The horror genre, though some people would LARGELY DISAGREE--and have--with me about this, I do think it's about guilt, about the 'guilt' of the patriarchy, about some certain...things done
oooooh, tell me more.
But Thor is still the patriarchy, either way, with his hammer, you know. (And I like Thor a ton, so I say this with a grain).
I like him a lot too, but yeah, this is a part of the character that ought to be acknowledged, precisely because it's something that goes unspoken IRL. And you don't have to condemn Thor in order to point that out? Like, formative experiences where you are encouraged to develop confidence and build on your strengths and believe that your efforts will pay off...CAN actually bring out the best in someone? It doesn't mean "the strong are inherently better," it means that in a world set up like Thor's it's the strongest who have the most opportunity to develop their best selves.
I just do want to watch for character that come in the guise of upheaval but want to embrace the ideas that spurned them. (a natural psychological reaction, I think, but it is there at times)
For sure. The impulse is a promising start, not a satisfactory end point, and we need to be willing to look critically at it.
OH MAN, the eras. Now, I mean, I usually 'know' American horror but I've tried other horror styles, and really it can tell you a lot about the fears of the culture/society/whomever had power.
Sometimes it is outright, like in John Carpenter's The Fog, the priest says something the extent that we love our founders of this city...and they were thieves and murderers. (the ghosts came back for revenge after being stolen from...it's not the best horror movie but things like that politically were coming out). Like, through the times? Bodysnatchers is a fear of communism, for instance. Most horror movies can go into that, and be very revealing about the society and the people within it.
In a way, there is always the sins of the father, an awareness of gender issues (like LARGELY IN HORROR MOVIES), and a racial divide acknowledgment. However sometimes the villain itself is made to be like, part of the problem so to speak, so the patriarchy can kind of absolve itself in a catharsis. I tend to think the slasher genre isn't meant to be 'puritanical' but is motivated by a fear of punishment from being open sexually. And the punishment generated is more of a 'this is what is in my mind' rather than a real deserved uh, punishment. :/ Sexuality and gender is pretty much....uh, large in horror, and I think it's an idea of trying to reconcile the differences but in a way that can yes, slant backwards...but is awesome for being out there at the same time.
Cat People was interesting on that note because in Catpeople, whenever the woman felt sexual desire, she turned into a giant cat and killed people uncontrollably. 0-0
Which it is argued as a good example of smashing it, which is interesting.
"Like, formative experiences where you are encouraged to develop confidence and build on your strengths and believe that your efforts will pay off...CAN actually bring out the best in someone? It doesn't mean "the strong are inherently better," it means that in a world set up like Thor's it's the strongest who have the most opportunity to develop their best selves."
!
Yes, this is true! XD I think the discussion can turn to condemning Thor and him not being aware of it, but I think the character is becoming more aware of it, and yes, it's not bad inherently that he succeeded in a society that was more suited to him.
I tend to think the slasher genre isn't meant to be 'puritanical' but is motivated by a fear of punishment from being open sexually.
oooooh. And thanks for the rec!
I think it's an idea of trying to reconcile the differences but in a way that can yes, slant backwards...but is awesome for being out there at the same time.
Yes! As much as I love taking things apart - and I really, really do (WAIT, REALLY? I COULDN'T TELL said no one) - this whole mindset that nothing should be examined until it can be presented unproblematically is toxic in its own right.
Yes, this is true! XD I think the discussion can turn to condemning Thor and him not being aware of it, but I think the character is becoming more aware of it, and yes, it's not bad inherently that he succeeded in a society that was more suited to him.
Yeah, people really like the "HE SUCKS BECAUSE PRIVILEGE" argument, and it's valid in a lot of cases, but it's not a trump card in and of itself. Thor has a lot of privilege and yet, doesn't seem to suck, so....*awkward silence.*
There are great documentaries too! XD Like Nightmares in Red, White, and Blue, and the American Nightmare. But I'm trying to find other things on horror in general, for other cultures.
"this whole mindset that nothing should be examined until it can be presented unproblematically is toxic in its own right."
YES. XD I agree with you X 10000.
