute ladies screaming…the most horrifying film I have seen is called Martyrs.
This is also my favorite horror movie of all time. I think mostly because of what you describe in the genesis, or “why” of Simon. The possibility that “Simon” could exist inside all of us, and is waiting for a chance to exert control is most disturbing to me. To me “Simon” represents the breaking point within all of us. Not evil persay, but the ability for people in their weakest moment or at their lowest moment to lose reason, and succomb to their most base desires. With all the pressures and pain of modern life, all the stimuli and images we get bombarded with, all the slights and hurts–it amazes me sometimes how much we as human beings must hold back, and how much we have to internalize to keep going. It’s a forgive and forget sort of society really, you know. For Gordon, the boiling water isn’t so much the last straw, but a catalyst, a reason, to expunge those base thoughts, those awful thoughts we tuck away and never act upon. And once he starts, once Simon takes over, there is no going back, he becomes a puppet. The one thing I think that makes all this ultimately debateable is the possible red herring of Hank. Why does Jeff see his “ghost”? If “Simon” is something inside of us–is he working on all of the Haz-mat workers? Is Danvers the sort of place that gives the Simon part of us a better chance to exert control? ANYWAY I could go on and on…just had to post my lengthy thoughts, since I have never heard of anyone having this movie being their favorite,too.