Thursday, July 3, 2014

My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead

       In the story "Why we Crave Horror Movies" By Stephen King, He claims that many watch horror movies to satisfy our feelings and the bad in us. We all do crazy things sometimes in our lives. King states, "We go to re-establish our feelings of essential normality; the horror movie is innately conservative, even reactionary"(4). While in the story "My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead ", Chuck Klosterman describes zombies like monsters. Klosterman uses an example of the "Barn of Terror" (388) to show how the invasion of zombies from the corny darkness cause them to be fear while they were looking for fun.  Klosterman states, "We were told to run through the moonlit corn maze if we vanted to live; as we ran, armed soldiers yelled contradictory instructions while hissing zombies emerged from the corny darkness. It was designed to be fun, and it was." He continues to explains his feeling about the strang scenario. For instance he writes a quote, "I know this is supposed to be scary," he said. "But I'm pretty confident about my ability to deal with a zombie apocalypse. I feel strangely innformed about what to do in this kind of scenario.'" (page 388).
      We may try to avoid them because we express anxiety from causing disease to us. The most important to us about zombie is killing. Klosterman presents zombies like a phenomenon we cannot get rid of them. As he mentions, "The zombies you kill today will merely be replaced by the zombies of tomorrow" (19).
        King's ideas are agree with Klosterman to the point that many people have fear to be existing.
Question # 4:
"This is our collective fear projection: that we will be consumed" (Klosterman 13). I think Klosterman tries to tell that our fear depends on us. As the technology is growing up, we become more expose to our fear. I agree with him because more we immerge in the technology , the most fear we would know. Without any  doubt, that fear may cause anxiety to us.

Annotating Dracula

As we near the end of our first unit and the start of our next (a close reading of Dracula), I want you to start thinking about what the novel means to you. For Monday's class, we're going to take that a tad literaly :-)
As you're reading through Chapter XIII for Monday's class, be thinking about a scene that really stands out for you. It can be funny, sad, scary, awesome, confusing, whatever! Just pick a scene that really made you stop and think.

Then, snap a pic of the annotations you've made to that scene, and upload it to the blog, but DON'T publish yet! We'll continue to look at your scene in class on Monday. And if you have a mobile device (phone, laptop, tablet) on which you can blog, bring it to class!

Good luck with your essay revisions!

Questions? Quibbles? Controversies?

Is Technology Holding Us Back?

    In Guillermo Del Toro and Chuck Hogan's "Why Vampires Never Die", the authors attribute the great popularity of "Dracula" to the many technological advancements being made during the time it was written. They state that since technology connects us more with others and makes the world "smaller", we have lost touch with ourselves, and we therefore do not know ourselves like we used to.
    Author Sherry Turkle covers this very same subject in her article "Can You Here Me now". Turkle starts off by noting her observations in the working environnment. She says that as she looks around a particular room, she notices people are less inclined to socialize and pay attention to each other, and more inclined to look on their phones and lose themselves in cyberspace. While Turkle admits there are pro's to technology, she states five cons which in her opinion are the harms done by communicating through technology. These include blending their real and virtual lives,  less times to be alone with ourselves, kids losing out on the experience to fend for themselves, the lack of privacy, and the split of our attention that technology causes. The author concludes by wondering what type of world we are going to live in if we continue these practices.
    Just like Del Toro and Hogan, Turkle would agree that technology is causing us to lose ourselves. This applies not only to our own personal time, but also the time we could be spending making genuine connections with other human beings. The paradox that may confuse some is that while technologies power becomes greater, then our resources to reach out all over the globe should yield more interaction. But in fact, we are noticing just the opposite. Turkle would explain this by saying that the technology actually limits us by taking away our motivation to talk to real people, as well as taking away our attention from the important things in life. It is interesting to note that Del Toro and Hogan discuss this phenomenon in relation to"Dracula", which was written in 1897. This shows that this is a problem that has been around for a while, and will only escalate more if people do not realize the error of their ways.

        -According to Turkle, being distracted by your phone or laptop during a presentation is very common in today's age.

Some Intertesting Victorian Era Publications about Women

As we continue to discuss the treatment and place of women in Victorian society, here are some interesting articles about aspects not discussed in Bram Stoker's Dracula.

The first is a list of "rules" for female cyclists. Remember that cycling was considered the realm of the "New Woman" and wasn't yet totally accepted in polite society.

