In this entry in the Cambridge Gothic Elements series, I tackle the question: is there a distinct form of the ‘folk gothic’ that’s substantively different from ‘folk horror’?
Here it is – free to download and read until January 1, 2024.
In the book, I define the folk gothic (in relation to folk horror), offer a continuum of films from horror (The Descent) through folk horror (e.g., Midsommar, The Ritual) to folk gothic (In the Earth) – and then I offer readings of short stories by Eleanor Scott and E. F. Benson, Alan Garner’s The Owl Service (and the TV adaptation), and Lee Haven Jones’ The Feast. A total blast to write!
My official summary:
Folk Gothic begins with the assertion that a significant part of what has been categorised as folk horror is more accurately and usefully labelled as Folk Gothic. Through the modifier ‘folk’, Folk Gothic obviously shares with folk horror its deployment (and frequent fabrication) of diegetic folklore. Folk Gothic does not share, however, folk horror’s incarnate monsters, its forward impetus across spatial and ontological boundaries and the shock and repulsion elicited through its bodily violence. The author argues that the Folk Gothic as a literary, televisual and cinematic formation is defined by particular temporal and spatial structures that serve to forge distinctly nonhuman stories. In emphasising these temporal and spatial structures – not literal ‘folk’ and ‘monsters’ – the Folk Gothic tells stories that foreground land and ‘things’, consequently loosening the grip of anthropocentrism.
Leave a Reply