Diane A. Rodgers
Search for other papers by Diane A. Rodgers in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
‘Isn’t folk horror all horror?’
A wyrd genre
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

The notion of folk horror as a distinct sub-genre has developed in leaps and bounds in the post-2000 period, with the most oft-cited examples being distinctly British film from the 1970s. A revival of interest in films from this period occurred alongside the release of a number of titles post-2000 which echo qualities from this earlier period. In 2017 Ben Wheatley (director of films considered seminal in the modern folk horror canon) wondered in my interview with him: ‘Isn’t folk horror all horror?’ The roots of horror are indeed often firmly based in folk tales, myth and legend, indeed horror is the stuff of folklore: unofficially recorded histories, campfire tales and urban legend. But, whilst the schlock and gore antics of villains like Freddy Krueger and Jason Vorhees may have folkloric origins in satanic panics and urban legends of murdered babysitters, the films in which such characters appear are not seen as folk horror. Not all horror is folk horror and, as I also argue, not all folk horror is horrific. Piers Haggard, director of The Blood on Satan’s Claw, is attributed as coining the term folk horror in the sense which it is now most commonly used and, in fact, intended its use as a way to separate his work from more typical horror. With reference to A Field in England (2013), related concepts of the folkloresque and hauntology I will consider how folk horror is currently perceived as a genre, but also what it is not, in terms of that which separates it from horror in general.

  • Collapse
  • Expand

All of MUP's digital content including Open Access books and journals is now available on manchesterhive.

 

Folk horror on film

Return of the British repressed

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 279 279 21
Full Text Views 44 44 2
PDF Downloads 31 31 1