Texas Chainsaw and Nosferatu (because I messed up)
Hello!
I'm going to be writing about both Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Nosferatu because I realized I misinterpreted last week's assignment, and didn't post a separate analysis for Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I guess better late than never...
I want to focus mostly on the concept of the "Final Girl", mostly because I think she represents most of the key anxieties around gender and sexuality that both Clover and Williams highlight (although Leatherface certainly brings a lot of those to the forefront, but I see a lot of my peers have written about that). Williams states pretty early on that the horror genre is about bodily ecstasies, and body genres themselves rely on body spectacle. Porn uses orgasm, horror violence and terror, and melodrama crying. I would argue that horror combines all of these to heighten tension, but I think it's worth noting that traditionally viewers are more comfortable with women experiencing these type of bodily ecstasies, especially on film. Clover's inclusion of quotes from notable horror directors (42) speaking about the importance of female victims within the horror genre only validates this, and her assertion that the women are "most effective in a state of undress, borne down upon by a blatantly phallic murderer, even gurgling orgasmically as she dies" (42). Even if the Final Girl is able to avoid this fate in the end, her survival relies upon the prolonged deaths of the objectified women before her.
Clover's analysis that the Final Girl is able to gain phallic power by the end of the film by claiming the weapon and ending the horror seemed to contradict her analysis of the Final Girl and the killer having almost androgynous and fluid gender presentations. In her argument of relation to the male viewer (which she spends a lot of time on), the Final Girl's phallicization made sense, but seemed like a limiting view within the larger context of the argument she presents. If the Final Girl is in fact "not like other girls", how did she survive the horrors presented to her without her prior phallic power? Or, as argued by Williams, does it come from her "good girl" nature?
Honestly, before I even read the Bernshoff article about Nosferatu, I was like "this is a little gay to me". There's something homoerotic about the way that Count Orlok and Hutter eating dinner together and just their vibe. Anyway, I think I was just picking up on the repressed sexuality of the entire film, but the fact that he left his wife to be with this vampire lined up with Bernshoff's point about the monster blocking the central romance of the film. This is even more true later as his wife becomes fixed on saving the town and dies in the process, ruining the romance between her and her husband.
Count Orlok's representation as a contagion to the town aligns with the idea of homosexuality as "depraved", "unnatural", or "contagious". The rats and reference to the plague represents a spread of something dreadful. He becomes the Other within the town and disrupts the status quo. His association with death is similar to the queer suggestion of "life over death by focusing on non-procreative behaviors" (94).
There is no doubt a certain sexuality about vampires, and feasting from one's neck. The act of gaining nourishment from another body and spreading that hunger creates a collectivist fear that is more human that most other monsters. I think that means it's easier for the viewer to position themselves in the point of view of the vampire, even with the same level of suture as other films. Two primal desires--hunger and sexuality--are best represented by vampires, and humans easily find themselves aligned with both.
I'm going to be writing about both Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Nosferatu because I realized I misinterpreted last week's assignment, and didn't post a separate analysis for Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I guess better late than never...
I want to focus mostly on the concept of the "Final Girl", mostly because I think she represents most of the key anxieties around gender and sexuality that both Clover and Williams highlight (although Leatherface certainly brings a lot of those to the forefront, but I see a lot of my peers have written about that). Williams states pretty early on that the horror genre is about bodily ecstasies, and body genres themselves rely on body spectacle. Porn uses orgasm, horror violence and terror, and melodrama crying. I would argue that horror combines all of these to heighten tension, but I think it's worth noting that traditionally viewers are more comfortable with women experiencing these type of bodily ecstasies, especially on film. Clover's inclusion of quotes from notable horror directors (42) speaking about the importance of female victims within the horror genre only validates this, and her assertion that the women are "most effective in a state of undress, borne down upon by a blatantly phallic murderer, even gurgling orgasmically as she dies" (42). Even if the Final Girl is able to avoid this fate in the end, her survival relies upon the prolonged deaths of the objectified women before her.
Clover's analysis that the Final Girl is able to gain phallic power by the end of the film by claiming the weapon and ending the horror seemed to contradict her analysis of the Final Girl and the killer having almost androgynous and fluid gender presentations. In her argument of relation to the male viewer (which she spends a lot of time on), the Final Girl's phallicization made sense, but seemed like a limiting view within the larger context of the argument she presents. If the Final Girl is in fact "not like other girls", how did she survive the horrors presented to her without her prior phallic power? Or, as argued by Williams, does it come from her "good girl" nature?
Honestly, before I even read the Bernshoff article about Nosferatu, I was like "this is a little gay to me". There's something homoerotic about the way that Count Orlok and Hutter eating dinner together and just their vibe. Anyway, I think I was just picking up on the repressed sexuality of the entire film, but the fact that he left his wife to be with this vampire lined up with Bernshoff's point about the monster blocking the central romance of the film. This is even more true later as his wife becomes fixed on saving the town and dies in the process, ruining the romance between her and her husband.
Count Orlok's representation as a contagion to the town aligns with the idea of homosexuality as "depraved", "unnatural", or "contagious". The rats and reference to the plague represents a spread of something dreadful. He becomes the Other within the town and disrupts the status quo. His association with death is similar to the queer suggestion of "life over death by focusing on non-procreative behaviors" (94).
There is no doubt a certain sexuality about vampires, and feasting from one's neck. The act of gaining nourishment from another body and spreading that hunger creates a collectivist fear that is more human that most other monsters. I think that means it's easier for the viewer to position themselves in the point of view of the vampire, even with the same level of suture as other films. Two primal desires--hunger and sexuality--are best represented by vampires, and humans easily find themselves aligned with both.
I totally agree with your point about the vampire coming between and ultimately ruining the main, heterosexual relationship in this film. I also talked about the othering of the vampire and how it changes the audiences perspective of him. He is no part human - only a monster. I also think your comment that the hunger and sexuality of the vampire allows humans in the audience to identify with him is super interesting! I think that these ideas were really taboo at the time which could be why audiences found this movie so intriguing.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny that you bring up the dinner scene because it always seems to me like a scene of the worst date ever because of the overt campiness of Orlock's interest in Hutter. I Think your reading is spot on in terms of the way that the film positions its audience to receive and be seduced by the horror of Nosferatu. Your comments about TCM are also really instructive and provocative. I especially think your early points about gender are worth exploring. I especially think the following claim is worth exploring: "Even if the Final Girl is able to avoid this fate in the end, her survival relies upon the prolonged deaths of the objectified women before her."
ReplyDelete