The monster and the homosexual

The monster
and the homosexual
7
HARRY M, BENSHOFF
!n a 1984 study o f anti-hom osexual attitudes, the investigato rs broke heterosexuals' fea rs of
gay and lesbian sexuality into three topi c areas:
(I)
Homosexu ality as a threat to the individu al - th at someone you kn ow (or you yourself)
might be homosexual.
(2 ) Homosexu ality as a threat t o others - homosexuals have been frequ ently linked in th e
med ia t o child molest ation, rape, and vio lence.
(3) Ho mosexuality as a threat t o th e community and other compon ents o f culture homosexuals supposed ly represent t he destru ction o f th e procreat ive nuclear family,
tradition al gender rol es , and (to use a bu zz phrase ) "family values. "1
!n short, for many peopl e in our shared Engli sh-language culture, homosexuality is a
monst ro us condition. Like an evil Mr. Hyde, or th e Wo lfman, a gay or lesbian self in side
of you might be stri ving t o get ou t Like Fran kenstein 's monster, homosexual s might run
Iilmpant across th e co untrys ide, claimin g "innoce nt" victim s. Or worst o f all , like mad
::c ienti sts or va mpires, wh o drea m of revoluti onizin g th e world throu gh some startlin g
':('i ntifi c d iscovery or pretern atural power, hom osexu al activists stri ke at the very foundations
III society, seeking t o infect or destroy not only t hose around them but th e very concepts of
W 'stern Judeo-Christ ian th o ught upon which civil society is built For th e better part of th e
! wc nt ieth cent ury, homosexual s, like va mpires , have rarely cast a refl ection i n th e social
Il lo kin g-glass o f popular culture. When they are seen , th ey are o ften fil tered t hrou gh th e
11'1 111 grap hy o f t he horror film : ominous sound cues, shocked reaction shot s, or even thunder
,lll el l ightn ing. Both movie monst ers and homosexuals have existed chiefly in shadowy cl oset s,
111111when they do emerge from th ese proscribed places into th e sunlit world , th ey cause panic
11 1111 f r. Their cl osets uph o ld and reinforce culturally constructed binari es o f gender and
.I'X II'l li l y lhat st ructure Western t hought. To create a broad analogy, monster is to "norma lity"
I IIJ )(I II ~, m I
I
r mati c fea rs, as well as a host of oth ers, t he
I IIIIII'IV,! ! iV(' f'i (', hl wl ll l~ 11 111 1 1'll l lI lil lllI 'lll lI lI sl Chri st ian s ct rs o f Am ri an ociety have
1I11J \liI In 1I1' 11 )(l lil lI' 1 1I 1I 1 1 "'.I'~ IIIi I ', wi ll il il ,III 01 :;1)('('1,' 01 'ivil (i, n) l ifc', ns wt' li as m r
'111 ,( '11111 / 1.11 ' 01 '1 IIII' , ', III II II ' 11 11 IIIIIIIIIIV 11111 1111 ', l ll lil lllI ll llI /l'iI IH'IiIII',nnY Til l 'y lI ll ':n plilli ol il ly
THE MONSTER AND THE HOMOS EXUAL
92
by painting th e gay and lesbian community in shocking, horrifying colors Til e Gay Agenda
(1993), a recent anti-gay propaga nda videot ape (which was produced in Antelope Valley,
California by a Chri sti an group calling itself the Springs of Life Ministry), uses discredited
"experts" purported ly to tell the truth about what depraved creatures homosexuals actu ally
are: ca refully selected footage from gay and lesbian pride festiva ls "document" the ir cl aims.
The point com es across loudly and cl ea rly: homosexuals are violent, degraded monsters and
their evil agenda is t o destroy th e very fabric of American society. Many members of Congress,
who received this tape gratis from the helpful Sprin gs of Life Ministry, seemed to find its
argument co mpelling and reasonabl e, espec ially during the recent nati onal hysteria
surro unding the question of whether or not homosexuals should be lega lly discriminated
~
93
HARRY M. BENSHOFF
against within the Arm ed Services. A similar use of horror movie iconography has recently
been employed by other Fundamentali st Christian groups in seasona l Hall oween "Hell
Houses ." In an attempt t o fri ghten t eenage patrons into conforming t o heterosexual norm s,
the traditiona l Hall oween haunted house t our is reappropriated for anti -gay propaganda.
Instead of showcasing vampires and werewolves , these "Hell Ho uses" now use monstrous
Thu s, "po liti ca l Significance" in fi cti ona l film and television is reserved for rea li st "social
prob lem" fo rm ats, while horro r movi es, like soap operas and com ic books, lie at the bottom
of th ose particular med ia hierarchies. What th ese denigrat ed artifacts might have to say about
the cu lture they encode and provoke is frequ ent ly ignored and/or discounted. In what follows
however,I wi ll be insisting that there is much to lea rn from looking at such text s, and argU in~
that the figure of the monster throu ghout t he hi story of the En gli sh-la nguage horror film c~
In some way be und ersto od as a metaphOri C construct standing in for th e fi gure of the
homosexual. However, wh ile thi s work wil l argue that the figure of the monst er ca n frequ ently
be eq uated (WIth greater or lesser degrees of ease ) with th at of the homosexua l, what this
meansfrom decade to decade and from film to film ca n be shown to change dramatical ly,
accord Ing to the forces behind th eir production as we l l as t he societal awa reness and
und erstandin g of human sexua lity as it is constructed in various historica l peri ods.
Theorizing the monster queer
2
effects to delineate the horrors of homosexuality and AlDS
The AIDS crisis, wh ich has spurred Christian compassion from some quarters, has also
sign ifica ntly fue led this "hom osexual as monster" rheto ric: now more than ever, gay men are
contagions -vampires - who, with a single mingling of blood, can infect a pure and innocent
victim , tran sformin g him or her into the living dead. Some people have always considered
any tiling th at opposes or lies outside t he ideologica l statu s quo intrinsica lly monstrou s and
unn atural. Perhaps expect ed ly, an ideo logica l approach t o fictiona l mon ste rs frequ ently
bleeds into an accounting of rea l-life horrors such as AlDS: recent critical essays on the mass
media have demonstrated how the representational codes and narrati ve tropes of the monster
movie'(plague , contagion, victim ization, pan iC) have been grafted onto much television and
newspaper coverage of AIDS3 Yet, in hi s book on how the med ia in Great Britain have covered
th e AIDS cri sis, Simon Watn ey warns us that "Aids com mentary does not 'make' gay men into
mo nsters, for homosexuality is, and always has been , constru cted as intrinsica lly monstrou s
within the heavily over-determ ined im ages inside which notions of 'decency,' 'human nature,'
and so on are mob ilized and relayed throughout the internal circuitry of the ma ss medi a
marketplace."4 Th e mu ltiple social meanings of the words "monster" and "ho mosexua l" ar '
seen to overl ap to varying but often high degrees. Certain sectors of the population still relal('
homosexuality t o bestial ity, incest, necrophilia , sado masoch ism , etc. - the very stuff 01
class ical )-Iollywood monster movies. The concept s "monster" and "homosexual " sha re man y
of the same semantic charges and arouse many of the same fears about sex and death.
