Genre_Study

Roy Yoo MSTU1001 Essay: Genre and The Orphanage (2009) Antonio Banoya’s debut feature film, The Orphanage (2007), is certainly a part of the supernatural horror genre. Yet, why is this so' What makes it a supernatural horror and who decides' Approaches to genre criticism are many and varied, but are predominantly concerned with the definition of genre itself, the classification of different films into genres and the cultural implications of genre. Two of these are particularly intriguing when applied to The Orphanage; these are the aesthetic and the ‘family resemblances’ approaches, as defined by Jane Stadler and Kelly McWilliam (235-7). From these perspectives it is possible to discern what makes The Orphanage a supernatural horror, but also what defines genre itself. Certainly, the aesthetic approach has its advantages. However, as will become evident, the ‘family resemblances’ approach, although certainly not all-encompassing, is more effective for this purpose. Broadly, genre acts as a means of classifying texts into recognisable groups and sub-groups by emphasising similarities and dissimilarities between them and other texts (Stadler and McWilliam 218; Watson 151; Trbic 104). As Stadler and McWilliam assert, in Screen Media, this process of categorisation “is both contextual and intertextual, because it is an articulation of one text’s relation to other texts, in terms of their shared features” (219). The shared features of genres are often referred to as genre conventions, an exceedingly broad term encompassing elements ranging from the textual, in terms of plot, style, setting and iconography, to the extra-textual, such as the envisaged response and composition of the audience (Trbic 107; Stadler and McWilliam 219). These conventions interact with the audience in that they can relate to and understand the text at a deeper level, having seen numerous films with similar conventions. This is particularly useful in terms of supernatural horror films that rely on suspense, enabled by audience expectation, to frighten their viewers (Tudor 450). Such a vague representation of genre is further exacerbated by modern scholars’ contention that genre operates and is defined at three different levels; those of the textual production, industrial marketing and audience consumption (Watson 153; Stadler and McWilliam 238). As a result, lines of definition between genres are significantly blurred and there is frequent contention over how to categorize any given genre text or, in fact, any given genre itself (Jones 160; Stadler and McWilliam 220). Indeed, the extent of this ambiguity is such that mixed- or hybrid-genres have become more common than single-text genres (Stadler and McWIlliam 221) and some have even suggested “abandoning the term (genre) itself” (Watson 153). Therefore, traditional film genre criticism has been significantly concerned with “tying down the 'essence' of film genres: identifying the fundamental characteristics of a genre, the boundaries between genres, deciding which films belonged to which genre” (Jankovic 23). The aesthetic and ‘family resemblances’ approaches to genre analysis are prominent forms of this style of criticism. The aesthetic approach focuses on the textual aspects of genre conventions (Stadler and McWilliam 235). This approach stresses patterns of repetition and variation in terms of thematic elements, including setting, plot and character, and stylistic elements, such as mise-en-scène, “everything that can be seen on the screen, including… costume, performance, setting and lighting” (Stadler and McWilliam 2) , and the distinctive use of sound and cinematography (Stadler and McWilliam 235; Watson 157; Maltby and Craven 121). Another stylistic element that has great significance, particularly in terms of horror, is that of iconography, the symbolically functioning conventions that are distinctive to a genre (Stadler and McWilliam 219; Maltby and Craven 121). This semantic approach, as it is often called (Maltby and Craven 121), maintains a reasonable consideration of the variation inherent in films of the same genre (Watson 157). Still, its text-centric nature allows empirical comparisons to be drawn between films and provides fairly concrete criteria for the genre classification of individual films. Thus, it has been particularly appealing to a modern society so concerned with rational explanations. Throughout The Orphanage there are innumerable aesthetic tropes that identify the film as a supernatural horror. At the most basic level, its combination of a stylised mise-en-scène and soundtrack, a fragmented plot and horror iconography are employed to induce fear and anxiety in its audience; these are fears of the unknown and the unnatural (Beal 18). With regards to mise-en-scène, The Orphanage utilizes the most common conventions of dark, low key illumination lighting and an isolated setting (Tudor 445). It is staged mostly at night, in an old orphanage, playing on the audience’s fear of the unknown. In addition, the fear portrayed by the victims is vicariously experienced by the audience, being synaesthetically imposed on