SCENE I
[A forensics laboratory in Northern Ireland. Two anthropologists stand over an operating table. The light is interrogating. The backdrop is dim and the bay windows dark. One figure is male, the other female. The decrepit mass on the table resembles a skeleton hide.]
SCIENTIST Scalpel.
ASSISTANT Doctor?
SCIENTIST Yes, Laura?
ASSISTANT The spec. data indicates dairy and meat digestion, which corroborates our highborn hypothesis.
SCIENTIST Further testing is needed for conformation Laura.
ASSISTANT Rory, we are so close. It’s all here. God willing--it’s all in front of us.
SCIENTIST Have you read Aeschylus?
ASSISTANT Don’t lecture me Rory. The nails are filed. The hair is gelled with French oils. The skin is laced with lavender extract. The bowels are ritualistically dismembered. This man was a Brahman, or a Druid, or even a King! A King Rory! Imagine that! The implications--think of the implications.
SCIENTIST Even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart. And in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.
ASSISTANT I don’t believe in God.
SCIENTIST Do you know why my parents named me Rory?
ASSISTANT No I’ve never known.
SCIENTIST My namesake was the last of the Irish Kings. Long after the high kings at Tara--long after the extinction of the giant wolves--and long before my lineage could possibly be traced. We are the descendents--the bastards--of god-kings who spat in the face of Christian Gods and worshipped the bogs they crawled out from.
[The scene fades to black.]
SCENE II
[The stage is suddenly illuminated exposing a stone cavern ordained with megaliths--
each baring an intricate carving. Three blood-filled cauldrons rest beneath three
archways exiting the tomb temple.]
KING Bring him forward!
[Three hooded figures drag forward the tortured body of a richly clad clansman.]
HERETIC Vile! Unclean! Usurper of my father’s throne!
KING Silence doomed one. God has spoken.
HERETIC You desecrate the stone throne. You, who would call yourself God and King of men, you that dare the slave come hither? Covered with an antic face. With no fear or scorn at our solemnity. By the stock and honor of my kin, I’ll see you struck dead from this life or the next. In dirt or pine, from the soil I’ll dry your roots and poison your herds. I’ll famine your slaves and watch from below, as you too are unseated! I’ll greet you with open arms and the embrace of a fervent worm--eager to digest.
KING Flesh-eater you will not be given the ritual of Passover. Take him to the bogs, make him a eunuch, tie weights to his limbs and feed him to the sludge of the earth. Forever he shall rot--till the very ends of time.
HERETIC I curse you! You and your misbegotten sons of whores! I’ll see you doomed for this and I will rise again! I’ll eat the flesh of false kings and bastard children! I’ll return for mine! A curse on you and all who call you true King! I’ll haunt you and yours hereafter, till the very end of time.
KING [betraying a hint of fear]
Cut out his tongue.
[Scene fades as HERETIC is carried away convulsing in rage.]
Here’s a picture of the zombie jaw:
Normal jaw on the left; zombie jaw on the right (with a larger jawbone and thicker muscle). Allegedly, “Important modifications occur to the zombie jaw. Extra bone is deposited on the lower jaw to form an attachment point for larger chewing muscles. These adaptations enable zombies to bite through skull and bone and get at the pillars of their diet: brains and bone marrow.” Wow, cool. I decided to believe that this was possible…I have little to no evidence to the contrary and I don’t know anything about biology (human or otherwise) so I can’t hypothesize.
Beyond that, “zombie teeth are not adapted to the powerful forces exerted on them by the jaw. Teeth crack and fall out, and the holes they leave behind leak sludge-like zombie blood. Eventually, all their teeth are gone, and a zombie is forced to chew with its exposed jawbones.” Wow, neat. Again, I decided to believe FVZA. I suppose it makes sense using the typical representation of zombies, considering that their super-human strength and indifference or insensitivity to pain would allow them to disregard the whole teeth situation. Unless they do care, which they might, but that’s not what this is about. Humans can already do a great deal of damage with their teeth, so it doesn’t seem like a stretch to imagine zombified versions biting through skin and skull with equal success. They would simply chomp down full force on whatever body part they can, until the teeth, or exposed jaw for the toothless, connects with the opposite side.
