Essays and Other Pieces of Literature

[Laharls_Wrath]

Post any interesting essays/stories you write here
I know I would be interested in reading them
*cough*Nitrovampireessay*cough*
also, I will enforce topicality within this topic

[Laharls_Wrath]

Oct 19, 2009 18:16:10 GMT -5 Chromeo said:

Oh yeah, and here we are...

The Modern Vampire
A comparison of “Let the Right Ones in” and “True Blood”


The image of the pale, bloodsucking vampire first became engraved on the western psyche in the late 18th century thanks to works like Bram Stokers “Dracula”. However, the popularity of the Vampire eventually waned. In recent years, the mythology of the Vampire has experienced a massive resurgence. So how has the modern Vampire changed to appeal to modern audiences?
In this essay I will be comparing Swedish alternative film “Let the Right Ones in” and American TV drama “True Blood”. These modern Vampire media deal with the subject matter in very different ways. However, they both use the metaphor of Vampirism to explore a deeper social concept.

“Let the Right Ones in” is a film that focuses on the life of a boy in his early teens growing up in urban Sweden. In contrast with more traditional films that deal with the issues of growing up in a modern society, “Right Ones” takes a morbid tone, and is highly violent and sexual, with an 18+ rating. The protagonist is a quiet child, who is constants bullied and abused by a group of classmates. He plans, or perhaps just fantasises about revenge in secret, training with a knife and keeping a set of newspaper clippings on violent crime. However, he apparently lacks the courage to either speak up about his difficulties or live his dreams of violent murder. He suffers in silence until meeting what appears to be a young girl, who he later learns is a vampire. She helps him to gain courage to stand up to his tormentors, while her aging partner quietly murders the townsfolk by night to feed her.

“True Blood” is a TV drama made by HBO which centres on a telepathic waitress working in a small town in the American Midwest. In this series, Vampires have come out of secrecy, and are now fully know to society, thanks to a synthetic blood drink (True Blood). The series location and themes draw an obvious parallel to the struggles faced by African Americans in the past and today. The metaphor of Vampires is used to explore prejudice and fear towards the black community during the civil rights era. As the protagonist gets to know the Vampire and eventually enters a relationship with him, almost all of her friends and family tell her she is getting too close to him. This is obviously reminiscent of the stigma against mixed race relationships that is still held today in some communities.

The portrayal of Vampires in both of the pieces is far more forgiving than the Vampire tales of old. In True Blood, the Vampire is painted as a victim or discrimination rather than a silent predator, and even the Vampire from Right Ones is showed as a sympathetic figure, despite her murders, as the film shows us a more human side or Vampirism. This is perhaps one of the defining characteristics of the Modern Vampire, a human side not seen in the emotionless killers of “Dracula” and similar works.

[Tails82]

All my essays are boring...

[Laharls_Wrath]

some might not be

[Laharls_Wrath]

Oct 20, 2009 15:51:23 GMT -5 Laharls_Wrath said:

Oct 19, 2009 18:16:10 GMT -5 Chromeo said:

Oh yeah, and here we are...

The Modern Vampire
A comparison of “Let the Right Ones in” and “True Blood”


The image of the pale, bloodsucking vampire first became engraved on the western psyche in the late 18th century thanks to works like Bram Stokers “Dracula”. However, the popularity of the Vampire eventually waned. In recent years, the mythology of the Vampire has experienced a massive resurgence. So how has the modern Vampire changed to appeal to modern audiences?
In this essay I will be comparing The Swedish alternative film “Let the Right Ones in” and American TV drama “True Blood” show many comparisons. These modern Vampire media deal with the subject matter in very different ways. However, they both use the metaphor of Vampirism to explore a deeper social concept.

“Let the Right Ones in” is a film that focuses on the life of a boy in his early teens growing up in urban Sweden. In contrast with more traditional films that deal with the issues of growing up in a modern society, “Right Ones” takes a morbid tone, and is highly violent and sexual, with an 18+ rating. The protagonist is a quiet child, who is constants bullied and abused by a group of classmates. He plans, or perhaps just fantasises about revenge in secret, training with a knife and keeping a set of newspaper clippings on violent crime. However, he apparently lacks the courage to either speak up about his difficulties or live his dreams of violent murder. He suffers in silence until meeting what appears to be a young girl, who he later learns is a vampire. She helps him to gain courage to stand up to his tormentors, while her aging partner quietly murders the townsfolk by night to feed her.

