|
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2000 4:19 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Hey all, sorry I've been missing the past couple days, but I've been busy with work and getting a room together here, which will take up quite a bit of time. Well on to what I was thinking of.
I was watching the movie version of Carrie (which came after watching the sequel, which though it may sound blasphemous to some of you, I thought was pretty good) and that got me thinking about the book and a few other books I've read and that got me going along on a certain thought that Carrie, along with a great many other books we call "horror" collectively, is not actually horror in the truest sense of the word. I should also warn anyone right now that there will be a few spoilers in here, so if you see a book you haven't read, I wouldn't go any further.
Now in some ways it's hard to say just what is horror and what is not as it's largely based on perception, but just indulge me for a bit here. To me it seems that we automatically want to put Carrie (just to go with my current example) in the horror section because of her telekinetic powers and the mass death scene near the end. On closer examination however, I believe Carrie is not so much a horror novel as a tragedy that just happens to have supernatural elements.
When you really look at the story (as written in the book) you have a poor outcast girl living with an insane fanatical mother, taunted by all her classmates, always living in a shadow of pure misery. Then just when it seems that things might finally turn around and she can come out of that shadow and be happy, everything goes to hell due to the childish prank of a few conspiring classmates led by one truly mean-spirited girl, causing the death of most of the class and eventually of the long-suffering outcast herself.
The same can be said of the Dead Zone as well. You have a good, honest man who's whole life is stolen from him by a chance incident on a dark road at night and then finds that he must die in order to save the world from an insane politician. Pet Sematary also definitely has it's roots in the tragic, though it does admitedly go more towards the horrific.
Now if you take away the fact that Carrie is telekinetic or John Smith's psychic bizarre psychic power, you have all the makings of a classic tragedy. So why are we so quick to just shove these automatically in the horror section without a second glance? It could be that they're by Stephen King, a name naturally synonymous with horror fiction, so we naturally consider all his books simply horror, but there are other authors who's novel's could easily fit in more as dramas, tragedies, comedies, but wind up in the horror section due to supernatural elements.
Now it could be another way around, that King just has a knack for breathing true human tragedy into his novels of terror, or that in almost all cases horror and tragedy are inseperably linked by their common motifs. It would certainly stand to reason, both involve death and destruction most of the time, both deal with all the complex human emotions of fear, sadness, and anger, and both tend to draw us somehow to the emotions that we try to avoid in the real world.
It's an interesting link to ponder when you really get a good look at it, so what do you all think? I've been curious about this for a while.
the Wolf
Submitted By: the Wolf |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2000 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
You make a good point Wolf but I think that CARRIE and THE DEAD ZONE are very much "horror." But I'm a person who sees horror in a very broad sense.
I'm always ready to quote Douglas Winter when he said in his brilliant introduction to his anthology PRIME EVIL. "Horror is not a genre like the mystery or Western but an emotion." Horror is all encompassing and I feel that the emotions and feelings brought up in CARRIE and THE DEAD ZONE are very much of the horror vein. Are they horror in the sense of Clive Barker's THE BOOKS OF BLOOD or those Friday the 13th films? No, of course not. But I do think they are horror.
You ask me what my favorite horror novel (or just plain favorite novel) I would tell you THE BLACK DAHLIA by James Ellroy. Most people might say that it's not horror at all but just a dark mystery or thriller. I would say that yes, the novel does fall into those categories but it is also a knock-you-on-your-ass-make-you-want-to-puke-with-disgust horror novel.
David Cronenberg once said that his favorite horror movie was Taxi Driver. What!? That's not horror, you say. But watch that movie again and you'll see real horror.
But that's my opinion. I'm all about destroying labels.
Submitted By: Mr Self Affliction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2000 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hmm, I do see what your saying Mr. SA, that horror doesn't always have to be all horrible slimey things in the dark waiting for human flesh, or axe-weilding psychopaths, or the other usual conventions. I certainly agree with that and that plenty of horror can be found in realistic fiction and even in real life itself. You make a lot of sense.
My main point was about the way we classify things and the seeming link between tragedy and horror, among other categories we go into. From what you're saying, I can also move the other way (in agreeing with your points) to say that in many ways Hamlet could be considered horror as well, given the ghost story element, the spiraling madness and the pile of corpses at the end. The same can be said for so many things as you've shown.