I tried to find other “credible” resources to answer this question, but that wasn’t a thing. So I’m left with what's above as the only seemingly plausible, non-Yahoo user generated response to my question. I would be lying if I said I was satisfied, but there it is. Zombies have teeth, unless they don’t, and either way they’ll try to bite you and it will hurt.
I'll be 'presenting' this story today. Thought if you were interested in the presentation it might be worth a read.
Cheers,
W.
What excited me about this beer is how zombie culture is consistently and persistently making its presence seen in everyday society, even in ways I've never encountered. As we've discussed in class, zombieism has a foothold in today's culture. Whether it's through television, film, literature, or through products like Zombie Dust, American culture seems to have a keen interest in zombies and zombie-related products. This is the first time I've personally seen any type of zombie-related alcohol, and knowing there is such a thing is pretty exciting. Then to learn that it's really good was even better, but we all know that anything zombie related is always amazing. Reading through some other blog posts from the class I've learned about other products that are centered around the zombie phenomenon and it's clear that zombie interest is not only present in our culture but flourishing.
The folks at Three Floyds Brewing Company describe this beer by saying that, "this intensely hopped and gushing undead pale ale will be ones only respite after the zombie apocalypse. Created with our marvelous friends in the comic industry." I think it's cool that they wanted to create a zombie theme with this beer. It's their most popular and well-thought-of beer and they wanted to put an undead spin on it. What's funny to me is how some reviews describe it:
- "Holy sh*t, it's like being slapped in the face with citrus, tropical, and pine blast."
- "The beer poured a nearly crystal clear, golden-amber."
- "I would drink this every day if it was possible. Seek out this beer and savor every sip."
Good aroma's and bright colors aren't things we normally associate with zombies but Zombie Dust manages to do it. So, if you come across this beer at any point, know that it's hard to come by and that it's amazing and pick some up. Honestly, what could be cooler than getting drunk off something called Zombie Dust?
The Apocalypse, in our cultural imagination at least, is some horrific event in which most, or all of the people on the planet die. This could be due to a meteor, alien invasion, robot uprising, divine intervention, zombies, or mutant molemen. It doesn't really matter. All that matters is the fact that millions of people are obsessed with the thought that at any moment some catastrophic event could kill everyone they loved. But not them. When someone envisions the Apocalypse, I would argue that they almost never picture themselves dying. It's always, "How would I deal with being one of the survivors?" This shows the life drive still in play, but it doesn't quite explain secretly hoping billions of people were dead.
I think our obsession with the world's end is just a way to divert our death drive onto something other than ourselves. I would say the same thing about violent video games. Without actually hurting other people, we are able to fantasize about death on a monumental scale. This fantasy satisfies our actual cravings, which are inherently violent, and allows us to go on functioning in society.
Zombies are an interesting manifestation of the Apocalypse. They are the most blunt version of Death we could envision (dead people walking), and I think this is why they are so popular. We picture ourselves slashing through a zombie head, or mowing them down with machine gun fire, and think nothing of it. They aren't alive, after all. We may even picture ourselves as happy to be in the Zombie Apocalypse, as it allows us the freedom to run around like a lunatic and kill everything that moves. Are we thankful to the zombies? Are we glad that they wiped out humanity? I think .001 people, if asked, would say they would be actually thankful if zombies wiped out humanity. On the other hand, zombies are their own genre now, with TV shows, movies, reproductions of classic novels, survival guides, etc. At what point does obsession become hope? And what does this hope mean? Unfortunately, the only way to really answer this question is to live through the Apocalypse, and that's probably not gonna happen is it?
1)The cylons were created by man. In some scenarios, the zombies were also created by man, either by Vodou (Delice), or science (28 Days/Weeks/Years Later).
