How does horror fiction work? What technique does an author employ to provide his or her reader the experience of wonder and dread? One theory is offered by Tzvetan Todorov, in his “Definition of the Fantastic”, published in The Fantastic: A Structural Approach to a Literary Genre (1975). The version I have is an excerpt in Ken Gelder’s wonderful collection of horror criticism, The Horror Reader (2000).
Todorov
uses examples from gothic horror of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries to illustrate his idea “hesitation.”
By this he means that the fantastic elements in a work of literature, in
order to be effective, must create in the reader a period of uncertainty or
ambiguity. Because a horror story
typically involves the interjection of some violation of natural law or
convention into everyday life, the protagonist—the reader as well—will for a
time question whether the events depicted are real or imaginary.
H.P.
Lovecraft, in his foundational essay Supernatural
Horror in Literature (1927) identified the following as critical to the
effectiveness of a work of horror:
“A certain atmosphere of
breathless and unexplainable dread of outer, unknown forces must be present;
and there must be a hint, expressed with a seriousness and portentousness
becoming its subject, of that most terrible conception of the human brain—a
malign and particular suspension or defeat of those fixed laws of Nature which
are our only safeguard against the assaults of chaos and the daemons of
unplumbed space.
“
Todorov’s
insight is that the experience of “breathless and unexplainable dread” is
actually the uncertainty itself,
which lasts as long as the question remains unresolved in the story. He goes on to propose three conditions that
identify a fictional work as an example of fantasy, or in this case, of its
subcategory, horror:
1. The reader must believe that the setting and
characters are intended to be perceived as realistic; this sets up the
conditions under which the reader will feel “hesitation” about whether the events
depicted are imaginary or not.
2. The protagonist and other characters of the story
may also experience this hesitation about the veracity of events, though this
is not a necessary condition in all cases.
(One can think of stories where the characters have no doubts one way or
the other about supernatural activities, but the reader remains uncertain.)
3. The reader understands that the text is not
an allegory, as in fables, nor poetic—that is, the writing is intended to be
taken literally.
The last
of Todorov’s conditions points to what in my opinion is a weakness in some of
Lovecraft’s writing, as well as some current examples of horror fiction. I mean those that rely heavily on
untransmuted dream imagery, or that appear to be some kind of prose poem or
fairy tale. These can certainly be
enjoyed for the vivid imagery and mood they may create in the reader.
However, because these texts signal early on that they
are not intended to be taken literally, and because they often traffic in
highly personal, autobiographical material, they are not, strictly speaking,
horrific. While dreams and nightmares
are excellent source material for fantasy and horror fiction, they need to be
modified and adulterated with considerable realism and narrative structure to
make them more universal and effective for the readers of horror stories.
Another
important point that Todorov makes in his essay is the importance of sustaining
the period of uncertainty, the “hesitation”, in both the reader and the main
character. As soon as the reader or
protagonist decide whether to believe
or disavow the events of the story, as soon as they conclude that the events are natural or supernatural in origin, the
sense of the fantastic is terminated. In other words, “The
spell is broken.”
Todorov
makes this comment:
“‘I
nearly reached the point of believing’:
that is the formula which sums up the spirit of the fantastic. Either total faith or total incredulity would
lead us beyond the fantastic; it is hesitation which sustains its life.”
An
example of these principles may be found in H.P. Lovecraft’s story, The Whisperer in Darkness (1931). (See also ‘The
Whisperer’—One of Lovecraft’s Best). The narrator’s point of view shifts by
degrees from bemused detachment to growing anxiety, as seemingly realistic
details accumulate about the fate of his doomed correspondent, Akeley. In his letters, Akeley describes the increasingly
menacing activities of a nearby colony of aliens. The narrator is initially unsure
if these are not simply the ravings of a paranoid rustic—surely there is a
natural explanation for them! But in the end,
he is fleeing from the horror himself.
This is one of his more effective stories. Lovecraft was able to sustain a
degree of uncertainty and “hesitation” to capture the imagination of his
readers.
(An
earlier post discussed one critic’s view of Lovecraft’s work; see also Some
Early 80s Literary Criticism.)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your interest in The R'lyeh Tribune! Comments and suggestions are always welcome.