Scan barcode
hayesstw's review
2.0
This is a very disorganised book.
It begins with a discussion of the 1984 Video Recordings Act in Britain, and the issue of censorship, and then eventually notes that the Bill was "the culmination of a popular campaign against the so-called 'video-nasties'... No clear definition of the 'video nasty' existed but it was generally accepted that they were examples of pornography and horror."
But [a:Mark Jancovich|169360|Mark Jancovich|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png] gives no clear definition of pornography or horror, at least not at the beginning, so at first sight the book appears to be about censorship. I can't help feeling that much of the material in the first chapter, titled "The horror genre and its critiscs", could have been relegated to an appendix. There is a lot of information about the critics, but very little about the horror genre itself.
The author then goes on to trace the development of the genre in various historic periods, beginning with late 18th-century Gothic novels, in relation to the prevailing social conditions at the time and place that the particular works were written. He also usually begins with the social conditions, and then mentions the works of horror fiction that were produced in the period, or some of them.
Sometimes the description of social conditions appears quite accurate, at other times it seems rather flimsy, resting on nothing more t5han the assertions of the author. Also, the linking to the social and cultural conditions is patchy, and sometimes seems very unconvincing. Dracula, for example, is presented as a symbol of capitalism in a rather shallow analysis. A much better one appears in [b:Vampires, mummies and Liberals|485270|Vampires, Mummies and Liberals Bram Stoker and the Politics of Popular Fiction|David Glover|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348773210s/485270.jpg|473564]. Of course a book dealing with an entire genre can't go into the same amount of detail as a monograph dealing mainly with one work, but still it could have been more convincing.
Between the world wars of the 20th century Jancovich speaks of "Fordism", which I assume derives from Aldous Huxley's [b:Brave new world|5479|Brave New World / Brave New World Revisited|Aldous Huxley|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1331315450s/5479.jpg|39947767], though he doesn't mention it. In a way that could also belong to the horror genre, as could Orwell's [b:1984|5470|1984|George Orwell|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348990566s/5470.jpg|153313] and Golding's [b:Lord of the Flies|7624|Lord of the Flies|William Golding|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1327869409s/7624.jpg|2766512] -- they certainly inspire horror in the sensitive reader. But they are not mentioned, and H.P. Lovecraft is only mentioned in passing. By the end of the book there is still no satisfactory definition of horror as a genre.
It begins with a discussion of the 1984 Video Recordings Act in Britain, and the issue of censorship, and then eventually notes that the Bill was "the culmination of a popular campaign against the so-called 'video-nasties'... No clear definition of the 'video nasty' existed but it was generally accepted that they were examples of pornography and horror."
But [a:Mark Jancovich|169360|Mark Jancovich|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png] gives no clear definition of pornography or horror, at least not at the beginning, so at first sight the book appears to be about censorship. I can't help feeling that much of the material in the first chapter, titled "The horror genre and its critiscs", could have been relegated to an appendix. There is a lot of information about the critics, but very little about the horror genre itself.
The author then goes on to trace the development of the genre in various historic periods, beginning with late 18th-century Gothic novels, in relation to the prevailing social conditions at the time and place that the particular works were written. He also usually begins with the social conditions, and then mentions the works of horror fiction that were produced in the period, or some of them.
Sometimes the description of social conditions appears quite accurate, at other times it seems rather flimsy, resting on nothing more t5han the assertions of the author. Also, the linking to the social and cultural conditions is patchy, and sometimes seems very unconvincing. Dracula, for example, is presented as a symbol of capitalism in a rather shallow analysis. A much better one appears in [b:Vampires, mummies and Liberals|485270|Vampires, Mummies and Liberals Bram Stoker and the Politics of Popular Fiction|David Glover|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348773210s/485270.jpg|473564]. Of course a book dealing with an entire genre can't go into the same amount of detail as a monograph dealing mainly with one work, but still it could have been more convincing.
Between the world wars of the 20th century Jancovich speaks of "Fordism", which I assume derives from Aldous Huxley's [b:Brave new world|5479|Brave New World / Brave New World Revisited|Aldous Huxley|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1331315450s/5479.jpg|39947767], though he doesn't mention it. In a way that could also belong to the horror genre, as could Orwell's [b:1984|5470|1984|George Orwell|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348990566s/5470.jpg|153313] and Golding's [b:Lord of the Flies|7624|Lord of the Flies|William Golding|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1327869409s/7624.jpg|2766512] -- they certainly inspire horror in the sensitive reader. But they are not mentioned, and H.P. Lovecraft is only mentioned in passing. By the end of the book there is still no satisfactory definition of horror as a genre.
More...