2)They rebelled. the cylons rebelled against their creators, it was essentially a slave rebellion. I will argue here, because I want to, that zombies are rebelling against original human nature by feasting on live humans. They typically do not rebel against each other, apparently they only want the freshest meats, and for that I can't blame them. Although in Aimee Bender's Among Us, there is the parable (fable? are zombies animals? definitions can be flexible in this case) of the zombie eating other zombies and becoming just the eating anatomy. So cool.
3)They want to wipe us out. Although perhaps unintentionally, as far as we can observe, zombies appear to not want to live beside us. We are their food source. They don't seem to care that if they eat all of us, they won't have anything left to eat. But it doesn't appear that they even care about being less hungry, only that they are actively hungry. They don't get full. They just keep going, shark-like. I just relearned that sharks die if they stop swimming. Do zombies die if they stop eating/shambling? Eventually? Hard to tell. We also don't know how old sharks get, as in, how long they live. How long would zombies live, assuming they are actually decomposing, which much of the amazing special effects tell us they do?
4) They're really strong. Most zombies are really hard to fight off. They may have rotten pumpkin skulls, which are apparently easy to puncture with a good steak knife, or hack in half with a Samurai sword (still my favorite part of ANY Walking Dead episode, don't care what's happening), but they seem strong in the way that a creature unable to feel muscle/joint/bone strain is strong, with a disregard for their own bodily limitations.
5)They are governed by rules different from human ones. In terms of the uncanny aspect of zombie nature, they are frightening because they are unnatural. So, too, are cylons, because they operate beyond their programming, for reasons that are unknown and illogical to us. The cylons themselves believe they have souls, which is another interesting part of the show. They have a different religion than humans. While humans believe in the multiple gods of Kobol (origin planet), cylons believe in a One True God. Part of why the war is so ferocious, as it is partially a Holy War. Or perhaps fundamentally.
6) They don't need to eat or drink to survive. Whatever is keeping both cylons and zombies alive, it's not food or water. They run on willpower.
7) Destroy the brain. The first round of cylons, the heavily mechanized non-human ones, can only be killed with a shot to the head. And often it has to be an exploding round. Zombies, obviously same thing. New round of cylons, because they're more like humans, can be killed in humanish ways, they're just harder to catch or beat arm-wrestling.
8) They're not to be reasoned with. Metal cylons, the ones least like us (think Warm Bodies, or Zone One) just want to mess up your day. You cannot talk them out of it. Does not compute. They are programmed, by us or by nature, to obey that programming, which is kill or eat people. If you ask them to stop, they will use their fancy arm-weaponry or ghoulish grill to end you.
9) It's hard to tell how they can sense you. Cylons have this bar across where their eyes would be that has a red light that slides back and forth. Is it like radar? Is it showing images into its cylon brain? Is it like sonar? They also don't have ears. Or a nose. So how do they know we're there? Same for zombies. In The Naturalist, the zombies don't seem to be able to hear, although they seem to sense heat, and are drawn to fire. They can't observe something past the fire, but they do know when a human-type entity is near. Maybe we give off a certain kind of heat.
So which monster (I use the word loosely, as I think cylons are rather handsome, in the way that skyscrapers are handsome, or my cell phone) is more unsettling? Personally, cylons are truly terrifying, as they seem more plausible. Just look at the robotics coming out of Japan. The last episode of Battlestar shows lots of examples of current day robots, doing servile things like giving drinks on a platter, or dancing together on stage, or speaking. It's eery, in a Matrix-y way, to think that we may very well bring about our own doom, the machines taking our place in the great order of things. We cannot forever assume we will be the dominant life force on this planet, and certainly not in space. Zombies, on the other hand, seem highly implausible, the dead coming to life and wanting to eat us seems silly.
Any thoughts?
Also, if I got any of my Battlestar info wrong, please, please correct me.
To be completely honest, it has been a struggle to find a worthy topic to blog about. Everything I can think of has been meticulously picked over by classmates and with my spring-semester-zombified-drooling-at-my-desk-state, I found little to actually blog about.
So then I watched the first episode of the Walking Dead, again. I watched the perfectly bearded Rick saunter into a lawless Atlanta on horseback, discover huge mobs of Zombies, and flee into the confines of a M1 Abrams tank, its not actually an Abrams, but it was dressed up to look like one, so im going with it. But still, IT WAS A TANK.