The second is this illustration of "a woman's heart":

Let's keep these in mind as we continue to read the novel.

Questions? Quibbles Controversies?

Technology: It's Progress and Minor Set Backs Overtime

       Growing up my father would tell me to use my head instead of using a calculator because the fact of using a calculator will effect my math skills down the line. I took his advice and only used the calculator when I find it necessary but yet I don't find myself any better at math. It still takes a moment, then again it's not every day someone asks you to multiply numbers.
   In Neil Postman's article, The Judgment of Thamus , he explain the pros and cons of technology. He starts with telling a story about King Thamus and an inventor named Theus. Theus was trying to impress the King on his new inventions and intergrade it into society with the King's approval. The King disapproved of the inventions because he felt it would hinder society and make them lazy and reliant on these knew inventions. Postman does agree that technology can become a burden, we only look at what technology can do but not as well take away. His thoughts are more towards the positive and negatives of new technology, "New Technologies alter the structure of our interest: the things we think about. They alter the character of our symbols: the things we think with"

From reading both Frank Rose's, The Art of Immersion : Fear of Fiction, and Neil Postman's, The Judgment of Thamus, I believe that they would agree with one another. Postman states the development of new technologies has changed the structure of our society and the way we think. This support the last few sentences of Frank Rose's article , " Technology makes authenticity suspect, and technology gives us a wherewithal to demand it- if that's what we really want. Except that it's not what we want. Its what we think we want". They both acknowledge the fact that technology influence our thoughts and how we deal with life in society.


My Zombie, Myself:Why Modern life feels rather undead is about zombies in our pop culture. In this essay it discusses the different ways zombies project our fears. It uses multiple examples in different forms of pop culture. It also talked about how it related to vampires connecting both zombies and vampires. It pointed out that zombies were connected to everyday life and maybe how we would feel at work or at school. We would feel like were always bombarded with paper work and it keeps coming even when we don't want it. Another explanation could be we feel like zombies after a hard day of work or school. 

       Monsters can speak to our deepest fears, and they can make you go insane taunting you with it. The fear of aids or rabies or illness is tremendous in the societies because of the obvious reason no one wants to get sick and die. Although monsters are creatures we keep out, they often find their way in our inner consciousness. The essay interpretation I agree with is both Chuck Klosterman's, My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern a life Feels rather Undead, and Chuck Hogan and Guerllmo Del Toro's Why Vampires never Die. My interpretation of what I believe their reason is valid, is because our culture is being consumed like zombies eat people and in Vampires never die they emit the emotion that we might desire to release but can't because of societies reaction. 

     Chuck Kholsterman states, "Return your voice mails and nod your agreements. This is a zombies' world, and we just live in it. But we can live better"(388). Basically Kholsterman is saying our society is survival of the fittest and if you can't adapt to the new conditions you will be eaten alive. In Why Vampires Never Die, Guillermo Del Toro and Chuck Hogan agrees when they write,"Monsters, like angels, are invoked by our individual collective needs"(379). This refers to religion and there drawn out from within.  The reason why this corroborates with my argument, is because  vampires do what we always wanted them to do and I think Guillermo Del Toro and Chuck Hogan would agree. Although I view both essays which contain very good arguments I would prefer Chuck Hogan and Guillermo Del Toro's Why Vampires Never die because of my connection to feeling the same way they describe which is Pathos. The reason why it's Pathos is because my personal connection of wanting to never age and always be adventurous, fast, strong, and flawless. Kholsterman himself states, " This is our collective fear projection: that we will be consumed. Zombies like the internet and the media are and every conversation we don't want to have"(387). This is important because society shouldn't be condiments to disaster and having so much different media we rely on to go on our day is a epidemic. As America is starting to grow more into technology we should also be aware of the different possibilities of monsters or zombies that want to constantly consume us. That's what I believe these essays are bringing awareness to.          

The Undead

In the article "My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead" by Chuck Klosterman write about how zombie are and how people deal with them. Klosterman says zombies are a value stock and that they are a target-rich environment meaning that they are everywhere. Klosterman mentions "The Walking Dead" on AMC that had around 5.3 million people viewing the first episode which had more views then the season 4 of "Mad Man". Their are two types of zombies. Their are slow ones and fast ones and thats all. There are steps given to us readers for killing zombies. Step 1 is to shoot the zombie in the brain with if possible a shotgun. Step 2 is the same as step one but just to another zombie. Steps 3 and 4 is to just repeat the cycle over and over again. "Zombie killing is philosophically similar to reading and deleting 400 work e-mails on a Monday morning or filling out paperwork that only generates more paperwork." This means that zombies will continue give to people stressful and repetitive action to deal with.

