Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rsau20

Download by: [Concordia University Libraries] Date: 16 September 2017, At: 12:07

Studies in Australasian Cinema

ISSN: 1750-3175 (Print) 1750-3183 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsau20

Australian eco-horror and Gaia's revenge: animals,eco-nationalism and the ‘new nature’

Catherine Simpson

To cite this article: Catherine Simpson (2010) Australian eco-horror and Gaia's revenge: animals,eco-nationalism and the ‘new nature’, Studies in Australasian Cinema, 4:1, 43-54

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/sac.4.1.43_1

Published online: 03 Jan 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 190

View related articles

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

43

SAC 4 (1) pp. 43–54 Intellect Limited 2010

Studies in Australasian Cinema Volume 4 Number 1

© 2010 Intellect Ltd Article. English language. doi: 10.1386/sac.4.1.43_1

KEYWORDS

Australian cinema/filmanimal agencyeco-horroreco-postcolonialnew nature Ecological humanities

CATHERINE SIMPSONMacquarie University

Australian eco-horror and

Gaia’s revenge: animals,

eco-nationalism and the

‘new nature’

ABSTRACT

We hear so much about extinction in debates around climate change. But what about those animals that go feral and then return – bigger, hungrier and angrier – to wreak revenge on humans who may have done them injustice? Using an eco-postcolonial framework, this article examines how a number of exploitation horror films have dealt with environmental topics and issues of trespass. In particular, I examine the agency of animals – crocs, pigs, thylacines and marsupial werewolves – in some key Australian eco-horror films from the last 30 years: Long Weekend (Eggleston, 1978), Razorback (Mulcahy, 1984), Dark Age (Nicholson, 1987), Howling III: the Marsupials (Mora, 1987), Rogue (Greg McLean, 2007), Black Water (Nerlich & Traucki, 2007) and Dying Breed (Dwyer 2008). On the one hand, these films extend postcolonial anxieties over settler Australian notions of belonging, while on the other, they signify a cultural shift. The animals portrayed have an uncanny knack of adapting and hybridizing in order to survive, and thus they (the films and the animals) force us to acknowledge more culturally plural forms of being. In particular, these films unwittingly emphasize what Tim Low has termed the ‘new Nature’: an emerging ethic that foregrounds the complex and dynamic interrelation-ships of animals with humans.

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 43SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 43 11/26/10 1:42:13 PM11/26/10 1:42:13 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Catherine Simpson

44

1. Thanks to Fincina Hopgood for this comment at the Bad Cinema Conference (Monash University, April 2009). My gratitude to Mark Ryan, Grisha Dolgopolov, Anthony Lambert and the two reviewers for their useful feedback. I have also drawn much inspiration from my 2009 Honours cohort’s provocative engagement with the new seminar Eco-Interventions: the cultures of climate change, as well as from postgrads, Emily Bullock and Kate Wright. Thanks also to ecologist Ian Wright.

Animals were exploiting us a long time ago. (Low 2003: 7)

[C]ontemporary interest in the environment is based on highly medi-ated representation of its most appealing aspects and today’s symbolism is drawn from popular culture.

(Bagust 2001: 5)

‘If it moves shoot it; if it doesn’t, mine it, or chop it down’. Such was the pre-vailing mantra towards nature in Australia throughout the twentieth century and beyond (Bird Rose 2005). But alongside attempts to utterly dominate lies a land that so often refuses to succumb, and many have become its unwitting victims. In Australian film texts, nature is resilient and at times even venge-ful towards those who do not treat it with respect. This is explicitly portrayed in the recently re-made horror flick Long Weekend (Eggleston, 1978; Blanks, 2008) that concerns a young couple who go on a camping trip to save their rocky marriage and ‘sin against nature’ by mindlessly killing animals and cut-ting down trees and then pay the ultimate price and become nature’s prey. On a broader level, Long Weekend reinforces humankind’s ethical responsi-bility towards the ‘more-than-human world’ (Abram 1996). In her book The Ecological Crisis of Reason, eco-philosopher Val Plumwood argues that ‘our failure to situate dominant forms of human society ecologically is matched by our failure to situate non-humans ethically, as the plight of non-humans continues to worsen’ (Plumwood 2002a: 2).

With its marauding eagles that cause fatal car accidents and the haunting, anguished cries of an orphaned baby dugong, there is a strong sense in Long Weekend that Gaia – or mother-nature, mother-earth – is returning to haunt us for past wrongdoings. James Lovelock’s book The Revenge of Gaia (2007) looks at the earth as a dynamic, living organism, as a ‘self-regulating evolv-ing system’ in which everything is interrelated. Lovelock’s thesis is that the world is ‘so morbidly ill that it will pass into a fever that will last for 100,000 years’. In his most recent work, The Vanishing Face of Gaia (2009), amongst many of his catastrophic predictions that living in a much hotter world that has already progressed past tipping point might produce, Lovelock discusses species extinction. A recent study (Brown 2004 cited in Bird Rose 2004: 35) has predicted that by 2050 one-quarter to one-third of all species of land ani-mals and plants will be extinct. The rate of extinction is so destructive that the twenty-first century might be known as ‘the age of loneliness’ (E. O. Wilson cited in Bird Rose 2004: 35). According to biologist Tim Low, Australia has one of the worst records in the world on extinction (Low 2003: 33). This evi-dent ‘animal holocaust’, as Plumwood (2002a) has put it, is indeed a pressing issue that needs further exploration on the social and cultural, rather than just the scientific, front. However in this article I am more interested in the resil-ience of animals. It focuses on a form of eco-horror and the ways in which this exploitation genre manages to smuggle in social issues.1