I guess what this really shows, is what a strong emotion fear truly is, in it's own way. How it seems to connect to so many other states of human feeling and entertainment. There's of course pure and outright fear, the cold chill that still runs up your spine on some level when you have to decend into a dark basement or other such situations. There's that laughter that is actually at times a release for some kind of fear. Sadness could be considered a kind of fear that we can't go on given certain situations. And so many other human feelings that can be linked to fear in some way.
The main thing I think, is that it's just amazing to me how much deep emotion is weaved into this genre we all love. So many people seem to blanketly think that horror is all just disgusting creatures of some kind lurking around dark corners, when it can actually be so much more when done right, stretching the whole gamet of human experience and in some ways even defining us as people, in the same way that the worst situation can bring out a person's true nature. Maybe I'm rambling a bit, but it's just fascinating to me, all the things that horror and fear can show. Amazing just what a diverse genre or feeling it is.
the Wolf
Submitted By: the Wolf |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2000 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"The main thing I think, is that it's just amazing to me how much deep emotion is weaved into this genre we all love. So many people seem to blankly think that horror is all just disgusting creatures of some kind lurking around dark corners..."
You're damn right! Most people I come across who don't like horror or don't read horror books (even horror fans who soly get their fix through movies) think of our genre as Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street movies. That's the main reason our genre has such a stigma and why we a lot of the times it isn't taken seriously.
Another good example of a horror story that's usually not considered a horror story is Charles Dickens' A CHRISTMAS CAROL.
Submitted By: Mr Self Affliction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2000 3:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
You guys are dead on. In fact, I was seriously considering doing a radio adaptation of A Christmas Carol for the site. I just couldn't find a way to work around the ending (which is notably upbeat for a horror tale) and stay true to the original work.
But yes, I totally agree with you Wolf - Hamlet definitely has a serious undercurrent of horror. It would be very easy to take the work and emphasize the horror elements of it to make a good, spooky horror flick. The hard part about convincing people that Hamlet can be seen as a horror work is the problem that the madness in the story (Hamlet's that is - not Ophelia's) is implied and debatable. Of course, the ghost is irrefutable (Hamlet wasn't the only one that saw it), but played such a minor role in the story that it is easily forgotten.
Macbeth, on the other hand, is a true out and out horror tale in my mind. And I have yet to see a good adaptation of this - either on stage or film - that embraces the horror elements.
I completely agree that labels are just counter-productive. It irks me to no end when I mention what a great horror film Alien was to have someone say, "But that's science fiction."
Submitted By: Casey |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2000 4:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Casey,
You hit a lot of good points here.
Macbeth is horror. You're damn right and it's my favorite Shakespeare story. Even when I read it in High School I was blown away and back then that was a very hard thing to do.
I have the same problem with Alien too. That's one of my favorite horror films but people are always saying "That's science fiction not horror." Even with John Carpenter's The Thing, people are always saying to me that it's science fiction and not horror. It's as if people believe that if an alien is involved that automatically makes it science fiction. Another argument I always hear is "Well, Blockbuster has Alien and The Thing located in the science fiction section and not the horror." Well guess what? They also have The Devil's Advocate, The Stand, The Sixth Sense, and Stigmata in the Drama section. Shows what they know. Labels are pointless but I can understand their need when it comes to marketing but we must remember that labels really mean nothing. Okay that's enough ranting.
Also...A good movie that exaggerates the horror elements of A Christmas Carroll is the Bill Murray movie Scroged. Still a comedy but their are some freaky moments.
Submitted By: Mr Self Affliction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2000 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Heh, I was going to mention Scrooged. It did have some really creepy (most notably the last ghost - which they really went for the image of death with). Ironically, it was when horror regular Carol Kane popped up that the horror/ghost element got dropped.
And agreed, labels do have a need though. After all, without labels, this page would be "The Cabinet of Dr. Casey - The Stuff That Creeps You Out and/or Disgusts You and/or Makes You Look into the Dark Regions of Your Mind, etc. Website" and how would anyone find it.