My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead & Why we crave horror movies


My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead

According to the article “Why we crave Horror Movies” by Stephen King, where King state “we all mentally ill; Those of  us outside the asylums hide it a little better and maybe not at all much better, after all”.  Chuck klosterman, in the article of “My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead”. Klosterman, based on his argument, “A lot of modern life is exactly like slaughtering Zombies”. Physically, zombie identical appear to a normal human being but limit conscious experience and the ability to transparency of mind.  The connection between these two articles used is a metaphor King used his thesis about horror movies in a way to what King means by that, psychologically speaking, when people watch horror movies it is a way of expressing our true feelings. King, has lot of knowledge to share about human mentality. The Mythic horror…has a dirty job to do.                                                                                                                                                       
It deliberately appeals to all that is worst in us. Which is exactly what klosterman stated about monsters how human can be related to it.

Question #4

Klosterman writes: This is our collective fear projection; that we will be consumed” (par. 13. Page 387). I think he means, these are the emotion that attire us to enjoy watching these kind of horror movies. And if we don’t express our emotion they build up. And those are the emotions that we face in our daily livings. Yes, I agree because Klosterman and King’s demonstrate in their writing and the connection that back up both arguments. I do share it because I’m living every day. The other cultural manifestation of that fear. These are the reason that his thesis that give the facts that we are mentally ill we want to see those things because we want to enact actual violence on other people. As we have occasion releases we are going to be okay.

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Are We Aware of The Influence Technology Has on us?

              In the essay "The Judgment of Thamus" by Neil Postman he discusses different opinions and ideas he and other writers had on technology. He begins the essay by introducing us to Thamus a character from Egyptian mythology, who is advising his exemplar Theuth, about the dangers of new technologies in their case the introduction of writing. According to Thamus “they will receive a quantity in information without proper instruction and in consequence be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant. And because they are filled with conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom they will be a burden to society” (Postman 202). Thamus believes that writing will become only a burden, because it would make people forgetful and people who are not actually wise think that they are. This is where Postman agrees and disagrees with Thamus; Postman emphasizes that “technological innovations are not only one sided, Postman states “it is a mistake to suppose that any technological innovation has a one-sided effect. Every technology is both a burden and a blessing; not either or, but this and that” (Postman 201) Postman agrees with Thamus in the sense that new technologies bring on a burden, but disagrees with him because they also are a blessing. Postman argues that the wise ones are the ones who realize that new technological innovations are both burden and blessings and are not impressed by them. Postman introduces us to Freud, and Freud’s argument is that even though technology has helped us, it has also created problems that would not have been there otherwise, one of Freud’s arguments about scientific advances is that if it helps to keep people healthier and alive longer, what’s the point in that is if people’s lives are joyless and difficult. Postman claims that the common people are made to believe that technology is good for them and that it doesn't have consequences, that technology will make their lives much better but to what cost.  He states that “A new technology does not add or subtract something. It changes everything” (Postman 213). What he means by this is that new technologies change everything like culture, the way we learn and understand new things.

Response: connections

             In “The Art of Immersion: Fear of Fiction” by Frank Rose and in “The Judgment of Thamus” by Neil Postman, both authors discuss new technologies and their impact on society but both have different views on technology. In the essay by Rose he argues the effect new technologies that improve the ways stories are told have on the public, for example serialization in 1830’s England. Rose doesn't really argue the negative of new technologies like novels, T.V., and movies have on people. He claims that people want to be immersed in something that’s not real like fiction novels and movies; they don’t want authenticity they want to be sucked inside like Don Quixote. I think this is something Postman would disagree on, because during the entire essay he goes on about how we need to be careful on how much we consume new technologies and how we use them. Postman also argues that even though we are made to believe that technology is good for us and that it could only benefit us, he warns us that is only one side of the truth.

