Genres

I've been listening to a podcast called The Evolution of Horror. Its hosted by Mike Muncer who, I believe, works at the British Film Institute (Or at least has an office there, since he occasionally mentions his 'closet-like office' at the BFI). Its an excellent series, but has a few things which have me scratching my head about. It ostensibly talks about the evolution of horror films over time to the present day. Each 'season' examines a given sub-genre of horror. I'm still working my way through, the first season was Slasher Films, the second was Ghost movies, and the one I'm currently listening to is on Folk Horror.

The odd thing I noticed? He tends to ignore films before the 50s. This is unfortunately true of almost every podcast about horror films. I would LIKE to hear people talk about films from the 20s, 30s, and 40s, but modern horror fans seem extremely dismissive of the horror films of that era. 

The other major thing I have a disagreement with is his definition of Folk Horror... largely be cause he ignores the largest aspect of Folk Horror... which is the presence of actual FOLKlore in it. He argues that films like Straw Dogs, Deliverance, and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre should be classified as Folk Horror... when I don't believe they are. It needs to be more than a rural setting to be "Folk" horror... you need the folklore element. 

The three films he refers to as 'The Unholy Trinity' of folk horror, the films considered the origin point of the subgenre, are The Witchfinder General (1968) (Sometime called The Conqueror Worm in the United States), Blood on Satan's Claw (1971), and The Wicker Man (1973). But the thing that really ties those together is the folklore. Both Christian Folklore and Pagan Folklore are part of the driving force behind those films plots, EVEN IF the ultimate evil of the film is entirely human. There is no supernatural force in The Wicker Man. There is no supernatural force in the Witchfinder General. But the folkloric beliefs are the things which drive the people in these films. It is both the belief itself and the manipulation of the belief. Hopkins, in The Witchfinder General, does not believe in witchcraft, but does MANIPULATE the belief in witchcraft for his own profit. 

When I think of Folk horror, there is ALWAYS that folkloric element, and you can see it in the list of films. Not just the three above, but things like Captain Kronos: Vampire Hunter, Children of the Corn, Dead Birds, Antrum, The Witch, The Ritual, Jugface, Midsommar, Pumpkinhead, Jeepers Creepers, The Blair Witch Project, The Noonday Witch, and The Final Prayer (The Borderlands in the UK) all have that mythic or folkloric thread that wends through them. If it does NOT have that element, its just rural horror. Consequently, unlike Mike Muncer, I don't count films like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Deliverance, or Straw Dogs simply because they do not have any of that mythic element in it. 

However, it must be said that not every film that involves folklore can be considered Folk Horror. Films like Candyman, The Autopsy of Jane Doe or Queen of Spades touch on folklore, but are definitely NOT folk horror.

Folk Horror is, to me, a connection between what has been in the past and what lurks in the natural world. There is something ancient in Folk Horror, something which hides behind the mystery and beauty of the natural world. The horror comes in not knowing what came before... of something forgotten or forbidden which emerges from a shadowed past or a remote landscape. There is a religious or spiritual element in Folk Horror.. a cult, a demon, a spirit, a belief... something intangible but still real in a philosophical sense, which binds people together, and which, more importantly, EXCLUDES others.

Things like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre simply don't have that intangible element. Leatherface and their family MAY have some belief system which leads to their activities, but if there is, it is never made explicit. There is some craft items of bones, but they seem to serve no purpose other than decorative rather than a ritual function... There is a bizarre scene which the hitchhiker seems to enact a spell... but it doesn't come across as anything more than simply him trying to freak people out. There is no NARRATIVE reason for those things, nor do they drive the plot in any way. In the Wicker Man, you see both odd crafts and spells enacted, but they are a part of the unfolding narrative. They are used to illustrate the beliefs of the Summerislanders and culminate in the grand ritual at the climax. They are used as stepping stones to the end point of the plot. It can be argued that that is the entire POINT of them. They are shown to be a part of the belief system which drives the locals to do what they do, and excludes Sgt. Howie. It is their culture. It marks him as an outsider. 

One could argue that demonstrates that the main characters of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Deliverance are outsiders, and while that is true, nothing is actually done to develop the communities that they stumble into. There is nothing to suggest that there is a deeper meaning or spiritual connection by the acts that they do. There is no connection to the past or to the land. Straw Dogs is even MORE tenuous of a connection, as it is little more than a home invasion film, and could be placed anywhere without it NEEDING a rural or remote, has no real connection to the ancient past, or to anything spiritual or folkloric. Again, I will argue that there is a distinction between a Folk Horror and simply Horror in a Rural setting.