MONSTERS IN AMERICA OUR HISTORICAL OBSESSION WITH THE HIDEOUS AND THE HAUNTING W. Scott Poole BAYLOR UNIVERSITY PRESSOi ean avid interest in my work ‘roject. I would like especially from her own work on nine- this book with me and read vrovides much needed worka- ‘istina Shedlock who created + the book. | look forward to to my goddaughter, Niamh id but has already fallen des- + she will read and enjoy this merging sense of humor, her sr irony, and her already fiery + I should also note that she vho are already teaching her an symbols for religious and ithout my partner Beth Phil- encourage me. She willingly ind making valuable sugges- ly would not always have the she makes both my work and Preface WITH A WARNING TO THE UNSUSPECTING READER Come now, ‘My Child I we were planning To harm you, do you think Weld be lurking here Beside the path Inthe very dark- Est part of The forest? —Kenneth Patchen ntertaining Comics (usually known simply as “EC”, created some of the most subversive images of the 1950s in titles like Tales from the Crypt and Vault of Horror. These macabre tales of mayhem, taking place in the midst of middle-class American life, used the conceit of a host known as the “Crypt Keeper” to introduce the horror and mix in some black humor. Late night showings of horror films on local TV used the same convention. In 1954 the world met Vampira, a campy and seductive woman in black, who introduced each film with a bloodcurdling scream. Here is a favorite introduction to a tale of terror from the Crypt Keeper that seems germane to this book’s purpose: Welcome dear fiends! Come in! Come into the Crypt of Terror! ! am. ‘your host the crypt-keeper ... This one is sure to freeze the blood inPreface / xiv your veins... Guaranteed to make little shivers run up ard down your ‘crawling spine! This little adventure in terror is about to happen to you! You are the main character. Right now, I am your crypt keeper and your Vampira. I am going to introduce you to monsters. I aim to give you unpleasant dreams. Since this isa book about monsters, you probably want to hear how | define the monster. Defining one’s terms, [am sure youhave been told, is essential to any discussion, Setting out on out nighttime journey with a clear meaning of our terms might help us survive the night. A book about monsters should define its monsters, But lam not going to do it. At least, I am not going to give you a Straightforward definition to underline o highlight. I prefer to take you na wild ride through the darkness of the American past, galloping hard and fast like Ichabod Crane (and not making any ill-considered stops like poor Marion Crane) in hopes we can reach the bridge in time. Maybe if we do, we will have worked out our definition of the monster Scholars like clear analytical mandates, that is, direct assertions of text and their historical moment. In American history they have been symbols of deviance, objects of sympathy, and even images of erotic desire. They structured the enslavement of African Americans, con- structed notions of crime and deviance, and provided mental fodder for the culture wars of the contemporary period.! You see why I did not want to give you a definition? Monsters have been manufacturing complex meanings forfour hundred years of ‘American history. They do not mean one thing buta thousand. Only by looking at a multitude of monsters can we come to understand some. thing about them and, in turn, something about American history. This book proposes to examine American history through its monsters. So do not expect neat definitions when it comes toa messy subject like monsters. A monster is a beast of excess, and monster Stories are tales of excess. Part of what makes the horror film so much fun is that. it refuses to follow the: ‘narrative plot of a simple melodrama. It. does not contain conflict and ignore contradictions in order to produce a happy ending, It blows conventions into a million pieces and makes a fetishsrunup and down your is about to happen to Vampira. I am going to pleasant dreams. robably want to hear how sure you have been told, nighttime journey with urvive the night. A book 1 not going to give you a light. I prefer to take you American past, galloping aking any ill-considered reach the bridge in time. efinition of the monster. rat is, direct assertions of ince I hope at least some UW read this book, let me hem a scholarly citation righbone. I buy fully into are “meaning machines,” depending on their con- 1 history they have been id even images of erotic African Americans, con- ovided mental fodder for 1a definition? Monsters ‘or four hundred years of but a thousand. Only by me to understand some- it American history. This ough its monsters. somes to a messy subject and monster stories are film so much fun is that e melodrama. It does not order to produce a happy ieces and makes a fetish Preface / xv out of excess. In this the horror film takes on the nature of its subject and its agent: the monster. “The subject of monsters contains too much meaning. It is the House That Drips Blood and the thing with 20,000 eyes. Itis bigger than it should be, more insatiable than anything in nature; it desires more and frightens you with its yawning monstrous maw. The very messiness of the monster makes it the