True to the postmodern condition, it seems cl ear from th e preced ing examples th at L1 H'
melodram atic formulas an.d patterns_oLr.epres.entatiQD to be found in the ho rror fi lm haw
slipped into the realm of "rea l-life" politics. And while horror fi lm s and monster movi
II '
freq uently dismissed as children's tare or vacuo_US., meaningless escapi sm, the demo niz Li n"
(or "monsterization") of homosexua ls in American society is a very seri o us life nd d (lIlt
issue. One might well wish that Ameri can society cou ld dismi ss anti -gay pr P
n li k '1'111'
Gay Agenda as easi ly as it does t he latest B horror film . To do so wo uld req uire lh ' II11rT1 f1 sklIIF
of another instituti o nali zed power hierar hy, 0 11
mb dd - d in th [rill 0 1 Ilw ell (l Il' xl
themselves: docum enta ri (n m<\I r how Il l lljloll~oI l H ll sl i('i1 ll y lh 'y nrc' prodl!(,( 'c! ) " II' 1I ' '' lldl y
,1
I er i vee! (I ,' SIl1lwi1 ow i 111 \( '1'1' II II YII I II' , wi il ll ' III III ,I \I Ii 111111 1II Id 11' 11'vi ,;lil li ' ,lIl1w' I, III " II ,, \I I '1111
1\\ 'llIoI ll" III l \\l l',II'II III' \t 11WII ', IH llill' 01111' III,tilil till ll ll'II'IW IIII II 'IIIII II II",IIII III 'l lItilll',IIIIIII'"
In th e 1970s, in a series of essays exploring the horror film, critic Robin Wood suggested that
core of th e genre might be reduced to three interrelated va ri ables: norma lity (as
defin ed chiefly by a heterosexua l patriarchal capital ism), th e Other (embodied in th e figur~
of th e monster), and the relationship between the two. 5 Accord ing to Wood's formul at ion
these mon st ers ca n often be understood as racia l, eth nic, and/or politica l/ ideological Oth ers:
whde more frequent ly they are constructed primarily as sexual Others (women, bisexua ls, and
homosexuals). Sin ce the demands of t he class ica l Ho llywood narrative syst em usually insist
on a heterosexual roma nce within t he stories they construct, the monster is t radi tiona lly
figured as a force th at attempt s to block t hat ro man ce. As such, many monster movies (and
the source mat erial th ey draw upon) might be understood as being "about" th e erupt ion of
some form of queer sexuality into the midst of a resolutely heterosexua l mili eu . By "queer, "
I mean to use t he word both in its everyday con notations ("questionable ... susp icious ...
strange ... ") and also as how it has been t heorized in recent years within academia and social
po lit ics. Thi s latter "q ueer" is not only what differs "in some odd way from what is usual
( r normal ," but ultimately is what opposes the binary definiti ons and proscriptions o f a
patria rchal heterosexism. Queer can be a narrative moment, or a performance or stance which
11 gates th e oppressive binari sms o f the dom inant he emon (what Wood and oth er critics
1 ve identifi ed as th e va riabl e o f "normal ity") both within cul t ure at large, and within texts of
lI o rro r and fantasy It is somewhat analogous to the moment of hesitation th at demarcates
~ matl c
'i'odorov's Fantasti c, or Freud's th eorizat ion of th e Uncan ny: queerness disrupts narrati ve
I'qu tll brlum and sets in moti on a question ing of th e status quo, and in many cases within
l.rlllas ti c li terature, the nature of reality itself6
cio logically, t he term queer has been used to describe an "oxymoroni c community of
tillh nce ," 7 whi ch includes people who mi ght also self-identif as a and/or lesb ian
II,; 'x ual, transsexua l, transvest ite, drag queen, leath er daddy, lipst ick lesbian, pansy, fairy :
tTy kl', bUl h, femm e, fem ini st, asexua l, and so on - any people not expl icit ly defining
1111 '1IIsl' !ves in "tradit io nal" het rosexu al term s. Quee r seeks to go beyo nd th ese and all such
I ,1 11'1\1l111'.' brl, do n th OIH'C' lll s o [ 11 rm ative heterosex uality and t radit io nal ender roles
III l 'IH'II '2,!.J.li ISS [t m ort' 111C1i 1',TVI', 1IIIIIII jl In Il S, nnd i'1 mbiBLl Oli S c nlra-h l ero. XLl EI lil'y (I'hu .
11 1I'1I ' oIl l ' liH I',('I IHllv lti lil d WIIl, .,,'lll d" II II IYoI,,"' oIl l til ',hl 11 111 '1'1':" ) OIIl 'I'I I:.; ti ':IlI 'I I;i sl l' lIllit il l
*
94
THE MONSTER AN D THE HOMOSE XUA L
HARRY M, BENSHOFF
issues of race, gender, disability, and class be addressed withi n its politics, making interracial
sex and sex between physically challenged people dimen sions of queer sex also, and further
linking th e queer corpus with the figure of t he Other as it has been th eorized by Wood in the
horror film , Queer activism itself has been seen as unruly, defi ant, and angry: like th e mad
~cientists of horror films, queer proponents do want to restructure society by calling attention
to and eventually dismantling the oppressive assumptions of het erocentrist discourse, As one
theorist has noted ,
the queer, unlike th e rather polite categori es of gay and lesbian , reve ls in th e discourse
of the loathsome, th e outcast, the idiomatica lly proscribed position of same-sex desire,
Unlike petition s for civil ri ghts, queer reve ls constitute a kind of activism that attacks
the dominant notion of the natural. The queer is the t aboo-breaker, the monstrou s, th e
un ca nny, Like the Phantom o f th e Opera, the qu eer dwe lls undergro und , below
the operatic overtones of the dominant; frightening t o look at, desiring, as it plays its own
orga n, prod ucing its own music.