Im not saying Rick could drive the damn thing, but how did it come to be in that position in the first place? Certainly, there are loads of factors that could be considered: maybe it was quickly overrun, maybe it ran out of gas, or was unwilling to fire on civilians and infected targets, etc. Still, the Abrams can be completely sealed, can travel up to 45mph, gets roughly 265mpg, a main gun, four extra lmgs (large machine gun) and has a crew of four. So it got me thinking...
Now, I completely understand that one of the founding principles of the Zombie genre is the complete destruction of military and any other kind of organized armed response. After all, thats what makes survivors so unique and compelling characters; they are on their own. The cavalry is not charging over the next hill.
Now turning our attention to notable Zombe works and class discussions, do you think the military/defense/police would be eradicated if there was a Zombie apocalypse now?
Zone One- The Marines and Army are mentioned as effectively clearing Zone One of all the walkers, yet as the end of the book suggests, nothing stops the dead. The wall is overrun, the other 'Pheenie' holdouts go dark, and the Zombies take back the city. Zombies 1- Humanity-0
Walking Dead- No clear military presence, everything appears to be overrun. Atlanta and the CDC episode both display scenes of failed defenses. The Governor kills a band of National Guardsmen, but they admit they have been cut off for weeks. Zombies 1 vs. Humanity .5 (Some survived, well, until the Governator.)
World War Z- The Battle of Yonkers was a complete failure for the US military. Cold war tactics and the 'advanced battle net' result in a widely publicized disaster. Eventually after the Honolulu conference, the military (heavily augmented by civilians) regains control of the continent by producing a cost effective rifle SIR and the lobo-thing, while fighting in regulated premodern infantry squares. The war is somewhat over and post Zack-World learns to cope with the Zombie threat. Humanity 1 vs. Zombies .5- Undersea Zombies= terrifying.
THIS IS NOT A TEST- Had to dig deep to remember this, no mention of the military, right? Between the whole tween romance and survival bit, I dont recall any passages addressing this. That said, I think the zombies in this book are easily the most powerful/effective. Humanity 0 vs. Zombies 1.
Pride and Prejudice and Zombies- Between the Kill Bill-esque vibe and the gentrified love triangles, the militia was mentioned on numerous occasions. Fighting the good fight and all that, Britain Soldiers On!
Humanity 1 vs. Zombies .5- I would have called it a tie, as the war is still ongoing, but Ill call it a wedding gift and give it to humanity.
Final Score-
Zombies 4 vs. Humanity 2.5.
Damnit. We lost.
Disclaimer-
This is based off of my completely arbitrary scoring system and I possibly could have miscounted. Im not going back to check. Feel free to dispute.
Dont despair!
Showcasing the incredible proliferation of the Z genre, I came across two examples of governments and militaries preparing for worst, in the unlikely (read inevitable) event of the Zombie Apocalypse.
Britain- Owing to the freedom of information act, the Ministry of Defense has outlined a plan to be led by the Cabinet Office, to return England to its pre-attack glory.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9721072/Britain-is-well-prepared-to-fight-apocalyptic-zombie-invasion.html
United States- Some security consulting company, named HALO corp., ran a Zombie training seminar in San Diego in October to run simulations of VIP escorts and mass hysteria. Quite a production it seems. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/29/zombie-apocalypse-trainining-military-halo-corp-_n_2036996.html
So, if this rambling blog post has proven anything, is that there are multiple responses and outcomes in the event of the Zombie apocalypse. Perhaps the military will be completely annihilated like Zone One? Or maybe it will struggle to survive, ultimately rising from the ashes, as we've seen in Brook's World War Z? Or maybe all we need to do is hole up in the Winchester, grab a pint, and wait for the army to save the day, as it happend in Shaun of the Dead?
Thoughts?
