Folklore in Horror!

General horror discussion. Movies, DVDs, Blu-rays, TV, and Podcasts.
AngryScholar
Thanks:

Folklore in Horror!

Post by AngryScholar »

Hello again, everyone!

This is the thread to discuss the role of horror in folklore. I’m a folklorist, and a horror fan, and I’m fascinated by the connections I see between these things. So I’m hoping to hear from all of you about your thoughts on these topics!

As a reminder, if you’re interested in participating in my research, I’d ask that you first read through the documents linked below. These will give you a better idea of the study and what I’d like to do with your responses. After reading that material, feel free to join the discussion here. You can also email me directly through the site or my university email (included in the study documents).

For this study I am only seeking online responses from participants age 18 and above. Please do not reply if you are under 18. By participating you certify that you are at least 18 years of age.

Here are the links to information about the study required by my university:
Okay, on to the questions! Here are some to get the conversation started:
  • What does the word “folklore” mean to you?
  • What is “folk horror,” and how is it distinct from the rest of the horror genre?
  • Why do you think folklore has such a prominent role in horror?
  • Does the use of folklore in a horror story—whether it’s “real” or “invented” folklore—somehow affect your emotional response, or how believable the story seems? Why or why not?
I’d love to hear your thoughts on these issues, and anything else you can think of related to the role of folklore in horror.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me through the site, or using the contact information provided in the Study Information Sheet.

User avatar
Alien Redrum
Services No Longer Needed
Services No Longer Needed
Thanks:
Posts: 11808
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 9:36 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Somewhere trying to cancel you.
Contact:

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Alien Redrum »

FIRST! (I wonder why :lol:)
What does the word “folklore” mean to you?
Stories that have basis in truth, but over the years have become something...dramatic? (Poor choice of words.)

This is mainly due that folklore's beginnings came from telling the tale via stories as opposed to writing it down.
What is “folk horror,” and how is it distinct from the rest of the horror genre?
As above, it has a bit of truth to it as opposed to something completely fabricated. Like horror films about Bigfoot, for example. I think it adds something that Bigfoot is based in folklore, so it could be true.
Why do you think folklore has such a prominent role in horror?
It's easily relatable to many, many people. Using Bigfoot again. Some of us grew up with a fascination with Bigfoot, so the fascination/fear/whatever is already there. So I'm seeing this movie with maybe a little extra excitement versus a film about an antagonist that I may have never heard of.

Plus, it gives a filmmaker a chance to explore something that has a built-in history. They have so much at their disposal for places to take the film/book/whatever because there may be a lot of information/stories out there.
Does the use of folklore in a horror story—whether it’s “real” or “invented” folklore—somehow affect your emotional response, or how believable the story seems? Why or why not?
Yes!! I love the idea of something that could be real. Don't get me wrong, I love Jason/Freddy/Candyman/etc., but when I'm camping in the woods, I'm not thinking of those guys. I'm thinking of the local sightings of Bigfoot, or the story of the guy that lived in the area and killed all those kids and you can still hear their screams at the right time at night. Michael Myers pretty much stays in the theater, but the antagonists of folklore are with you always. They follow you, hoping to get you at the right moment.
Follow Horror DNA on Twitter.

I'm thinking I might make one to keep in the trunk of the car though. Might be nice to have hot water if I ever have to watch a Matthews compound for 3-4 days hoping to get the drop on Sergio Frenchi. - Neon Bolan

User avatar
Neon Maniac
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Thanks:
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:17 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Out making America great again

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Neon Maniac »

First, hello and welcome to the forum.
What does the word “folklore” mean to you?
To me, folklore are the old stories. Every society has its own version of folklore, passed down generation to generation. They seem to often have a moral, but not necessarily, and quite often involve some kind of cryptozoological, spiritual, or magical being(s). Elves and faeries, Sasquatch and Coyote, etc.