8
Queer even cha llenges "the Platonic parameters of Being - th e borders of life and death ,"9
Qu eer suggest s death over life by focusin g on non-procreative sexual behaviors, making it
especially suited t o a genre which t akes sex and death as central themati c concern s,
Oth er film genres - t he melodrama, the musical - also lend th emselves to such queer
theorization, yet few do so as read ily as the fantasti c genres. While each o f th ese genres are
very different in many ways, they are similar in th at th ey create a ready-made (non -reali st)
hyperspace for th eir spectators, die eti c worlds in which heterocentrist assum t io ns may be
as "rea l" or as "make-believe" as magic and monsters, As Alexander Doty has noted, "everyone's
pleasure in these genres is 'perverse,' is queer, as much of it t akes place within th e space 01
th e contra-heterosexual and the contra-stra ight"I OIn the case o f monster movies and sci ence
fi ct ion films, t he narrative elements themselves demand the depiction of alien "Oth ern ess,"
which is oft en coded (at the site o f prod uction and/or reception) as lesbian, gay, or oth erwi ('
queer. As one bibli ographic review of th e genre notes,
Fantastic literature has always conta ined depiction s of ho mosexua lity, both fema le and
male, It has also contained portraits of androgynes, trans sexual s, gender-sw it chi ll\',
people, and alien sexuality that is cl early not heterosexuaL In th e centuries before writ I',
could deal explicitly with homosexuality, they used fanta stic li terat ure's va ri ous form',
to disguise ho moeroti c passions. II
~
In thi s respect, horror stori es and mon st er movies , perhaps mo re th an any other enll',
active l invoke ueer readings, because of t heir obvious meta horical non-reali st) forni',
and narrative formats wh ich disrupt th e heterosexual status quo.
- Yet, as products o f a patriarch al culture, th ese artifact s also tend to narrow th SCOP(' III
the word queer by refl ecting the dominant cult ure's masculi nist bi ,wh r in all or Cj Ul't'I'"
multifarious plurali ty is most freq uentl y Sign ifi ed in t rm , or (w l1 il (' ) I11('n ,1 110 mril c' h0I1I11
sexuality, Th e fema Ie here se rves as the o urc or I 11 ' mOll f; ll l l l l', I, Jill l 1111 ' 11111 1(' 1\C\l11 0S('X II,Ii
or qu ee r is monstro us precise ly b < u h (' ll1bo(\i l ':, I li tl l ill II '1i',111 ',11 11111' II '11111 11 11 (', 1,1 11 11'1
in ul wa rc1 di : ll lnys r in lilt' .'(' I('cli o ll nl ll f,I'X IIIII IIIIII'I I I III<iII ' IIIII III II Il Io Iil y II" ,I'IVI,II Illi
WII IIII'II (1111111 l<tI ', II'VtI 11 '011'111,11 Il iI" 1'11111' 11 1,,11 111 wi lli III I ' 111I 1y 1111111 ,11 111'1 I" "Ililll wi lli Ii
95
does not 'respect borders, pos itions, rul es' , , , that which 'disturbs identity, system, order."'12
Kri steva ce ntrally locates the abject in patriarchal culture's fea r of and revulsio n towards the
specifi ca lly maternal body with its fluid boundary-crossing potential; it destroys ri gid
territori ality and undermines binary oppositio ns , just as queer theory insist s.)
Furthermore, in accordan ce with th e ma sculin e/fem inin e mode l in which Hollywood
homosexua lity is/was usually depi cted , gay or qu asi-gay couples in film are often made to
mimic heterosexual ro le-mode ls. This stereotype has broad impli cati ons, as Richard Dyer
points out:
Wh ere gayness occurs in film s it does so as part of dominant ideology, It is not there to
express itself, bu t rath er t o express something about sexua lity in general as understood by
heterosexuals , how homosexuality is thought and felt by heterosexuals is part and parcel
of the way the cultu re teaches them (and us) to t hink and fee l about their heterosexuality,
Anti-gayness is not a di scret e ideological syst em, but part of th e overall sexual ideology
of our culture, 13
The stereotype of t he butch and femme halves o f the homosexua l coup le (or th e monster
queer couple) refl ect s t he inherent sexism in the heterosexual model: the sexist ideology
enforces the belief that men and women cannot be equal by disallowing t he possibility of a
relation ship between two (same-sex) equals. Th is coded inequ ality of th e sexe s becomes one
o f the bases for th e dominant ideology's fea r and loathing of male homosexua ls, According
10 this model, on e man "must" feminize himself (give up the phallu s) and act as the "woman"
10 another man, Reflecting thi s, as well as other cultural and fo rm al sexist im peratives, the
ma jority of homosexual figures in the American cinema (especi ally during t he cla ssical period)
have been and still are coded as masculine with some type of feminin e and/or monstrous
Inint. 14 In ho rror film s, monsters which might be understood as d isplaced lesbian figu res
II cur far less frequently (although perhaps they are more readily ackn owledged, as in t he
I'onstru ct of the overtl y lesbi an va mpire). Also rarer in Ho llywood cinema, th ough certainly
pr sent , are those mon sters which might be understood as reflecting th e fears of androgyny
1 II" Lra nssexualism, Yet , because Ameri ca n culture has generally constru cted its ideas about
tl ii d fea rs of hom osexu ality within a framework of mal e hom osexuality, the majority of the
Ili onsters in vestigated in th e following pages reflect s thi s bias, As such, what this work will
l it ' chiefly invest igating might be considered a "subset" of q ueer: (primaril y male) homo'1 1'x ua lity, even as it draws from th e expanding body of queer theory and historiography of
I w(' nti eth-cen tury gay and lesbian experience. 15
I~ a rli e r critical t hinking on th e mon ster movi e frequent ly drew upo n metaph ys ical or
11',y hoa na lyt ic concepts relating to the genre's twin obsess ions, sex and death, Som e earlier
wil li ng o n the links between cinematic horror and (homo }sexuality used a Freudi an model
