Happy new year, readers! Now that the long dirgey coda of 2015 is finally over (I thought it would never leave...) and the winter solstice sees the beginning of lighter, longer, warmer, less penury-inclined days ahead we can finally look forward to what 2016 holds in store. And one thing it does hold in store is lots of lots of Horror (and, probably, horror too – but that's a different matter).
March this year sees
the UK release of 'The Witch', another not-particularly-successful
attempt to bring the much contrived tropes of witchcraft to the big
screen. The key ingredients of dark, primitive forests, puritanical
superstitious townsfolk and pagan evil are present and correct. Such
stuff is surely trope-on-a-rope these days. Only recently Vin Diesel
heroically flopped in the abysmal 'The Last Witch Hunter' which was
the latest exploration of the corresponding witchcraft-related trope
– that of the ruthless witchhunter, witchfinder or similar emissary
of righteous justice. Movies and other cultural portrayals of these
confrontations are plentiful. But what, exactly, is this stuff all
about?
In order to edit the
lengthy exposition which starts this discussion it is first necessary
to get out of the way what witches really were – namely, the
predominantly female cultural leaders of village ceremony and healing
that was prevalent in pagan societies before attempts were made by
Christian authorities to violently suppress them. The notion of
witches as hideous crones linked to Satan and evil was a cultural
creation used to justify what amounted to a widespread genocide of
female power and alternative spirituality, and it has since become
embedded in popular culture.
So, moving swiftly on
from that...what is the witch/witch-hunter dynamic really about?
Well, we must first look at what the witch represents in these
stories. The witch is almost always portrayed as female, despite it
being a unisex position (much in the same way that a nurse is
portrayed); she also has a link to the 'wild', often found living in
the forest, controlling the elements or literally riding the wind –
a literal 'force of nature'. Her skills are arcane, occult and
pre-Christian, and her power is portrayed as primitive and
fundamentally sexual: much talk of 'spells' and 'enchantment', either
literally cast or metaphorically cast as sexual attraction. In short,
all sorts of casual misogyny abounds with various allusions to
'original sin', Lilith, women's innate corruptibility and ability to
corrupt, and so on.
The witch hunter
predictably plays a more blunt role in this paradigm. Universally
portrayed as a man ('Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters'
doesn't count), the witch hunter is charged with a dour moralism, a
pious sense of certainty and incorruptible integrity. A man of god,
brave enough to be so over-the-top ruthless and determined that he is
impervious to any charms (physical, spiritual or otherwise) that the
witch may use against him. He is also uniquely violent, allowed as he
is to accuse and torture without any objective proof of guilt and
armed with the judgement of God he is particularly cruel.
The contrast here is
very straightforward: one between a heathen, anarchic, pagan
femininity and a phallocentric, masculine, centralising authority.
The interrogations that the witchfinder undertakes are a sadistic
attempt to break the spiritual, sexual and political independence of
the woman - and furthermore this is something he appears to take
great pleasure in doing. It is a Freudian power dynamic come to life
as much as it is a glib demonstration of a gender essentialism
viewpoint.
But why does it have to
be so? Why can't the witch hunter and the witch come to a better way
of settling their disputes? Does the basis of such tales always have
to remain this way? It is tempting to ask how the dynamic would
change if the witch hunter was female, or how the tale would play out
if the witch hunter was more fallible and the witch less so – maybe
they would fall in love and form a more equal partnership, one based
on recognised uniqueness and mutually respected difference?
Of course, don't expect
much of that at the Cineplex; but still, it's worth considering the
next time you consume this particular piece of cultural candy.