them, another standard horror trait (Scott 7). Furthermore, the setting is misty and aged, adhering to the familiar trope of an evil that has originated from elements of the past, again, representing the vague and unknown. One of the key, and most interesting, aspects of the film is the characterisation of Tomàs, the villain or “monster” (Buxton 325) of the piece. First and foremost, Tomàs’ mask represents a very common horror trope. By obscuring the identity of the monster, the film-maker is able to play once more on the audience’s fear of the unknown as well as to dehumanise Tomàs, depicting him as a kind of soulless fiend. What resides beneath the mask is of equal importance. Tomàs is revealed to have been deformed as a child, both a reason for his wearing the mask and an attempt to elicit further fear from the audience; this time, a fear of the unnatural. Yet, this is juxtaposed against a form of pathos and sympathy that surrounds him, resulting from his deformed state and “drawn mainly from the psychological conflicts of the monster’s experience” (Buxton 324). This creates a paradox between repulsion and sympathy that fuels a fascination with Tomas’ fate, a trait almost distinctive to horror. Such an identification with Tomas is further enhanced by the use of a semi-subjective point of view, travelling shot as he creeps down the hallway towards Laura, in the bathroom. The second key to Tomàs’ characterisation is the ambiguity as to whether he is “real or the product of a fevered imagination” (Butler 12). Horror films often feature a lack of clear distinction between the living and the dead (Buxton 324) so as to exploit the audience’s fear of both the unknown and the irrational. That Tomàs may be imaginary, or perhaps a ghost, and that he too is a figure from the past is representative of both the unknown and the unnatural. Furthering this ambiguity is the use of off screen sound, such as the children’s screams in the séance scene, as it is unclear whether this is diegetic or internal diegetic, subjective sound, that which only the audience and the protagonist can hear (Stadler and McWilliam 70). Finally, the use of children as ‘monsters’ in horror is similarly common (Heller-Nicholas 41; Beal 18). As figures of innocence, it is all the more frightening when they are the ones who become evil. It places them “on the edges of our personal and cultural landscapes” (Beal 18), making them unnatural, and therefore horrifying. There are numerous other areas in which The Orphanage conforms to the conventions of horror. Its plot is circular, fragmented and provides a lack of a conventional resolution. While Laura and Sìmon end up reunited, they are both dead and although her husband now believes her, his path is left open ended. This provides scope for a sequel and adds to the realistic nature of the film, an aspect that makes it all the more frightening (Tudor 444). The use of an eerie, dissonant and fragmented musical score together with ambient noises, particularly in the séance scene, is another key facet. The point at which Laura discovers the old woman in the shed is a perfect example of how this combination is used in supernatural horror films to “create horror through a slow tightening of tension rather than with lurid "gotcha!" moments” (Butler 12). Several further iconographic elements are also evident. The ‘unknown’ represented by Tomàs’ mask is similarly depicted by the mist that constantly surrounds the expansive orphanage and Laura’s climactic descent into the monster’s lair, the forbidden place that is inevitably entered in any horror film (Beal 18). Also, “the nursery rhyme motif” (Heller-Nicholas 41), again connected with the accentuated creepiness of children as villains, is one chiefly associated with the horror genre. Its repetition at the climax is made all the more frightening by use of a sweeping pan shot, keeping all the action in the one shot and thus accentuating the suddenness of the children’s appearance. However, there are a number of deficiencies with the aesthetic approach. Many contend that an empirical approach is far too rigid to apply to a form as fluid and abstract as film (Watson 154; Jones 160; Herller-Nicholas 41). From this perspective, the borders and boundaries that “encompass a particular genre are never set in stone, but are in a constant state of flux, continually shifted and challenged” (Jones 160), and therefore, unable to be tied down by theories of conventionality. Obviously, the semantic approach must be applied with a degree of common sense; yet, it is perhaps still too narrow. Genre characteristics overlap to such an extent that individual films can easily fit into numerous genres simultaneously. The Orphanage’s typical iconography and conventions could easily be present in a similar thriller, leading some critics to even label it so (Moore 13). Its Spanish dialogue identifies it as a foreign language genre film in the context of an English-speaking audience. Furthermore, the majority of its horror traits would undoubtedly be present in a comedic parody of the film. This exposes a further deficiency, as the functions of comedy, and