In his most recent book (2009), Lovelock, countering Charles Darwin, argues that living organisms do not always passively adapt to their surround-ings, but often go out of their way to change their environments to suit their requirements.

Despite the preponderance of animals in Australian cinema, little work has been done on their role or function, with the exception of Deb Verhoeven’s notable Sheep and the Australian Cinema (2006) and Helena Forscher’s

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 44SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 44 11/19/10 4:08:04 PM11/19/10 4:08:04 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Australian eco-horror and Gaia’s revenge

45

2. Evidently it is not only limited to the horror film genre in which these hybrids emerge. Think also of Babe: the Gallant Sheep Pig (Chris Noonan, 1995). As Verhoeven (2004: 63) has argued, in order to avoid being delivered to the dinner table Babe has to use compromise, flexibility and survival and learn ‘how to think like a sheep and act like a sheep dog’.

exemplary Ph.D. thesis Animals in the Landscape (2008). Rather than an extended textual analysis, this article focuses on moments in a series of key films: Razorback (Mulcahy, 1984), Dark Age (Nicholson, 1987), Rogue (McLean, 2007), Howling III: the Marsupials (Mora, 1987) and Dying Breed (Dwyer 2008). Using what I call an eco-postcolonial framework, I argue that, first, in their attitudes to foreigners, tourists and/or trespassers as ‘prey’, these films extend postcolonial anxieties over settler Australian notions of belonging. In the sec-ond section, drawing on the work of Val Plumwood, I argue that the existence of large predators like the crocodile challenges the notion of human mastery over nature. Using Razorback, Howling III and Dying Breed, the final section discusses what Low has termed the ‘new nature’: a cultural shift whereby ani-mals have an uncanny knack of adapting and hybridizing in order to survive and sometimes even thrive. As such, they (the films and the animals) force us to acknowledge more culturally plural forms of being.2 All the films discussed exploit ‘nationalist’ discourses (Laseur 1992: 367), particularly in relation to their attitude towards territory and trespass, natives and non-natives. Many were released long before climate change emerged as, according to Monbiot (2006: 15), the biggest global issue. This indicates that they do not raise new issues, but rather extend old discourses about human-caused environmental destruction. Their mainstream topicality is the product of urgency surround-ing climate change.

Trespass: foreign prey and fair game; natives and non-natives

Before we can interpret the agency of animals in Australian horror films, we need to first understand how animals are situated in terms of Australian nationhood. Tim Flannery (1994: 390) has claimed that, ‘any lasting notion of Australian nationhood must arise from an intimate understanding of Australian eco-systems’. And Franklin (2006) has argued in his book Animal Nation that animals are a rich symbolic source and can tell us much about the nature of identity, belonging and nationhood. In the Australian context animals occupy an enigmatic position that goes right to the heart of Australian national values (Franklin 1994). On the one hand they are perceived as part and parcel of the mystique and agency of a landscape that has not been tamed like the cultured gardens of Britain or continental Europe. On the other, the animals are seen as victims of colonial enterprise.

Like Australian culture(s), fauna in Australia has never been stable, but rather continually changing and dynamic. Franklin says that in Australia, ‘settler society was unsettled by nature generally, but especially the fauna, and set about not only the introduction of domestic farm and household species in the familiar colonial manner but also of wild animals that were more aesthetically pleasing’ (Franklin 2006: 15), such as those animals that could be hunted like the wild boar in the Northern Territory or those that could be fished, such as the trout in Tasmania, which were more favoured than the prolific but less valued carp. ‘Professional shooters worked their way through country shooting out the wildlife much as the forests were clear-felled’ (Franklin 2006: 15). On the other hand, Low has also studied the way in which both rare native species and introduced animals often thrive in environments where we would not expect them to be, such as cities, so much so that ‘our image of nature may need refining’ (Low 2003: 33).

