When the Woman Lurks: Gender in Modern Slasher Films
Since the inception of the subgenre, the slasher film has relied upon recycled and regurgitated generic conventions. Many scholars have addressed female representation in slasher films, typically identifying women as visually spectacular victims of masculine-coded killers, ill-fated feminine monsters or androgynous “final girls” who fight their way to the finale with brute masculine force. However, in recent years, a change in authorship has fostered the development of a new form of female representation in horror: the feminist monster. The feminist monster is an amalgamation of prior onscreen representations of women in horror; she is simultaneously victim, monster and survivor. However, rather than being defined by her victimhood or monstrosity, she is empowered by her difference and often functions as a lawless vigilante seeking vengeance on those who have wronged her and her gender. Through a comparative examination of female representation in traditional slasher films and modern female-fronted slasher films, I argue that the feminist monster represents women’s contemporary reclamation of horror, both as a genre and as a productive process.
- Amy Jane Vosper (Trent University, CA)
Since the inception of the subgenre, the slasher film has relied upon recycled and regurgitated generic conventions. Many scholars have addressed female representation in slasher films, typically identifying women as visually spectacular victims of masculine-coded killers, ill-fated feminine monsters or androgynous “final girls” who fight their way to the finale with brute masculine force. However, in recent years, a change in authorship has fostered the development of a new form of female representation in horror: the feminist monster. The feminist monster is an amalgamation of prior onscreen representations of women in horror; she is simultaneously victim, monster and survivor. However, rather than being defined by her victimhood or monstrosity, she is empowered by her difference and often functions as a lawless vigilante seeking vengeance on those who have wronged her and her gender. Through a comparative examination of female representation in traditional slasher films and modern female-fronted slasher films, I argue that the feminist monster represents women’s contemporary reclamation of horror, both as a genre and as a productive process.
"We Will Never Bow Down!" How Black Christmas Subverts the Tropes of the Slasher Subgenre and Offers a Possibility for Feminist Filmmaking
The aim of this paper is to reclaim the slasher film as a positive space for feminist politics to be explored and to reframe the subgenre through a feminist perspective by analysing the woman-directed Black Christmas (Sophia Takal, 2019), the second remake of the same-titled 1974 proto-slasher. It will analyse how Black Christmas subverts the tropes of the subgenre and offers a twist on the final girl, the avenging superego and the abjected woman.
The textual reading will be twofold: first, I will turn to an aesthetic analysis of the appropriation of ‘the look’ by the female characters in the film to explain how Black Christmas constructs female agency, especially when contrasting it with the two prior Black Christmas films (the 1974 and the 2006 remake). This analysis will also look at how the camera works in favour of the female characters instead of oppressing them with neither a sadistic-voyeuristic look nor a fetishistic-scopophilic look. Secondly, this analysis will be underpinned by a theoretical analysis of the narrative through psychoanalytical lenses to challenge rather than further cement long-standing assumptions of the subgenre as well as question Freudian and Lacanian theories by using Susan Lurie’s feminist theory of the castrated woman to explain the misogyny in films.
By doing a narrative and an aesthetic analysis of Black Christmas, this paper aims to offer a feminist reading of a slasher film that allows its female characters to be themselves without justifying the male aggression towards them.
- Bruna Foletto Lucas (Kingston University, UK)
The aim of this paper is to reclaim the slasher film as a positive space for feminist politics to be explored and to reframe the subgenre through a feminist perspective by analysing the woman-directed Black Christmas (Sophia Takal, 2019), the second remake of the same-titled 1974 proto-slasher. It will analyse how Black Christmas subverts the tropes of the subgenre and offers a twist on the final girl, the avenging superego and the abjected woman.
The textual reading will be twofold: first, I will turn to an aesthetic analysis of the appropriation of ‘the look’ by the female characters in the film to explain how Black Christmas constructs female agency, especially when contrasting it with the two prior Black Christmas films (the 1974 and the 2006 remake). This analysis will also look at how the camera works in favour of the female characters instead of oppressing them with neither a sadistic-voyeuristic look nor a fetishistic-scopophilic look. Secondly, this analysis will be underpinned by a theoretical analysis of the narrative through psychoanalytical lenses to challenge rather than further cement long-standing assumptions of the subgenre as well as question Freudian and Lacanian theories by using Susan Lurie’s feminist theory of the castrated woman to explain the misogyny in films.
By doing a narrative and an aesthetic analysis of Black Christmas, this paper aims to offer a feminist reading of a slasher film that allows its female characters to be themselves without justifying the male aggression towards them.
Queer Slashers, Sensibilities and Spectatorship
In this paper, I will examine the use of queer bodies in slasher films, specifically in how slashers differ in context when the author (director and/or writer) is queer or non-queer. I will focus on how the use of queer bodies and queerness has been used in the slasher -- from its boom in the early 80s to more slashers in the 21st century.