perfect entry into understanding the messiness of American history. If history were music it would not have the austere balance of a Bach concerto. It would be the opening assault of the Sex Pistols’ “Anarchy in the UK,” angry, discordant, and yawping at you in combative tones. History issues threats as much as it inspires reflection. Some historians will be less than happy with this book. Many of them will note that I spend more time on sea serpents than the Civil ‘War, or that I dash past the American Revolution in my eagerness to talk about the American Enlightenment’s fascination with the home- grown, allegedly carnivorous mastodon. They are right that some events get short shrift and a very different kind of analysis than appears in most historical studies. Obviously a work like this does not aim to deliver the kind of heaping spoonfuls of nuanced historical fact we expect from ‘good textbooks. Asa trained historian, I share these concerns. Even a look at the chapter titles suggests that this author is up to no good. But also worry that the historian’s profession has become deeply problemacic because both a younger and older generation have become profoundly discon- nected from their putative audience and, in a strange way, from theit ‘own topics. Professional historians sometimes see themselves as stu- dents and curators of a master narrative. Amateur readers of history, meanwhile, turn to popularly written books on historical subjects because they offer a damn good yarn and literally nothing else. Neither of these groups sees themselves as enfolded in history, ‘sometimes as its agents and sometimes as its victims. The average reader keeps reading World War II books as if they tell a clear, uncomplicated story. Grad students learn the ropes and take their comprehersive exams and go on to pass the narrative onto their students (or drop the narrative on them like the metaphorical ton of bricks). None of these groups lets history enrage, implicate, and penetrate them. ‘Master narratives are, by definition, lies and untruths. Th we need to study monsters. They are the things hiding in history's dark places, the silences that scream if you listen closely enouga. Cultural critic Greil Marcus writes that “parts of history, because they don't fitPreface / xvi the story a people wants to tell itself, survive only as haunts and fairy tales, accessible only as specters and spooks.” The secrets and the lies, and perhaps most importantly the victims of history, are in those sto- ries of monsters, those dark places waiting to be explored. These places became dark in the first place because they did not fit the historical story ‘we wanted to tell ourselves.* So, am wondering if maybe the movie The Texas Chainsaw Mas- ssacre can explicate issues that a full-scale study of Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal policy cannot. Its lead character, Leatherface, certainly makes an impression, and his house of horrors hasa lotto tell us about the American frontier. lam wondering if Frankenstein’s monster might offer us a new way to grasp the horrors of scientific racism or if Dracula ‘can teach us something about the early twentieth-century Red Scare, 1 do not want to be misunderstood here at the beginning, This is not an effort to use some horrific examples from fentasy literature and film to illustrate important truths about American history. Instead, I am seeking to read the monster as what theorist Slavoj Zitek refers to as “a fantasy scenario that obfuscates the true horcor of the situation.” ‘The monster reifies very real incidents, true horrors, true monsters. This is why they are always complicated and inherently sophisticated. ‘The ‘monster has its tentacles wrapped around the foundations of American history, draws its life from ideological efforts to marginalize the weak and normalize the powerful, to suppress struggles for class, racial, and sexual liberation, to transform the "American Way cf Life” into a weapon of empire.* ‘The reader should also be aware that the author believes in mon- sters. They are real. Before you shut this book and write it off as For- tean propaganda, know that I do not see myself as a poor man’s Mulder from the television show The X-Files, here to tell you that the truth is out there. But before we start talking about “monsters as metaphors,” let's examine that construction a bit and you will see why I would rather just assert my belief in monsters.* “The problem is in the concept of metaphor itself. "My love is like a red, red rose” is metaphorical language expressing a desire to sing the beauty of the beloved (and to get laid by the beloved). But really, who cares? Metaphors can be beautiful, inexact, or just plain silly but, regard- less, nobody takes them seriously. The phrase "just a metaphor” sounds suspiciously to me like “just a waste of time.” Lots of books are out there about monsters as metaphors for this or that social or psychological process. I do not think this approach works ‘well when it comes to history. In American history the monsters areve only as haunts and fairy s” The secrets and the lies, of history, are in those sto- to be explored. These places id not fitthe historical story 2 The Texas Chainsaw Mas- study of Andrew Jackson's acter, Leatherface, certainly