But what about Australia’s much prized, so-called native animals? The argument about maintaining and promoting the so-called purity of ‘native annimals’, Franklin argues, is problematic because it draws on what he

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 45SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 45 11/19/10 4:08:04 PM11/19/10 4:08:04 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Catherine Simpson

46

3. In addition, the recently re-released film Wake in Fright also contains a much-maligned real-life kangaroo sequence.

terms eco-nationalist logic. For in parallel with Australia’s assimilation poli-cies (such as the White Australia policy) to ensure national purity, the nation also undertook aggressive species-cleansing policies to maintain the native flora and fauna, using a very similar logic. The fear and threat of outsiders did not only relate to ‘other’ people. As Hage (1998: 169) has argued, ‘the ecological fantasy is part of the nationalist fantasy and vice versa’. For exam-ple, Australia’s so-called native dog, the dingo, is known to have originated in Asia but has been ‘caught up in the symbolic politics of belonging’ per-haps because it was here before 1788, the beginning of colonization, and is an aboriginal totemic ancestor (Franklin 2006: 15). This is nowhere more evi-dent than in the film Evil Angels (Schepisi, 1988) based on the famous Lindy Chamberlain case where the central debate concerned whether a dingo was capable, or not, of attacking a baby. Despite the claims of Indigenous locals that a dingo could indeed take a young baby, Chamberlain was con-victed, and then later acquitted. Or take the brumby – when the New South Wales Parks and Wildlife were reported in the media shooting brumbies there was an outcry because the brumbies were ‘inscribed on Australian popular memory, culture and history […] in the unfolding of the Australian nation’ (Franklin 2006: 21), something that, particularly for the generation of Australians that grew up in the 1980s, was captured and cemented in popu-lar imagination through the Man From Snowy River and its sequel (Miller, 1986; 1988). So what we have here is a hierarchy of attachment to specific animals that cannot be claimed to have necessarily originated in Australia, which in turn complicates what constitutes the notion of a ‘native animal’ in the first place.

So-called ‘native’ animals like the kangaroo hold a particularly ambivalent position in Australian culture. In one context, there is a strong attachment to the kangaroo as a national icon and exemplar of unique fauna. The successful nature documentary Kangaroo – Faces in the Mob (Aldenhoven and Carruthers, 1992) did much to cement the furry and loveable reputation of this animal through following a ‘mob’ of kangaroos for a year and tracing their socia-ble living habits. In the 1980s Professor Gordon Grigg championed ‘eating skippy’ as a solution to ‘the plight of the continent’s devastated ecologies’ (Craw 2008: 82). In addition, it was seen as a nationalistic activity: ‘an authen-tically Aussie cuisine’ (Craw 2008: 82). In yet another instance, a fact that Razorback (Mulcahy) exploits for its premise, kangaroos are cruelly hunted and used as a source of pet food.3

In Razorback an American journalist and animal rights activist, Beth, is vio-lently killed by a giant rampaging pig, a razorback, while reporting on the barbarity of the nascent kangaroo pet-food industry. Razorback’s pigs have morphed into monsters that exist in a sinister symbiotic relationship with the workers at the Pet-pak factory whose livelihood depends on the slaughter of kangaroos (O’Regan 1996). The majority of the film concerns the quest of Beth’s husband, Carl, who ventures to outback Australia to avenge the death of his wife at the hands of the razorback and the deviant Pet-pak workers who have played a part in propagating the beast.

Curiously this is not the only film in which American women suffer at the hands of the local flora and fauna and are sacrificed in the landscape (Lambert 2009: 63). At the end of Dallas Doll, the manipulative American central char-acter, Dallas, (played by Sandra Bernhardt) is trampled to death by a flock of rampaging sheep. In Ray Lawrence’s thriller Lantana (2001), the audience is led to believe that the American writer and academic has been opportunistically

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 46SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 46 11/19/10 4:08:04 PM11/19/10 4:08:04 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Australian eco-horror and Gaia’s revenge

47

4. Interestingly, in both films an indigenous presence is marked by indigenous music (non-diegetic in the case of Japanese Story and diegetic in the case of Rogue) that can be heard at the beginning of both films.

murdered, but it turns out her death is accidental, or rather, nature’s fault; she has tripped on the lantana weed and fallen to her death down a rocky harbour outcrop. In Crocodile Dundee (Faiman, 1986) journalist Sue Charlton (Linda Kozlowski) only just escapes the jaws of a giant croc. In the more recent Rogue and Black Water the giant crocs kill and maim extensively and indiscriminately, American and UK tourists alike as well as Australian locals, theories for which I return to in more detail below.

On the one hand, these deaths of Americans can be read simply as more ‘invasion scenarios’ (Morris 2002): foreign imperialists getting their just des-serts from meddling in another nation’s business. On the other hand, per-haps they also show that these foreigners and tourists are unable to know, understand and read the land and the things in it. This is a hostile land that forges a particular type of Australian: a laconic, laidback and tough character who is often able to survive despite the odds. The sacrifice of the tourist in the landscape enables the Australian locals to perform the role of the ‘know-ing guides’ in the films, to claim a greater sense of belonging, if only through ‘knowing’ about the dangers in the landscape that they have to take care in (Simpson 2006).

An interesting comparison occurs in Japanese Story (Brooks, 2003), where the geologist Sandy (Toni Collette) and her Japanese companion, Hiromitsu (Gotaro Tsunashima) get bogged out in the bush after they have trespassed on Indigenous land without permission (at Hiromitsu’s urging). Sandy per-forms the role of the knowing guide who predicts much of the looming trou-ble, with her comments about people ‘dying out in the bush all the time. Lots of people!’ Hiromitsu eventually falls victim to the consequences of cultural trespass that they both commit. In an extraordinary scene two-thirds into that film, Hiromitsu, unaware of the dangers lurking below the surface, is instantly killed after diving into a gorge, thus realizing Sandy’s fears about the threatening landscape (Simpson 2006).

