The Legacy of Robin Wood
Wood stated ‘The release of sexuality in the horror film is always presented as perverted, monstrous and excessive; both the perversion and the excess being the logical outcome of repression.’
These ideas were fleshed out in the three part essay ‘An Introduction to the American Horror Film’ (Part I: Repression, The Other, The Monster; Part II: Return of the Repressed; Part III; The Reactionary Wing). This essay was published in The American Nightmare: Essays on the Horror Film, which was edited by Wood and his partner (academically and romantically) Richard Lippe. Wood was one of the first critics to note the overtly conservative nature lurking within the subtext of slasher movies. As a student of film studies, Wood’s enthusiastic writings really captured my imagination, bolstered my love for the critical analysis of horror cinema and fed my passion for film - particularly with the essay mentioned above. For me, An Introduction to the American Horror Film opened up a whole new way in which to view horror films.
After graduating from Cambridge in the early Sixties, Wood became a teacher and began writing articles on film. When he contributed an essay on Hitchcock's Psycho to the highly reputable Cahiers du cinema, Wood began to contribute to film journal Movie. In 1965, after a spell of teaching in England, France and Sweden, Wood published his first book, Hitchcock's Films. This was actually the first book to be published about the filmmaker in English. In the early Seventies he lectured in film in Canada. In 1973, he returned to England and lectured at Warwick University as part of a ground-breaking project set up with the British Film Institute to introduce the concept of film studies to the UK university curriculum. During this time Wood and his wife, teacher Aline Macdonald, divorced. Returning to Canada in 1977 he met and fell in love with Richard Lippe, and became professor of film studies at York University, Toronto where he taught until his retirement in the early 1990s. During his time here, Wood helped form a critical collective involving students and colleagues and published their work in CineACTION!. Wood would often draw on the critical theories of Freud and Marx and he was particularly interested in exploring the psychology behind the motivation of various film characters – especially those in Hitchcock’s films. As an openly gay man in the 70s, Wood’s writings were also frequently political, and he explained his reasons for this in his essay The Responsibilities of a Gay Film Critic. In 2005, Wood said one of his main motives for writing about film was: “To contribute, in however modest a way, to the possibility of social revolution, along lines suggested by radical feminism, Marxism and gay liberation.” His other works focused on filmmakers such as Ingmar Bergman, Claude Chabrol, Michael Antonioni and Arthur Penn. Various other titles include Hollywood from Vietnam to Reagan, Sexual Politics and Narrative Film: Hollywood and Beyond and Rio Bravo (BFI Publishing).
Wood died of leukaemia at the age of 78 and leaves behind his partner Richard Lippe, ex-wife Aline MacDonald, children Carin, Fiona and Simon, and five grandchildren. He had a profound influence on the study of cinema.
'Why should we take Hitchcock seriously? It is a pity the question has to be raised. If the cinema were truly regarded as an autonomous art, not as a mere adjunct of the novel or the drama – if we were able yet to see films instead of mentally reducing them to literature – it would be unnecessary.' Robin Wood. 23 February 1931 – 18 December 2009
Comments
Madelon whilst I don't always agree with the psychoanalytical approach, I do find it fascinating and usually quite provocative. I'm not really familiar with James Twitchell - his idea that all horror narratives somehow deal with incest sounds, erm, interesting! One of the cases when I don't agree with the psychoanalytic approach! Still, I'm sure it inspires healthy debate - which is good.
By the way - I finally read your piece on the joy of Haunted Attractions - great stuff! Hope your studies are going well.
Pax I hope you enjoy reading some of Wood's works - glad I was able to point you in his direction.
Shaun I completely agree - Wood made the horror film academically acceptable in the 1970's. For that, we will all be eternally grateful!
Twitchell has been influential but... interesting, as you put it. Another one of his main ideas includes a description of a typical horror audience and states that 1) women are not supposed to be interested in horror at all, and 2) men are only allowed to enjoy horror for pleasure up to 20 years of age, or thereabouts. After that age, the interest should turn to an academic one; otherwise the man turns into what Twitchell calls a 'rogue male' (a dirty old man, if you will). In the book he literally equates these men to Lolita's Humbert Humbert.
I think that a lot of these approaches to horror, and their usefulness, very much depends on how and what you look at the genre. For my studies, Wood and Clover or Heller and Todorov, who are mainly concerned with literature and the act of reading, are less interesting than Freud and Carroll.
Good to hear you liked the paper! Studies are going well, thanks. I'm preparing for a chapter that deals with (horror) magic(k) and have submitted my piece on The Wizard of Gore to Christine. With a bit of luck, you'll see that appearing soon.
I first read the work some time ago, and did not remember it fondly. Upon rereading, it was still bad. ;)
Then again, opinions on horror fans, even in academia, tend to be rather... odd. Berys Gaut has described the pleasure taken from negative emotions as atypical, thus branding horror fanatics as atypical people. A recent piece by Oliver and Sanders lists a lover of the genre as a male who enjoys thrills/adrenaline rushes, is somewhat rebellious and aggressive, and not particularly empathetic or concerned about the welfare of others.
I think I'd take the dirty old man, if I were you ;)