Over the past fifteen years, Peter's work in horror and other genres, in the form of short fiction, poetry, criticism, and comics, has appeared in numerous anthologies and periodicals. Current publications:Dark Territories Read by Dawn Volume 3 Diamond BookShelf Withersin
A Web site devoted to horror and children? Who would think of such a thing? Well, Lance Vaughan for one…
A Web site devoted to horror and children? Who would think of such a thing? Well, Lance Vaughan for one. But if you’re into horror, you should probably stay clear of Kindertrauma unless you have several hours to burn. Disturbing art, mind-boggling videos, incisive and knowledgeable reviews, and wildly compelling visitor-supplied “traumafessions”—these are just some of the pleasures that await you. Making connections across diverse media, hosts “Aunt John” and “Uncle Lancifer”—talented writers and artists both—have created one of the most original sites on the genre that I’ve ever come across. What drives them to explore all the twisted back alleys of childhood so relentlessly? We caught up with Lance recently to find out.
Firefox News: One of the things I really like about Kindertrauma is how much ground it covers, all of it interesting. Tell me if this breakdown is off, but Kindertrauma seems to be about things that scared us adults when we were kids as well as scary things happening to kids in movies and kids who are scary in movies. So at the 50,000-feet level, can you tell us how these three areas are connected? Or is there no connection per se, you're just intrigued by them all?
Kindertrauma: Originally our concept was to document people's stories about the first movie that ever really scared them. The answer to this question is always interesting because it's a defining moment in everyone's life, especially in the lives of horror fans who usually spend the rest of their days trying to recreate that original high or conquer that initial feeling. There is a particular level of fear that really only a child can experience due to his or her still rather confused and malleable perception of the world and since we were all once children, it's something we can all identify with.
Once we came up with the name KINDERTRAUMA, though, it just blew up and expanded on its own. We knew there would be downtime between submissions and while working on the visual aspects of the site we naturally began thinking of children's place in the genre itself. They hold a pretty secure roost as both potential victims and rather formidable opponents and we were surprised to find little acknowledgment of that fact. Eventually we realized that what we were talking about expanded far outside the world of film and that the site could encompass far more than we initially planned. So it's actually the name KINDERTRAUMA that dictates our content. Besides the areas you mentioned, anything that involves childhood and fear is potential material.
Young viewers definitely seem to be affected more by films with protagonists in their own age range. At first we questioned if this was just because these were the films that kids were more likely to be exposed to. As soon as we started getting submissions, or even when we would speak to other fans about this project, two titles kept coming up over and over again, POLTERGEIST, particularly the clown doll scene, and the television miniseries IT with Pennywise. Both were easily accessible to kids. But I think the answer lies in CHILD'S PLAY, which also rates very high, an R-rated film that I think younger viewers sought out due to its familiar imagery and young protagonist. The truth is, nowadays kids are pretty much exposed to whatever they want to be, so it comes down to identification. Even in the broader sense, if you take a film that's divisive amongst horror fans like THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, which you either find scary or you don't, it comes down to identification. The idea of being lost is frightening to me, so I find it effective. I empathize with the feelings the characters are going through. But if you're like a lot of people who absolutely don't have that fear, there's nothing there, it just seems silly.
Something I've found fascinating is the prevalence of a sort of "imp" archetype. Films that feature malevolent smaller beings have a particularly tight grasp on young viewers. Some of these feature child protagonists like THE GATE or GREMLINS, but they work equally well and have a similar staying power with an adult lead as in TRILOGY OF TERROR and DON'T BE AFRAID OF THE DARK. My guess is that children are sort of obsessed with size and power issues so they identify regardless, and probably alternately, between the prey and the monster.
I want to return to the issue of identification, but for now I have to follow up on your intriguing reference to archetypes. I'm not sure how many decades back your study of the genre goes, but in terms of how kids are portrayed—either as victims or monsters—would you say there's been any real evolution or progression? Or are we simply dealing with archetypal roles/images/situations that get recycled with minor variations over the years?
I'm a big believer that there's nothing new under the sun. Most of these stories are at heart retellings of a “big bad wolf” [narrative] in one form or another. Having said that, I think the culture's comfort level certainly fluctuates. Where once THE BAD SEED was controversial and taboo breaking, it's rather tame by today's standards. As acceptable as the child killer or child monster has become, I think the child victim grows exceedingly more off-bounds. I would even think the Danielle Harris HALLOWEEN titles would be difficult to pull off today because of that sensitivity. One pretty clear-cut example of these changing mores is the fact that the early ‘70s SESAME STREET show was released on DVD this year with a parental advisory attached. Children have not changed since the '70s, but our perception of the kind of danger they must live with certainly has.
Of course I should point out that THE GIRL NEXT DOOR was made recently, and it's probably the most extreme child endangerment movie you would want to imagine. It's a well-done film that deserves an audience, but I guarantee you the makers had an extremely difficult time with distribution.
THE EXORCIST is a great example that I normally would not think of. Nobody would consciously want to be in Regan's shoes and yet there is a real vicarious thrill to seeing this normally meek and affectionate child curse, blaspheme and throw the adults around like dolls. Children live under a great deal of repression. They are forever being told to stop squirming, to be quiet, to be essentially "good." I think we all know, even as adults, what exhausting work being "good'" can be. In a film like GREMLINS we know who the bad guys are and we know how the film must end, with all the "toys" being put back in their boxes, but the most thrilling scenes for the viewers of any age are the scenes of absolute chaos. The gremlins live out an anarchist fantasy safely.