Much like the post-Mabo consciousness (Collins and Davis 2004) that marks Japanese Story where the Japanese tourist Hiromitsu pays with his life for trespassing on Indigenous land without permission, the tourists in David McLean’s Rogue, as the female tour leader Kate (Radha Mitchell) tells us, have also trespassed onto an Indigenous-controlled waterway: ‘We’re really not supposed to go through here – this is sacred land’. After their boat is bumped and damaged by a giant crocodile they are stuck on an island in a mangrove swamp deep in Arnhem Land. With the rising tide, they finally get trapped by the lure of the rogue crocodile that is tagging his prey one by one. Earlier in their tour, Kate informs the tourists that crocodiles ‘watch their prey and learn their habits’. In both Japanese Story and Rogue Indigenous people are displaced and the issue of ownership and protocol is realized through the expertise of the white woman guide and not directly represented by an Indigenous person.4 Rogue, Razorback as well as Lantana and Japanese Story in one way or another, as with many of the films I discuss below, depict a failure to read the signs, and pay attention to them, leading to eventual death, ‘out there’ in the land.

Rogue’s eco-postcolonial framework is made manifest through the issue of double trespass, both cultural and ecological. We are repeatedly told in the film that not only is this Indigenous land, but it is also the ‘crocodile’s terri-tory’. Through the process of granting agency to the more-than-human other, like much eco-horror, the terrifying crocodiles in Rogue, Black Water and Dark Age undermine the notion of human supremacy over nature.

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 47SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 47 11/26/10 1:43:23 PM11/26/10 1:43:23 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Catherine Simpson

48

5. This film, while released in the United States in the 1980s, has never been released in Australia. Dark Age came to prominence as a result of Quentin Tarantino’s fascination with it in Mark Hartley’s Not Quite Hollywood (2008).

Crocodile territory and eco-terror

Home to the widest variety of dangerous species of animals and insects in the world, including ten of the most venomous snakes and four of the top six animals categorised globally as ‘most dangerous’– viz: the Great White Shark (No. 6), the Box Jellyfish (No.5), the Saltwater Crocodile (No.4) and the Funnel Web Spider (No.2) (Animals & Wildlife, 2006) – Australia has no shortage of indigenous animal subjects to demonise.

(Forscher 2008: 210)

The crocodile has been called ‘the archetypal sum of mankind’s fears’ (Carroll 2001). Giblett claims that the crocodile has been playing the role as an ‘orally sadistic monster’ for a long time, but of course, ‘only since humans appeared on the earth long after it’ (Giblett 2006: 300). In his article ‘Alligators, Crocodiles and the Monstrous Uncanny’, he argues that through the human projection of fears and fascination onto these more-than-human others, the crocodile becomes a manifestation of Freud’s ‘uncanny’ (Giblett 2006: 300). However, there are also stories of humans and crocodiles coexisting in rela-tive peace and harmony, such as those locals in Port Douglas, related by Kate Rossmanith: ‘When Christopher Skase purchased […] the Mirage Resort, he could never have known that 20 years later there’d be crocodiles living at the 11th hole of the golf course. Visitors play the shot quickly’ (Rossmanith 2007). In the following section I resist the anthropocentric temptation of an engage-ment with animals on a purely psychoanalytic level, and explore the eco-post-colonial terrain that these films might provoke.

A broader notion of Gaia’s revenge and interconnected ecologies comes to the fore in Black Water. Prior to a crocodile terrorizing a young couple and their niece on a fishing trip we are told en route to a crocodile farm that the crocs there are bred for tourism and then harvested at 18–24 months – ‘the optimum time for the handbag market’. While not the direct actions of the characters themselves, like in Long Weekend, the tourists in Black Water evidently belong to a broader anthropocentric culture of animal exploitation and commodification. When Grace’s (Diana Glenn) boyfriend Adam (Andy Rodoreda) is taken by the crocodile, her anguished cries echo throughout the mangrove swamp and the camera cuts to close-ups of nature’s minutiae – bees buzzing, ants crawling – as if to signal that this is the ‘natural’ cycle of life where the predator becomes prey in the crocodile’s domain. In fact, this scene echoes many of those in the much earlier Long Weekend. However, in the context of Long Weekend it is Gaia mourning one of her losses as a result of some mindless human desecration carried out by the campers, rather than the human-centred mourning in Black Water. As Plumwood claims, who was herself a survivor of a vicious crocodile attack, ‘The idea of human prey threatens the dualistic vision of human mastery in which we humans manipulate nature from outside, as predators but never prey’ and in this way the eco-horror genre itself reflects a ‘deep-seated dread of becoming food for other forms of life […] Horror and outrage usually greet sto-ries of other species eating humans. Even being nibbled by leeches, sandflies, and mosquitoes can stir various levels of hysteria’ (Plumwood 2002b).

