Gill Man

Gill Man

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

The Church of Paranoia

Good horror to me is synonymous with atmosphere. It can be a physical atmosphere conjured up by such old standbys as full moons, darkness, graveyards, driving rain, Gothic mansions, isolated cabins, abandoned mental hospitals, lonely roads, and so on; or it can be a psychological atmosphere of fear, terror, doubt, suspicion, loneliness, and paranoia. In the latter case, the atmosphere is yet more effective when imposed over what amounts to a normal environment -- say, that of a small town.

True horror is not the radically different, but the everyday seen through frightened eyes. If it's 3 AM and pouring rain, and I have to take shelter in a rotting barn in the woods where 10 years ago, a heap of severed heads was discovered, that's supposed to be scary. If I live in a small town where everyone knows everyone else, the discovery that there is a serial killer in my midst makes me realize that I don't know everyone else. Not at all. And that is horrifying in a much different sort of way; the feeling is not merely shock and horror but betrayal, because I'm not supposed to be scared here. The houses of my neighbors suddenly appear sinister to me, and the quirks and idiosyncrasies of those neighbors suddenly take on new and terrifying meanings. Nothing is as it seems, and I can't trust anyone. I've been robbed of that most precious of all small-town and suburban sensations: my feeling of security.

When I read The Church of Dead Girls, two things struck me. The first was that the atmosphere of paranoia reminded me strongly of such diverse but effective works as Tami Hoag's Night Sins, the movie The Thing (Carpenter's version), The Twilight Zone episode "The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street", Agatha Christie's Ten Little Indians, and even The Crucible. In each case a precipitating incident leads to ever-increasing paranoia among a group of people; in each case, small quirks of behavior, odd habits, even unusual hobbies are misinterpreted as having sinister significance. Friendships and even familial bonds are tested and often found wanting in the atmosphere of suspicion and fear. A witch hunt atmosphere prevails, and nobody is what they seem to be.

The second fact of Church to strike me was the idea, touched upon in Psycho, that "we're all a little crazy", and that our private lives act as a sort of curtain by which we can give vent to our insanity without being subjected to public scrutiny. Take, if you will, the idea of masturbation. In private it falls under the vast heading of "what goes on with the shades pulled down." In public it is a crime and considered indicitive of a sexual fetish at the best, and a sexual deviancy at the worst. Yet the difference is merely a matter of opening a door and walking a few feet. In a sense, a lot of "crazy" behavior is simply private behavior exhibited in a public forum -- talking to oneself, for example, is not unusual at home, but is considered "crazy" on the street. The difference is not in the act, but in the location -- behind or before the curtain. So long as we behave "normally", stay within the lines, so to speak, in public, we can be as crazy as we like behind closed doors. But 'closed doors' can be a metaphor for normal-seeming behavior as well as a literal interpretation.
An unspoken thought, however hideous, takes place behind an impenetrable curtain. And so long as we keep our more deviant thoughts and feelings in the realm of fantasies rather than actions, behind the impenetrable curtain of our skulls, we remain "normal."

To me, the fascination of the serial lays largely in two areas: the first is that his outstanding quality is not his insanity, but rather the fact that his insanity has progressed beyond fantasy to the realm of action. Many people dream of committing murder, rape, arson, etc. but very few people actually do it. The second is that a serial killer is often "normal" or close to normal in everyday life. He has mastered the art of walking between the lines in his daily routine. In slasher movies, the killer is an over-the-top madman, lurching about in a stylized mask and weilding a blood-sloppy chain saw. In real life he would be loose only a matter of hours before the police shot him down. But John Wayne Gacy was a crew-cut pillar in his community, even a member of the Chamber of Commerce. And what terrifies people is not so much the murders he committed but the fact he looked so normal. His normalcy was akin to a betrayal; certainly it was a challenge to their security. One can't walk down the street after a case like that without wondering what is going on behind the closed doors of the neat little houses next door. The strength of Church lies partially in its establishment of justified paranoia, but also in the discomfort it creates by reminding the reader that the distance between themselves and the serial killer is not quite as long as they think.

5 comments:

  1. Excellent post, Miles! Both of the things that struck you about CHURCH struck me, as well, but I didn't think through them with your remarkable clarity. Better still is your conclusion, where you draw back, commenting on our fascination with serial killers and making the point that we feel betrayed by killers' former normalcy. It's downright uncanny, just how normal many of these killers seem, even in the midst of their crimes. Finally, I just have to say I loved the phrase "crew-cut pillar in his community".

    ReplyDelete
  2. I loved the analogy you drew between closed doors and the appearance of normalcy. I'd never thought before about the interpretation of certain acts with the door open, if you will, and with the door closed. Kinda funny when you think about it that way, but you're absolutely right. It's like we're given license to get in touch with our inner crazy, as long as we're alone with the door closed or inside our minds. But the instant the crazy oozes out and touches someone else, it becomes beyond crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Awesome job on this post, Miles. I loved how you connected people's view of actions being committed in private and public settings. I'll also admit now that I talk to myself both privately and publicly, so I completely understand people's reactions to a "crazy person" in their midst. Your post also made me think back to why the Narrator stole Donald's hand. The Narrator tells readers that he can't show the specimen jars to his classes anymore, yet he keeps them above his desk shelf. Another example of the private being hidden and something that would be chastised for being revealed in public.

    Side note: My dad is a science teacher and happens to have quite a few specimen jars with a fetal pig, sheep's brain, etc., and I always thought that they were the coolest things...but I could never take them out of the storage closet at school.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Another excellent post, Miles. I'm often concerned that you guys won't "get" why I assigned a particular book. You, I'm happy to say, got it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Scott, I'm glad to be breaking out of the horror-pattern I've been in since high school: Stephen King, Thomas Harris and some Richard Matheson. Nothing against any of them (quite the contrary) but I'm ready to see what people who really know the whole genre have to recommend for me. I've been meaning to read through the whole list of horror classics ever since I read "Danse Macabre" 20 years ago. I just wish I hadn't seen that John Williams concert that went through the whole plot of "Psycho" a month before I reread the book!

    ReplyDelete