"WHY We Crave Horror Movies" / "My Zombie, Myself"

In the article, “My zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life feels Rather Undead” by Chuck Klostreman discusses that people have become obsessed with zombies and there immortal powers. Zombies have taken over mainstream movies and cable programs. They are valuable and there market is constantly expanding. Zombies are considered a commodity to mainstream because they can build on the zombie physical pace and image, making them faster or slower and more scary looking.
             Klosterman goes on to explain that people tend to humanize their fears. Their fears that are humanized are called “Monsters.”. These creatures that people create come from there ideas that are influenced by there fears.
             People may also be attracted to zombies because of the way they are slaughtered. It may be a reflection of there day to day life routines and challenges that they face. The slaughtering of zombies goes by steps that are repeated, until you or the zombies perish. This could probably explain why people are fascinated with zombies. People’s have zombie like behaviors and routines that come from there unconscious fears.
            The internet and the media are also considered as zombies because people see and hear things that they don’t what to see and hear. This causes people to be less aware of their fears and more absorbed in what their being told.

Question 4
             Klosterman states, “This is our collective fear projection: that we will be consumed.” I think Klosterman is trying to say that people’s fears are being projected back to them through mainstream and the Internet. If people confront their fears and have a better understanding of it, they will know the proper action to take in any given situation. They wouldn’t have to humanize their fears by creating a monster. I agree with Klosterman that this is a collective fear because it is a combination of other external and internal factors that are influencing people’s fears. I share it also because I watch mainstream media and I take in the information that it provides, never really knowing if it true or not. The media use news as away to make people fearful.

“Connections” response
            Stephen King’s and Chuck Klostreman article agrees that people find fear to be exciting. That why horror films do so well in mainstream. It brings to life people unconscious fears through their thoughts and not in reality.

Why We Crave Horror Movies/My Zombie, Myself

With the popularity of AMC’s show The Walking Dead, there has been a rise in the discussion of zombies in the media. In Chuck Klosterman’s essay My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead, he points out that zombies are an expanding market. 5.3 million people watched the first episode of The Walking Dead on AMC as opposed to the 2.9 million who watched the season 4 premiere of another AMC program, Mad Men. These stats tell how popular zombies are these days and how many people would rather watch a show about zombies. Klosterman discusses why zombies have such strong cultural appeal. According to Klosterman our fascination with zombies is connected to our ambition to delete somebody or any struggles you have in your life. Klosterman suggests that maybe the popularity of zombies may be due to a different metaphor than those discussed by scholars and film critics.  
What if contemporary people are less interested in seeing depictions of their unconscious fears and more attracted to allegories of how their day-to-day existence feels? That would explain why so many people watched that first episode of “The Walking Dead”: They knew they would be able to relate to it.”
The author then goes on to provide examples of how his thesis of life as a zombie may be connected to various aspects of our routine existence. Klosterman claims that a lot of modern life is exactly like slaughtering zombies.  Klosterman compares zombie killing to reading and deleting 400 emails or filling out paperwork that generate more paperwork. What he meant by comparing zombie killing to this is the downside of a zombie attack is that the zombies will never stop coming and in life you will never be finished with whatever it is you do. The author also compares zombies to the internet and media noting “all of it comes at us endlessly and if we surrender we will be absorbed.” Klosterman describes this way of thinking as seeing our daily battles manageable by saying, “as long as we keep deleting what’s in front of us, we survive.”
Question 4: what I think the author meant by saying “This is our collective fear projection: that we will be consumed”, is if you surrender to zombies you will be overtaken and absorbed just like with the internet.  We fear we will be consumed by the internet. This is true, the internet can take your consciousness away and make you dumber. Although it increases visual literacy skills, it makes you dumber in critical thinking. The more you go on the internet the more you’ll be consumed. I do think that this is a collective fear. Everybody is afraid of being consumed by internet because everyone uses it and knows what it does, some just refuse to admit it.
After reading Why We Crave Horror Movies & My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead, I think both authors kind of disagree with each other on one thing and agree with another. According to King, we like horror movies because of the fun and entertainment that comes from watching them. Another reason why he says we like horror movies is to prove we can. On the other hand, according to Chuck Klosterman we like movies/shows with zombies is because of an entirely different metaphor than those commonly discussed by film critics. People want to feel they can relate to the zombies. Klosterman claims, people can relate to shows with zombies, because most of modern life is exactly like slaughtering zombies. Basically according to King we like horror films for the entertainment, and according to Klosterman we like zombie films because we can relate to them. I think they do agree on one thing. They both agree that people like horror and it is a very popular genre in these times.
The Walking Dead characters: Rick Grimes, and zombie (left to right)