Folklore also seems to have some kind of superstition tied to it. Silver vs. werewolves, the endless uses of iron, etc.
What is “folk horror,” and how is it distinct from the rest of the horror genre?
Horror based on folktale elements/creatures. The Leprechaun series would be an easy example. I'd say folk horror movies are just the next version of one generation passing along the tale to the next. Regardless of how well they agreed with the previous 500 years of folklore, both Universal's Dracula and The Wolfman defined what vampires and werewolves were, what they did, and how they died for the 20th century.
Why do you think folklore has such a prominent role in horror?
These are old tales. They've been passed around campfires at night for generations. Horror/spookiness has always been their hook. We're presented with a lurid situation that draws our interest, but then has a lesson in there for us. These were the original horror stories.
Does the use of folklore in a horror story—whether it’s “real” or “invented” folklore—somehow affect your emotional response, or how believable the story seems? Why or why not?
It depends, and it's really just how it grabs me. If it's invented, to be honest, it's usually lame. It ends up "borrowing" a lot of elements from various stories/myths that have already been created and just ends up looking foolish. Just my opinion. Sometimes though, it can also work.

To give you an idea of what I mean, take a look at Candyman. I absolutely hate Candyman. Why? Because Candyman was "made up" by Clive Barker, but is essentially Bloody Mary as a pimp. Ok, fine. But it's still a rip off of Bloody Mary. Which also makes me want to point out that urban legends are essentially modern folklore.
:facts:

Because AR doesn't take my posts seriously

AngryScholar
Thanks:

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by AngryScholar »

Thank you both for your replies!

Before we get deeper into the conversation, I wanted to double-check with everybody about the use of your names. Are you comfortable with me using your names as they appear on the forum in publications (books, journal articles, etc.)? This is addressed in the Consent Form, but I wanted to make extra sure.

If you'd prefer I can use a pseudonym of your choice. But because of the nature of scholarship I'll need to include links to the forum, so people will be able to see your names anyway.

User avatar
Alien Redrum
Services No Longer Needed
Services No Longer Needed
Thanks:
Posts: 11808
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 9:36 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Somewhere trying to cancel you.
Contact:

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Alien Redrum »

Shoot, sorry. This is Stewie. :lol:

You have my name and permission.
Follow Horror DNA on Twitter.

I'm thinking I might make one to keep in the trunk of the car though. Might be nice to have hot water if I ever have to watch a Matthews compound for 3-4 days hoping to get the drop on Sergio Frenchi. - Neon Bolan

User avatar
Neon Maniac
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Thanks:
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:17 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Out making America great again

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Neon Maniac »

You've got my permission to use my handle here, if you need my real name please PM me.
:facts:

Because AR doesn't take my posts seriously

User avatar
Alien Redrum
Services No Longer Needed
Services No Longer Needed
Thanks:
Posts: 11808
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 9:36 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Somewhere trying to cancel you.
Contact:

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Alien Redrum »

Stop being coy, Mr. DB Cooper. No one believes you're still alive anyway. :shake:
To give you an idea of what I mean, take a look at Candyman. I absolutely hate Candyman. Why? Because Candyman was "made up" by Clive Barker, but is essentially Bloody Mary as a pimp. Ok, fine. But it's still a rip off of Bloody Mary. Which also makes me want to point out that urban legends are essentially modern folklore.
This is interesting, this is exactly why I liked it. Barker/the filmmakers took something old and made it new again, giving it an interesting history.

However, you're mentioning this reminded me of how much the TV show Supernatural incorporates folklore into the show. Grimm does the same. Would these shows even be close to what they are without folklore.
Follow Horror DNA on Twitter.

I'm thinking I might make one to keep in the trunk of the car though. Might be nice to have hot water if I ever have to watch a Matthews compound for 3-4 days hoping to get the drop on Sergio Frenchi. - Neon Bolan

User avatar
Neon Maniac
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Thanks:
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:17 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Out making America great again

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Neon Maniac »

True, Grimm and Supernatural rely heavily on folklore.

Earlier you mentioned Jason/Freddy/etc. Let's set aside Freddy for a minute, because he's just kind of a wise cracking asshat going after innocent kids. But I'd say Jason was a modern folktale, especially if you look at it in the realm of morality.