Demeter Fragrances describes Zombie for Him as "a combination of dried leaves, mushrooms, mildew, moss and earth." And Zombie for Her as basically the same thing but with "dregs from the bottom of the wine barrel for a feminine touch." This Huffington Post article is less enthusiastic about how these zombie fragrances could possibly smell nice. The men's version "smells a lot like the volcano exhibit at the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science." (Definitely just New Mexico's museum and not any other.) And the women's "smells like grass, but not fresh smelling grass. It's more like the lawn clippings that have been sitting in trash bags for weeks because nobody wants to lug those things to the curb to be picked up." But with wine, because women smell like wine, right?
So, I know that the zombie craze is gaining speed and popularity, and it's definitely a market to cash in on, so I don't fault Demeter for coming up with something like this... but really? I'm so curious about how well this product is going to do. And I honestly want to know - would you buy this? Would you buy it because it's a zombie perfume, and it's kind of funny, and we're all in a zombie class? Would you buy it because you think it could come in handy when the zombie breakout begins and we can all try out The Walking Dead method of disguising our human scent? (Provided it doesn't rain.)
Is this zombie craze just going to turn into the next teeny-bopper fad like that Twilight thing? I hope not, but possibly. That's where all the money is, right?
We all know that AMC's The Walking Dead is about zombies. It says it right in the name. If someone
were to ask you what the best zombie TV show is, you'd probably immediately say The Walking Dead because there aren't any other zombie TV shows. False. At it's core, Game of Thrones is about zombies. The first scene of the pilot episode shows a dead child walking around all blue-eyed and frosty mouthed. I think it's time to compare and contrast.
1. Apocalypse Progress
The Walking Dead: This show starts out with Rick waking up in a hospital and stumbling outside to learn that civilization has fallen apart and most people on the planet are dead. He also realizes that most of the people on the planet that are dead are walking around trying to kill the living. This causes Rick, and everyone else that survived the outbreak to have to change the way they live, and deal with the societal, emotional, and psychological effects of the apocalypse. These characters have to adapt to a harsh world where none of the normal rules apply.
Game of Thrones: This show starts out in a similar manner; characters realizing there are forces that can bring the dead back to life, and not in the Jesus way. Problem is, nobody believes the guy that saw the zombie and they behead him. There are however, hints that something really bad is going to happen in the not-so-distant future. Winter is Coming is a phrase commonly heard in the show, and in the books it's made more apparent that winters last a long time in Westeros, years and years. While the characters in The Walking Dead have had the world they knew ripped away from them, the people in GoT have the chance to prevent this apocalypse.
2. Zombies
The Walking Dead: These zombies are more or less the typical model. Slow, dumb, intent on eating flesh, yadayada, etc. There isn't an explanation as to why they're around, but it's shown that everyone who dies becomes one. When alone, they don't present too much of a threat, however in groups they can be devastating. They can be tricky to kill as they have to be de-brained, however they are very predictable, to the point where they can be used for certain purposes. A large problem with these zombies is the fact that everyone turns when they die. Death is unavoidable, and so it seems are zombies.
GoT: These zombies are a horse of a different weight class. They are closer to the traditional voodou model, as they are resurrected by the magic of their masters. These zombies are much more dangerous, as they can be controlled to do whatever the White Walkers want. They can wield weapons and sneak up on people and their motives aren't so base. They are also more difficult to kill. Instead of whacking them on the noggin, they must die by fire. While in modern times there are lighters, gasoline, and even flamethrowers, in a medieval world like GoT creating fire is more of a process, and wouldn't always be practical if you were ambushed.
3. Humans
The Walking Dead: In this world, humans were for the most part good, with a few bad eggs. After the apocalypse happened though, they were forced to become more selfish and to give up some of their humanity in order to survive. People like the Governor have risen to power because the apocalypse has hardened them. Even the good guys like Rick and Michonne have no problems abandoning a helpless hitchhiker to his death, simply because they did not know him.
GoT: Humans in this world have had a much rougher go than those in the Walking Dead. Save the lords and ladies, most people are poor and live the hard lives of those before technology really caught on. Murder and rape are a pretty common factor, and as such there are lots of bad guys and the good guys usually end up getting punished for their actions. For example, Ned Stark gets beheaded for telling the truth, and Jaime Lannister gets his hand chopped off for trying to help Brienne(he may not be the typical good guy, but he's not that bad). If life's this hard now, imagine how shitty it will be when the zombies come.
