Thinking about exorcisms

Disclaimer that I'm mostly basing this off of some conversations I once had with Father Peter, the Catholic priest on campus. So, also keep in mind this comes from a Catholic perspective.

I always find myself close to laughing when watching movies like The Possession, especially during the exorcism scene where everything is absolute chaos and flying around and everyone is screaming. It makes me wonder, is that actually what an exorcism looks like? Probably not. 

My friends and I were able to have a couple of interesting conversations with Father Peter last year since he has conducted a few minor exorcisms during his time as a priest. He cleared up a few things for us, the most pressing idea being that no, exorcisms are not as insane as people make them out to be in movies. My biggest concern during the conversation was if any person was susceptible to demonic possession, if, according to Father Peter, demonic possessions are real. He responded by saying that no, not just any person can be possessed. In a way, the person has to allow the possession to happen; they have to be so lost and so far wandering that they let the demon in. 

I don't know if The Possession was hoping to make a somewhat accurate depiction of demonic possession and the subsequent exorcism. But, in my opinion, it isn't accurate. It makes no sense why Em would be possessed following this logic; even if she might "allow" the dybbuk to possess her, she wasn't lost or wandering or in a dark state of mind. She wasn't in a situation that would allow her to be more vulnerable than she would be naturally. She was very content and happy with her life and the people around her. 

Of course, I could be a little off base right now since this should probably be looked at from the perspective of Judaism rather than Catholicism. Just some thoughts about exorcisms.

The Loss of teeth in : The Possession

 We all know the Scene where Em makes Brett's teeth fall out. Nasty Stuff! But what about the symbolism behind that? Teeth falling out usually symbolizes loss of control or  emotional disturbances you are  going through as you or your environment is going through change. This scene immediately followed by Brett leaving and not returning can be a symbol of him not accepting the new Em or even the fact of Em not liking him (referencing the garage scene).

The Real Evil Lurking Within: Tokenization, Exotification, and Racism in the Subtext of 'The Possession (2012)'

Taken at face value, The Possession (2012) is a classic example of a Hollywood horror film, as it hits a fair number of tropes in the possession subcategory; an otherwise 'ordinary' white nuclear family left to grapple with the sudden, uncharacteristic, and dangerous change in one of their children (usually, it is the benevolent, gentle, and endearing white daughter). 

    The film depicts spiritual/metaphysical elements of a non-WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) culture and portrays these elements in a manner which seeks to exotify or sensationalize. Yes, the dibbuk box was of Jewish origin, so including parts of Jewish tradition in the narrative was necessary to make this film both plausible and believable. However, it may be worthwhile to consider:

    1) Why was a dibbuk box in particular chosen to be the main conduit for horror in this film? 

    2) Why was Judaism discussed or portrayed only in relation to the demonic circumstances at hand? 

    3) Why was Apyzou's dialogue transcribed in the subtitles as [unintelligible whispering], rather than a direct translation? If it was the film's intention to leave these words purposefully obscured, why? 

    4) Why did Clyde (the dad) need to seek help from the Hasidic community in particular -- a branch of orthodox Judaism viewed by western goyim as "traditional" or, less kindly, "other," or even "backwards"? 

    5) Why couldn't Clyde's family have been Jewish? Why couldn't it have been a demon from a Christian tradition? Would either of these alterations change how 'scary' this film is? Why? 

    All of these are questions alluding to the main issue with not only the writing and execution, but the very concept of the film itself: the exotification and subsequent (literal) demonization of Judaism & its portrayal as, at best, a strange, foreign, yet ultimately benign and subservient token minority (as symbolized by Tzadok), or at worst, a danger that can be tracked into your home and influence your children in ways that you are unable to comprehend or control (as symbolized by Abyzou). The irony of this dichotomy is that it isn't a dichotomy at all; both Tzadok and Abyzou are Jewish, both are used as tools to strengthen the bond of the white nuclear family, solidifying their connection to each other whilst simultaneously drawing clear cut lines between what should be viewed as normal, safe, or right (the white nuclear family reunited as one), and what is abnormal, unfamiliar, or 'other' (Judaism). Tzadok is not even thanked for risking his life to exorcize Abyzou. And then he is killed rather unceremoniously. In the final shots of the film, we do not see Tzadok's corpse, or even a stray lamb dangling out of his totaled car; the first and last on-screen depictions of Jewishness in The Possession are an evil, child-killing demon. 

Also interesting to note are the only depictions of black people in The Possession being 1) basketball players, and 2) a school teacher, who is the first character to die. It seems that this film hit all the best classic Hollywood horror tropes.