Among New American Ghost Cinema, one can witness the re-emergence of an interesting sub-genre: the

The next thesis proposed by Cohen is that a monster is the harbinger of category crisis. In order to feel comfortable about places, people, and things in the word, we tend to group things into categories. All of these are placed in categories typically by physical appearance and certain traits that tend to stick out. Well, what’s scary about monsters is that they tend to be unnatural and not just fit into one category, but rather many different categories. One of the most common characters described by this thesis is Count Dracula, a monster that is neither dead nor alive. When one cannot be distinguished into a basic category this tends to frighten us because it goes against one of our common norms. He breaks our human-made laws of nature. Along with the violations of our norm groups, monsters also tend as an act to forewarn our cultures of crisis. The creator of Frankenstein can be seen as an act to

The idea of what a monster is and how it pertains to modern day society has fascinated readers and writers for decades. Before taking this class, I was aware of what a monster is and the function it served in today’s society. Furthermore, after taking this class, I am now aware of what a monster truly is, and what really separates a monster from a regular person. The piece of text that I mainly chose to focus on and elaborate closely to demonstrate the aspects of a monster is appropriately named, Monster, by Walter Dean Myers. The reason I chose this piece of literature is because, Monster thoroughly elaborates what a monster is in todays society and how it functions in the modern day world. In this essay I will elaborate on

We learn that it is not normal to go out into the streets biting people when were hungry; instead we know to cook or to go to a restaurant and order food. This basic repression allows humans to live together and thrive as one. It seems that basic repression is something every human needs in order to be considered normal. Basic repression shows the universal "right and wrong." Surplus repression on the other hand depends entirely on a particular society or culture. At an early age of life human beings are being placed into predetermined roles within a society. Surplus repression makes majority of the people we know into "monogamous heterosexual bourgeois patriarchal capitalist" these things seem normal to us. Although we don't need these surplus repressions to survive or co-exist with others we still follow these standards because it's something passed down to us, an expectation. Our society expects people to fit into that specific mold. The essential difference between the two ideas is that basic repression is necessary to live a normal life and it is also inescapable while surplus repression is more conditioned to a specific

Society’s biggest flaws stem from the inability to understand the unknown; fear is one of the greatest contributions to this inability. Society projects their own fears and flaws onto monsters in order to deter the realization that they are the real monster. In John Gardner’s “Grendel”; Grendel is the victim to this concept because society has a preconceived notion about him and automatically stigmatizes him. Grendel is an embodiment of mankind’s greatest fears and a reflection of them selves. Our obsession with monsters is due to the lack of understanding from something that is completely different from ourselves. Society only projects their fears onto monsters because it has been integrated in society to see monsters as malicious

The horror genre has been captivating and enthralling the masses for centuries, but more recently in the twentieth century these morbid tales have moved from the old media of oral stories and literature to the new medium of horror pictures. Horror pictures still are not the end of the evolution of the horror genre, as this medium itself has experienced evolutions to satisfy an increasingly desensitized audience. To exemplify this evolution of horror pictures we will be taking a look at an occult classic from 1968 Night of the living dead and a new thriller The Walking Dead. Both horror pictures portray a zombie apocalypse and there are similarities and differences in the main characters, the zombies, and the worlds of the two pictures.

Monsters are challenges that the human race must overcome. In Jeffrey Cohen’s essay “Monster Culture,” Cohen reasserts the presence of the monstrous within society, and its relation to different cultures in a specific time period. All of Cohen’s seven thesis makes sensible arguments that gives the audience a glimpse on what his purpose is. Each thesis are presented differently, but Cohen correlates his ideas to explain the monster’s true existence. The convergence of intellectualism makes a strong connection between Cohen’s appeal to pathos. Cohen utilizes emotion in his writing to mainly appeal to his audience, and give them an idea on what goes on behind the monster’s identity. The final thesis “The Monster Stands at the Threshold of Becoming”

Asma states, "Monsters can stand as symbols of human vulnerability and crisis, and as such they play imaginative foils for thinking about our own responses to menace.” This means that human weaknesses and fears are represented through monstrous figures, and these fictional situations provide perspective into how we react in fearful environments. In our current society we fear many things, including but not limited to failed or corrupt governmental systems, the afterlife, the unknown, and captivity, which makes this claim valid. Although we may not realize it, these fears are embodied by the horror monsters we see in popular culture. Society shares common fears, and often times the most prevailing fear is reflected in the most popular characters at any given time. Monsters are the fictional representations of society’s dark subconscious, exploring not only why the author’s statement is accurate but what we actually fear.