Thor is awesome. I mean, I think a lot of Loki fans, too, despite the argument of privilege (and yeah), do just dislike him in some way in general? Even Thor/Loki shippers, seem to have this thing, where they do excuse the emotional part Loki has in the dynamic, and just seem to expect certain things from the character.
But Thor himself--I love Loki but I would go to any movie for him alone, so.
oooooh, tell me more.
But Thor is still the patriarchy, either way, with his hammer, you know. (And I like Thor a ton, so I say this with a grain).
I like him a lot too, but yeah, this is a part of the character that ought to be acknowledged, precisely because it's something that goes unspoken IRL. And you don't have to condemn Thor in order to point that out? Like, formative experiences where you are encouraged to develop confidence and build on your strengths and believe that your efforts will pay off...CAN actually bring out the best in someone? It doesn't mean "the strong are inherently better," it means that in a world set up like Thor's it's the strongest who have the most opportunity to develop their best selves.
I just do want to watch for character that come in the guise of upheaval but want to embrace the ideas that spurned them. (a natural psychological reaction, I think, but it is there at times)
For sure. The impulse is a promising start, not a satisfactory end point, and we need to be willing to look critically at it.
Reply
Sometimes it is outright, like in John Carpenter's The Fog, the priest says something the extent that we love our founders of this city...and they were thieves and murderers. (the ghosts came back for revenge after being stolen from...it's not the best horror movie but things like that politically were coming out). Like, through the times? Bodysnatchers is a fear of communism, for instance. Most horror movies can go into that, and be very revealing about the society and the people within it.
In a way, there is always the sins of the father, an awareness of gender issues (like LARGELY IN HORROR MOVIES), and a racial divide acknowledgment. However sometimes the villain itself is made to be like, part of the problem so to speak, so the patriarchy can kind of absolve itself in a catharsis. I tend to think the slasher genre isn't meant to be 'puritanical' but is motivated by a fear of punishment from being open sexually. And the punishment generated is more of a 'this is what is in my mind' rather than a real deserved uh, punishment. :/ Sexuality and gender is pretty much....uh, large in horror, and I think it's an idea of trying to reconcile the differences but in a way that can yes, slant backwards...but is awesome for being out there at the same time.
Cat People was interesting on that note because in Catpeople, whenever the woman felt sexual desire, she turned into a giant cat and killed people uncontrollably. 0-0
Here's a great essay on Candyman: http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/edoc/ia/eese/artic20/kuhn/kuhn.html
Which it is argued as a good example of smashing it, which is interesting.
"Like, formative experiences where you are encouraged to develop confidence and build on your strengths and believe that your efforts will pay off...CAN actually bring out the best in someone? It doesn't mean "the strong are inherently better," it means that in a world set up like Thor's it's the strongest who have the most opportunity to develop their best selves."
!
Yes, this is true! XD I think the discussion can turn to condemning Thor and him not being aware of it, but I think the character is becoming more aware of it, and yes, it's not bad inherently that he succeeded in a society that was more suited to him.
Reply
oooooh. And thanks for the rec!
I think it's an idea of trying to reconcile the differences but in a way that can yes, slant backwards...but is awesome for being out there at the same time.
Yes! As much as I love taking things apart - and I really, really do (WAIT, REALLY? I COULDN'T TELL said no one) - this whole mindset that nothing should be examined until it can be presented unproblematically is toxic in its own right.
Yes, this is true! XD I think the discussion can turn to condemning Thor and him not being aware of it, but I think the character is becoming more aware of it, and yes, it's not bad inherently that he succeeded in a society that was more suited to him.
Yeah, people really like the "HE SUCKS BECAUSE PRIVILEGE" argument, and it's valid in a lot of cases, but it's not a trump card in and of itself. Thor has a lot of privilege and yet, doesn't seem to suck, so....*awkward silence.*
Reply
"this whole mindset that nothing should be examined until it can be presented unproblematically is toxic in its own right."
YES. XD I agree with you X 10000.
Thor is awesome. I mean, I think a lot of Loki fans, too, despite the argument of privilege (and yeah), do just dislike him in some way in general? Even Thor/Loki shippers, seem to have this thing, where they do excuse the emotional part Loki has in the dynamic, and just seem to expect certain things from the character.
But Thor himself--I love Loki but I would go to any movie for him alone, so.
Reply
Leave a comment