Post by tjaman on Oct 12, 2006 16:40:35 GMT -5
I've finished my work for the day.
In fact, I've finished a good chunk of my work for tomorrow, as well.
I'm not going to have much to do tomorrow at all.
This worries me slightly, because tomorrow may be incredibly difficult. Or it might be a complete breeze. It all depends on whether there's a story for my section front on Monday or not.
I'll know before I leave.
But for right now, today has breezed by so swimmingly I was thinking of turning in a review of "Lost."
But instead I'm going to talk about vampires.
Last Thursday, Jamieson Ridenhour, an English professor from Bismarck, came to the Minot State University campus and talked at length about vampires.
He cited the first person to write about vampires was a scientist of sorts in the 17th century, who travelled throughout Eastern Europe to demystify strange stories of the benighted countryside. He wanted to disprove the stories and reaffirm his personal theology, and as he wrote -- at length -- he found that he mostly could but he had serious doubts. Because based on actual observation -- which people just really hadn't done a lot of up to that point -- there were some strange things happening with the dead bodies he was unearthing.
There were stories that people were writing about strange beings that had unusual powers of dangerous personal charisma, drawn from ancient folk tales -- the sort that have arisen in every culture. One thing he mentioned that I thought was very interesting was the Chinese version of vampires, which sucked spinal fluid. The first thing I thought of -- besides "Ew!" -- is the episode "She," in which Jhiera, a beautiful demon of more or less Asian cast, was escaping a home dimension where she could be controlled via mutilation of her spine. I wondered if Joss was trying to pay homage to Eastern vampire legends, and if he was, I suddenly find I have a little more respect for the episode. Would Kai have influenced him at all in this? I know so little about her, honestly.
Then Ridenhour discussed the vampires that began appearing in literature toward the end of the 18th century into the 19th, most famously in epic poetry of a darkly sexual nature and the adventures of the femme fatale. The folkeloric vampires (which were nasty creatures), and Byronic hero-types, which as he described the character fit Joss's image of Angel perfectly -- dark, brooding, impossibly handsome, around which there was, well, swooning -- both of the male and female persuasion, which fits some of Doyle's hero worship and the gay-friendly ideal Py has long argued about the show.
According to Ridenhour. Lord Byron himself did not write about vampires, although a jilted male lover did, producing a manuscript describing a tall, dark, brooding man who sucked the life from people and cast them aside, initially presenting the story to a publisher as being from Lord Byron. Byron may have taken the theme somewhere afterwards but I wasn't taking notes and he did talk a lot.
He discussed Bram Stoker's "Dracula," saying it was unusually well-written -- for him (Stoker was a stage manager primarily and his other writing was mostly forgettable), and is in fact still worth reading. Also, he noted, other Victorian literature that's still in print -- which "Dracula" is -- has been out of print and then revived at some point (except for maybe superstars like Dickens). "Dracula" has been in print ever since it was first pressed something like 120 years ago.
The 20th century put vampires on film, and while Stoker's widow refused to release the rights to "Dracula," it was finished as "Nosferatu," and then all copies were destroyed (because it was still unmistakeably "Dracula"). Except for two cans which were discovered in a vault after everyone's death, sometime in the 1930s, which is how we've managed to see it.
There were all sorts of vampire movies produced and released, however. He listed the most significant ones, but again, I wasn't taking notes so I forgot them.
Mostly he said the power vampires have is to present what we fear. For instance, in the 1950s, there was a film released that featured the last man alive in a world of vampires, and the isolation and monstrosity of man. There's usually an underlying sexual vibe running through vampire stories -- the femme fatale of Victorian literature presenting the fear of sexually forward women, which he said probably would be as frightening in Victorian society as a vampire.
The vampires of Anne Rice novels were much more personable. And the nature of the monster was explored and to a degree reduced. And other vampires -- "The Lost Boys" -- highlighted a monsterhood of idle willfulness.
He described "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" as the best thing on television, and talked for several minutes about Buffy and Angel and how the nature of what the monsters are was blurred all over the place in that show.
When he started taking questions, I got to ask the first question. I asked him what he thought of Dracula's appearance in "Buffy." He was instantly able to give the season and episode number and apologized to the audience for being something of a geek. He said he was happy with it, that it was true to the story and the character, mostly and while he didn't like the actor who played him, homework had certainly been done.
All in all, it was a wonderful lecture and while I'm certain I've gotten things muddled and confused in my recounting it, the man knew his stuff and was wildly entertaining. All errors are mine.
