Friday, September 27, 2013

Enough Already!

Response to Why Vampires Never Die


Our class assignment over the weekend was to read Why Vampires Never Die by Guillermo Del Toro and Chuck Hogan and then show how we see the two authors relating to Stephen King’s article Why We Love Horror Movies as well as Eric Camarillo’s piece Vampires and Why We Love Them. So Now I am left with the less than thrilling task of BS-ing my way through 250+ words in order to conclude as to whether the authors would be in agreement, disagreement, or  “something in between.” I mean it is vampires for crying out loud. How much of a debate can you really have on vampires? Either you love them or hate them, unless you want to compare the little leeches to the vampires of old (and we all know that is a topic for discussion that will never die.) For the most part all of the authors seem to be open-minded when it comes to the young bloods and even though they are not exactly singing the praises of new vampire literature (though Camarillo did mention he was in a “fandom”, which one I do not know and I would have to exclude Stephen King because his article came long before the Twilight era,) they are not exactly condemning it either.

I can see Del Toro and Hogan being in agreement with Camarill0 regarding the progression and evolution of vampire literature. In the articles Why Vampires Never Die and Vampires Why We Love Them, it talks about the different genres of authors in vampire literature in which Anne Rice and John William Polidori were one of the names honorably mentioned. Del Toro, Hogan and Camarillo acknowledge that it is the vampire’s ability to change throughout the years that has made them so popular. However, I do think that they would have agreed to disagree or would have been somewhere in between in regards to their belief as to why Dracula became such a huge success. Both articles talked about "fear” in different analogies. When Del Toro and Hogan referred to fear it was more literal. In their article they talked about how people, especially the British who were known to be extremely proper, were now allowed to experience “fear and awe.” I think they would have been on the same page as Stephen King, whose article was centered on the “crave and release” concept of fear. In the article King was basically saying that we as human beings crave horror movies because it provides that adrenaline rush that only comes from being scared half out of your mind. In the article he likened the viewing of horror movies to riding a roller coaster. On the other hand when Camarillo wrote about fear, it was more symbolic of the prejudices folks had at the time. It was about fear of foreigners, fear of hypersexual women, and fear of feminine men.

I am curious as to Mr. King’s take on twenty-first century vampire literature. I’m kind of curious as to whether or not he supports it and sees it as inspiration to step his game up being that word on the street is that ‘he ain’t got it no mo’’ But then again, when you have been in the game for as long as he has, do you really need to step anything up? With a catalogue like his there is only one thing to do… Sit back and enjoy the ride

1 comment:

  1. Late! And why would you tell your reader that your post is a "less than thrilling task of BS-ing my way through 250+ words"? Why would I want to read that?!

    But you make some good connections and bring some evidence. Still, how can you NOT even guess how King would react to vampire lit.? I think you can :-)