Although the best reasons for “going to the movies” are to be entertained and eat popcorn, understanding a film is actually quite complex. Movies are not only a reflection of life, they also have the capability of shaping our norms, values, attitudes, and perception of life. Through the media of film, one can find stories of practically anything imaginable and some things unimaginable. Movie-makers use their art to entertain, to promote political agendas, to educate, and to present life as it is, was, or could be. They can present truth, truth as they interpret it, or simply ignore truth altogether. A movie can be a work of fiction, non-fiction, or anything in-between. A film is an artist’s interpretation. What one takes away from a film depends upon how one interprets what has been seen and heard. Understanding film is indeed difficult.

Insidious easily fits the film conventions of the horror genre and themes. Insidious incorporates classic horror elements like haunted houses, ghosts, children being possessed, and outside experts of the spiritual world. A family with three children start to witness things out of the ordinary and are unable to understand what they are seeing. The mother, for instance, knew she was seeing strange deities, but her husband refused to believe it and thought she was just out of it. The classic element of denying there is anything out of the ordinary going on is a classic horror element. Typically the people who deny the reality that there might be something supernatural happening, are the first people to be killed or affected in some manner.

In Stephen King's "Why we Crave Horror", the famous novelist argues for a rather depressing explanation of society's fixation with horror movies. He insinuates today's generation's obsession over gory and demonic storylines is a result of our internal need for violence that must be satisfied. Such claims may shock readers at first, however, King's use of diction, imagery and tone leave us no choice but to agree with his analysis of human behaviour. He uses these rhetorical tools to prove to the naive reader that we truly are "mentally ill".

“ People fear what they do not understand. ” In the original 1888 edition of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, this saying is excessively shown throughout the journey of Frankenstein himself and his creation known as “ the creature.” Fear is spreaded in this famous, gothic novel because the epitome of society is lacked by both the creator and the creation, leading to much misunderstanding with who is the real monster. In this novel, the true monster is society because the ideals indirectly presented led Frankenstein to abhor and abandon the creature, the ultimate isolation of both, and the delirious vengeance developed by the two.

In Stephen King’s somewhat subjective essay in the 1984 Playboy magazine, Why We Crave Horror Movies, King describes his reasoning behind why so many people are fond of watching movies residing in the horror genre. The content of his essay, though inserted in an unconventional area for

Monsters have proven to be more than just the fiendish appearance or the evil within such creatures – their monstrosity symbolizes, more or less, the characteristics that define mankind and/or our innermost fears. Prior to this Exploration of the Humanities course, I have interpreted monsters for what they are: heartless and destructive creatures that generate fear. However, I never bothered what the true cause of such fear is – only associating the gruesome presence with a psychological reaction of horror. But taking this class allowed me to broaden my perspective on monsters and monstrosity: humans fear the “Other” because we as individuals have an “Other” within us (subconsciously) that we are not willing to show to those in our

Throughout cinema, there has always been space in our hearts for the gore and intrigue that come from horror films. Though they come with different plots, there remains “the monster”, the character that brings along disgust, horror, suspense, and even sympathy. In Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960), our monster is Norman Bates, the boy next door. This was one of the first times in American cinema that the killer was brought home, paving the way for the future of horror movies. According to Robin Wood in “An Introduction to the America Horror Film” (183-208), Bates follows the formula of the Monster being a human psychotic. This is conveyed through his normal façade portrayed with his introduction, the audience’s ambivalence, the use of

Breaking down meaning by disrupting the distinction between the subject and the object. (Childers & Hentzi 1978:308). Kristeva theorises that because the abject is situated outside of symbolic order, our confrontation with it becomes an innately traumatic experience akin with the disgust we experience when confronted with an object which has been violently cast out of the cultural world, having formerly been a subject (Kirsteva 1982:65). In Horror and the Monstrous-Feminine, Barbara Creed refers to horror as a “crossing of borders”. The abject therefore can be seen as referring to horror itself. That is to say, horror defies the lines of decency, morality and accepted social practice in ways that threaten to jeopardize the stability of order. Creed discusses the representation of the woman as the monster rather than as the victim to a male monster. She associates the monstrous feminine in patriarchal society to sexual difference and castration. The term monstrous feminine emphasizes the signifigance of gender in the formation of her monstrosity. She disputes the notion of the male monster and Freud’s theory of the castrated woman who is established as a victim by nature. The monstrous feminine addresses more regarding male fears than female subjectivity. The woman is more accurately feared as the castrator than the