Without exploiting tourists as easy prey, a much earlier rampaging croco-dile thriller, Dark Age, seems to be hinting towards a more complex relation-ship with these non-humans.5 Set somewhere in the Northern Territory, a local park ranger and two tour guides are given the task of managing a giant

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 48SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 48 11/18/10 3:01:09 PM11/18/10 3:01:09 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Australian eco-horror and Gaia’s revenge

49

6. In his article ‘Alligators, Crocodiles and the Monstrous Uncanny’, Giblett (2006: 299) claims that while most stories construct the crocodile as a predator, they are more precisely scavengers.

saltwater crocodile that has been attacking and killing the locals (Carroll 2001). However, the ranger (John Jarratt) finds himself at odds with the crocodile ‘guardians’, the local Indigenous population, who believe the crocodile is a totemic figure in which the spirits of their ancestors have manifested, and want this beast preserved, even after it has taken one of their own. After the giant crocodile attacks and kills a little boy, the ranger and some bounty hunt-ers are ordered to seek out and destroy the beast. The Indigenous people want the crocodile transported to a safe secluded place where it can live peacefully. The ranger seeks to collaborate with the Indigenous people to respect their wishes, and tries to protect the local residents threatened by the crocodile.

On the one hand, the existence of ‘large predators’ such as crocodiles can be read as a sign of a country’s inhabitants’ acceptance of their ecological integrity and identity: ‘When they’re allowed to live freely, these creatures indicate our preparedness to coexist with the otherness of the earth, and to recognize ourselves in mutual, ecological terms, as part of the food chain, eaten as well as eater’ (Plumwood 2002b). The existence of the rogue crocs in Dark Age, Rogue and Black Water, along with their resilience to the attacks of many humans, may in the first instance reflect a level of ecological coexistence with this large predator.6 However, in Rogue and Black Water the crocs eventu-ally have to pay for their sin of taking human lives, and they meet grisly fates with drawn-out violent deaths. In the context of the films discussed thus far, and from the perspective of ecological integrity, some of us might have to be mercilessly sacrificed, but there are, evidently, more points for tourists, and especially Americans. Ultimately, on a broader level, they illustrate the resil-ience of Gaia: the land and everything in it.

In the next section I deal with thylacines, marsupial werewolves and razor-backs. These animals are hybrid species, mixtures of the ‘native’ and ‘non-native’ that have dynamically morphed, adapted, become bigger and better and thoroughly thrived in the Australian environment, thanks often to their human accomplices. What these films unwittingly emphasize is what Low has termed the ‘New Nature’: an emerging ethic that foregrounds, amongst other things, the complex dynamic of animals’ interrelationships with humans.

THE ‘NEW NATURE’ AND THE MORE-THAN-HUMAN

Morris argues that many films from the 1970s and 1980s feature bizarre, apoc-alyptic invasion-scenarios and also seem particularly fascinated with ‘breed-ing’ and ‘degeneracy’ (Morris 1998). While not all the films that I look at in this section are from this period, both breeding and degeneracy nevertheless do come to the fore, particularly in the first film I examine, Razorback.

Like Howling III, Razorback is a parody of the horror genre. In addition to Carl avenging his American wife’s rape by the ruthless Pet-pak brothers, who then leave her for dead with knowledge that the razorback is on its way to finish her off, the other central narrative thread concerns the fate of Jake. Jake has been charged with the murder of his grandson, even though at the begin-ning of the film we witness the baby boy’s cot being rampaged by the vicious razorback. The prosecution’s case rests on the testimony of the two sinister and conniving Pet-pak brothers Dicko and Benny. Through their comments about the razorback as a, ‘shy and cunning beast […] a kind of cowardly bas-tard’ and easily scared off by ‘a good boo!’, they question the possible agency of the animal in killing or maiming anything. Jake on the other hand, main-tains that ‘God and the devil couldn’t have created a more despicable species’

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 49SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 49 11/18/10 3:01:10 PM11/18/10 3:01:10 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Catherine Simpson

50

and that ‘it has two states of being – dangerous or dead’. The brothers from the outset are symbols of bestial degeneracy. They mercilessly leave half-killed kangaroos to suffer and have perfected an evil pig-snorting squeal to boot. As such, the film hints at a ‘secret depravity’ (Rayner 2000: 29), and the brothers’ symbiotic relationship with the feral pigs themselves recalls Low’s comment that ‘animals will exploit the opportunities that we provide’.

Helen Forscher claims that, ‘analysis of the horror genre foregrounds the nexus between Australian identity, assimilation and metamorphosis into animality. The feral/Indigenous dichotomy is identified as a key trope in Australian representation and the portrayal of particular modes of human–animal relationships are seen to function as indicators of deviance in charac-terization’ (Forscher 2008: 5). While this applies directly to Razorback, there seems to be something much more than just deviance in characterization that is happening in Phillipe Mora’s classic, Howling III: the Marsupials as well as Jodi Dwyer’s Dying Breed.

