The Horror of Fear
Professor
Leicester’s essay, “What’s a Horror Movie?”, discusses the concept of defining,
“the discourse of horror,” by the repetition of certain, “elements, whether
words or images or bodily motions or institutions that can be used to signify
horror (the affect), because they’ve been used that way before” (2). Michael Reeves’ Witchfinder General (1968) conforms to these criteria of “horror”. Based on its basic content of gore, rape, the perceived supernatural, and screaming women it can be discerned that this movie has clearly, “seen other horror films”. While the movie does mirror its predecessors, it also serves as its own form of, “the mirror stage,” to its viewer by mimicking repetitive human nature, thus, “convert[ing] the image to, and treat[ing] it as, a body capable of being desired or feared” (Leicester 13, 15). Witchfinder General (1968), based on real events, is set in a time of great upheaval during Britain’s civil war, and genuinely reflects the way
people react during times of political unrest. The witch hunt performed
by Mathew Hopkins and his sadistic assistant, John Stearne, exemplifies the
results of powerful people using fear-mongering as a control device.
Actual witch hunts took place around the world until the late 18th
century, causing several innocent people to be tortured and killed. Witchfinder General (1968) depicts the cruelty that had been administered to the accused during the scenes in which the priest, chained and imprisoned, is brutally abused in order to coerce his “confession”, as well as the “public trial,” where he and two women are thrown into a moat as a test of witchcraft. Beyond the disgust and discomfort that the “elements of horror” cause, the film illustrates the frightening reality of human vulnerability to manipulation.
After
Hopkins informs Stearne that he is finally allowed to inflict pain upon John
Lowes, the accused priest, the camera closes up on Stearne’s smiling face and,
in accordance with the stock elements of “horror”, the man breaks into maniacal
laughter. A match cut then displays Lowes, chained and bleeding, as
Stearne beats him and demands a confession. Hopkins, Tom Salter, and another
man watch the interrogation from outside the cell. Despite his suffering,
a weakened Lowes still refuses to admit to any crimes. It is at this
point that Hopkins insists that, “he confessed, you heard him.” When Tom
Salter -out of explicit voyeuristic pleasure, rather than the pursuit of truth-
denies this assertion, Stearne, “refresh[es] his memory.” He grabs
Salter’s shirt collar and slams him into the bars that separate them.
Salter immediately revokes his previous position with a frantic nod.
Although Salter has no difficulties watching an innocent man treated with
great cruelty, when his own safety is threatened he becomes inclined to protect
himself. He has seen the torment these men have subjected and his terror
compels him to succumb to their demands. Unlike Salter, who stands as
close as possible to observe the physical violation of Lowes, the other man
stands at a considerable distance from the action. He immediately accepts
Hopkins’ assertion that he too heard the confession. This man has now
seen the agony Hopkins is capable of producing to the accused, as well his
reaction to being contradicted. Beyond any physical threats, the man has
now ascertained the magnitude of power these men have within the alleged
judicial process. Naturally, his instantaneous compliance is motivated by
his own trepidation at these discoveries. The scene ends when, with a nod
of his head, Hopkins utters a single word: “witnesses”.
Once
again, the following scene transitions with a match cut featuring several
villagers following the condemned with the intention of being, “witnesses,” to
the atrocious treatment of their peers. As the mob makes its way towards
the moat, the camera closes up on three nooses hanging from a tree. This
particular shot serves to represent the preconceived fate of the three,
“confessed idolaters.” During the journey to the destination, the crowd
is rambunctious and seemingly excited for the proceedings. When “Stearne
go[es] on with [his] task,” the group’s attitude rapidly shifts as the yells
and laughter cease, leaving only the pleading screams of the victims. The
previous enthusiasm for the theoretical swiftly depreciates as reality sets in.
This type of response identifies with the notion that, “failures of
repression... make[s] the source of what turns [someone] on and what horrifies
[someone] the same thing,” implying that the general group is both aroused and
appalled by their own fear (Leicester,12) . After the alleged are lowered
into the water, Lowes and one other woman swim to stay afloat while the second
woman sinks and is allowed to drown. As a result, the first two are
considered to, “have the mark of Satan upon them,” while the latter, now dead,
is determined innocent. Hopkins’ skewed version of, “Due Process,” in
this scene manages to instill fear amongst the masses. Those who believe
in his accounts of witches and their characteristics will undoubtedly spread
their fears by speaking of their “firsthand encounters”. After seeing the
unavoidable results of being accused, others might join the mob mentality as an
instinctual method to remain safe from suspicion. In other words, those
who contradict Hopkins’ practices, such as Sara Lowes and Richard Marshall, are
susceptible to torture and quite possibly death.
“What a
horror movie offers is ‘horror,’ a discursive or Symbolic presentation of what
has been previously made by culture in order to call forth horror” (Leicester,
16). Witchfinder General (1968) uses Mathew Hopkins as a representation of powerful self- serving people who find opportunity in despair. During
times of unease, such as war, citizens can often feel uneasy about their safety. During the introduction the narrator states that, “the structure of law and order has collapsed, “and the “justice and injustice are dispensed in more or less equal quantities, and without opposition.” This environment allows for the easy manipulation of frightened citizens in search of some sense of safety. The need for control causes the people in this film to go along with these witch hunts. Mathew Hopkins capitalizes on the unease and fear of these people by fostering a greater sense of fear through the public torture of innocent people. The “horror” offered in this film is the breakdown of society without structured government and law and the loss of morality brought about by such circumstances.
No comments:
Post a Comment