Neil Postman VS Frank Rose

In the article, "The Judgement of Thamus" by Neil Postman is an essay that is based on technology and now bad it could be in society today. First, Neil Postman begins with Thamus, the  king of a great city in Upper Egypt. Thamus believes that "writing will be a burden to society and nothing but a burden." (201). But this is definitely not the case. When the world was introduced to technology, it seemed that everything, including everyone became more advanced, but also less dependent on old fashion way of living Neil Postman states, "Every technology is both a burden and a blessing; mot either-or, but this -and-that."(201). In other words, Neil Postman is saying that technology and be good for us, but also bad. People are relying on technology like television or computers to our lives easier. If we are just learning from a screen, we won't actually learning anything. That little hamster in it's running wheel isn't running as fast as he was. Basically, Neil Postman is saying that technology and be good for us, but also bad. People are relying on technology like television or computers to make our lives easier. If we are just learning from a screen, we won't actually learning anything. That little hamster in your head, running in it's little wheel isn't running as fast as he was before. In conclusion, Neil Postman is saying that technology isn't all that it appears to be. We lose our original way of thinking.  

Connections: I feel that both Neil Postman and Frank Rose both have different views instead of similar ones. Neil's focus was more on technology and Frank's focus was being aware of how movies can change our way of thinking. Neil Postman  was more into technology being more efficient then reading and writing. Frank Rose was more into the will being of people reading books and entering a fantasy world. In no way do I see these authors having any similarities.  

Here a video that I found that relates to Neil Postman :


Postman Vs. Rose

The essay "The Judgement of Thamus" by Neil Postman is an essay covering numerous thoughts on technology. Postman opens his essay giving some background info on the main subject of his essay, Thamus. He claims that Thamus had an error of judgement. Postman writes, "The error is not in his claim that writing will damage memory and create false wisdom. It is demonstrable that writing has had such an effect. Thamus' error is in his believing that writing will be a burden to society and nothing but a burden" (201). Throughout the essay, Postman goes on to explain why he says that there is an error in Thamus' judgement. He also talks about Freud, who believes that technological advances should not be taken lightly. Freud writes, " child would never have left his native town and I should need no telephone to hear his voice..." (Postman 203). Postman then refutes this argument by writing, "The Technophile would surely answer Freud by saying that life has always been barren of joys and full of misery but that the telephone...have not only lengthened life but made it a more agreeable proposition" (203). Meaning that although some people wold rather do without technology, technology as actual made life easier. Throughout the essay, Postman points out, not only the errors in Thamus' judgment, but the things we should take from his judgement. He writes that technology does not add or subtract to the environment around us, but instead, it creates an entirely new environment. Towards the end of his essay, Postman writes, "We need to know if television changes our conception of reality, the relationship of the rich to the poor, the idea of happiness itself" (214). Overall, Postman is saying that there isn't anything necessarily wrong with technology and its advances BUT we should be aware of the effect of technology and its advances on the world around us.

"Connections" response:
Both Rose and Postman talk about technology in their essays, but in different ways. Rose's essay, unlike Postman's, is straight to the point. He identifies his claim (that we do not really want authenticity) and gives us reasons to support his claim. In order to identify the claims of Postman's essay you'd have to read more because it isn't as evident. Postman's article also has more than one claim but as you read on you find that there is one main central claim. Both authors do have the same attitude towards their subjects. Neither of the authors try to make it appear "wrong" if you do not agree with their claim BUT they both write in a way that makes the reader think about the opposition while agreeing with the author. I do not believe that the authors come to the same conclusion because Rose writes that we want to be immersed in technology but Postman believes that we should be aware of the good, bad and reality of technology.

Why Vampire Never Die

Dalphee Champagne

English 24


  In the article “Why Vampire Never Die” by Guillermo del Toro and Chuck Hogan, discuss and explain the reason why vampire are immortal and will continue to be a big part in today’s modern society and maybe continue still the of human existence is the way that it caught human attention in a way that it has a lot of points that related to human in real life most importantly in two main issues; vampire are either romantic heroes or monsters. Vampire mutate and lives in the dark, most widely known vampire was “Dracula” birthed by Bran stoker in 1897.  Why till this day human are still interested in “Why Vampire Never Die” rather it is the movie or the book? According to authors (381), “We enthrone the deadly virus in the very same way that ‘Dracula’ allowed the British public to believe in monster”. For example, in Why We Crave Horror Movies” by Stephen King, He thinks that we all, as human being have a little monster in each and every one of us. Which attracting us to like scary movie or story where we find pleasure or entertainment us mentally and sometimes emotionally.