I II Il 'press io n as a theoretical rubri c. In Margaret Tarratt' s groundbreaking essay of the ea rly
111'(0;;, "Mo nste rs fro m t he Id ," th e author exa mined Hollywood mo nster movies of t he 1950s
1IIl I ller uas iv Iy postu lat d that t he monster represented an eruption of repressed sexua l
<1, ", Ill', II, l'hu , 19'" I ' Tfll' 'I'nil'lff (from Another Wo rld) develops expli cit parallels between the
1111111:;1(' 1 ill Clll s110 11 11 1111 II II' 1Ii>ldi ll OUS nature o f t he film' s male lead , Captain Hendry. The
1111111',1 1'I !,l 'I v('!; i I!, tI 1111'I, '1 ,11 11111 I 'X l li I 's:, lol1 ( r II ndry' s Iust s; it is a d isplaced and concretized
111:111 1'111pll l llil l il l",I II' I VI'II II 11I',IIIVI:\, IlIII' tlllil l' m l n, I rm ov i s ft hi sera will repea ted ly
II VI 'I II lli l" 1111111' '1'11 1' l 11'1 111111 /11"" 1111' 11111I I' 111i/1I1I 1I ( I II'I~), 'l'I'iI' :ilm/ Gill,1 M OI'I ' /I'r (19 ") ), i'l nd
96
THE MONSTER AND THE HOMOSEXUAL
HARRY M, BENSHOFF
most of their scaly brethren seem to "pop up" like clockwork whenever the hero and heroine
move into a romant ic clinch, Th e ideas put forth by Tarratt became com mon and useful tools
to understanding the functioning of the genre, but what is perhaps less well known was that
Rer essay was initially published in the British journal Films and Filming, which was produced
and marketed primarily for and to a gay male readershipn
During th e 1970s and 1980s, in a series of articles and books, Canadian film schola r Robin
Wood furth er developed Tarratt's ideas, expanding them generally to all horror film s, and
speci fically to the film s of 1970s-horror auteurs such as Larry Cohen, Wes Craven, and Tobe
Hooker. (Robin Wood is himself a gay man who makes certain distinctions between hi s preand post- "coming out" work in film criticism)18 Drawing on Herbert Marcuse's and Gad
Horowitz's readings of Marx and Freud (in Eros and Civilization and Repression, respective ly), 19
Wood invokes concepts o f basic and surplus repress ion to sketch a model of life under
patriarchal capitalism, According to this model, society can not be formed or continue to exist
without a certa in amount of basic repression, Surplus repre ssion, on the othe r hand, is
used by those in control to keep all "Others" subjugated t o th e dominant order. The Other
reciprocally bolsters the image of "norma lity": as Sim on Watney has observed, "Stra ight
society needs us jhomosexualsl, We are its necessary 'Other.' Without gays, stra ights are not
straight."20 According to Wood's readings of the Ameri can horror film, it is easy to see th ese
Others cast in the role of the monster: repressed by society, these sociopoliti ca l and
psychosexual Others are displaced (as in a nightmare) onto monstrous signifiers, in which
form they return to wreak havoc in the cinema, While some have critiqu ed this model as
essentiali st, Wood did note th e importance of historical parameters in understanding th e
relationship between normality and monsters, asserting that "jtlhe monster is, of course,
much more protean, changing from period to period as society's basic fears clothe them selves
in fashionable or immed iately accessible ga rm ents,"2 1
For many, the repressive hypothesis explicit in Tarratt's and Wood's readings of the genr
was overturned by the work of the Fren ch theorist Michel Foucault, who, in The History of
Sexuality (1978) argued that sexuality is in fact not repressed by society, but rather explicitl y
constru cted and regu lated via a series o f discourses wh ich i nclude those of the medical , legal,
religious, and media establi shm enls, While many of t hese discourses have the same effe I
on certain secto rs of society as might be argued under th e repressive hypothesi s (th('
excl usion from th e public sphere , dehumanization, and monsterization of certain form s 01
sexuality), Fouca ult argues th at "it is a ruse to make proh ibition into the basic and constitu ti V!'
element from which one would be able to write the history of what has been sa id concern i 11 1\
sex sta rtin g from the modern epoch."22 In a by now famous turn of phrase, Foucault not d (11
"repression " that " jtlhere is not one but many silences,"23 (Thi s does not mean th at basil
psychoanalytic concepts such as sexual repression and ego-dystonic hom osexuality wi II IHII
be discussed within the following pages, Indeed, homosexua l repress ion - as it mi ghL ,xi', 1
within an individual psyche rath er within society at large- is still a potent formu lation in II< IW
one might understand the homosexual and/or hom ophob ic dyn mi
f many horr r fi I Ill ', I
Like Wood, Foucault was a homosexual cu ltura l criti c who dr('w Iljlo n (and CVCl11l1 iil i v
expa nded) a Marxist understand ing of how socieLy r glll nl l'S lilllllllil ',('xll illil y, dl'w lopl l II ', d
more preci se ly hi st o ri cized formul ati n whi ch ('X, lln lll<" , 1\I' w jlI1WI,\ II lld kll tlw ll'd",I ' oil '
embedd ed inth pracLic o[ o('i,iI di scOllI SI' , ,' IIIIII II!l litl ' t1 I,lloIll ' 1111111 II\( ' 11'111 1'1" ,111 11 111" ,
10 1h ' prod Ilcl i Oil o f :;('X li n III y, 1,'011('01 I ill 11 1\11'd 11 111 11111 1', I', II! IWII I 11111111 ' Wil l 'II 'III "1111 ' 1111111 11
1111111' ill1( IV dI ll '" 1\(1 1 1t 'l lIill l I 11 11' 1,11 ',11111111 ' ,I 'X Ilr II II 111 1111111 1111 Iv II1 IIIi ' l1 'III IIl III!I IVI
97
function; it reli es instead on a multiple channeling into the controlled circuit s of the economy
- on what has been called jby Marcusel a hyper-repressive desublimation." 24 As sex and
sexualIty becom e more ever-present in the public sphere, they are nonetheless regulated
Into certain cu ltura l constructions through powerfu l socia l discourses, Yet, as Fouca ult further
asserts,
we must co nceive discourse as a series of discontinuous segments whose tactical
function is neither uniform nor stable, To be more precise, we must not imagine a world