indeed horror as well are almost indefinable at a textual level, relying on audience reaction to determine whether they are either humorous or terrifying (Watson 157). For example, the first emergence of Tomàs has the potential to be rather humorous, and can actually have this effect despite its frightening intentions. Horror is, fundamentally, intended to “elicit a vertigo-like combination of dread and fascination” (Beal 19), to inspire horror (Kroenert 29); the relation between the genre’s function and its name is no coincidence. Although horror conventions intend to induce a visceral response, its text-centric nature (Jankovic 24) provides no scope to determine whether or not these devices are actually effective, and frightening. Finally, this approach encounters the “traditional 'empiricist dilemma': pre-selecting a group of films for study, the study of which then supposedly identifies the appropriate criteria for their selection” (Jankovic 23). This ‘chicken-egg’ style problem (Watson 158) merely accentuates the inherent ambiguity of this approach. Conversely, the ‘family resemblances’ approach focuses on “loose intertextual similarities, rather than on strict textual definitions” (Stadler and McWilliam 236). The name refers to the method of delineating genres in terms of their films’ shared traits, of which each text possesses many but certainly not all, rather “like family members” (Neale 229). Essentially, this means that texts are analysed relatively, in terms of other texts, as opposed to being compared to a definitive list of common aspects of their genre (Cawelti 58). Thus, the approach is “ultimately reception centric” (Stadler and McWilliam 237), in that the determination of what is similar between texts is ultimately the viewer’s prerogative. This circumvents the text-centric difficulties of the aesthetic approach. The audience’s reaction, particularly in terms of horror and comedy, can be taken into account in order to classify different films into genres and, furthermore, the generic audience composition can be considered in defining genres themselves (Heller-Nicholas 40; Stadler and McWilliam 220). Audience composition is particularly relevant to horror as most film viewers are either pro- or anti-horror (Jankovic 26). Thus, horror films have predictable audiences, often those that seek adrenaline (Kroenert 29), or have a desire to vicariously experience socially unacceptable fantasies (Cawelti 60). Additionally, this approach does not encounter the ‘empiricist dilemma’ as it does not attempt to “identify the single 'truth' of a genre” (Jankovic 23). Rather, it accepts that there is none and, resultantly, categorises films in inter- and extra-textual terms. Indeed, such an emphasis on the audience (Jones 160), has led some scholars in this tradition to suggest that “genre is what we collectively believe it to be” (Tudor 1973: 135 in Watson 158). However, this is not to say that the textual factors are irrelevant or neglected by this approach. As Jankovic notes, it “allows essential definitions in through the back door” (24) as the audience may subconsciously or consciously identify inherent similarities between films in terms of what are considered to be genre conventions by the aesthetic approach. Therefore, the entirety of the aesthetic analysis explored above is still relevant to the ‘family resemblances’ approach, which merely explores further considerations as well. In this sense, it may be suggested that this approach “exceeds aesthetic analyses” (Stadler and McWilliam 236). Undoubtedly, The Orphanage can be classified as a horror film as it has the ability to inspire fear in the majority of audiences; Butler notes that its “results are exquisitely creepy, even if you're a skeptic” (12). That horror films, in general, inspire fear in their audiences immediately relates The Orphanage to these texts. More specifically, critics often relate this film to those such as M. Knight Shyamalan’s The Sixth Sense (1999) and Alejandro Amenabar’s The Others (2001) (Scott 7; Courrier 48). In terms of textual links, each of these films deals specifically with the iconographic premise of a lack of distinction between the living and the dead whilst not quite straying into the realm of a conventional ghost story (Butler 12). Furthermore, they all incorporate central child characters in order to accentuate their creepiness, a trope seen extensively throughout horror in films such as Kiersch’s Children of the Corn (1984) and Holland’s Child’s Play (1988). The setting of The Others is also similar to The Orphanage, the expansive, isolated and aged mansion that is constantly mist-enshrouded creating a sort of “spectral potency” (Courrier 48). Additionally, each of these films is predominantly emotionally or psychologically driven, instead of being action-orientated, providing what Scott terms a “blending of the creepy with the weepy” (7). The nursery rhyme motif recalls a great number of horror films, ranging from classics such as John Carpenter’s Halloween (1978) to Nerlich and Trauchi’s relatively unknown 2007 Australian horror film, Black Water (Heller-Nicholas 