What actions tend to be automatic death sentences in horror? I don’t mean obvious things like going to investigate a weird noise or running up the stairs when being chased by a killer. I’m referring to real-life actions that are mundane at best but, for some reason, almost always guarantee that a character will be axed off. I’m, of course, referring to doing drugs, having sex, and other forms of debauchery. I’m sure we can all think of some scenes where characters are doing some penetration only to end up well, penetrated.
My favorite of these would have to be Jason’s first actual kill in Freddy VS Jason, especially when he does that bed-folding thing. Most of us have at least done some form of these activities, and we never got murdered during or right after, and neither do characters in most genres. Why is it different for horror? It may seem that horror subtly promotes conservative views. At first glance, this makes sense because it’s usually young, rebellious characters on the chopping block.
The real answer, which I’ve seen be said by someone whose name escapes me at the moment, is that you’re more vulnerable while doing those things. The act of sex is one where guard is automatically lowered. If someone is drunk or high, they’re not going to be able to move or think fast enough to escape a killer. Then again, it might depend on the kind of drugs. Imagine Leatherface trying to chase down a meth head.
With that said, while the intent of having this trope may not be to promote those kinds of traditional ideals, it’s still easy for consumers of the genre to have that takeaway. I’ve seen people say that the older they get, the more they identify with the villain in horror films murdering annoying teenagers. Even though this is in jest, I think it indicates a disconnect between the older and younger generations. Is horror conservative? Stephen King said he thinks so in his article “Why We Crave Horror Movies”.
From what I’ve skimmed of it, the reasons appear to be that it gives us a chance to face our fears in a controlled environment and makes things easy to grasp from a moral perspective, meaning it’s typically black and white. You know the monster biting people’s legs off is the villain. Scary movies also work in fear of the unknown. That’s antithetical to progress, as it requires venturing into it. Here’s my point of contention.
It depends on perspective. Are there plenty of killers who do it for the sake of it? Yeah, Freddy Kreguer or any of the numerous people who have been Ghost Face. However, some characters have done it for different reasons. Jason Voorhees was drowned as a child, adding an element of tragedy to him.
John Kramer became Jigsaw due to a system that failed him and the desire to make his victims gain a new view of life. What they’ve done is still horrible. I don’t want to give the wrong impression about that. My point is that it shows you can introduce some moral complexity. You can see where a character is coming from while still understanding that they’re a monster that needs to be stopped.
As for fear of the unknown, it’s more what could be lurking in it, and for me, I’m not afraid of that. I’m afraid of the things lurking in the unknown that want to kill me. Lions can see in the dark and are some of the most vicious predators on the planet. Housecats can as well, and they’re able to have strong bonds with their owners. I mean, technically, the same thing can be said about big cats, but those instances are usually under specific circumstances. What about an author such as Lovecraft?
After all, his stories were meant to show how little we know and tell us that certain knowledge is dangerous. There’s a bit of a contradiction there. As the characters in his stories warn us about these horrors, they inadvertently inform us of their existence or the possibility that something similar could exist. His work could also indicate that humanity has an innate fear of progress.
Why don’t we rise against oppressors despite us outnumbering them vastly? If you answered because they control weapons of mass destruction, that’s fair. Then, I shall pose another question. Why does it take so long for people to realize change is required? Not to mention, it takes even longer for that to translate into action.
Sure, you see calls to it, but it takes extreme circumstances to make people hit the streets unless we’re talking about the French. I know of places that could use their fervor. I believe the reason that most don’t share that attitude is simple. No matter how many holes a boat has, nobody wants to rock it until it’s sinking. Even when these rebellions do occur, we end up falling back into the same predicament of the few controlling the many.
Old habits die hard. Apply this to a societal level, and you have tradition. Understandably, they’d bring us comfort. Horror inflates that security bubble and then sticks it with a needle. It’s meant to stir the pot.
Now that I think about it, King calling horror conservative is a bit odd considering a lot of his work tends to fly in the face of that. I can’t speak about his latest books. The most recent one I read is Revival. A lot of his novels tend to be critical of religion. In them, it’s not rare to find some kind of religious abuse or abuse perpetrated by someone religious, usually Christian.
Stories such as The Mist could be seen as an allegory for what happens when unregulated entities get out of control. Either that or I’m reading too deep into it. Pun intended. It’s not only Stephen King, though. Horror has always been progressive whether through allegory or representation. I should clarify good representation doesn’t mean a story simply having a character falling into that category.
It has to be done tactfully. From what I’ve heard from one of my friends, a problem with certain horror movies is that the twist turns out the killer is transgender such as in Psycho or Sleep Away Camp. Though, those characters aren’t actually transgender. I can’t fully speak on it as I have yet to watch either of those films.
It’s more about how the audiences at the time perceived them.
With that in mind, it does come across as socially irresponsible. Even if the characters themselves aren’t trans if you break them down, people watching may take that at face value. They’ll think individuals like that are dangerous or it’s a way to reinforce already established bigotry. I’m not saying horror shouldn’t be allowed to have queer characters as villains. It’s more that it should be made clear that the reason a character is bad isn’t due to identity but action.
It shouldn’t be, “This character is evil because they are queer”. It should be “This evil character happens to be queer”. I think it’s more accurate to say that horror isn’t fully conservative or progressive. Rather, there are stories falling in the genre that may have those elements. In order to show progressivism it has to be contrasting outdated tradition.
Either this is shown by having characters with opposing views or the story itself is pointing the finger at society. Whatever the case, enjoy what is scary however you see fit. If you’re going to light up beforehand or do something else, be sure to lock up. It would be tragic if you were caught off guard.
If you want to support me, check out my Reddit’s pinned posts linked here (one of them has my tipping links) or join the writing Patreon I am a part of linked here where we post horror stories. Thanks, and happy reading.