of discourse divided between accepted discourse and exclu ded discourse, or between
the domin ant disco urse and the dominated one; but as a multiplicity of discursive
elements that can come into play in various strategies 25
As British cultural theorists such as Stua rt Hall have pointed out. the multiplicity of th ese
discourses and their multiple sites of reception also allow for the active negotiat ion of
these Issues, Thus, when talking about a cultural product or "d iscursive ob ject" such as a
filmiC genre system, one wou ld be wise to take into consideration the hi stori cal discourses
not only of production (where meanings are encoded) but also those of recepti on (where
meanings are decoded according to a multiplicity of different read in g pos itions) 26
I , I
Howactual ractices of spectatorsh ip interact with the narrative patterns of a genre system
must then be conSidered when discussing the queer pleasures of a horror ' m text itself,
Where does t he viewer of monster movies positi on him/herself in relation to the text? The
overtly heterosexualized coup le of the classical horror film of the 1930s might be said to
r present the most common (or intended?) site of spectatorial identification for these
I)a rtlcular films , yet as many th eori sts have pointed out, it is more likely that specific shot
mechanIsms Within the film 's formal construction wi ll link the spectator's gaze to that ofthe
t\ o th ICVillain or monster 27 Furthermore, th ere is more to the processes of spectatori al
Id ntlflcatlon than patterns of subj ect ive shots and cinematic suture 28 For example , the
IleterosexualIzed co uple In these film s is invariably banal and underdeveloped in relation to
I h sa domasochistic villain(s), whose outrageou s exploits are, after all, the raison d'etre ofthe
I:<' nre, To phrase it in Rich ard Dyer's terms, in the horror film, it is usually the heterosexua lized
lil'ro and heroine who are stereotyped - painted with broad brush strokes - while the villain s
.Illd monsters are given more complex, "novelistic" cha racterizations 29 As the titular stars of
1,ll elr o wn filmic sto rie s, perhaps it is the monsters that the audience comes to enjoy,
I X I ~ r ~ e nce, and Identi fy wit h; In many films, norm ative heterosexuality is reduced to a trifling
11011 r tlve convention, one which becomes increasingly unnecessary and outmoded as the
iiI 'm c evo lves across the years,
I ,I
'1'1,1 [ cus o f th is work ~ fo r a hopefu lIy welcome change presupposes a queer spectator
Wil l I ,I ll nd s these genre [11 ms for pleas ure and entertainm ent. What does it mean if lesbian s
"Jt' lllll y With th b auti[ul [(' mn l va mpires ofTne Hunger (1983), or if gay men go to see Tom
I 111i 'i<' bi l (' I rt1 II) ill i 11 11'111" IIII'll' wlifl IFII' Vamp ire ( 1994)? In what ways does this happen and what
I, lit l' "pt! '(' ~ ) i l id" 111 ('lilllll l ' ,Ii 1.11 1:1' for ye' l nn lh er dep ict io n o f mo nstro us predatory
11 1I1111l',I' XII,d,, ( Itll' llllI l ,111 , 1\1 willi 1111 ' 111\111',11' 1 {'il ll rn nil l11 i1i1 Y dir[c rC' 111 Il1il111:" 10 rnnn
, 1111 1' 11'111 1" '1'Id,' oI llt1I ', 1111\ III"
IIII~
tl w" y' , II III 'H,lll vl' l!t lll l', 1111 1111' 1IIlI lv idll ,d '111'1
IIII~
98
HAR RY M . BENSHOFF
in question, even as some depicti ons of queer mon sters undoubtedly conflate and reinforce
certain sexist or homophobic fears within the public sphere. For spectators of all types, th e
experience of watching a horror film or monster movie might be understood as similar to
that of the Carnival as it has been theorized by Bakhtin, wherein th e conventions of norma l ity
are ritu alistica lly overturn ed within a prescribed period of time in order to ce lebrate t he lure
of th e deviant 30 Halloween fun ction s simil arly, all owing oth erw ise "normal " peop le th e
pleasures of drag , or monstrosity, for a bri ef but exhilarating experience. However, ~
straight participants in such experiences usually retu rn to t heir daylight worlds, both th e
monster and the homosexual are permanent residents of shadowy spaces: at worst caves,
castles, and closets, and at best a marginalized and oppressed position within the cultura1
hegemony. Queer viewers are thu s more likely than straight ones to experience the monster' s
plight in more perso nal, individualized te rm s.
What th en exactly makes the experience of a horror film or mon ster movie gay, lesbian, or
queer? There are at least four different ways in which homosexuality might intersect with th e
~ fi lm. The first and most obvious of these occurs when a horror film includes identifiably
gay and/or lesbian characters. Th ese characters might be victims, passers-by, or the monsters
themselves, although gay and lesbian people (to thi s point in tim e) have never been placed
in the role of the normative hero or heroine 3 1 Broadly speaking, the appea rance of overtl y
homosexual fi lm characters does n't occur until the late 1960s and early 1970s, following th e
demise o f th e producti on Code and its restrictions aga inst the depiction of "sex perversion ."
Films such as Blacula (1972). Theatre of Blood (1973). or The Sentinel (1977) fall into this category.
In th ese film s, gay or lesbian charact ers fall victim to the monster just as straight characters
do, although somewhat di sturbin gly their fates are frequently deemed "deserved " by th e fi Ims
they inhabit , often solely o n the basis o f their charact ers' ho mosexuality. Other fi lms such as
The Fearless Vampire Killers (1967) , TheVampire Lovers ( 1971). or The Hunger (1983). characterize th ei r
va mpires as specifica lly ho mosexual or bisexual. These films have perhaps done much t o
cement into place the current social constru ction of hom osexuals as unnatural, predatory,
plague-carrying killers, even as th ey also might provide a pleasurable power-wish fulfillm enl
fantasy for some queer viewers.
