{"id":574,"date":"2019-02-22T13:31:09","date_gmt":"2019-02-22T18:31:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/courses.digitaldavidson.net\/death19\/?p=574"},"modified":"2019-02-22T13:31:09","modified_gmt":"2019-02-22T18:31:09","slug":"how-self-aware-horror-can-frighten-postmodern-audiences","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/courses.digitaldavidson.net\/death19\/2019\/02\/22\/how-self-aware-horror-can-frighten-postmodern-audiences\/","title":{"rendered":"How Self-Aware Horror Can Frighten Postmodern Audiences"},"content":{"rendered":"

Both In the Mouth of Madness<\/em> (1995), directed by John Carpenter and The Cabin in the Woods<\/em> (2012), by Drew Goddard and Joss Whedon, display an overt awareness of the fact that they are horror films. Newer horror films, in order to be successful, must be aware of the films that have come before them. Both Mouth of Madness <\/em>and Cabin<\/em> fit Kimberly Jackson\u2019s definition of metahorror: \u201ctheir self-reflexivity is part of their construction, [\u2026] they expose the limits of the narrative structure in which they operate; [\u2026] they are at once definers of the genre and moments or examples of it\u201d (Jackson 11). Metahorror is a reaction to the oversaturation of the genre, often commenting not just on conventions but also on the role of technology in the horror film. With this focus on self-reflexivity, it appears that horror has moved away from what has made horror so appealing in the past: jump scares, suspense, gore, and the reinforcement of normality\u2014all of which allow for a cathartic experience. Postmodern horror films can still frighten, however. Both films include gruesome violence, which Isabel Pinedo argues is in line with postmodernism\u2019s intent to imagine \u201cthe fragility of the body by transgressing its boundaries and revealing it inside out\u201d (Pinedo 21). So, though an ironic distance is created between the events on screen and the viewer, it gives the viewer space to reflect on deeper fears, rather than reestablishing the norm.<\/p>\n

In terms of theory, postmodernism is \u201cself-conscious, self-contradictory, self-undermining,\u201d and committed to \u201cdoubleness, or duplicity\u201d (Hutcheon 1). Postmodernism is borne out of our desire to decentralize previously wholeheartedly accepted acts of life and ways of thinking (though in attempting to decentralize these, may accidentally be reinforcing them). Postmodernism underlines \u201cin its ironic way the realization that all cultural forms of representation\u2014literary, visual, aural\u2014in high art or the mass media are ideologically grounded, that they cannot avoid involvement with social and political relations and apparatuses\u201d (Hutcheon 3). Underlying postmodernism is the assumption that \u201cwe can only know the world through \u2018a network of socially established meaning systems, the discourses of our culture,\u2019\u201d which rings especially true when looking at the popularity of films such as Scary Movie<\/em> or Tucker and Dale vs. Evil<\/em>, which rely on an established knowledge of the horror genre to have meaning (Hutcheon 7). Postmodernism calls into question all that which people had taken for granted, from social order to the existence of reality outside of representation.<\/p>\n

Even the name of John Carpenter\u2019s In the Mouth of Madness <\/em>is self-reflexive and reflects a postmodern playfulness and self-awareness as John Carpenter is a prominent horror filmmaker in his own right (Pilipp 56). As the credits roll before the film starts, book jackets for the novel In the Mouth of Madness <\/em>are being printed off in the background.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The film acknowledges the construction of the novel which it centers on, hinting that viewers might do the same for the film they are watching. The story of the film follows a cynical detective (a very film-noir character, making scenes shot at night, with chiaroscuro lighting and an emphasis on water in the streets, much more purposeful) as he tries to find a horror book author, Sutter Cane, similar to Stephen King.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Postmodernity illustrates a return to the individual rather than the pre-WWII belief in humanism and collective progress, so it seems fitting that the protagonist of Mouth of Madness<\/em> would be so reminiscent of a noir hero, a genre focused on self-reliance and isolation (Jancovich 84). Cane believes that the stories he has written are true and that the events will unfold as he describes if people read the book. It is the readers that give the work its meaning, which makes Cane\u2019s readers complicit. The role of the author becomes complex; was it as Cane said, that \u201cthey were telling me what to write. Giving me the power to make it all real,\u201d effectively erasing the need for an author? (Mouth of Madness<\/em>) Outside forces are driving Cane, who eventually is able to control John Trent, the main character. Throughout the film, viewers have to question what parts of the film are \u201creal\u201d and which are related to the novel. The lines of reality and fiction can be blurred due to postmodern intertextuality; \u201cas a result of this fusion (or substitution) of fiction and (for) reality on the part of the viewer, Hollywood has developed a new fad: the tendency of movies to be increasing self-referential, drawing attention to themselves as productions or employing cross-references to other movies\u201d (Pilipp 55-56). The film closes with Trent going to see the film version of the novel he has been forced to set upon the world\u2014he is the star and it is also directed by John Carpenter.<\/p>\n