If kids go into the woods, do bad things like drink, smoke and fornicate, Jason will get them.

That's essentially 90% of all folklore on the planet, I think. :lol:
:facts:

Because AR doesn't take my posts seriously

AngryScholar
Thanks:

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by AngryScholar »

This is great stuff, guys, thanks!

One thing I'm always interested in is how different people's ideas about folklore can be. I have a PhD in folklore; "folkloristics" is the term we use to mean the academic study of folklore. It's a small discipline, but it's been around for a good while. It's closely related to anthropology (at least in the US). Our professional society is called the American Folklore Society, and AFS holds a big annual meeting where folklorists gather to present research and public folklore projects they've done.

In the field, we typically define folklore as "expressive culture." Folklore is something every person is engaged in doing every day. Things like slang, riddles, joke cycles, and narrative genres like myth and legend are all examples of folklore, as are things like tattoos you may have, or the word you use for carbonated sugary drinks, or the thing people do at comic and anime conventions where they dress up as their favorite characters (cosplay). More generally, we think of folklore as "everyday" culture. It's ordinary stuff, not formal or institutional, things that everybody does (or can do).

In the responses so far, things like orality, "old stories," and the issue of belief have come up. Stewie, you called it "truth," while Neon used the word "superstition." But I think both those words are pointing to something that people "believe in." Am I reading you guys right on that, that folklore sometimes has to do with things people might believe in?

There's some interesting genre stuff going on here, too. Folklorists tend to divide narrative folklore into four major genres: myth, legend, folk/fairytale, and personal narrative. Myths are sacred narratives, set outside of normal history, and usually deal with the creation of things, how aspects of the world came to be as they are, etc. Legends are stories that are typically told as if they might be true (this includes so-called "urban" or contemporary legends, which very often have nothing "urban" about them!). Folktales or fairytales are understood as stories which are not believed, but may work to teach lessons, as you suggested, Neon. Personal narratives are first-person stories about events that happened (or supposedly happened) to the narrator. (These are sort of simplified definitions, but they give you a broad idea.)

I say all this because I think it's important for folklorists to pay attention to how other people use those same words. "Legend" and "myth" really can mean very different things in ordinary language than what they mean to a folklorist. (Think of the show "Mythbusters," for example.) It's really helpful for me to hear your ideas on all of this--and of course, as a horror fan, I think I understand what you mean.

Neon, you defined folk horror as
Horror based on folktale elements/creatures. The Leprechaun series would be an easy example. I'd say folk horror movies are just the next version of one generation passing along the tale to the next. Regardless of how well they agreed with the previous 500 years of folklore, both Universal's Dracula and The Wolfman defined what vampires and werewolves were, what they did, and how they died for the 20th century.
That's a cool way to look at it. We also talk a lot in folkloristics about the ideas of tradition (things remaining the same over time) and variation (things changing), and your ideas about folk horror seem to jibe with that.

What do you guys think would be a "good," or successful, example of folk horror (or folklore in horror, if there's a difference)? I have a few ideas of my own on this, but I'd love to hear your thoughts!

User avatar
Neon Maniac
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Thanks:
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:17 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Out making America great again

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Neon Maniac »

Am I reading you guys right on that, that folklore sometimes has to do with things people might believe in?
Yeah, I would definitely agree that folklore is something people believe in. Not in a religious or academic way, but maybe more in a cultural way. The lessons getting passed along seem to bounce somewhere between what not to do and how you should act in society. Peter and the Wolf, don't lie or you're going to be eaten by wolves, to the modern don't have premature sex or you're going to be killed by a lunatic. Monsters under the bed or in the closet only kill children who won't go to sleep.
What do you guys think would be a "good," or successful, example of folk horror (or folklore in horror, if there's a difference)? I have a few ideas of my own on this, but I'd love to hear your thoughts!
This is a tough question. Successful how, or in what way? I think Universal's Dracula and Werewolf could be considered successful for the reasons I previously mentioned. They've defined the modern attributes for those beings, as well as how to avoid them. They were very successful at worming their way into western culture and claiming their own spot.