ors has lot to tell us about ankenstein’s monster might tific racism or if Dracula atieth-century Red Scare. tte at the beginning, This is from fantasy literature and american history. Instead, 1 eorist Slavoj Zizek refers to ‘ue horror of the situation.” horrors, true monsters. This herently sophisticated. The xe foundations of American ts to marginalize the weak -uggles for class, racial, and 1 Way of Life” into a weapon he author believes in mon- 20k and write it off as For- self as a poor man's Mulder tell you that the truth is out onsters as metaphors,” let's see why I would rather just shor itself. “My love is like a ressing a desire to sing the 1e beloved). But really, who sr just plain silly but, regard- ie “just a metaphor” sounds :ers.as metaphors for this or : think this approach works a history the monsters are Preface / xvii real. The metaphors of the American experience are ideas hardwired to historical action rather than interesting word pictures. If you stick with me on the path, Iwill explain more. Just be forewarned—I take my mon- sters seriously. do not, however, take traditional historical chronologies seriously. Although this book engages in a chronological analysis of a kind, it also ignores some of the basic conventions of historical narrative. We will move back and forth between periods, and listen to voices in the sev- enteenth century and the twentieth century at the same time, generally mucking up any effort to read the American experience asa linear, and thus progressive, march through time. This is because I hope to trace the ways American monsters form a systemic network, or perhaps. cultural echo chamber, rather than something like a time line. Itisalso because I believe that seeing history asa stark glacial forma- tion of dates and facts leads to viewing history as “dead” and definitively “in the past.” This, in turn, can make way for the tendency to monumen- talize those events, to invest them with the immovable power of marble statues. History as memorizable event becomes at once detached from the present and the embodiment ofa profoundly conservative pedagogy, markers of boundaries and parameters that can never be changed. His- tory then becomes dead cultural weight the present must carry on its back rather than living events in conversation and debate. On the other hand, refusing to accept the idea that history is dead things on a time line frees us from the incredibly assertive arrogance of the past, its life- less yet grasping hand. If we do otherwise, we will feel that hand, cold and brutal, holding us tight and not letting us go.* ‘And so we are going to pass a long night together. If you and I make it until morning and find our way out of this dark wood, we will not see ‘American history the same way ever again. Seeing America through its monsters offers a new perspective on old questions. It allows us to look into the shadows, to rifle through those trunks in the attic we have been warned to leave alone. Notall of our myths will make it out of here alive. hope one of the first victims, by the way, isthat loudmouth “Amer- ican exceptionalism.” This unfortunate philosophy has it that America has always been the innocent abroad, the new nation who teaches the world democracy. This sophomoric notion of world histocy since 1776 presents the United States as Little Red Riding Hood, setting off on the forest path of democracy and economic liberalism. A hard look at Amer- n history raises questions about whether the American nation has been the innocent in the woods or that other, more feral figure in the forest (Oh grandma, what hairy arms you haPreface /- xvii So let our midnight ride begin. We will start by figuring out the ‘way monster narratives work and what others have said about them, and hardly catch our breath before we plunge into colonial America’s world ‘of witches and wonders. Creatures of scientific nightmare will haunt us in thenineteenth century as we meet Hawthorne and Poe, two old hands at navigating this eldritch wood. The twentieth century seems to open ‘nt into a new vista, but we only briefly see some sunlight, and we are back in the dark wood again, hiding from escaped mental patients and seeing strange lights in the sky. We will begin to dream of home and yet also wonder if it is all that safe a place after all before we get chased by creatures of the night eager to chew on us and suck us dry. Thope you have snuggled back into your favorite reading chair and assured yourself that the world, or at least your little comer oft, isa safe place. Unfortunately for you, | propose to show you that itis not. You are implicated in a violent history, a historical landscape where monsters walk. Like it or not, you are part of the story, and it is not a romantic ‘comedy or a melodrama. You are the main character in this terror-filled little tale, ‘At about this point, the Crypt Keeper would unloose a demonical laugh, both at the twisted subject matter the audience was about to read and the twisted nature of the audience who wanted to read it. Vampira ‘would give her adolescent audience a bloodcurdling scream to announce that the grisly fun could begin. I cannot pull off that laugh, and in print no one can hear you scream, So, without further ado, let us bring on the night.