ASDA and Tesco "Psycho" costumes - How far can horror go?

Asda's withdrawn costume (Image taken from the BBC News Website)

This afternoon, a BBC story was posted online about the withdrawal of Asda's "Mental Patient Fancy Dress Costume", and Tesco's "Psycho Ward" costume after a number of complaints that they enforced a stigma on those living with mental illness. The companies, in their best efforts to keep the peace, also offered a donation to the charity, Mind, which had criticised the stores for offering these outfits.
 Soon, politicians and the public alike gathered around to share their thoughts and opinions on the topic, with a large amount of people agreeing that it was offensive. Naturally, as an avid fan of all things Halloween and horror, I couldn't help but take to my keyboard to offer my own thoughts - and here it is - are we taking this a little too seriously?

Tesco's withdrawn costume (Image taken from the BBC News Website)

 I'll be honest, I dressed up as a psych ward patient a couple of years ago, and at the time I couldn't say I even considered that it might be offensive. I am a sufferer of depression myself, and have been on a number of different anti-depressants, but when I donned my costume that Halloween, I was not myself, and I did not aim to replicate anybody with this illness - I was a character of my own fiction, one which I had designed to be scary. I do recognise the concern these people are trying to raise. There is a stigma that comes with mental illness (I have seen the brunt of it) and this, like a lot of issues to do with disability, needs to be addressed. There are people living with these sorts of illnesses and others often don't know how to support them. HOWEVER, is there a difference between selling these types of costume and a character like, say, Hannibal Lecter - a psychopath, succumbing to his mental illness, who is deemed terrifying and used as a horror icon? Can we now say that literature, television shows and films that MAY enforce a stigma on those living with mental illness should be removed on the basis they are offensive?  Do we consider that we might be offending nurses, or surgeons, people who may have lost a patient on the table and have felt affected by it, when slipping on our bloodied scrubs and wielding plastic knives as accessories? These costumes are not mocking, or attempting to be cruel, they are a nod to the horror genre.

Norman Bates from Psycho (Image taken from Wikepedia.en)

In my first year of university I wrote a piece on the horror genre, listing a number of features that regularly occur. My argument was that the horror genre often reflects a shared fear of something relevant to the time the film was made. It blows the issue up and makes it plain scary. For instance, Britain's rising concern with teenage crime and violence could arguably be reflected in horrors such as Eden Lake. One thing that has always been relevant and reoccurring is the idea of the human mind, something we still know very little about, and this often veers into the idea of human capabilities. Think films such as Switchblade Romance, Silence of the Lambs, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and, of course, Hitchcock's iconic Psycho. Like horror, Halloween addresses our fears and allows us to express them. I must be clear and stress that I am not saying we are afraid of people with mental illnesses, but afraid of our own capabilities and the power our mind can have over us.

On the subject of costumes, I was surprised to see that this was the only costume choice that was targeted. I understand how people may be offended by the term "mental patient" being used on the costume, but if we are going to go as far as to ban these outfits, then perhaps we should consider a few others to also rid our shelves of. A common fancy dress choice, not only for Halloween, is the "Sexy School Girl" outfit. If we look into this, are we not just objectifying school children? Could we go as far to say that it is encouraging pedophilia? To take it further, if we dress as the dead, might we offend those who are bereaved? There are many costumes that may upset, or even shock people, but the reaction to this particular issue leads me to question whether we are really doing something good, or whether we are encouraging the stigma ourselves. By creating such a reaction against it, are we simply making mental health a taboo subject once again?

 
My final word on this debate is that it's really all a big kerfuffle over bad wording. If it was the same costume with the name "Serial Killer" or if it was an authentic costume of, say "Leatherface" or (again) "Dr.Lecter" then I have no doubt that they would have been fine to sell. In fact, one could argue that the "Psycho Ward" costume from Tesco pretty much IS a knock off of Hannibal's outfit. This is probably because it's trying to be cheap and affordable without breaking copyright laws. I am certain we will still see people in orange jumpsuits, who are playing the Silence of the Lambs villain, and nothing more. At the end of the day, I feel that all we can do is promote awareness of such illnesses, whilst also accepting that costumes like these are really trying to sell cheap-o versions of popular horror icons without treading on copyright toes and were not intended to offend.  

Hannibal Lecter in Silence of the Lambs (Image taken from Fanpop.com)

To read the BBC News report online, click here.



I encourage debates and would love to hear your opinion. However, I urge you to be considerate of others, as I have tried to be, when responding to this blog. Thank you.