The ‘extinct’ thylacine is another ‘native’ animal that haunts many recent cultural texts about Tasmania (Bullock 2009, Forthcoming). Bullock (2009) argues that the thylacine constitutes an important element of what she terms Tasmanian gothic, and the ‘sightings’ or attempts to bring it back to life through cloning are attempts to ‘assuage our collective guilt over the envi-ronmental degradation of the past 200 years’ (Bagust 2001: 5). In his article about the rather controversial attempts to clone the thylacine at the Australian National Museum, Bagust argues that one of the primary reasons why the thylacine remains such a pervasive influence in the popular imagination is the existence of the famous short film footage Benjamin (Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife service, 2000) made about the last thylacine in Tasmania in 1933 who died a few years later in captivity in 1936. As he paces his cage, the ghostly anguished presence of the soon-to-be-extinct Benjamin belies the animal’s status as a predatory carnivorous marsupial. While there are frequent so-called ‘sightings’ of the thylacine in Tasmania, ‘for the majority of “experts” the thylacine is gone forever’, as Bagust (2001: 2) claims: ‘a tragic exemplar of the price nature has paid in the creation of our global industrial society’.

In the recent horror film Dying Breed, the thylacine is not extinct, and still exists in a remote Tasmanian wilderness area. The thylacine’s existence has been supported by the small island-village of Sarah, whose sinister and paro-chial inhabitants recall those of another horror film, Peter Weir’s (1974) The Cars that Ate Paris. In much the same way that the residents of Paris exploit the bodies and remnants of car accident victims to keep the town alive, the country town locals in Dying Breed rightfully consider anyone who enters their territory as an opportunity to be exploited. They literally feed off tourists who venture into their town looking for the elusive thylacine. The residents of Sarah Island are the descendants of Alexander ‘the Pieman’ Pearce, the infamous, escaped convict who existed in the harsh Tasmanian wilderness in the 1820s by devouring his companions. Pearce was re-captured and hanged in 1824 after he was found with human flesh in his pockets. Evidently the thylacine and the Sarah Island community ‘need to stay hidden to survive’ as one of the locals puts it, but both species also need fresh ‘stock’ to reproduce, and naïve tourists who wander into their domain are there for the taking/eating/raping. While the narrative link is only hinted at, rather than explicitly portrayed, the thylacine has evidently managed to survive due to its symbiotic relationship with the residents who leave the remains of their victims for the carnivorous thylacine to devour.

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 50SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 50 11/18/10 3:01:10 PM11/18/10 3:01:10 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Australian eco-horror and Gaia’s revenge

51

The film’s primary focus is on the main descendant of Alexander Pearce who inhabits the lush but brooding remote wilderness around the town and picks off the central protagonists, a group of four campers, one of whom, the zoologist Nina, is intent on finding both evidence of the thylacine’s existence and how her sister died in the village eight years before. When the campers become perilously lost downriver, deep in Pearce-country, they catch sight of one of the Sarah Island inhabitants watching them from a distant dam wall. Nina’s boyfriend, Jack, justifies why they should ask for directions: ‘it’s their territory, they know their way around’, thus reinforcing the campers’ outsider status. In the final few moments of the film, just before Jack is (we are led to assume) devoured, Pearce’s great-grandson justifies his actions by lamenting, ‘you tourists have no tradition’. The notion of trespass remains at the centre of many of these films, whereby outsiders, or foreigners all ‘deserve’ what they get for committing eco-cultural trespass; whether they are the tourists who stumble into the crocodile’s territory in Rogue and Black Water, or the ones in Razorback, The Cars that Are Paris or Japanese Story, or the unfortunate campers in Dying Breed. Meanwhile, provided they have lived in the area long enough to be able to ‘read’ its signs, and understand its dangers and mythology, local white settler Australians can claim a greater sense of belonging.

The tone of Howling III is more comedy-horror in line with Razorback than the horrifying-horror of Dying Breed. The film is a spoof of the earlier Howling films and revolves around a strange species of marsupial werewolves, or rather were-thylacines – produced from the coupling of humans with thylacines. ‘Could this be a combination far too dangerous for the world to see?’ the DVD cover proclaims. However, when the anthropologist Professor Harry Beckmayer (Barry Otto) witnesses the birth of the central character, Jeboa’s were-thylacine baby, he is awestruck: ‘a marsupial human that has evolved in secrecy, simultaneously with our own species’. Like the thylacine and the inhabitants of Sarah Island in Dying Breed, the were-thylacines continue to exist as an isolated community in the remote Australian bush as well as in Siberia. Beckmayer’s liberal attitude towards cross-species coupling has a ‘touch’ of the Donna Harraway about it, and echoes Low’s notion of emerg-ing interrelationships between animals and humans:

[…] the cyborg appears in myth precisely where the boundary between human and animal is transgressed. Far from signaling a walling off of people from other living beings, cyborgs signal disturbingly and pleasurably tight coupling. Bestiality has a new status in this cycle of marriage exchange.

