Research project - Early Horror Monsters

This article from Media Magazine issue 35 (February 2011; The culture issue) sees Steph Hendry explore the evolution of the horror genre, specifically the use of 'monsters'. 

                                    

The article explores -

• The horror genre pre-World War 2
• The horror genre in the "Not so Swinging 60s"
• The "End of an era" for the horror genre
• Contemporary monsters within the horror genre

I will be using the article to research the horror genre as a whole, and the creation of the 'horror monster'. This means that I will be taking an in-depth look at Hendry's introductory paragraph, and her exploration into pre-World War 2 horror films. 

I decided to research this as the horror genre is one that I have not really explored in much depth. Its broad subject matter and 'life-span' means that there is always something new to learn about it, too.

Firstly, the article tells us that the horror genre is popular with the audience due to each individual response it provokes.
The monsters used in the films have characteristics that are "derived from their (the spectator) most deep seated fears and taboos"

This suggests that the audience 'enjoy' the thrill that they get from watching a film with a monster that taps into something inside them that no one else can or knows.  

The horror genre has seamlessly evolved from using fictional monsters as allegory for social context, to using real 'monsters' that represent the direct fears of the audience from a particular period of time.

Either way, whether realistic or not they have still evolved through the decades to represent different social issues.

Often, horror monsters reflect the social issue most feared or rife and rampant at the time. Hendry says that horror monsters can therefore "give an insight into the anxieties and concerns of culture"

However, as mentioned above, each audience member has a different individual response, so how can one monster account for the audience as a mass?

Hendry says that, although people may not have the same worries at any given time, it is still "possible to identify cultural and contextual trends" in society that will be present in each individual, and that can therefore be represented by the horror monster.  

Pre-World War 2 can be classed as any horror film prior to 1945. Shortly after World War 1, Nosferatu debuted in Germany and began the huge influx of monsters like vampires. Nosferatu was seen as an 'invader', from somewhere unusual and unknown. His 'attack' on his victims saw him penetrate them with his teeth - now an iconic and typical vampire action - and an exchanging of bodily fluids. Hendry tells us that this could be "read as a sexual metaphor but significantly the outcome of a vampire attack is death or infection". This is easy to agree with, as there are very little times in vampire movies where a bite does not result in the death or 'transformation' of the victim.

The 'bite scene' from Nosferatu highlights this point perfectly. The slow pace of the scene added to the girl's low moans and Nosferatu's 'wandering hands' gives the 'attack' an almost sexual feel. Furthermore, the attack does result in 'death or infection', backing up Hendry's point.

Although this has become a quintessential inclusion in vampire films, at the time of Nosferatu it was used for social context, to represent a Germany that was not only economically and socially devastated, but also poverty and disease ridden. Society was vulnerable and susceptible to both disease and poverty, and so would respond to a monster that was able to both give them a 'disease' and take away from their livelihood at the same time. Therefore, Hendry tells us that, simply, Nosferatu represented "invasion and infection"

However, despite Nosferatu being a main pre-World War 2 horror monster, his representation of poverty and disease was said not to be the only social issue represented by the horror genre. Both Frankenstein's monster and Dracula comment upon the class differences in society. Dr. Frankenstein is said to "take a god-like role in the act of creation" yet he "oversteps his social position" thus suggesting that each individual knew their place in society. This is shown in the scene where Frankenstein's monster comes to life, as he has gone beyond his capabilities and his own ideals. Dracula, on the other hand, featured a "corrupt and abusive aristocratic class" which can be seen to be a direct link to society and those within it. Evidentially  those within this class are said to be "the sources of horror".

Finally, and possibly most importantly to the evolution of the genre, is how some monsters (such as Frankenstein's monster) are 'man-made' monsters, which is a comment upon how mankind had "shown itself to have the potential to be monstrous". This ties in clearly with the War itself, and post-World War 2 saw the attacks on both Nagasaki and Hiroshima, two events of human cruelty with a theme of 'science gone wrong'. Away from America, the Holocaust also reflects a huge level of human cruelty. Hendry tells us that, leading through to the further evolution of the horror genre and beyond, "horror movies soon reflected this"

Overall, I would say that Hendry's article was hugely informative and helpful to my research. The points included are balanced and give more than one possible reason or point of view for a certain aspect. I was able to use quotes from the article to further points I had learned, and this enabled me to add depth to my research that I probably would not have had if this were not an article from a magazine.