“True Blood” is a TV drama made by HBO which centres on a telepathic waitress working in a small town in the American Midwest. In this series, Vampires have come out of secrecy, and are now fully know to society, thanks to a synthetic blood drink (True Blood). The series location and themes draw an obvious parallel to the struggles faced by African Americans in the past and today. The metaphor of Vampires is used to explore prejudice and fear towards the black community during the civil rights era. As the protagonist gets to know the Vampire and eventually enters a relationship with him, almost all of her friends and family tell her she is getting too close to him. This is obviously reminiscent of the stigma against mixed race relationships that is still held today in some communities.

The portrayal of Vampires in both of the pieces is far more forgiving than the Vampire tales of old. In True Blood, the Vampire is painted as a victim or discrimination rather than a silent predator, and even the Vampire from Right Ones is showed as a sympathetic figure, despite her murders, as the film shows us a more human side or Vampirism. This is perhaps one of the defining characteristics of the Modern Vampire, a human side not seen in the emotionless killers of “Dracula” and similar works.

I think I fixed it
other than that it good, just a bit short

[Laharls_Wrath]

I could post the essay comparing the connotation of rule to that of govern if anyone wants to read it (which I doubt). It is the one I got the B- on

[little j ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ ✔]

The closest I have to an essay is this.

[Tails82]