(Harraway 1991: 152)

Like the Indigenous crocodile guardians in Dark Age, Beckmayer believes the were-thylacines should be regarded as an endangered species that are in need of protection, while others deem them evil deviants because of the havoc they create when provoked. Another central narrative thread concerns Olga, a ballerina but more importantly, a Russian-Siberian relative of the endan-gered were-thylacine species who has defected to Australia. When there is a manhunt for the were-thylacine community, Olga justifies were-thylacine aggression towards humans on the grounds that, ‘We kill to protect ourselves. You’ve been killing us for thousands of years – what choice do we have? We are human like you!’ As Forscher argues, unlike most werewolf scenarios, through Howling III’s emphasis on Jeboa’s voracious sexual appetite, it is her

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 51SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 51 11/18/10 3:01:10 PM11/18/10 3:01:10 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Catherine Simpson

52

animality, rather than her deviant monstrosity, that is foregrounded. During the post-coital coupling between Jeboa and the American film-maker Donny, it is more loving fascination than horror when he discovers for the first time that Jeboa has a pouch. The other romantic coupling, or species transgres-sion, in the film involves Beckmayer, who falls in love with the beautiful asy-lum-seeking ballerina Olga. At the end of the film we see these two couples existing happily, as well as evidence of offspring carrying the were-thylacine gene with the trademark tiger lines. As a result the film becomes, as Forscher mentions, more an allegory about social justice, and I might add here, ‘an interspecies ethics’ that can be read as a demand to extend a notion of justice to all those more-than-human others who may indeed be dangerous when provoked but nevertheless have the right to exist. However, it must be noted that filmically bringing the thylacine back to life as a hybrid were-thylacine in Howling III, and its brief but eerie appearance in Dying Breed, signals, as Bullock (2009, Forthcoming) has argued, attempts to assuage our guilt over collective human environmental destruction, which originally resulted in the thylacine’s extinction.

CONCLUSION

One of the problems with anthropocentrism, argues Plumwood, is that it ‘fos-ters illusions of invincibility and hides our real danger’ (2002a: 2). And Wood (1986: 75) has claimed that, ‘the true subject of the horror genre is all that our civilization represses or oppresses’. So in many ways, eco-horror performs an important societal and cultural function. What these examples of Australian eco-horror display, where humans become prey for animals, is not always an acceptance of our ‘ecological identity’, but more the existence and agency of the ‘more-than-human world’. In much the same way that Plumwood writes of particular types of literature that write nature as agent, ‘re-subjectivising and re-intentionalising the non-human as an ethical and intentional subject of narrative’ (Plumwood 2002b, 2002a: 54), this type of eco-horror also re-writes the animal as agent, the power of which we fail to acknowledge at our own, human peril.

Films such as Howling III, Dying Breed and Razorback emphasize the inter-relationships between humans and non-humans in an evolving concept of Gaia. This in turn provides a de-centring of human actors/agents and the emergence of what can be regarded as disturbing transgressions in the case of Dying Breed and Razorback or alternatively perhaps, a ‘pleasurably tight cou-pling’ (Harraway 1989) between human and animal in the case of Howling III. This ‘New Nature’, claims Franklin, is very different to ‘the nativist ideal ecol-ogy of eco-nationalists’, which relies on establishing pure species and ‘bound-ary maintenance’ (Franklin 2006: 24–5). Instead it is ‘characterised by hybrids and transformations, movements and disturbance – much of it irreversible and none of it completed’, which also underscores Flannery’s adoption of Gaia as a dynamic system (2008). ‘Australia is a place that has been altered irrevocably by migration and mobility of people, things and natures. And it is this fertile mixing and hybrid vigour that generates, paradoxically, the true nature of Australia’ (Franklin 2006: 238). I doubt whether Franklin, Flannery or Plumwood had Razorback or Howling III in mind when writing their exem-plary environmental treatises. However, far from being mere entertain-ment value, exploitation eco-horror cinema can be a rich source with which to examine societal and cultural attitudes towards the environment and its

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 52SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 52 11/18/10 3:01:10 PM11/18/10 3:01:10 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Australian eco-horror and Gaia’s revenge

53

more-than-human others. And to be perfectly honest, given that Australia has ten of the world’s most venomous snakes, I am waiting for a good Aussie snake film. Anyone?

REFERENCES

Abram, D. (1996), The Spell of the Sensuous: Perception and Language in a More-Than-Human World, NY: Random House.

Bagust, P. (2001), ‘The End of Extinction? Playing the Devil’s Advocate for Designer Thylacines and Theme Park Ecosystems in the Age of Pan-Entertainment’, Australian Journal of Communication, 28: 1, pp. 1–18.

Bird Rose, D. (2005), Reports from a Wild Country: Ethics for Decolonization, Randwick: UNSW Press.

Bullock, E. (2009), ‘The Cultural Poetics of Tasmanian Gothic’, Unpublished Ph.D. thesis (forthcoming), Faculty of Arts, Macquarie University.