I can readily recall as a child watching just about every ‘70s disaster film and finding the build up before the fall almost unbearably boring. I was waiting for the crash, for the destruction, for the turmoil. Even the most gentle child knows the pleasure of stomping on a sandcastle after painstakingly building it. The id must be fed but I think if we identify with both hero and villain it can be fed safely and we are able to walk away feeling "good."
As far as recommending a movie that plays with these themes I'd suggest Stuart Gordon's DOLLS which is basically a fairy tale come to life. The "bad" people are punished accordingly and the "good" people are granted a new level of freedom. The dolls, who are ostensibly threatening, actually perform as a kind of morality police. It's also interesting to note the biggest moral crime in the movie is losing your child-like nature.
Thanks for bringing the id into this conversation. One early psychoanalytic theory that comes to mind after hearing you talk about kids indulging their destructive tendencies is the idea that young children believe their wishes have real power. This is a source of both consolation and guilt for them. If mommy gets sick, they recall earlier thinking, "I wish mommy would just go away/die/etc." The greatest dramatization of this principle is perhaps the old Billy Mumy Twilight Zone episode "It's a Good Life," but you also see it at work in The Omen and in various films that feature young people with psychic powers, from Village of the Damned to Carrie. So here's my question: when we thrill to these movies as adults—meaning we identify psychologically on some level with such characters—do you think we're "regressing"? Or do you think that the appeal of such fantasies proves that we never really leave psychic mechanisms like these behind, that they’re always latent until dreams or movies allow us to experience them fully again?
To me, adults are just children who have been around longer. But I'm probably not the best example of someone who has shelved their childhood, hence the site. The biggest difference between adults and children besides the obvious, is that adults cling tight to their critical brain in order to feel empowered and important. As a child when you watch a movie, you take it as gospel. I think the first time you think to yourself, "Hey, that couldn't happen!" or "I see the wires!" it may make you feel safe, but you've also just lost something. Many people, when they return to films that scared them as kids are disappointed and that's why.
I still think adults have the same empowerment dilemmas, but they can act them out in life by buying cars, firing people and having affairs. Children are limited in that respect and I think that movies provide the perfect arena for them. Adults who are able to turn off the world and enter that child-like stance of blind acceptance while watching a film are a lucky lot. So I guess what I'm saying is, I don't think of it as regression when we're in touch with our darker instincts and fantasies from childhood. I think it reveals a deeper level of self-knowledge and even though the name and shape of the ogre may have changed, it's in some fashion still the same ogre. I hope the day never comes when I'm so adult or secure in my own skin that I can't feel the rush of adrenaline I always get whenever I watch CARRIE take her classmates to task.
Very nicely put. Looking at things that way, in fact, one can make the case that all horror films are in some way about childhood—even those that don't have kids in them. I guess a better question is, do you see the supposed ill effects of the genre (remember, horror films were just banned in China) as not really related to their content, but rather to our self-awareness, or lack thereof, about what we're experiencing as audiences? That is, when you get that rush from watching Carrie, does it make all the difference that you know some personal issues are being played out on a symbolic level—is that what keeps someone like you or me from becoming the madman who goes out there and does mow down his classmates for real? God knows there's a lot of that out there, and the killer's movie preferences always seem to make the papers as if evidence of some cultural truth.
I think horror movies are healthy. I think to be complete, well-adjusted people we have to include our darker instincts and our shadow self in the equation. I'm really skeptical when after a mentally ill person is apprehended that his or her possession of a horror film is cited as a negative influence. I'd be curious to know what their entire DVD library consists of. Is there a copy of A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN in their collection as well? Do they also own the first season of FRIENDS? If so, why are they not held responsible as well?
In all seriousness, I think it's passing the buck and another example of being unaccountable as a society. The Columbine kids may have played DOOM but the reality is: if they were not treated inhumanly by their classmates; if their parents were more involved in their lives; if the administration at the school was more active; and if they were not given anti-depressants that are proven to have adverse side effects that include homicidal ideation, there probably would have been a different outcome. The possession of a horror film or violent video game may just signify the fact that they were working through these issues but sadly failed.
We received an account from a reader who was raised in an abusive family. For her the film HALLOWEEN was an inspiration to survive her living situation. I don't think non-horror fans realize the depth of empathy and even love that horror fans feel toward the heroes and heroines in these stories. Michael Myers's mug may appear on the T-shirt but Laurie Strode is our Joan of Arc. Horror movies are art and art is always healthy.
Words to live by. In fact, they could almost be a mission statement for the site. Speaking of which, what can horror fans expect to see from Kindertrauma in the future? Or from you and John as individual writers and artists?
I'm excited about what's ahead for Kindertrauma, but I couldn't really venture a guess as to what that might be. We're happy allowing the readers and contributors to steer the boat. We could have never predicted the responses that we've gotten thus far and the side tangents they've inspired. We're going to keep filing in the review index and chronicling kids in horror, but the great thing is that we have no idea what we'll find in our mailbox each morning. As far as outside projects go, they'll just have to take a back seat for now. I feel as though we've hit a real nerve here and our focus is to continue to give people a forum to vent and tell their stories. The truth is we're both just too engrossed with these trauma tales to look anywhere else.