I will first establish a brief history of queer bodies in slasher films from Sleepaway Camp (1983) to Knife+Heart (2017). In the following section of the paper, I will focus on how non-queer authors appropriate queer bodies to enforce harmful stereotypes of the LGBTQ+ community at large. Finally, I would outline the contributions to the slasher genre by queer authors and how often a queer sensibility arises in these films, even when queerness isn’t explicitly present in the film. I want to answer throughout these sections: what makes intentionality, visual, and message so different across slashers when analyzing authorship and the appropriation of queer bodies?
I will look at a comprehensive list of slashers that feature queerness, queer bodies, and were made by both non-queer and queer directors. I expect to find significant differences within the mise-en-scene of the films as well as their treatment of queerness as either a fraudulent or legitimate identity. Additionally, I do expect to discover a “queer sensibility” present in the work of queer authors.
- May Santiago (George Mason University, US)
In this paper, I will examine the use of queer bodies in slasher films, specifically in how slashers differ in context when the author (director and/or writer) is queer or non-queer. I will focus on how the use of queer bodies and queerness has been used in the slasher -- from its boom in the early 80s to more slashers in the 21st century.
I will first establish a brief history of queer bodies in slasher films from Sleepaway Camp (1983) to Knife+Heart (2017). In the following section of the paper, I will focus on how non-queer authors appropriate queer bodies to enforce harmful stereotypes of the LGBTQ+ community at large. Finally, I would outline the contributions to the slasher genre by queer authors and how often a queer sensibility arises in these films, even when queerness isn’t explicitly present in the film. I want to answer throughout these sections: what makes intentionality, visual, and message so different across slashers when analyzing authorship and the appropriation of queer bodies?
I will look at a comprehensive list of slashers that feature queerness, queer bodies, and were made by both non-queer and queer directors. I expect to find significant differences within the mise-en-scene of the films as well as their treatment of queerness as either a fraudulent or legitimate identity. Additionally, I do expect to discover a “queer sensibility” present in the work of queer authors.
The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow, or Will It? Reimagining the Slasher in Serial Mom
In this paper I argue that John Waters’ 1994 campy slasher sendup Serial Mom playfully subverts the slasher’s characterization of queer people as killers, seen in mother-obsessed murderer Norman Bates or the chainsaw wielding menace with a wig and rouged cheeks, Leatherface. In No Future, Lee Edelman theorizes a queer antisocial position rooted in his observation that queers are differentiated from heterosexuality by their non-reproductive sex and therefore are commonly burdened with the cultural death drive. ‘The child,’ he argues, represents an ideal of reproduction and futurity, while the queer is burdened with an expectation of finitude. Therefore, straight people comfortably place the burden of their death drive onto the queer figure and obsess about the danger of the queer figure to ‘The child.’ Edelman suggests we lean in, declaring, “Fuck the child.” The slasher formula, wherein a queer outsider terrorizes and kills the children of white middle-class families, seems an apt visual expression of Edelman’s argument. Yet Waters’ revision turns this on its head, transforming the hyper-normative suburban mom, Beverly Sutphin (Kathleen Turner), into the film’s killer. While queers have long been the killers of the slasher, Waters recasts the role with a figure who, from a queer perspective, poses a true threat: a cis straight white suburban mom who perpetuates the oppressive normativity of capitalism and the nuclear family. Sexual deviants, punks, and horror gore-hounds are harmless and fun in Serial Mom. White suburban middle-class culture is the killer.
- Peter Marra (Wayne State University, US)
In this paper I argue that John Waters’ 1994 campy slasher sendup Serial Mom playfully subverts the slasher’s characterization of queer people as killers, seen in mother-obsessed murderer Norman Bates or the chainsaw wielding menace with a wig and rouged cheeks, Leatherface. In No Future, Lee Edelman theorizes a queer antisocial position rooted in his observation that queers are differentiated from heterosexuality by their non-reproductive sex and therefore are commonly burdened with the cultural death drive. ‘The child,’ he argues, represents an ideal of reproduction and futurity, while the queer is burdened with an expectation of finitude. Therefore, straight people comfortably place the burden of their death drive onto the queer figure and obsess about the danger of the queer figure to ‘The child.’ Edelman suggests we lean in, declaring, “Fuck the child.” The slasher formula, wherein a queer outsider terrorizes and kills the children of white middle-class families, seems an apt visual expression of Edelman’s argument. Yet Waters’ revision turns this on its head, transforming the hyper-normative suburban mom, Beverly Sutphin (Kathleen Turner), into the film’s killer. While queers have long been the killers of the slasher, Waters recasts the role with a figure who, from a queer perspective, poses a true threat: a cis straight white suburban mom who perpetuates the oppressive normativity of capitalism and the nuclear family. Sexual deviants, punks, and horror gore-hounds are harmless and fun in Serial Mom. White suburban middle-class culture is the killer.