Bringing the thread back to literature - I've heard a lot of authors try to distance themselves from the horror label, wanting instead to be put in the "Fiction/Literature" section usually reserved for the Steinbecks, Hemingways, Haleys, etc.. Now I don't totally disagree with their opinion - after all, all literature is literature - but I'm not entirely sure that I want to have to go search through various non-horror novels to find something that I am interested in. Also, at least in my opinion, when they say that they don't want to be known as a "horror author", it makes it sound as though there is something derogatory about horror - which is both an insult to the genre as well as its fans. Me, I'm a HORROR fan and I am proud of that fact. Thoughts?
Submitted By: Casey |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2000 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ah, A Christmas Carol! I have to agree with both of you guys that that one has plenty of horror in it. I remember seeing an old movie version of it that (if you'll pardon the horrible pun) scared the dickens out of me because the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come was the very image of death and tossed Scrooge into a flaming grave at the end of the sequence. If that's not horror, than I don't know what is. And Scrooge had it's moments too, even though, as you both said, it's mainly a comedy.
And Macbeth, how could I have missed that when talking about Shakespeare? Between the crones, the murders, the visions, and the prophecies, it has all the elements of a good horror story. Like you Casey, I'd love to see versions of that and Hamlet done that somehow emphasize the horrific elements a bit more, I might have to find a way to do that once I really get into an acting carreer. And one has to admit, in the Mel Gibson Hamlet, some parts are somwhat creepy in atmosphere just because of the sets, the lighting and the way Helena Bonham Carter plays Ophelia's madness.
I know what you mean as well about the stubborn way people cling to labels. You mentioned Alien and how anytime you describe it as horror, people immediately say, "No, it's science fiction." In some ways, that brings me back to my original arguement. Yes, it IS science fiction in the way that it deals with space ships, aliens and possible futures, but what so many people refuse to grasp is that it is ALSO horror in the way that the alien is the perfect killing machine and stalks the crew as nothing else could, moving silently and slaying in the most ghastly ways. It's the same way that most people would not hear that Carrie is horror, but is ALSO an amazing dramatic tragedy. To that end, in searching for horror, I have also looked in the various other categories in the store that it could conceivably appear in. That's what people won't see so often, is that a true classification of any literary work is composed of many labels which should encompass almost anything that such a work has to offer.
I also whole-heartedly agree with you Casey though, that the single labels do have their usefulness in finding what we really want. And I too can't stand those bookstores that don't have a section set aside for horror, or the fact that some decent authors want us to search through the general lit section to find their stuff. When I'm looking for classics, I like to be able to go to the classics section and look there, for comedy to the comedy section, and for mystery to the mystery section, etc. And when I'm looking for my favorite genre, then I really don't want to go on a blind scavenger hunt through general lit. I want to be able to go to those several rows (though it's unfortunately usually just one meager row in the back of the store somewhere) marked HORROR and look over all the authors in one place and think, "Yeah... I'm home now!" That's my thought on that one. Like you Casey, I wave my HORROR flag high, as I'm sure most of us here do! We're horror fans, we're nice people, but if we can't find what we want, it'll get ugly... >: )
the Wolf
Submitted By: the Wolf |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2000 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with everything Wolf said. WE ARE HORROR FANS and I'm not affraid to admit it. Screw the people who give me odd looks, their lives are boring and they know it.
One more thing about Alien. When you boil the structure down, Alien is basically a slasher film set in space but at the same time it's much much more than that. Final words.
Submitted By: Mr Self Affliction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2000 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Blockbuster has Alien and The Thing located in the science fiction section and not the horror." Well guess what? They also have The Devil's Advocate, The Stand, The Sixth Sense, and Stigmata in the Drama section. Shows what they know"
I once found 'Lord of the Flies' in the horror section at Blockbuster and when I mentioned it to one of the workers there, he pointed out that it belonged there because it had a sticker on it that said "HORROR". I guess that showed me!
OTOH, I guess that some people might be able to make the argument that it actually is horror. A fly encrusted boar's head, anyone?
Submitted By: Layback76 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2000 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Everything is Labels. That's just the way it is. I hate it but what are you going to do? Hmmmm...killing spree.