  The author stated the idea of vampires always being alive satisfies our desire to always remain young and not grow old.  Because naturally, human crave those kind of entertainments.            Vampire emphasizes the eternal in human. Vampires believed to be primates cannibals. Even it is a myth, some people actually practice that same path and become a reality in their lives.        Just as modern man benefits from science, Dracula himself has benefit and become a reality to human. For example, (CNN) -- If left up to audiences, the trend of the undead will never die. A few shows on TV, have become the top viewers interest The "Twilight" saga earned six nominations; "True  Blood" and "Vampire Diaries" got two each; Horror hit "Paranormal Activity" earned a nomination in the independent movie category. To prove the authors argument, that is the human behavior toward these scary movies and shows.
In question #4. Culture manifestation to me would have be Vampire because vampires are the most popular in our world and more acceptable in our society is because “True Blood" and "Vampire Diaries have become the most popular shows on television. According to Guillermo del Toro and Chuck Hogan use SciFi  make vampire more useful and interesting in our pop culture. They have the ability of mental and sexual control.


Integrating Sources (for Essay #1)

To help you practice how sources can be integrated (and possibly find a 3rd source for your first essay), we're looking at some articles that relate to those we've already read.

Look at the “Connections” question at the end of the article you discussed in your Essay #1 rough draft. Read the article it asks the question about. Then post to the blog, summarizing the new article, and answering the “Connections” question at the end of the original article.

If you wrote about “Why We Crave Horror Movies” in your essay, read “My Zombie, Myself," summarize it, answer question 4, and then state whether you think King and Klosterman agree, disagree, or some combination of the two with each other.

Questions? Quibbles? Controversies?

Tuesday, July 1, 2014

“Imagination of Disaster”

Susan Sontag
The article “Imagination of Disaster” by Susan Sontag discusses that our fantasy imagination takes us to a place that numbs us from the reality of terror, real or anticipated. It distracts us from unbearable pains. Fantasy in science fiction makes the world look good but it is neutralizing it. People who perceive a disaster as a fantasy can release themselves from normal obligations.
             Science Fiction films are widely considered to be one of the most successful of the popular art form. The films are about disaster and not about science. Sensuous details are provided by the films and were created from unsuccessful novels. Science fiction films are one of the purest forms that don’t involve another persons feeling.
            In the 1950’s science fiction films had family oriented themes. The older films and comics were significant but also had an innocent connection to disaster. In science fiction films the scientist is usually viewed as a devil and Savior. Science has been viewed as magic and has been used the wrong way. Sontag states that man always knew that there were black magic and white magic and that science fiction films are overlapped with horror films. She also explains that the films also consist of strong moralistic values that teach the proper use of science by humans, verses the mad, obsessive use of  science.
Question 4
           Back to the Future is a 1985 contemporary science fiction film that challenges Susan Sontag’s argument. The film is about Marty McFly who helps his friend Doc Brown (a scientist) and was taken back in time by Doc Brown’s time machine. Marty McFly was a boy from the 1980’s who had to come to the realization of being in the1950’s. He tries to get his young parents in the 50’s to fall in love again so that he can fix the damage that has been done already by his present actions. Sontag’s view seems more generalized than factual in most cases. Sontag claims, “science fiction films are not about science. They are about disaster.” I disagree with Sontag quote, Back to the Future is a prefect example of a film that had an scientific ideas that were implemented by Doc brown and a mishap took place that sent Marty Mcfly back in time. He has to try and go back to his rightful place in time. I feel that the film didn’t consist of disastrous moments but had more moments that involved problem solving.  