Friday the 13th though, very much not successful by those same metrics. While everyone knows Jason kills you in the woods (and sometimes in space or Manhattan), kids are still fornicating, drinking and smoking pot in the woods. Not successful at all!
:facts:

Because AR doesn't take my posts seriously

AngryScholar
Thanks:

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by AngryScholar »

Yeah, I would definitely agree that folklore is something people believe in. Not in a religious or academic way, but maybe more in a cultural way. The lessons getting passed along seem to bounce somewhere between what not to do and how you should act in society. Peter and the Wolf, don't lie or you're going to be eaten by wolves, to the modern don't have premature sex or you're going to be killed by a lunatic. Monsters under the bed or in the closet only kill children who won't go to sleep.
So it's largely about morality? But what about literal supernatural belief? For example, plenty of people actually believe in ghosts (or fairies, or demons, or whatever). How do you feel about movies that draw on traditional beliefs in that sense?
This is a tough question. Successful how, or in what way? I think Universal's Dracula and Werewolf could be considered successful for the reasons I previously mentioned. They've defined the modern attributes for those beings, as well as how to avoid them. They were very successful at worming their way into western culture and claiming their own spot.

Friday the 13th though, very much not successful by those same metrics. While everyone knows Jason kills you in the woods (and sometimes in space or Manhattan), kids are still fornicating, drinking and smoking pot in the woods. Not successful at all!
I guess what I mean is, what horror films (or books, or other media) which draw on folklore, or have a "folk" aesthetic, seem to work, in your opinion? For example, The Wicker Man is arguably the most famous example of "folk horror." Do you think it's a good movie? Do you think it uses the folk aesthetic effectively? Why or why not?

User avatar
Neon Maniac
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Thanks:
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:17 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Out making America great again

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Neon Maniac »

So it's largely about morality? But what about literal supernatural belief? For example, plenty of people actually believe in ghosts (or fairies, or demons, or whatever). How do you feel about movies that draw on traditional beliefs in that sense?
It is largely about morality. Stories have to have some kind of conflict. The protagonist wins or loses in that story, largely due to their moral standing. The lying boy is killed. The good kids escape. Pure and noble profit, selfish and greedy gnash their teeth. Morals may not be intended, but through the arc of a storyline they are present.

Ghosts, creatures, etc. Yes, people have literal supernatural beliefs. If we look at folklore as a car, a belief in ghosts may be the car body, but it still needs wheels and an engine if it wants to go. Morality is a huge part of that. It creates the conflict and decides the winner. The moral may not be blatant, it may be inferred or extrapolated, but it's still there.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about.

I live in the Pacific NW. I've lived all over the NW, and one thing you can never get away from is Sasquatch. While a case could be made to say that Sasquatch is a folklore character, there are no real stories about Sasquatch. There are no lessons here with Sasquatch. What there is, is a lot of first and second hand accounts of Sasquatch sightings. Even in the Native American legends here, Sasquatch isn't a character. Not like Coyote or Raven. There are no tales like that about Sasquatch because Sasquatch carries no more morality than a bear, fish or bluejay.

Ghosts? Yes, ghosts carry morality. For the sake of brevity, I'm going to just keep typing ghosts, but I really mean all folklore type characters. Elves, faeiries, whatevers. An actual ghost story is going to have the ghost wanting something from the protagonist, driven by an emotional motivation. That creates a moral, whether intended to or not.

Typical Sasquatch story: I saw bigfoot when I was camping last summer. He walked right through our campsite.

Not very rich or interesting is it? A typical ghost story treats a ghost as an active, motivated participant that threatens or protects the protagonist in some way. Our lesson may be as simple as how not to piss off ghosts, but the lesson is there all the same.