The second type of homo-horror film is one written, produced, and/or directed by a ~
man or lesbian, even if it does not contain visibly homosexual charact ers. Reading t hesl'
film s as gay or lesbian is predicated upon (what some might call a debased) concept of th l'
cinematic auteur, which would argue th at gay or lesbian creators of film products infuse som l'
sort o f "gay se nsibility" into th eir films eith er consciously or otherwise. Yet such qu est ion<,
of authorship, which are certainly importa nt and hold beari ng on thi s particular st udy UOI
exampl e the films of Jam es Whale or Ed Wood) will herein be of lesser importance, sinc II
is not necessary t o be a se lf-identified homosexual or queer in order t o prod uce a text whi cli
has something to say about hom osexua lity, heterosexuality, and the queern ess t hat th ),' 1'
two terms proscribe and enforce 32 A variation on th e hom o- horror aute ur approach i til dl
in wh ich a gay or lesb ian film star (wh ether "actuall y" homosexual o r cultu rall y perce iv d II',
such) brings his/ her perso na to a horror film . Clas ical H Il yw( ad ei n m is fu ll r Sil l Ii
perform ers, who, rega rd less of their off-screen li ve" brin g :1 11 1111II il ', llI kll l,l(' i1 o mOS('X llnl ,ill
tothe characte rs th ey create: Eri c Blo r ,Fr nk l il1 Pll lll\ ll( lI ll, 1'0 111'11 W, dll 'l , ( :I'OI{\I' S; IIHII' I',
Ju d ith And erso n, r.v e I\rd n, r In Gnri1o, :l IHI M,III I' III ' l ill 'III, II , 111 11,1111 1' 11 1::1 oIll 'w 'l'lli
hMil C'1 r, cr il l ci in 19'3 0,' il OII OIIIII II:, I,y '11.1111", I ,' ill lJ l ll lI ll l" I,v VI IIII 'III 1'11 11 ' 1111111 ' II)(I()',
1IIIII I'oI11 y 11)'/0, : 11I",l l ypl ly 111l ',I YI II' 11111111111 111111 1111 11IIII
THE MONSTER A ND THE HOMOSE XUAL
99
~ third and perhaps most important way that homosexuality enters the genre is throu gh
subtextual or connotative avenues . For the better part of cinema's history, homosexuality on
screen has been more or less allusive: it lurks around the edges o f texts and characters rath er
than announcing itse lf fo rthri ghtly In film s such as White Zombie (1932). The Seventn Vic U;;
(1943). or How To Make a Monster (195 8). homosexuality becomes a subtle but undoubtedly
present signi fier wh ich usually serves to characterize the villain o r mons ter. This particular
trope is not exclu sive to the horror film . It has been pointed out in films nair, action film s, and
in other film s wherever homosexuality is used to furth er delineate the depravity of the villain 33
A lexander Doty has argued aga inst this model of connotat ion, suggesting that it keep s
gay and lesb ian concerns marginalized: "connotation has been the representational and
interpretive closet of mass culture queerness for far too long ... IThi sl shadowy rea lm of
connota ti on ... all ows straight cu lture to use queerness for pl easure and profit in mass
culture with out admitting to it. "34 Accordingly, in many of these films, queerness is reduced
to titi llation, frisso n, fa shi on, or fad The "love that dare not speak its nam e" remain s a
shadowy Other whi ch conversely works to bolster th e equally con structed idea of a normative
heterosexua Iit y.
e of co nnotation conscious or otherwi se ) wh ich allows for
But it is als rec'
and fosters the multiplicity of various readings and reading positions, inclu ing what has
Oe'en ca lled active queer (or gay, or lesbian) reading practices. If we adopt Roland Barthes' s
model of significat io n wherein th e denotative meaning of any signifier is simpl y th e first o f
many possibl e mean ings along a co nnotative chain, then we can readily acknowledge that a
multitude o f spectato rs , some queer, some not , will each understand th e "denotative" even t s
o f a vi sual narrative in different ways. For Doty, then, there is the (fourth) sense that any film
viewed by a gay or lesbian spectator might be considered queer. The queer spectator's "gayda r, " already attun ed to th e poss ible discovery of homosexuality within culture-at-Iarge, here
fu nctions in relation to speci fi c cu ltural artifa cts. As such , "Queer read ings aren't 'a lternative'
readings, wi shful or willful mi sreadings, or 'reading too much into things ' readings. Th ey
r suIt from th e recognition and articul at ion of the co mpl ex range o f queerness that has been
In popular culture texts and their audiences all alo ng. "35 In th e case of horror film s and
1I10nst er movies, thi s "complex range of queern ess" circulates th ro ugh and around the fi gure
Ilr the monster, and in his/her relation t o normality.
These approaches to findin g homosexuals in and around th e text are hardly mu t ually
I 'xcl usive - in fact, these factors usually work in some combinat ion to produce a text which
Illi ght easily be understood as being "abou t" ho mosexuality. James Wha le's Tlie Old Dark Hou se
( 1932). d irected by and st arring homosexual men, would be on e such film that combine s
Iii 'se approaches: whi le it might be poss ible for some spectators to miss the homosexual
I!ll d rcurrents wh ich fuel t he plot (sin ce no characte r i s forthrightly id entifi ed as overtly
III lin 0 exual) , fo r other spectators these themes readi Iy lea p off the screen. Conversely, other
11 1m whi ch have no openly homosexual input or context might sti ll be understood as queer
IIY virt u o f t he ways in whi ch th ey situ at e an d represent th ei r mon st er(s) in rel atio n t o
111 '1 '1'0 xu li ty . Ultim at Iy, th n, th is pro ject rests upon the variable and intersubj ective
11 "' llO ns s b I.w n m di n 1('x l ,' lind th ir spectato rs, in this case spectators whose indiVltll ldliz ~ci : o(' ill l SlliJI I'cl lvlll l'" III IVI' .I Ii ('lIci y r>rep red and enab led them to ackn ow ledge "the
IllIil l lll'X 1i1 111:1' (I I ClII 111'1I11""," IlloIl l'xl', I', 11111 11' 1': 11 1\ 11' h-I ngUrR m nst r m vi
100
THE MONSTER AND THE HOMOSEXUAL
HARRY M, BENSHOFF
Notes
See John Wayne Plasek and Janicemari e Allard, "Misconceptions of Homophobi a," in
Bashers, Baiters, & Bigots: Homophobia in American Society , ed. John p, De Cecco (New York:
Harrin gton Park Press, 1985) 23- 38,
2 For more on the phenomenon, see Kellie Gibbs, "Fundamentalist Hall oween: Scared All
the Way to Jesus," Out 29 (February 1996) 20 ,
,
'
3 Some of th ese essays include: Ellis Hanson, "Undead," in inside/out: Lesbian Theories, Gay
Theories, ed, Diana Fuss (New York: Routledge, 199 1) 324-3 40 ; Andrew Parker, "Grafting
David Cronen berg: Monstrosity, AIDS Media, Nati onal/Sexua l Difference" and Kathanne
Pa rk, "K imberly Bergalis, AIDS, and the Plague Metaphor," both in Media Spectacles, eds
Marjori e Garber, lann Matlock, and Rebecca Walkowitz (N ew York: Routledge, 1993)
209- 23 1 and 232- 254
Other writings on the connections between ficti onal monsters and homosexuality (not
cited directly below) include: Terry Castle, The Apparitional Lesbian: Female Homosexuality and
Modern Culture (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993); Rhona J, Berenste in , Attack of
the Leading Ladies: Gender, Sexuality, and Spectatorship in Classic Horror Cinema (New York:
Columbia University Press , 1996); Ri chard Dyer, "Children of th e Night: Vamplfl sm as
Homosexuality, Homosexuality as Vampi ri sm," Sweet Dreams: Sexuality, Gender, and Popula r
Fiction, ed , Susannah Radstone (London: Lawrence and Wishart , 1988) 47-72; Bonni e
Zimm erman, "Daughters of Darkness: Lesbian Vampires," lump Cut 24/25 (1981) 23-24; Martin
F, Norden, "Sexual Referen ces in James Whale's Bride of Frankenstein," Eros in the Mind's Eye:
Sexuality and the Fantastic in Art and Film, ed , Donald Pa lumbo (New York: Greenwood Press,
1986) 141-150; Elizabeth Reba Weise, "Bisexuality, Th e Rocky Horror Picture Show, and Me,"
in Bi Any Other Name: Bisexual People Speak Out , eds Loraine Hutchins and Lanl Kaahuman u
(Boston, MA: Alyson, 1991 ) 134-1 39; Patricia White, "Female Spectator, Lesbian Specter:
The Haunting," in inside/out: Lesbian Theories, Gay Theories , ed, Diana Fuss (New York: Routledge,
199 1) 142-172; Diana Fuss, "Monst ers of Perversion: Jeffrey Dahmer and The Silence of the
Lambs," in Media Spectacles, eds Marjori e Garber, lann Matl ock, and Rebecca L. Wa lkowl tz
(New York: Routledge, 1993) 18 1-205; Edward Guerrero, "AIDS as Monster in Scien c
Fiction and Horro r Cinema," lournal of popular Film and Television 18:3 (Fall 1990) 86-93
4 Simon Watney, Policing Desire: Pornography, AIDS, and the Med ia, second edition (Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press , 1987) 42.
