Horror Literature and the Status Quo

It is my contention that horror is essentially a conservative, even reactionary, genre.

There are exceptions, of course, that goes without saying. But at its core, horror is not progressive. The scary story story is meant to reinforce the status quo.

Horror has its roots in folk tales and fairy tales. The purpose of those stories is often designed to scare the crap out of kids so that they behave and do what they’re supposed to do: obey parents and other authority figures (often the church, and certainly the government) and to be normal.

Defying Death

In the past, people were much more in touch with death than we are today. For us, death has been sanitized. We don’t even kill out our own food. Everything comes from the grocery store.

Even in one’s own family, death was a common visitor. Anthony Trollope had 6 siblings. Only 2 survived into adulthood, a brother and a sister. And his sister died young, at age 32.

While agonizing, death was considered normal. After all, it is appointed unto man once to die, and then the resurrection from the dead.

So death is normal. What is abnormal is to try to cheat death. For by cheating death, one is either playing God or is something unholy.

Frankenstein deals with the first theme. Playing God. And the result is, as we know, a tale of horror. Frankenstein’s being is a thing that isn’t normal. A new Adam that is a travesty of nature, a monster, that must be destroyed. It’s not right to cheat death by creating new life.

But what of those who’ve already died? God forbid should they come back to life. Ghost stories are scary because ghosts are usually scary things. They are the dead who aren’t completely dead. And they must be put to rest so they can pass on.

Worse, though, are the ones who have some how been able to cheat death through unholy means. Enter the vampire. The undead who feeds on the living to sustain its unholy existence.

Dracula is the tale of the hunter turned hunted. The unholy, the undead, that must be made dead to make the world right again.

Unnatural Existence

Then there are the beings that just aren’t natural. And by not being normal are terrifying.

Enter the werewolf. A terrifying beast. Man and wolf. The rational man and the wild bloodthirsty beast in one being. Werewolves destroy and therefore must be destroyed, for they are not normal. And in our world, the not normal isn’t allowed to exist. Or at the very least, is to be secreted away.

Cryptids are aberrations of nature. I mean just look at the Jersey Devil. That thing ain’t normal. And being not normal makes it terrifying. And if it terrifies us, it must be destroyed.

The Dark Places

In Ancient and Medieval life, the forest was considered a scary place. In a world where the forest covered so much of the land and was unknown, that feeling that the forest should be avoided was natural. And so many folk tales tell of bad things that happen in the forest.

And in the new world the scary forest continued to provide fodder for tales of terror. After all, that is where the scary natives lived.

But the forest isn’t the only bad place. What about under one’s bed? What child isn’t scared of what is under the bed at some point in his life? Or what might be lurking in the back of the closet?

And haunted houses are can be added to the list of scary places. 

The list goes on and on. What isn’t normal is to be feared, avoided, and destroyed. So that the norm can be maintained.

The Role of Science

But what about science? Doesn’t science allow us to triumph over that which terrifies us?

Ask Dr. Frankenstein’s creation that question.

Or we could ask Dr. Jekyll. The man who wanted a way to indulge in his secret, forbidden desires and not feel guilty about doing so. Science enables the good doctor to achieve his secret desire. And then things go south. A lessen there: don’t monkey around with science and don’t indulge in activities that aren’t good, wholesome and normal. And for God’s sake don’t sin!

Not Like Us

Horror is about fear. Particularly fear of the unknown. Fear of what we don’t know. What is under our beds, particularly at night? Do we know? Do we even want to look and find out?

What will we become if we indulge our secret desires? Probably best if we don’t know.

What will happen if we sin? Best if we don’t find out.

What happens if we violate natural law?

And what will happen if we try to play God?

Best to play it safe and don’t go there.

HP Lovecraft was a reactionary. He wished we were still under the British monarch.

He was afraid of what Providence was becoming with the influx of peoples who were not like the old families.

The Cthulhu Mythos was created as a warning. The ones invading our world, who are not like us, will in the end destroy us — because they do not care about us and our values, or our traditions, or our culture.

Perhaps it is better to believe the lies we believe about reality. Because the truth will make you insane.

2 responses to “Horror Literature and the Status Quo”

  1. Wow, what a dissertation! Horror is conservative? Never thought of it like that, but maybe there’s some truth there. Certainly folk tales, the original horror stories, were meant to keep children on the straight and narrow and not so curious that they’d stray from the norms of their societies. And it’s true that in the Judeo-Christian beliefs you live one life and are then resurrected into Heaven or Hell… Talk about a horror story meant to keep children of all ages on the straight and narrow! But some eastern religions and beliefs have you being reincarnated again and again, and in some you return the the “tao,” a mystical force that makes up everything, and which may or may not recycle you down the road somewhere. Too many different views of death and the afterlife to generalize, methinks.

    As to forests, the Europeans came to the New World which was covered with a scary forest… scary in part because that was where the natives lived. But the natives are people, too, and if they live in the forest, they must have a completely different view of it than the Europeans.

    Was Lovecraft really being conservative when he created a whole new field of horror, dependent on nothing that had come before? On a lesser scale, the flood of movies about abominations caused by radiation and science run amok in the 1950s were certainly conservative, appearing in batches as if made with a cookie cutter, but how about the first one? Who was that producer aping to maintain the status quo?

    As always, you’ve offered a mind-bending premise to consider, and I’m sure your readers will be thinking about it for a while. You’ve condensed a college course down to one article and provided, as always, some serious food for thought. I hope this draws a lot of discussion; it’s certainly deserving of such!

    Liked by 1 person

  2. An interesting thesis, and I agree there are parallels between religion and horror, fairy tales, and the like regarding disciplining children and maintaining a semblance of order in lawless times. But I disagree that conservativism is solely about maintaining the status quo. In both social and political conservatism, there is certainly a desire to maintain existing customs and values; but there is usually also a philosophy of preferring gradual change over sudden change, rather than total opposition to change. I also think that fear of the unknown, and the resulting desire to eliminate that unknown, may be more closely related to the survival instinct than to conservativism; though bigotry can certainly be involved there as well. Speaking of Lovecraft, it is well-known that he was racist and bigoted, so you may be right that this mindset at least partially inspired his works.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment