|
Post by Dr Strange on Mar 21, 2011 10:36:51 GMT
It was originally known as Radcliffism, wasn't it? Doesn't the term show up in one of Jane Austen's early drafts? I am sure you are right - so it's really harking back to those first gothic romances, where the apparently supernatural happenings in the old dark castle always had a "rational" explanation.
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Mar 21, 2011 10:46:45 GMT
it's pretty ironic that the weird menace guys made such use of a device straight from Radcliffe when her brand of Gothic was the complete antithesis of the de Sade/ Monk Lewis approach they otherwise favoured.
|
|
|
Post by Jojo Lapin X on Mar 21, 2011 11:03:27 GMT
"Radcliffism" in the Gothic novel undoubtedly has to do with the Enlightenment. It offered the opportunity to be thrilled by the seemingly supernatural while simultaneously reassuring the reader that today we do not really believe in such superstitions.
But why did it suddenly fall out of favor? I have essentially two theories, one optimistic and one pessimistic. The optimistic one is that the wider reading public has realized that entertaining a hypothesis for the purpose of literary fantasy does not imply that one endorses it in reality. The pessimistic one is that today's readers want to be reassured that there is in fact some "numinous" dimension to their otherwise drab existences. Unfortunately I think the second theory is more likely to be true, and that we are entering the Dark Ages again.
|
|
|
Post by noose on Mar 21, 2011 11:06:02 GMT
We are entering the Dark Ages again. I'll be okay, I have a torch...
|
|
|
Post by David A. Riley on Mar 21, 2011 11:20:53 GMT
"Radcliffism" in the Gothic novel undoubtedly has to do with the Enlightenment. It offered the opportunity to be thrilled by the seemingly supernatural while simultaneously reassuring the reader that today we do not really believe in such superstitions. But why did it suddenly fall out of favor? I have essentially two theories, one optimistic and one pessimistic. The optimistic one is that the wider reading public has realized that entertaining a hypothesis for the purpose of literary fantasy does not imply that one endorses it in reality. The pessimistic one is that today's readers want to be reassured that there is in fact some "numinous" dimension to their otherwise drab existences. Unfortunately I think the second theory is more likely to be true, and that we are entering the Dark Ages again. I think you are probably right. There is every possibility that a new Dark Ages looms ahead of us. Science has been undermined and irrational religious extremism is on the rise, not just from the East, but within the United States too, where the theory of evolution is disputed by a strong religious right. No wonder films and books about the risen dead are so popular. (Mind you, I like them too and I hardly have a religious bone in my body!)
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Mar 21, 2011 11:36:15 GMT
"Radcliffism" in the Gothic novel undoubtedly has to do with the Enlightenment. It offered the opportunity to be thrilled by the seemingly supernatural while simultaneously reassuring the reader that today we do not really believe in such superstitions. Maybe. But the 18th C "gothic revival" is usually portrayed as an aspect of Romanticism... which in turn is supposed to have been a rejection of Enlightenment ideals. I think there's probably some truth in the idea that overt supernaturalism fell out of fashion for a while, but the gothic-romantic movement was also trying to reinstate a broader sense of the "irrational" as an active driver of human behaviour. So the emphasis is on emotion (and often on insanity) rather then rationality. How long did that phase really last though - before the "gothic romance" reverted back to the use of the supernatural?
|
|
|
Post by Jojo Lapin X on Mar 21, 2011 11:49:32 GMT
How long did that phase really last though - before the "gothic romance" reverted back to the use of the supernatural? It depends a bit on what you mean by "gothic romance," but I am not sure it ever did. I am not familiar with anything more recent than Victoria Holt, but she certainly belongs to the Radcliffe school from start to finish---i.e., the apparently supernatural always has a rational explanation. It may well involve insanity, of course.