5 Many of these essays have been reworked and published in Robin Wood , Hollywood: From
Vietnam to Reagan (New York: Colu mbia University Press, 1986) 79,
6 Tzveta n Todorov, The Fa ntastic A Structural Approach to a Literary Genre, trans, Richard Howard
(Ithaca, NY Corn ell University Press, 1973) especia lly 25-40 ; Sigmund Freud , "Th '
Uncanny," in The Standard Edition of the Comp lete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud , Vol. XV II,
tran s, Jam es Strachey (London The Hogarth Press, 1955) 2 19-252,
This trope of t he genre has been theorized by a great many peop le in a vari et y of wa~h
For example, Noel Carroll has foc used on rot, ooze, sli me, and blood as generi c mOI,II :,
whi ch suggest tran sit ion and t ransgress io n, concludin lhnl "W hnl horrifi s is th \ whlC'!1
I ies outs ide cu Itu raI cat egories" - in sho rt , th C'JU C(' I (N O(I\ (" 11 1(I II , 'I'hl' pfJi/o oph~ of 11 111111/ ,
orParadoxes oftlle l-learl (N wYo rk : I 1I11 .(lg, I ()()()) '1',)
7 I. ui s Sio n, "R ,Y0 I1 0 Diil IO{ \l ll'," S(Al I I,'U,IIr!I«(1 II/III (011/1/1/11111 I /l1 '1t/ 1l1 :i lll'll/mll'lll (M' llliJ
11)1 ) I ), qll nl l 't! I II 1,1' ,, 1Il IIJ\\ ",III , "M,ild ll \', II 1'1 ,il l 'I Il v I 1111 'I
'I/It
I/til I 1','1'/, '11' (/\p I II II1I1 I) I'I
101
8 Sue Ellen Case, "Tracki ng the Vampire," differences 32 (Summer 1991) 3.
9 Case 3.
10 Alexan der Doty, Making Things Perfectly Queer: Interpreting Ma ss Culture (Minn ea poli s:
University o f Minnesota Press, 1993) 15.
II Eric Ga rber and Lyn Pa leo, Uranian Worlds: a Guide to Alternative Sexuality in Science Fiction,
Fantasy, and Horror (Boston, MA: G. K. Ha ll and Co. , 1990) vii.
12 Quoted from lul ia Kristeva, The Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection , t ran s. Leon S, Ro udiez
(New Yo rk: Co l umbia University Press, 1982), in Barba ra Creed, "Horror an d the
Monstrous-Femi nine: An Im aginary Ab jecti on," Screen 27 (january-February 1986) 44-70.
Expan din g upo n Kri steva's ideas, Creed notes that "definiti ons of the monstrous as
constru ct ed in the modern horror text are grounded in ancient religious and hi storica l
noti o ns of abj ection) - particularly in rel ation to the following religiOUS 'abominat ions':
sexua l immora lity and perversion; corporea l alteration , decay and death; human sacrifi ce ;
murder; th e corpse ; bodi ly wastes; th e fem in ine body and incest." Thi s li st accurately
describes the constell ation of factors th at surround and circu late through the socia l
constructions of both th e homosexua l and the monster.
13 Richard Dye r, "Gays in Fil m," jump Cut 18 (August 1978) 16.
14 For more on this and related points, see Ba rbara Creed, "Dark Desires Ma le Masochism
in the Horror Film ," in Screen ing the Male: Exploring Masculinity in Hollywood Cinema, eds St even
Coha n and In a Rae Hark (New York Routledge, 1993) 118- 133,
15 A brief note o n terminology, Genera lly speaking, in the fo llowin g pages I use the t erm
"homosexua l" in a somewhat clinical sense, to refer to a pred ispos ition towards same-sex
desire and sexual activity. I use the words "gay" and "lesbia n" in reference to th e specific
twen t ieth·century constru ction (s) of that sa me desire and act ivity: gay and lesb ian refer
t o social identiti es. "Queer" is th e most mul tifa ri ous term, encompassin g hom osexual, gay,
lesbia n and all other term s used for describing contra·straight sexuality; thu s most o f the
mon sters depicted in horror fi lms are "monster queers" by virtue o f th eir "deviant"
sexual ity, I also use queer to re fer to a read ing protocol , o ne described by aspect s
of textual cod ing and active specta torship that qu esti on o r go beyond normative,
compulsory, wh ite, male, heterosexist assu mptions.
16 Margaret Tarratt, "Monsters from the Id, " Films and Filming 17 3 (December 1970) 38-42
and 174 (j anuary 1971) 40-42 , Reprinted in Ba rry Keith Grant, ed, Film Genre Reader (Austin:
Un iversity o f Texas Press, 1986) 258-277,
17 For a brief narrative history of Films and Filming , see Anthony Slide, ed, In ternational Film,
Radio, and Television Journals (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1985) 163-164. Slide notes the
magazine's "definite hom osexua l slant" and also the mild controversy it caused in 1971
when some reade rs began to ob ject. See also "Letters," Films and Filming (j uly 197 I) 4.