These two shows are very different in style, themes, and pretty much everything else except that they both have zombies, and even the zombies are pretty different. However, they are both about zombies at the core. Hopefully George R.R. Martin and Robert Kirkman(less likely) don't die before they finish their series', and if they do, hopefully they will come back as zombies and finish them.
It isn't hard to understand where the UW police are coming from; imagine if a real public danger were to arise when they were responding to a misguided report about nerf guns? However, I think that the pros of this 'Zombies' game and what it represents far outweigh the cons. If the students of UW were to cease playing this game due to recently heightened awareness of public threats, it would simply be caving in, and contributing, to a collective consciousness of fear. This might be somewhat of a stretch, but I thought that this article exemplified some of the points that Sara Sutler-Cohen sheds light on in "Plans Are Pointless". Sutler-Cohen demonstrates how it is that zombies have evolved, in popular culture that is, to become part of a survivor narrative, rather than simply a representation of total apocalypse. If the UW police were to put an end to the "Zombies Versus Humans" game, as is implied might happen in the article, their actions would be more in line with the now obsolete conception that zombies are the end-all be-all harbingers of the apocalypse. The police, regardless of their motivation, would be treating the "zombies" as a threat, rather than a manageable problem. As Sutler-Cohen points out, we are well beyond this; zombies are here to stay and we, including the UW police, must come to terms with this fact.
On a practical note, rather than demand that the students end this tradition, which has grown to include over 250 participants, I think a much more positive solution would be for the participants to go to greater lengths to publicize the nature of this event. That way, spectators will not mistake their toy guns for real ones and police forces will be where they are needed most.
I’m in a book club. Our current read is a book called “The Tipping Point,” by a fellow called Malcom Gladwell. Thursday night, I had been reading the book prior to turning out the lights, and pieces of Gladwell’s ideas were still swimming around in the back of my head as I was drifting off. Somewhere in that mystical state between sleep and awake, I started to make some connections. To give you a brief summary, the premise of “the Tipping Point,” is that change doesn’t happen in a gradual, linear way, but instead eventually reaches a “tipping point,” at which change happens rapidly and drastically, often creating unexpected phenomena and radical transformations. Gladwell describes the Tipping Point as the “the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point” (12). It’s also a way of thinking that proposes that “ideas and products and messages and behaviors spread just like viruses do,” (Gladwell, 7) that in fact, many of the changes we witness in our society, are in essence, a kind of epidemic.
Thus, in my sleepy, half-dream state, certain lines from “Plans are Pointless,” started resonating in my head along with the bits from Gladwell’s book, particularly the idea that the Zombie is the “New Vampire,” and further, that the zombie “may be demonstrative of collective cultural anxieties of the day” (Sutlet-Cohen, 191). For whatever reason, it seems that zombies are relevant in today’s world. They have purchase here, in our society, at this particular moment. I began to wonder – if Zombies are the “New Vampire,” when was the “tipping point?” and how did it happen? Why zombies? Why now?
In Kyle Bishop’s article, “Dead Man Still Walking,” he posits that a zombie invasion hits closer to home for most Americans
“Because of the aftereffects of war, terrorism, and natural disasters so closely resemble the scenarios depicted by zombie cinema, such images of death and destruction have all the more power to shock and terrify a population that has become otherwise jaded to more traditional horror films. The most telling barometer of this modern age, therefore is to be found not in the romanticized undead protagonist of Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight series (2005-2008)…but in the unstoppable hoards of the zombie invasion narrative” (Bishop, 12).
This idea is further supported by the increasing use of zombies as a cultural metaphor to describe and explain ideas as diverse as banks reliant on government funds (zombie banks), to court cases (as described in Sutherland and Swan's "Corporate Zombies" essay) and computers, to, as one of the previous blog posters pointed out, the differences between modern Republicans and Democrats.