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Mar 21, 2011 12:04:54 GMT
This is to seriously oversimplify the matter as ever, but rather than "revert back to the use of the supernatural", I think it branched off in two directions. Those who favoured the Radcliffe approach took it further into psychological terror and the 'Gothic Romance' while the de Sade/ Lewis school mostly favoured physical horror and the supernatural. Admittedly he's not always to be relied upon for accurate dates or author attributions, but between them, Peter Haining's Great British Tales Of Terror, Tales Of Terror from Europe And America and The Shilling Shockers follow developments through to circa 1840. I've not broken them down into Radcliffian suspense tales/ full-on supernatural horrors, but PH seems to have unearthed several examples of each.
As to the second dark age:
"People still believe in The Bible and all that damp bed-sheet crap, but I'm not convinced. I think it was a real thoughtless hot night in the sheets that put me here. The world is just pure biology and we're deluding ourselves with these spiritual notions." - Captain Beefheart, NME 1986.
And this from a man responsible for some of the most transcendental anti-rock music I ever heard in my unlife.
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Mar 21, 2011 12:23:02 GMT
"Radcliffism" in the Gothic novel undoubtedly has to do with the Enlightenment. It offered the opportunity to be thrilled by the seemingly supernatural while simultaneously reassuring the reader that today we do not really believe in such superstitions. But why did it suddenly fall out of favor? I have essentially two theories, one optimistic and one pessimistic. The optimistic one is that the wider reading public has realized that entertaining a hypothesis for the purpose of literary fantasy does not imply that one endorses it in reality. The pessimistic one is that today's readers want to be reassured that there is in fact some "numinous" dimension to their otherwise drab existences. Unfortunately I think the second theory is more likely to be true, and that we are entering the Dark Ages again. I think you are probably right. There is every possibility that a new Dark Ages looms ahead of us. Science has been undermined and irrational religious extremism is on the rise, not just from the East, but within the United States too, where the theory of evolution is disputed by a strong religious right. No wonder films and books about the risen dead are so popular. (Mind you, I like them too and I hardly have a religious bone in my body!) Maybe people don´t like them anymore because it is just a fake. Of course in western culture religion has - thankfully - lost its stranglehold which is another reason for the growing hysteria of the religious right. And without a enforced belief system it is okay to enjoy the supernatural as just another made-up story like Star Wars. Not to forget that this is a clean and guilt-free violence which has become accepted. The heroes don´t kill humans, they kill non-humans. Which is okay - at least as far as movie or tv executives are concerned. In a social climate where it is impossible to make a Dr. Fu Manchu movie it is okay to kill a lot of zombies. But is kind of remarkable how fast those attitudes changed, at least in us-tv. I remember how the early X-Files made a quite nice episode about a necrophilic serial-killer but had to resort to calling him a "death-fetishist" because the censors threw a fit. 15 or so years later network series like Criminal Minds not only have no problems with a necrophilic serial killer, they have no problem whatsoever to describe minutely what the guys does. (Criminal Minds has won me over - it is really terrible in its symplistic kitchen-sink approach to psychology but remarkable sadistic in its depiction of serial killing. Half of their plots could be lifted right out of a Terror Tale. Come to think of it, these are the heirs of the Terror Tale. They had the balls to basically remake SAW for an ep.) So maybe jojo is right: it is the dark ages. What is next? Arena fights?
|
|
|
Post by David A. Riley on Mar 21, 2011 12:37:05 GMT
I think that remake of Saw is the only episode of Criminal Minds I've ever watched. It was great TV right up until the (literally) last minute "solution" to the puzzle of where the criminal and his latest victim, were. Then it was over in a flash. Very disappointing. By that stage I thought it was bound to be a two-parter, but no, they wrapped it all up in that closing minute. "What is next? Arena fights?" You know what? I would actually go to one of them.
|
|
|
Post by jamesdoig on Mar 21, 2011 20:47:44 GMT
How long did that phase really last though - before the "gothic romance" reverted back to the use of the supernatural? I'm not sure there was an actual break with the supernatural - ghost stories and the like were still being published. Radcliffe was just incredibly popular and a lot of hacks followed her example, as always happens in the mad rush to make a buck.