Carroll, D. (2001), ‘Dark Age: A Review’, http://www.tabula-rasa.info/AusHorror/DarkAge.html. Accessed 1 August 2001.

Collins, F. and Davis, T. (2004), Australian Cinema After Mabo, London: Cambridge University Press.

Craw, C. (2008), ‘The Ecology of Emblem Eating: Environmentalism, Nationalism and the Framing of Kangaroo Consumption’, Media International Australia, 127: May, pp. 82–95.

Flannery, T. (1994), The Future Eaters, Sydney: Reed Books. —— (2008), Now or Never: A Sustainable Future for Australia?, Sydney: Black

Inc Books. Forscher, H. (2008), ‘Animals in the Landscape: An analysis of the role of the

animal image in representations of identity in selected Australian feature films from 1971 to 2001’, Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Bond University, April.

Giblett, R. (2006), ‘Crocodiles, Alligators and the Monstrous Uncanny’, Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 20: 3, pp. 299–312.

Hage, G. (1998), ‘White Nation: Fantasies of White Supremacy in a Multicultural Society’, Sydney: Pluto Press.

Harraway, D. (1991) Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature London: Free Association Books.

Lambert, A. (2009), ‘White Aborigines: Women, Space, Mimicry and Mobility’, in C. Simpson, R. Murawska and A. Lambert (eds), Diasporas of Australian Cinema, Bristol: Intellect.

Laseur, C. (1992), ‘Australian Exploitation: The Politics of Bad Taste’, Continuum 5: 2, pp. 366–77.

Low, T. (1996), ‘Cats: Scoundrels or Scapegoats?’, Nature Australia, Autumn, p. 80.

—— (2003), The New Nature: Winners and Losers in Wild Australia, Canberra: Penguin.

Lovelock, J. (2007), The Revenge of Gaia: Earth’s Climate Crisis and the Fate of Humanity, Canberra: Penguin.

—— (2009), The Vanishing Face of Gaia, Canberra: Penguin. Monbiot, G. (2006), Heat: How to Stop the Planet Burning, London: Allen Lane

Publishing. Morris, M. (2002), ‘White Panic or, Mad Max and the Sublime’, Senses of

Cinema 18: Jan/Feb, http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/01/18/mad_max.html. Accessed 1 August 2009.

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 53SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 53 11/18/10 3:01:10 PM11/18/10 3:01:10 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17

Catherine Simpson

54

O’Regan, T. (1996), Australian National Cinema, London & New York: Routledge.

Plumwood, V. (2002a), Environmental Culture: The Ecological Crisis O Reason, London and New York: Routledge.

—— (2002b), ‘Prey to a Crocodile’, Bealtaine, 30, http://www.aislingmaga-zine.com/aislingmagazine/articles/TAM30/ValPlumwood.html. Accessed 15 July 2009.

Rayner, J. (2000), Contemporary Australian Cinema: An Introduction, Manchester & New York: Manchester University Press.

Rossmanith, K. (2007), ‘Crocodile Fears’, The Monthly, June, http://www.the-monthly.com.au/nation-reviewed-kate-rossmanith-crocodile-fears – 537. Accessed 1 August 2009.

Simpson, C. (2006), ‘Antipodean Automobility and Crash: Treachery, Trespass and Transformation of the Open Road’, Australian Humanities Review, pp. 39–40, September, http://www.australianhumanitiesreview.org/archive/Issue-September-2006/simpson.html. Accessed 1 August 2009.

Verhoeven, D. (2004), ‘A Notional or a National Cinema? Thinking (Nothing) of the Australian sheep films’, in Conference Proceedings of the 12th Biennial Conference of the Film & History Association of Australia and New Zealand, Australian National University, Canberra Australia, 2–5 December 2004, National Film and Sound Archive & Australian Film Commission: Canberra & Woolloomooloo, pp. 61–71.

—— (2006), Sheep and National Cinema, Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

Wood, R. (1986), Hollywood from Vietnam to Reagan, New York: Columbia University Press.

SUGGESTED CITATION

Simpson, C. (2010), ‘Australian eco-horror and Gaia’s revenge: animals, eco-nationalism and the ‘new nature’’, Studies in Australasian Cinema 4: 1, pp. 43–54, doi: 10.1386/sac.4.1.43_1

CONTRIBUTOR DETAILS

Catherine Simpson has been seconded from Media to the Science faculty to set up a new Science Communication programme. She is co-editor (with Renata Murawska and Anthony Lambert) of Diasporas of Australian Cinema (Intellect, 2009). Catherine has organized film festivals in Australia and Turkey and writes on the cinema of both countries. She has a growing interest in the ecological humanities and is working on a new book with Anthony Lambert, Ecologies of Australian Cinema.

Contact: Faculty of Science, Macquarie University, North Ryde 2109, Australia. E-mail: catherine.simpson@mq.edu.au

SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 54SAC_4.1_art_Simpson_043-054.indd 54 11/18/10 3:01:10 PM11/18/10 3:01:10 PM

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

2:07

16

Sept

embe

r 20

17