"How do you feel about movies that draw from traditional belief"

Well, it depends. And really, it depends on how interesting or well done the movie is and how I feel about the creature. Not a fan of leprechauns, so Leprechaun never had much interest to me. Demons? So, to have a belief in demons you have to buy into the Christian belief system that created them. According to that, if a demon appears in front of you, you can kick it's ass by drawing on the strength and power of God. So, it's a non-event. If that doesn't work, then it's obvious the protagonist isn't holy enough. You've got a lesson.

If you buy into the existence of demons, you have to buy into how Christianity works. Ditto for djinn's and Islam, Jews and golems. If you don't, you're going to be beaten by those entities. If you do buy in, you can easily thwart them. Which is more interesting for a story? Would you rather watch a movie about a demon that plagues a family for generation due to a curse they can't break (because they're faith is poor, obvs) or a 3 minute movie where a demon appears and the protagonist says, "In the name of Jesus Christ I send you to the pit for eternity" and poof the demon is gone.

Normal plain ghosts? Ok, no religion necessary there. Usually a ghost is going to want something from the protagonist. Maybe they want to kill the protagonist for revenge, want the protagonist to return something, right a wrong, etc. There are lessons all over that. There are very few stories where the ghost is just a dick. The best I can think of is Poltergeist, and even that has several lessons attached to it. Don't disturb the resting place of the dead. Don't meddle with creatures you don't understand. Or to quote HP Lovecraft, don't raise up what you can't put down.

So, in short, for a movie or other story, I really have to buy into the concept for it to be interesting. If it's something I have no cultural familiarity with, that makes it a lot easier. The Dibbuk box movie was great. I was a fan of the asian horror coming out about 14 years ago. But a western ghost story? It may end up with me saying 'meh'. I don't think I'm alone here.
I guess what I mean is, what horror films (or books, or other media) which draw on folklore, or have a "folk" aesthetic, seem to work, in your opinion? For example, The Wicker Man is arguably the most famous example of "folk horror." Do you think it's a good movie? Do you think it uses the folk aesthetic effectively? Why or why not?
I would definitely argue against Wicker Man being 'arguably the most famous example of "folk horror"'. And I wouldn't say it worked at all. It has a folk aesthetic, sure. Never saw the Nicholas Cage version, could barely sit through the original.

Going to jump back to Dracula here. How many Wicker Man movies did Christopher Lee make? How many Dracula movies? Wicker Man draws on some odd ideas really only understood to some people from the UK who know celtic history. Dracula is understood by most people on the planet. Dracula's still culturally relevant, I'm not sure if Wicker Man ever was.

And Wicker Man is basically a re-telling of HP Lovecraft's Dagon or The Shadow Over Innsmouth, only retelling it with a different mythology involved.

How about Shyamalan's The Village? What US elementary school student didn't have to study all the crazy ass 18th century spook stories with headless horseman, witches, and eating blood in oatmeal? The Village plays on the old superstitions extremely well.

Folktales are being made and remade every day. Don't mind the emperor's new clothes, it's still the same emperor underneath. There's a new movie Mortal Engines. Tell me how that's not a re-imagining of the Erlking and the Wild Hunt?
:facts:

Because AR doesn't take my posts seriously

AngryScholar
Thanks:

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by AngryScholar »

There's a lot to unpack from that last post, Neon. First and foremost, on the topic of The Wicker Man, I'm not a fan either (although the Nicholas Cage version is hilarious!) But more to the point, here's an interesting post from Horror Homeroom that breaks down the specific use of "folk horror" that I'm referring to. While I share your feeling that The Wicker Man isn't a very good film, I think it's fair to say that it's an iconic entry in the folk horror subgenre.

Another interesting thing is your point about the Sasquatch:
I live in the Pacific NW. I've lived all over the NW, and one thing you can never get away from is Sasquatch. While a case could be made to say that Sasquatch is a folklore character, there are no real stories about Sasquatch. There are no lessons here with Sasquatch. What there is, is a lot of first and second hand accounts of Sasquatch sightings. Even in the Native American legends here, Sasquatch isn't a character. Not like Coyote or Raven. There are no tales like that about Sasquatch because Sasquatch carries no more morality than a bear, fish or bluejay.
Typical Sasquatch story: I saw bigfoot when I was camping last summer. He walked right through our campsite.
It sounds like what you're suggesting is that Sasquatch isn't "real" folklore because there aren't any good stories about the creature (that is, no stories with a clear conflict and a clear moral or lesson). It also sounds like you're arguing that folklore has to be old. This is really interesting to me because folklorists don't make those distinctions. The statement "I saw Bigfoot last night" may not be a "good" story by my standards, but it still is a story, and personal narratives are one of the genres of folklore I mentioned.