In De Rerum Natura, Lucretius explains the Epicurean philosophy regarding nature and the universe. In Book II.216-2.268, he explains that everything in existence is made up of atoms, which are too small to be seen by the naked eye. These atoms fall through the void, slightly swerving as they fall to combine with one other and form objects. Without this slight swerve, Lucretius explains, atoms would never have come into contact with each other and nothing would exist, since the atoms would continue to fall through the void and never combine with each other. Not only did the swerve lead to the formation of existence itself, but it also accounts for chance and free will. Lucretius explains that the swerve allows mankind to make its own choices to some extent, since nothing is predestined to occur. The atomists’ theory, supported by Epicurus, Democritus and Lucretius, has great implications. If everything in nature is governed according to rational principles, it would make no sense for atoms to swerve out of this natural order. The Epicureans went against determinism by trying to find a middle ground, saying there are no divine powers influencing the world but arguing that free will is still possible, attributing this possibility to the swerve.
Lucretius, in his argument for the swerve, first describes the basic idea which was set forth by Epicurus. Corpora cum deorsum rectum per inane feruntur ponderibus propriis, incerto tempore ferme incertisque locis spatio depellere paulum, (Lucretius 2.217-19). “The bodies are sent straight downwards through the void by their own weight, at an uncertain time and location, that they swerve a little from their course.” Lucretius finds the basis of existence and free will within this swerve. Without the swerve, atoms would not collide, and nothing would come into existence. These atoms that fall and collide with each other are too small to be seen by the naked eye, and the swerve is also indiscernible. tantum quod momen mutate dicere possis (2.220). “Only so much movement that you are able to say their movement has been changed.” Although they are small, the atoms collide from the effects of this swerve to form objects, constantly assembling, disassembling, and reassembling into new combinations.
According to Lucretius, the swerve of atoms also allows for free will, as it adds the element of chance to an otherwise deterministic theory put forth by the other atomists. Nam dubio procul his rebus sua cuique voluntas principium dat et hinc motus per membra rigantur (2.261-2). “For doubtless, his own free will for each man gives the beginnings of movements for these things, and these movement are diffused through the limbs.” Man possesses free will, and Lucretius argues that human will is capable of spurring the atoms to action. Motion is observed, but this motion would not occur without a conscious effort. Omnis enim totum per corpus materiai copia conciri debet concita per artus onmis ut stadium mentis conixa sequantur (2.266-8). “For all the supply of material throughout the whole body must be stirred up so that, having made the effort, strives to follow the mind.” The mind acts first, urging the limbs of the body to movement.
To a small extent, Lucretius says, living things have the capability to spur on movement of atoms. “Lucretius demonstrates that in both kinds of motion-voluntary and forced-the mind does, or may, initiate action of the body” (Avotins p.79). Without the swerve Lucretius describes, there would be no free will, as everything would be predestined to move in a set pattern. In fact, he says, without this swerve the atoms would continue to fall through the void, never combining to form any objects at all, and existence would cease to be. While Lucretius believed that existence was subject to certain natural principles, he did not believe in a world where every action was predetermined to happen. The swerve accounts for the slight deviation in the atoms falling through the void, allowing free will to exist.
Lucretius was an important advocate of Epicureanism in that he brought Epicurean ideas from Greek society into the Roman world. “Lucretius is not a great philosopher…he is rather an intelligent disciple, who can assimilate and expound his master’s doctrines and his master’s unsparing confutations of other thinkers” (Hose p.163). It is also important to remember that Lucretius wrote in poetry, desiring to get his message across through an enticing poetic account rather than through prose. Lucretius was not introducing new material to the Epicurean argument, but rather introducing the philosophy of Epicurus to the Romans.
The critics of Epicureanism adopted a different view of existence. Cicero, in Book I of De Finibus, says he opposes the ideas set forth by the atomists such as Democritus and Epicurus. He states it is inaccurate for both Democritus and Epicurus to believe that atoms have been in a downward movement through the void for an eternity, with no cause and no beginning to their movement. Cicero then questions how Epicurus could justify the notion of a swerve, calling it a “childish fancy” (Cicero I.vi.19), since it is impossible for the atoms to swerve for all time without a cause to set this swerve in motion. “Epicurus says the atoms swerve without a cause,-yet this is the capital offense in the natural philosopher, to speak of something taking place uncaused” (I.vi.19). The idea that the motion of atoms did not have a beginning, but rather has been occurring for eternity, is impossible. Cicero argues that there had to be some cause for the movement of these atoms.
Also, Cicero points out that even though the swerve is used by Epicureans to explain how objects can come into existence through the collision of atoms, the swerve goes against the natural system of falling atoms Epicurus is arguing for. Also, Cicero points out “If all atoms swerve, none will ever come to cohere together; or if some swerve while others travel in a straight line…this riotous hurly-burly of atoms could not possibly result in the ordered beauty of the world we know” (I.vi.20). By adding a swerve to explain how objects come into existence, Epicurus damages his argument for an orderly, eternal universe made up of falling atoms. Either the swerve exists, and the atomist theory becomes flawed, or the swerve does not exist, and existence becomes impossible. Since there is an existence, Cicero argues that the Epicurean theory is incorrect.
While critics argued that the Epicurean system was flawed because of the idea that a swerve existed which defied the orderly system of atoms falling through the void, Lucretius believed this swerve was extremely important. “It is clear from Lucretius’ treatment that he did not regard the ‘swerve’ as a weakness which must be glossed over and disguised, but as a strong point of cardinal importance in the system” (Bailey, p.318). While Lucretius believed in an orderly progression of atoms, he rejected the notion that what took place throughout existence was predetermined to happen. Instead, he saw the swerve as capable of explaining how humans are capable of making choices and possess free will. Without the capacity for free will allowed by the swerve, there would be no need for a moral system.
While ultimately the concept of a swerve is flawed, as it would go against the natural order, it does have an important purpose. Although Epicureans agreed with the atomist view that natural laws rather than divine powers governed existence, the strict materialism set forth by the atomists made it impossible for free will to exist. “The Atomists had set up a materialist philosophy directed solely by uniform laws of cause and effect…Epicurus, unwilling in his way to risk his moral system, tried to escape from the impasse without abandoning a materialist position” (Bailey p.321). The swerve of the atoms allows for the possibility of free will, and without it everything would be predetermined, making a moral system impossible. The act of will moves the mind to action, which in turn causes the limbs to move. The mind initiates the action, and the will is capable of acting or not acting on thoughts.
While the idea of the swerve may weaken the theory of the atomists, it allows for free will and the notion that people are responsible for their actions. “The one phenomenon to which the swerve does make a definite contribution is the purposeful movements of living beings. Natural events in general are aimless, according to [Epicurus], and therefore require no special freedom from normal atomic motion in order to be explained” (Long, pp.160-61). The Epicurean view goes against the idea of predestination, instead arguing that while nature and all existence is subject to basic natural principles, the mind is capable of making decisions and spurring on atoms to movement if it chooses. In this way the idea of a world dominated by cause and effect relationships is challenged.
The main Epicurean argument is that the world is made up of atoms, which are always falling through an infinite void. These atoms combine to form objects, and are constantly arranging and rearranging. These combinations are made possible by the argument that as the atoms fall, they swerve slightly and collide with each other, bringing existence into being and allowing free will to occur. Epicurus set forth this view, adopting Democritus’ atomist position and adding the swerve in order to make the capacity for free will in humans a possibility. Lucretius also argued for Epicurean views, expressing Epicurus’ ideas in poetic verse and spreading knowledge of Epicurean views to Roman society.




(Enjoy!)

[Tails82]

Man that looks way smaller on the board D:

[thewave]

tl;dr

[Chromeo]

Suddenly the essays I have to write don't seem so bad.

[Chromeo]

I guess this isn't really an essay, but it's homework anyway...

[Tails82]

Note to self: kill AOL

[Chromeo]

Uh... Sorry.

[Tails82]

It loads halfway and disappears >_>