Also, I would probably be one of those guys to make an argument that Lord of the Flies is horror. Maybe not Jason/Freddy horror but I know that when I first saw the movie (yep I saw the movie before I read the book) the part where Piggy (that was the fat kid's name right?) got killed, it freaked me out.
Submitted By: Mr Self Affliction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2000 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh I'd definitely say that Lord of the Flies has plenty of elements of horror! From the grotesque imagery of the fly-covered boar's head, to the brutal, accidental killing of one boy on the beach, to the purposeful death of Piggy, to the rest of the boys actually being ready and willing to murder one of their school mates, cut off his head and stick it on a poll, this one is definitely horror on some level.
The horror in this book is in the progressive nature of the savagery of the boys, touching upon that hideous, darker nature in humans that seems to lie in wait for the just the right circumstances to set it free and give it reign over the soul.
While it is a classic adventure book with tragedy mixed in, it could certainly easily be called a horror novel of the most base human nature and how under the right circumstances the kind, civilized exterior that so many seem to prize can be shattered like a seashell to reveal something dark and evil within.
the Wolf
Submitted By: the Wolf |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2000 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"...it had a sticker on it that said 'HORROR'."
Some don't even have a label to excuse their lousy judgement. A few years ago, I had a running battle with the employees at our local Captain Video. Apparently some fool had decided (probably because the cover mentioned Lewis Carroll + puppet effects by one of the Muppet-masters) that "Dreamchild" belonged in the Family section with Big Bird and Barney. After about the fifth time I wasted my breath explaining to the checkout crew why THIS FILM IS NOT FOR THE KIDDIES, I finally managed to grab the uber-manager by the throat (figuratively) and DEMAND that he watch it. I didn't see the film on any shelf for quite a while after that, but when it returned...you get one guess where it was.
But back to literature...
In my town we have two bookstores: a tiny B. Dalton that discontinued its Horror section a couple of years ago; and a HUGE Barnes Ignoble that discontinued its Horror section a couple of weeks ago. In both cases the books got shuffled into the general fiction/lit section. In both cases the stores retained their oh-so-hefty SciFi/Fantasy sections.
-Can anyone explain what the Blades'n'Bosoms and/or Tolkeinesque books have in common with Starships and/or Cyberpunks that they should share a section? To the exclusion of Horror, no less? I guess the authors who want to be thought of as "Artistes" wouldn't be satisfied with that either. ["I want to share a shelf with Hemingway!" - "WHY?!" =:^o]
If I'm ranting, I apologize, but given some of the postings in this string, I think you understand my feelings. And God bless you, Casey/et al, for building this little Haunted Palace where I can still explore strange new territories (howzat for a mixed metaphor?;^)).
One last film ref before I go:
I don't care how much it made you laugh-
-"Beetlejuice" is a HORROR film.
Bye for now
RomanyX
Submitted By: RomanyX |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2000 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yep, labels are a bitch.
"I guess the authors who want to be thought of as "Artistes" wouldn't be satisfied with that either. ["I want to share a shelf with Hemingway!"
I think it's more of the publishers decision to place the books and not the authors. Also, Barnes & Nobel are in the middle of a nation wide process to mix the horror into the generic lit section. However, I know a few managers who are not complying.
And I would definitely agree with you that Beetlejuice is horror. Funny yes, but horror none-the-less.
Submitted By: Mr Self Affliction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2000 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've often had this discussion with people...and almost word for word about Carrie. I never found Carrie to be a truly scary book or film, even though I liked both, but more a supernatural tragedy. It's an incredibly sad story.
And if you want to go for a horror novel that's not actually considered a horror, well, one of the scariest books I've ever read is 1984 by George Orwell. I will never forget how those last four words sent chills down my spine. The idea of a world so controlled, so oppressive, yet such a possibility...that concept has always frightened me. Brave New World is similar, but not as scary. However 1984 is classified at the book shop, it will always be a horror to me.
Submitted By: Katie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
  |
|
All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2 Next
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | RSS Feeds
Copyright ©1994-2013 by The Cabinet Productions, Inc.
If you have any questions, comments or corrections, please Contact Us.
|
|