But why is the cultural climate now any different than other periods throughout modern history? When did this obsession with zombies all start? The suggestion in Sutler-Cohen’s article seemed to be that the current “Zombie Renaissance” as it were, began post 9/11. After researching a little, it seems that most scholars who study zombies and popular culture agree that 9/11 set off a stream of zombie films and media that has continued throughout the decade. In 2007, Peter Dendle, a zombie scholar at the University of Pennsylvania, published an article entitled “The Zombie as a Barometer of Cultural Anxiety.” In it he posits that zombies generally experience a resurgence during times of economic hardship, war, and other forms of societal stress. For instance, prior to 9/11, the last few times zombies have experienced such marked popularity was in the 1930’s (Great Depression), and in the 1960s (Vietnam War), respectively. Thus it seems that we can get a “read” on the state of the nation by looking at the number of zombie films made in a given year or span of years; zombie films, it appears, are a hallmark of bad times. Unsurprisingly, the reverse also seems to be true: the number of zombie films produced saw a noticeable decline during the halcyon era of the 1990s (Bishop, 12-14).
If we try to apply this information to the idea of the Tipping Point, things quickly become confusing. It’s difficult to say whether zombies are simply a reaction to certain stressors in society or whether zombie films were already becoming more popular, in a gradual way, until some series of events (such as 9/11) “tipped” the zombie film and transformed it into a cultural epidemic once more. Is the popularity and relevance of the zombie shifting to the rhythm of major events, or is there something to be said for the idea that certain small events or changes in cultural consciousness could “tip” the zombie from a B-movie interest to a blockbuster affair. Like I said, it’s hard to be sure.
Ironically, though, if the idea of the Tipping Point can be applied to the renewed interest and obsession with zombie films, literature and television, then the zombie genre has spread throughout our culture in much the same way that zombieism spreads in the context of those novels and films – like a virus. Something to think about.
Bibliography
Bishop, Kyle. American Zombie Gothic: The Rise and Fall (and Rise) of the Walking Dead in Popular Culture. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc. 2010. Online.
Bishop, Kyle. "Dead Man Still Walking." Journal of Popular Film and Television. 37.1 (2009): 16-25. Online.
Dendle, Peter. "The Zombie as a Barometer of Cultural Anxiety." Monsters and the Monstruous: Myths and Metaphors of Enduring Evil. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2007. 45-57. Online.
Gladwell, Malcom. The Tipping Point. New York, NY: Little, Brown and, 2002. Print.
Sutler-Cohen, Sara. “Plans are Pointless: Staying Alive Is as Good as it Gets.” Zombies Are Us: Essays on the Humanity of the Walking Dead. McFarland & Company, Inc. 183-193. Print.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/19/17826502-an-empty-metropolis-bostonians-share-photos-of-deserted-streets?lite
Recently realized I am short one post. Anyway, I'm sure many of us have been following the events in Boston this morning. Aside from the reality of whats going on, I was struck by the images of a locked down Boston. It makes me wonder about the chaotic, wrecked highways/cities we have described in books like World War Z and Zone One(the great panic and Last nights especially). In Walking Dead we see miles of traffic jams, and in one flashback the violent chaos of Atlanta. Would there be panic in the streets, looting and violence, or would people take shelter and try to let law enforcement/the military handle the threat.
It could come down to how much warning people had. In big storms, it seems like violence breaks out in before it hits, as people try to get supplies or evacuate(and of course after, if supply lines aren't re-established). Whatever we may think about the government, people have a strong tendency to cede to authority/experts in emergencies, which in fairness is usually a good idea.
However, in the apocalypse, these systems have failed, or are in the process of collapsing. Would the sight of the dead rising, or even infected running in the streets induce panic and disregard for whatever containment measures were being attempted? Or would most people barricade themselves even tighter than brave the outside. Basically, do you think our cities would implode, or quietly rot? I mostly wonder about initial outbreak cities, since I think that once a zombie plague got going, panic would be the almost certain option in cities that weren't hit early on.
(obviously this post isn't about Boston in particular or the events still going on, I just found the photos of a city locked down through emergency procedures extremely interesting/thought-provoking)