"Why Vampires Never Die"

                                                         Why Vampires Never Die
            Vampire images were hard to avoid by people all over New York City, it was a modern day epidemic that couldn’t be stopped. Guillermo Del Toro (Mexican author and filmmaker) and Chuck Hogan(A Crime fiction and horror novelist) novel gives an account of this taking place all over New York City. This epidemic started 200 years ago around 1816 which was a cold year. A few pals got together at Villa Diodati on Lake Geneva competing to see who could tell the most frightening tales. This friendly and competitive gathering gave birth to two horror film icons, Dr. Frankenstein and the Vampyre (which is today known as Vampires).
            John William Polidori created two vampire fictions. The first vampire ficition was a blood sucker and the second vampire fiction was a romantic hero. He put together the folklore and personal resentment in his works which makes it unusually interesting to readers. The whole concept and name “vampire” is part of the mythology of many other countries such as India, Romanian, and china. The concept of vampires could be so old that it goes back to Babylonian times.
            Vampire storylines have come from a long way. They can also mutate very fast. People have become more stimulated by the whole idea that vampire occur in all forms. It caters to a wide verity of people who like Soap opera, storylines, sexual liberation, noir detective fiction and etc. Polidori create to the two main vampire fictions but the vampire that is most popularly known today was created by Bram stoker in 1897. He created “Dracula” during a technological Revolutionary time which made it very successful.
            People have a place within themselves that crave for vampires; this is an unconsciousness that is a reality for them. It shows that people do not have complete control over themselves and there souls. Monsters carry an air of mystery that tugs at people’s spiritual world that makes them eager to inquire about it.
            Del Toro and Hogan state (Par.15) “Despite our obsessive harnessing of information, we are still ultimately vulnerable to our fate and nightmares.” In many cultures we can see many manifestations of our nightmares that have become a reality. According to Del Toro and Hogan statement, I feel that people getting into horrific accidents, and dieing in natural disasters are part of our nightmares that we do not wish to see happen in reality. These horrific experiences which occur alter people’s lives; these experiences are the monsters of people’s reality. This could probably explain why people are so drawn to monsters and horror.  
             One monster that I do find to be interesting would is a dragon. The reason for this is that they spit fire out of there mouth and blow steam through there nostrils. They are the most frightening monsters around. Despite its fire spitting, I feel that dragons are really cool imaginary monster, if they aren’t upset. Vampires are also cool but its hard for me to be scared of another human who only bites and sucks blood. I would be more fearful a dragon that could fry me to death.


Dracula Vampire

 This is my understanding of Dracula. Dracula was created by Bram Stoker in 1897. Dracula has the ability to turn into a rat, a bat, a wolf and mist. His posses’ supernatural strength and can moves faster the blink of an eye. His strengthens and abilities weaken when he is over exposed to daylight. He also sucks people’s blood.

Monday, June 30, 2014

Dracula vampire

Based on my understanding of the few vampire novels I've read and seen on television, there's a few versions of vampires that comes to mind. The first thing that comes to mind about vampires are the generic ones in vampire killing series that incinerates when exposed to sunlight and are weak to garlic and crosses. These same vampires are the ones that die instantly when impaled in the heart. Then there are the "pure blood" ancient vampires who are truly immortal, immune to sunlight, and don't consume human blood. When these ancient vampires sustain a huge injury, they go into slumber
to recover. Last but not least are the vampires from twilight who goes to school,sparkles under the sun and seduces young girls.

Dracula, Until The End of Time

   My prior knowledge of vampires or Dracula was from watching movies like the Blade Trilogy. What I've observed in today's recent television and movie craze about these nocturnal humanoids is that Dracula is always seen as the strongest because he was the first vampire. Being the first vampire and surviving for many years his skill set is much different than the vampires created after him. He's usually more powerful and tactical.
    Some of the old myths of Dracula I remember was him not being able to see his reflection in the mirror and having a weakness for garlic, which would inflict pain. If my memory serves correctly Dracula also wasn't able to touch the cross. The last characteristic has been slowly dissipated. In a lot of the current  small and big screen Dracula, vampire, trends that I find interesting is some of the vampires were devout Christians but now turned into a creature that God has abandoned. The Damned.
    I never thought of why Dracula was created. I figured it was just someone passing time with a great story and it began to live on as more people were exposed. When I read Why Vampires Never Die for class I never would have considered that Dracula might have been created by the lust, wanting for immortality, and making us feel value unlike other monsters that make us feel weak.
    I did a quick research of where it's possible for Dracula to have come from. I didn;t want to believe he came from a horror story contest. Supposedly the origins started from a rulers son. The ruler was named Dracul which meant dragon or devil in olden day Romania. His son, Vlad, was known as the Impaler (Vlad the Impaler) and because Vlad was Dracul son -a was placed at the end of his name, meaning little dragon. It could be possible that because he was known as the impaler that that's the main way to kill Dracula is for him to be impaled himself.