* heads over to see what kind of headache he's looking at for Monday's paper *
Toodles.
In fact, I've finished a good chunk of my work for tomorrow, as well.
I'm not going to have much to do tomorrow at all.
This worries me slightly, because tomorrow may be incredibly difficult. Or it might be a complete breeze. It all depends on whether there's a story for my section front on Monday or not.
I'll know before I leave.
But for right now, today has breezed by so swimmingly I was thinking of turning in a review of "Lost."
But instead I'm going to talk about vampires.
Last Thursday, Jamieson Ridenhour, an English professor from Bismarck, came to the Minot State University campus and talked at length about vampires.
He cited the first person to write about vampires was a scientist of sorts in the 17th century, who travelled throughout Eastern Europe to demystify strange stories of the benighted countryside. He wanted to disprove the stories and reaffirm his personal theology, and as he wrote -- at length -- he found that he mostly could but he had serious doubts. Because based on actual observation -- which people just really hadn't done a lot of up to that point -- there were some strange things happening with the dead bodies he was unearthing.
There were stories that people were writing about strange beings that had unusual powers of dangerous personal charisma, drawn from ancient folk tales -- the sort that have arisen in every culture. One thing he mentioned that I thought was very interesting was the Chinese version of vampires, which sucked spinal fluid. The first thing I thought of -- besides "Ew!" -- is the episode "She," in which Jhiera, a beautiful demon of more or less Asian cast, was escaping a home dimension where she could be controlled via mutilation of her spine. I wondered if Joss was trying to pay homage to Eastern vampire legends, and if he was, I suddenly find I have a little more respect for the episode. Would Kai have influenced him at all in this? I know so little about her, honestly.
Then Ridenhour discussed the vampires that began appearing in literature toward the end of the 18th century into the 19th, most famously in epic poetry of a darkly sexual nature and the adventures of the femme fatale. The folkeloric vampires (which were nasty creatures), and Byronic hero-types, which as he described the character fit Joss's image of Angel perfectly -- dark, brooding, impossibly handsome, around which there was, well, swooning -- both of the male and female persuasion, which fits some of Doyle's hero worship and the gay-friendly ideal Py has long argued about the show.
According to Ridenhour. Lord Byron himself did not write about vampires, although a jilted male lover did, producing a manuscript describing a tall, dark, brooding man who sucked the life from people and cast them aside, initially presenting the story to a publisher as being from Lord Byron. Byron may have taken the theme somewhere afterwards but I wasn't taking notes and he did talk a lot.
He discussed Bram Stoker's "Dracula," saying it was unusually well-written -- for him (Stoker was a stage manager primarily and his other writing was mostly forgettable), and is in fact still worth reading. Also, he noted, other Victorian literature that's still in print -- which "Dracula" is -- has been out of print and then revived at some point (except for maybe superstars like Dickens). "Dracula" has been in print ever since it was first pressed something like 120 years ago.
The 20th century put vampires on film, and while Stoker's widow refused to release the rights to "Dracula," it was finished as "Nosferatu," and then all copies were destroyed (because it was still unmistakeably "Dracula"). Except for two cans which were discovered in a vault after everyone's death, sometime in the 1930s, which is how we've managed to see it.
There were all sorts of vampire movies produced and released, however. He listed the most significant ones, but again, I wasn't taking notes so I forgot them.
Mostly he said the power vampires have is to present what we fear. For instance, in the 1950s, there was a film released that featured the last man alive in a world of vampires, and the isolation and monstrosity of man. There's usually an underlying sexual vibe running through vampire stories -- the femme fatale of Victorian literature presenting the fear of sexually forward women, which he said probably would be as frightening in Victorian society as a vampire.
The vampires of Anne Rice novels were much more personable. And the nature of the monster was explored and to a degree reduced. And other vampires -- "The Lost Boys" -- highlighted a monsterhood of idle willfulness.
He described "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" as the best thing on television, and talked for several minutes about Buffy and Angel and how the nature of what the monsters are was blurred all over the place in that show.
When he started taking questions, I got to ask the first question. I asked him what he thought of Dracula's appearance in "Buffy." He was instantly able to give the season and episode number and apologized to the audience for being something of a geek. He said he was happy with it, that it was true to the story and the character, mostly and while he didn't like the actor who played him, homework had certainly been done.
All in all, it was a wonderful lecture and while I'm certain I've gotten things muddled and confused in my recounting it, the man knew his stuff and was wildly entertaining. All errors are mine.
* heads over to see what kind of headache he's looking at for Monday's paper *
Toodles.