|
|
|
Post by Jojo Lapin X on Mar 22, 2011 18:43:27 GMT
"Hell's Anteroom" (Spicy Mystery Stories, March 1937). What do you know, a bona fide supernatural horror story. This one involves a painting that can only be seen through a glass of wine, a gypsy curse, and a strange furry baby. And another narrator who runs into an old friend who used to be "Pan-like" in his youth. Not bad, actually.
|
|
|
Post by Jojo Lapin X on Mar 23, 2011 20:01:32 GMT
"The Sharp Teeth of Satan" (Spicy Mystery Stories, September 1938). Here is a somewhat sophisticated variation. Halfway through this story of vampire-style murders at a hotel, the protagonist announces a rational solution to the mystery, only for it to turn out to be wrong---supernatural agencies were at work after all! I imagine Zagat's experiments with form were driving his editors crazy at this point. The package is nicely rounded off with some over-the-top Lovecraft-like racism: "[He] was a Eurasian mixed breed, than which there is no more devilish combination on God's footstool."
|
|
julieh
Crab On The Rampage
One-woman butt-kicking army
Posts: 70
|
Post by julieh on Mar 30, 2011 17:18:27 GMT
I've mentioned this in my "looking for suggestions" thread, but thought THIS would be the place where I would probably get some ideas and feedback (since this is the discussion which gave me the idea in the first place).
(quick recap - I make audio dramas.) One thing I like to do is show off my versatility as a writer by taking difficult and sometimes obscure genres, researching them, and writing an episode "in the style of". To date, I've done "Hammer Dracula", "Giallo thriller", "detective noir" and "Jane Austen" among others. (And am currently working on a Grand Guignol and a hammer/amicus portmanteau film.)
So reading the above thread put me in mind to try my hand at "shudder pulp". So I'm hoping the folks here will help me sort out the common cliches, themes, character types, etc., that are common in this genre.
If you'd rather not clutter up this forum with this discussion (since I don't want to be a pest), feel free to drop over to the "looking for suggestions" thread I have in the "between the wars" area.
Thanx much for any help!!!
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Mar 30, 2011 23:18:16 GMT
So reading the above thread put me in mind to try my hand at "shudder pulp". So I'm hoping the folks here will help me sort out the common cliches, themes, character types, etc., that are common in this genre. hi julie; as a kick-start, Robert Kenneth Jones lists eight recurring themes, but I reckon he's over-complicating the issue. It's true that 'supernaturalism', 'curses & spells' and 'the evil crone' put in sporadic appearances, but most of the supposedly uncanny goings-on are eventually rationalised when the kindly mayor or some other pillar of the community is unmasked as the insane genius pulling the strings. I think we can narrow it down some. First, there's the basic setting, familiar from hundreds of horror stories but essential to the weird menace. The young couple, preferably on honeymoon, break down in some remote spot next to a desolate mansion/ abandoned mine/ lunatic asylum/ mist-shrouded graveyard. SOMETHING comes at them out of the trees. The granite-jawed hero is socked over the head and his voluptuous wife of two hours carried off to a mad scientist's laboratory/ torture chamber or similar den of iniquity. Now, to my way of thinking, the single absolute MUST of a weird menace is our voluptuous young woman in peril. It doesn't matter who or what is providing the peril - demented circus freaks, septuagenarian sex maniacs, bogus satanists, trad zombies, octopus-men, her loving husband (see below), a blow-torch gang or woman hating surgeons - let 'em all loose, the more the merrier. In fact, the thoughtful hacks knew to provide at least three VYW's because, even it was mandatory for the hero to eventually rescue his own gal, he could hardly be expected to save the others from a fate worse than a fate worse than death. Usually he'd been injected with the VIRUS OF IDIOCY or some other neat drug, and it would take a time to wear off. Now and again, the roles were reversed, and the girls got to have all the fun, but I guess this was frowned upon as just plain perverted because it didn't happen too often. So, the above, a back-story providing the bad guy with at least some semblance of motive (callous rejection by a VYW is a favourite), and the much admired Scoobie Doo ending. What am I leaving out?
|
|