41). That each of these films is conventionally considered to be a horror film, and specifically a supernatural horror with regards to The Others and The Sixth Sense, places The Orphanage firmly within this genre and sub-genre. Furthermore, with such a place established, The Orphanage itself may help to define the genre and become a reference point with regards to other texts. Yet, despite circumventing some of the deficiencies of the aesthetic approach, this approach has its own difficulties. Its scope is potentially too broad in that, some contend, “such a loose, intertextual ‘family resemblance’ can potentially be asserted between any two texts” (Stadler 237). Thus, it cannot definitively solve the problem of trying to categorise film texts. The Orphanage could certainly still be considered a thriller with this approach, depending on the audience’s determination. Secondly, with regards to Tudor’s assertion of collective belief as a force of definition, Jankovic indicates that such “consensual agreement cannot actually be identified” (23). Indeed, there is even contention between advocates of horror as to what the genre encompasses (Heller-Nicholas 41), many drawing distinctions between ‘real’ horror and what they regard as “commercialized, sanitized tripe which is consumed by moronic victims of mass culture” (Jankovic 25). Certain critics have even identified The Orphanage with the mainstream, commercialised form of horror (Moore 13). Finally, both of these approaches completely neglect the third sphere of genre definition and operation, in terms of industry. They possess no capacity to account for the economic aspects, advertisements, and critical perceptions that shape genre and categorise genre films (Jankovic 24; Stadler & McWilliam 233). Thus, The Orphanage’s media coverage and critical exploration, which certainly define it as a supernatural horror, cannot be considered. The Orphanage is undoubtedly an exponent of the supernatural horror genre. As has been demonstrated, the aesthetic approach can account for this categorisation to some extent. However, it is quite limited by its text-centric nature, a deficiency that is circumvented by the ‘family resemblances’ approach. Through this approach, it is apparent that audience reception and composition are just as essential as textual conventions in classifying this text and also defining genre. However, as neither of these approaches can account for the influence of industry, perhaps a more modern discursive approach, that attempts to incorporate all three spheres (Stadler and McWilliam 237) is more desirable. Works Cited Critical Works Beal, Timothy K. “Our Monsters, Ourselves.” The Chronicle of Higher Education 48.11(2001): 18-21. Proquest. Web. 22 Oct. 2009. Butler, Robert W. “The Orphanage.” Tribune Business News [Washington] 11 Jan. 2008: 12. Proquest. Web. 24 Oct. 2009. Buxton, Rodney A. “The Horror Film: An Introduction.” Journal of Film and Video 61.2 (2009): 70-71. Print. Cawelti, John G. The Six-Gun Mystique. 2nd Ed. Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1984. Print. Courrier, Kevin. “The Orphanage.” Boxoffice 144.1 (2008): 48. Print Heller-Nicholas, Alexandra. “Genre Resistant: Black Water – the Supernature Slasher'” Metro 157 (2008): 38-42. APA FT. Web. 22 Oct. 2009. Jankovic, Mark. “‘A Real Shocker’: Authenticity, Genre and the Struggle for Distinction.” Continuum 14.1 (2000): 23-35. APA FT. Web. 22 Oct. 2009. Jones, Mike. “Official Sites: Movies, Games and the Blurry Lines of Genre.” Metro 148 (2006): 160-163. APA FT. Web. 23 Oct. 2009. Kroenert, Tim. “Reign of Terror: The Rise and Rise of the Australian Horror Genre.” Inside Film 101 (2007): 28-29. Print. Moore, Roger. “A Miasma of Horror Surrounds ‘The Orphanage’.” Tribune Business News [Washington] 8 Jan. 2008: 13. Proquest. Web. 24 Oct. 2009. Neale, S. Genre. London: British Film Institute, 1980. Print. Scott, A.O. “The Ghost Down the Hall Is Scary in Spanish, Too.” New York Times. Late Ed. 28 Dec. 2007: 7. Proquest. Web. 24 Oct. 2009. Stadler, Jane and Kelly McWilliam. Screen Media: Analysing Film and Television. Crow’s Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin, 2009. Print. Trbic, Boris. “Film Genre: An Introduction.” Screen Education 46. Winter (2007): 104-109. Proquest. Web. 24 Oct. 2009. Tudor, Andrew. “Why horror': The Peculiar Pleasures of a Popular Genre.” Cultural Studies 11.3 (1997): 443-463. Print. Watson, Paul. “Critical Approaches to Hollywood Cinema: Authorship, Genre and Stars.” An Introduction to Film Studies. Ed. Jill Nelmes. Routledge: London, 2003. 129-181. Print. Filmography Black Water. Dir. David Nerlich and Andrew Trauchi. All Interactive Distribution, 2007. Film. Child’s Play. Dir. Tom Holland. United Artists, 1988. Film. Children of the Corn. Dir. Fritz Kiersch. New World Pictures, 1984. Film. Halloween. Dir. John Carpenter. Compass International Pictures, 1978. Film. The Orphanage [El Orfanato]. Dir. Antonio Banoya. Picturehouse Entertainment, 2007. Film. The Others. Dir. Alejandro Amenabar. Dimension Films, 2001. Film. The Sixth Sense. Dir. M. Knight Shyamalan. Buena Vista Pictures, 1999. Film.