As a parallel example, there's the Internet monster, Slender Man. I've worked with Slender Man stuff a good bit, and I've argued that the Slender Man Mythos, as it's called, draws on folklore to create a certain feeling of reality. Slender Man stories are often designed by their various creators to "look like" folklore. And ultimately, because they're shared and circulated, told and retold, they become folklore (or at least have the potential to do so). But finding out what it means for something to "look like" folklore is part of what I'm most interested in here.

Typically, folklorists take the attitude that if people (any people) are doing something (sharing stories, engaging in a practice like ghost-hunting, whatever), and if it happens enough that we can speak of there being a "tradition" (which really just means more than once), that's enough for us to think of it as folklore. As a final example, some years ago, I worked with a couple who were not only paranormal investigators, but also Bigfoot afficionados (and believers). All of that stuff they did--the sharing of stories about ghosts and Bigfoot; the practice of paranormal investigation--can be studied as examples of folklore. So Bigfoot, ghost-hunting, Slender Man and other Creepypasta: really anything that people are engaging in together, any cultural process or practice that shows both tradition and variation over time, can be viewed as folklore.

But that's all the official, academic attitude. I'm really most interested in learning more about what the idea of "folklore" means to folks outside the discipline--so your answers are really helpful!

User avatar
Neon Maniac
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Thanks:
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:17 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Out making America great again

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Neon Maniac »

But more to the point, here's an interesting post from Horror Homeroom that breaks down the specific use of "folk horror" that I'm referring to. While I share your feeling that The Wicker Man isn't a very good film, I think it's fair to say that it's an iconic entry in the folk horror subgenre.
So what you're really talking about is British Pagan Wheat Horror? I find it interesting that you would consider that folk horror, while disregarding horror that has actual folk elements to it. Thank you for the article, I apologize for wasting your time.
:facts:

Because AR doesn't take my posts seriously

User avatar
Alien Redrum
Services No Longer Needed
Services No Longer Needed
Thanks:
Posts: 11808
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 9:36 am
Anti-Spam Question: No
Location: Somewhere trying to cancel you.
Contact:

Re: Folklore in Horror!

Post by Alien Redrum »

As a parallel example, there's the Internet monster, Slender Man. I've worked with Slender Man stuff a good bit, and I've argued that the Slender Man Mythos, as it's called, draws on folklore to create a certain feeling of reality. Slender Man stories are often designed by their various creators to "look like" folklore. And ultimately, because they're shared and circulated, told and retold, they become folklore (or at least have the potential to do so). But finding out what it means for something to "look like" folklore is part of what I'm most interested in here.
See, I think this is where I separate from you and Neon. I don't consider icons such as Slender Man, Freddy, Jason, Myers, etc., horror. For me at least, in order to consider it folklore, it has to have a kernel of belief from someone (or multiple somones).

Like Dracula. I don't consider Dracula folklore, but I do consider the vampire folklore. Same with werewolves.

But Slender Man, for example, is just a made up creature coming from the imagination of someone as opposed to someone's experience. However, I can see it (maybe) eventually becomeing part of folklore as its origins get further and further lost over time.

Yet something like Jason, Freddy, Myers and the like...no one is going to believe that they are real. They may always be part of pop-culture/history, but not folklore. I need my folkore based in some sort of reality or experience.
Follow Horror DNA on Twitter.

I'm thinking I might make one to keep in the trunk of the car though. Might be nice to have hot water if I ever have to watch a Matthews compound for 3-4 days hoping to get the drop on Sergio Frenchi. - Neon Bolan

Post Reply