I Ii See "Responsibilities of a Gay Film Criti c," Film Comment 14 I (january-February 1978),
R prin ted in Bill Nichols, ed., Movies and Methods, Volume Two (Los An ge les: University of
Ca lifo rnia Press, 1985) 649-660. One might wonder as t o the degree his thinkin g about
fl nd writin g on th e ho rro r fi lm was related to thi s process.
II) I I ' rb rt M r u , I-::ro and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud (Boston , MA: Beacon
ill 's', 1955 ), Gil d II I )1()w ll 'I" I~ep r('ss io n : Basic and Surplus Repression in Psychoana lytic Theory:
I,' U'14d, I~ei fl , ai'll) Mill / III" (1l ldl.il ll IIlll v ' I'. il y fT ronto Pr s , 1977) .
III WoI IIII'Y I()
' I WIHH I 'II)
102
HARRY M. BENSHOFF
22 Michel Fouca ult, The History of Sexuality , tran s. Robert Hurley (New York: Vintage Books,
1978) 12.
23 Foucault 27 .
24 Foucault 114. Compare these thoughts with those of Herbert Marcuse in "Chapter Three:
Th e Conquest of the Unhappy Con sciou sness : Repress ive Desublimation," in One-
PART THREE
Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Indu strial Society (Boston , MA: Beacon Press,
1964) 56-8 3.
25 Fouca ult 100.
26 For an overview o f the theoretical arguments which developed within and from th e
PRODUCING HORRORS
Birmingham Centre for Contem porary Cultural Studies, see Graeme Turner, British Cultural
Studies: An Introduction (Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman 1990). Many of th e most importan t
original essays are collected in Michael Gurevitch, Tony Bennett, James Curran and Janet
Woolacott , eds, Culture, Society and the Media (New York: Methuen, 1982) and Stuart Hall ,
Dorothy Hobson , Andrew Lowe , and Paul Willis, eds , Culture, Media, Language (London :
Hutchin son, 1980).
27 Linda Williams, "When the Woman Looks, " in Re-Vision:
Introduction
Publicati ons of America, Inc, 1984) 83-99
28 For an exploration of some of these issues, see Nick Browne, "The Spectator-in-the-Text:
contexts within which it was produced. However, these were largely seen in rather general terms.
Essays in Feminist Film Criticism, eds
Mary Ann Doan e, Patricia Mellencamp, and Linda William s (Los Angeles: University
Th e Rheto ri c of Stagecoach," in Movies and Methods, Vol. 2, ed . Bill Ni cho ls (Los Angeles:
University of California Press, 1985) 458-475.
29 Ri chard Dyer, "Th e Role of Stereotypes," in Th e Matter ofImages:
Halloween), see Robert Stam, "Chapter Three: Film, Literature, and the Carnivalesque, "
Subversive Pleasures: Ba khtin, Cultural Criticism , and Film (Baltimore: The Jo hns Hopki ns
University Press, 1989) 85-121. Alth ough he doesn't specifically talk about horror fil ms,
severa l o f the ten criteria he isolates for th e cinematic expression o f th e Ca rniva lesq uc
are highly relevant to the genre.
3 1 For an interesting account of how gay and lesbian actors get marginalized both with ill
Hollywood narrative system s and industrial practice, see Patricia White, "supporti n{',
Character: The Queer Ca reer of Agnes Moorehead," in Out in Culture: Gay, Lesbian , and Queel
Essa ys on Popular Culture, eds Corey K. Creekmur and Alexander Doty (Durham, NC and
London : Duke University Press, 1995) 91 - 114.
32 For a full er discussion o f th ese issues , see Doty 17-38.
33 See Dye r, "Homosexuality and Film Noir," in Th e Matter of Images: Essays on Representa lio~l \
(New York: Routledge, 1993) 52-72
35 Doty 16.
Films were therefore related to general cultural structures such as capitalism or patriarchy.
Part III concentrates on rather more specific studies of the contexts within which films are
Essays on Representation (N ew
York: Routledge, 1993) 11-18.
30 For a di scuss ion of the Bakhtinian Carnival and how it relates t o film (and brie fl y
34 Doty xi-xii
I n Parts I and II, the various extracts tried in different ways to relate the horror film to the cultural
produced . For example, in various different ways, each of these articles examines the specific
eco nomic and institutional systems within which horror films have been produced, although each
extract, in its own way, relates these systems to other issues and processes.
In Chapter 8, Paul O'Flinn concentrates on the process of'adaptation' through which Mary
Shelley'S classic novel, Frankenstein, came to be made into a film , James Whale's Frankenstein
(1931). He starts out by considering the ways in which Mary Shelley'S novel can be related to the
cultural context within which it was written. While many studies present their cultural contexts
as simple and inert backgrounds that were the foundations for more complex and dynamic texts,
O'Flinn presents the context of Frankenstein's production as one of complexity and contradictions. Here the cultural context is seen as a process of dialogue and debate which was not
imply a background to Mary Shelley'S novel , but rather a process within which the novel was a
particu lar intervention.
However, when O'Flinn moves on to discuss the film, Frankenstein, which was produced by
Universal Pictures, he moves on to consider the industrial conditions of its production. This does
lI ot involve a detailed study of the film's production history as more recent criticism has begun
I do, but rather a more general criticism of mass culture. Mary Shelley'S novel may have been
II
Gothi c novel , which was 'pre-eminently a middle-class form in terms of authors and values as
w II as readership' (p. 109). but it was also a radical political statement. However, for O'Flinn,
III Universal horror films were 'middle-class in none of these senses, produced as they are
by I rge bu sin esse s in search of mass audiences' (p. 109), and so reproduce 'the dominant
lei' 10 y inthe 1930 '(p. 11 2). Twothingsareinterestinghere:first,thatamiddle-ciass aud ience
I" ', ' ' n as comp atibl witll l a(\i :di m whil e a mass audience is not; and second, th at whi le it
h
d"I' 1I1
Id n
~~1I 1 y to III IlV ld l' " I l it lejll
11 1111 '1 WIl III,•• (J' II IIIII II I,""
of the poli t ica l economy of a mass-aud ience film ,
,iI ,,, Il li om y orb
i< produ ti n in M . ry Sh II y' s lim . In
1111 1111 111 1. 11 1'11 111 n l ll'. ll Oillll'. till ' pnlitlclI l l'CO II Illy )11"1\111111,,1, '
tlll ' II'I', 11 0 ', illlllill ·. tl il ly , " til l I lli lit Ii