Final Essay Topic

For my final essay, I will be writing on the allegorical nature of Zombies, including the prevalence of zombie media in modern culture, and the variety seen in the genre of zombies. I will be focusing on the early origins of zombies, stemming from myths long ago and moving towards talking about what zombies signify to me and our current culture. I think that zombies can represent a multitude of things from consumerism, to terrorism, to environmental destruction and I will be focusing on how the vast variety of zombie films, tv shows, books, etc. convey these different allegories in our modern society. I will also discuss why exactly the zombie genre has become so popular, and how its prevalence is so telling of our current culture. I will use examples from Night of the Living Dead, to the Walking Dead, to funnier movies like Zombieland and Shaun of the Dead, as well as exploring other media like the book World War Z and the graphic novel the Walking Dead.

The Walking Dead

This is the third time this semester (and in my life) that I have loved a graphic novel. I think I am really starting to get into this genre as a serious form of literary entertainment.

The Walking Dead has been one of those shows that, since it came out, I have wanted to watch, but have never committed myself to. So this was a great introduction.
One thing I really liked about this graphic novel in particular was how quickly it moved. Within the first 10 panels you knew what it was basically about and who Rick Grimes was. And from there, no time was wasted on any bullshit. The authors cut right to it and moved it along at a enjoyable clip. Additionally, I found much of what was said to be very poignant. Like some people have noted, the part about how she was such a nice girl, and how the zombie infection didn't pick and choose its victims really stood out to me.
Also, after I read this first volume, I watched the first episode in the series. I loved it. I was really amazed at how closely it followed the first bit of the graphic novel. Reading the descriptions of the first 6 episodes on netflix, it seems like the first season is mainly the first volume of the graphic novel with some extra stuff thrown in.

Maybe now I will start watching the show and find the rest of the graphic novel to binge watch/read over winter break!

Flame Alphabet pt. 2

"Marta's unspoken question--why I had caused her harm--was one I would not have been able to answer. There was a small, decisive advantage to the language toxicity here. One did not have to stand there explaining oneself, inventing motives that might make sense to someone. Explanations of any kind, in fact, were simply extinct.
    Among the many rhetorical modes that had perished, it was this one I was not sorry to see go." (227).

This was a super powerful passage (and section of the book) in my opinion. This specifically really illuminates on of Marcus's main points. First of all, Sam knows what Marta is thinking, even with the complete absence of her words. She shows him that she is confused/upset/taken aback that he deliberately caused her harm. Additionally, this passage speaks to the futility and decorum that went hand in hand with language before the toxicity. That people have to constantly apologize and invent justifications for their actions is one of the most frustrating things about language often. Without language, no one is forced to invent meanings that "might make sense to someone." in this instance, the toxicity seems like a positive thing.
This whole second half of the book was riveting and really engaging.

The Flame Alphabet

"Had this parents built a locker beneath the stairs, as we did? Cut in a peephole, lined the little room with pillows? Had they shielded themselves from the speech of their offspring, effaced their hearing, or damaged the little ones themselves, stopped the reeking language as its source? Were they pumping white noise from the old slab radio, and did it not fully hide the child's speech? or perhaps the parents had already fled upstate. If they were smart. If they knew how to shut down their attachment apparatus and see they children for what they really, most essentially, were. Agents of such terrible mouth sounds that, relation or not, one hoped never to see them again." (105)

Damn. This passage, and this whole first half of the book is so full of heavy, mind-boggling, incomprehensible passages and narrations like this one. In particular, this passage highlights the sheer desperation bred from this epidemic. It shows to what lengths parents that once, and possibly still do, loved their children are forced to go to in order to have any hope of survival. I could not imagine being in the position these people are faced with in the novel. It is so unfathomable to have to flee your own blood just to survive and continue living. That's what makes this novel so powerful: Marcus digs deep into that which is unimaginable, and does it in a seemingly logical and justified way. 

Bounty

I found this novella fascinating and entertaining. From the first page, the tone was set and I was very intrigued and excited to read on. Saunders has a real gift for writing and he kept me engaged for all 25 pages.

One of the aspects I found most interesting was that Saunders chose not to portray all normals and all flaweds in the exact same way. Rather than portraying all normals as horrible people, they were portrayed more as slaves the system in their own regard. While the flaweds were truly the enslaved population, the normals that showed sympathy were not really able to express that. Of course there were many who were cruel and condescending towards the flaweds, but not all were the same. This added a level of truthfulness to this dystopian novella. 

I found this to be one of the most interesting readings we have done so far. 

Source Summary

I am going to write on the topic of atheism as it compares to religion in modern society.

"Atheism" J. Gordon Melton
This article defines atheism and gives a contextual history of atheistic beliefs. It defines atheism as the group of beliefs that do not recognize any form of deity. But rather than outright denying God as many Christians have contended in the past, modern atheists simply find no meaning in the term "God" and cannot find any rational to prove God's existence. The article also talks a lot about Marxist and non-marxist atheism and how in the 20th century, atheism has grown to be very important in the political arena. finally this article discusses the new ideas of neo-atheism, lead by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens. This neo-atheism is most notably defined by the aggressive and staunch stances of its leaders and the outright denial and rejection of other belief forms. This new movement has clout because many identify with the publicity brought to the beliefs.

"Answers to the Atheists" EJ Dionne Jr
This Washington Post article is essentially a qualification of the arguments of neo-atheism. Its author is a christian and ascribes to that faith. The part I found most interesting was the fact that the other forms of atheism were only targeting christianity, and neo-atheism is doggedly opposing all forms of religion in the world, often acting as radical as religious fundamentalists. The author admits that many christians do not questions themselves, while neo-atheists are asking the hardest questions in society.

"The New Atheism: Its Virtues and Its Vices"
This article does an awesome job of objectively comparing Christianity to atheism (which is what the basis of my essay is). Similar to the last article, it focuses a lot on the flaws of atheism, but has a lot of good points about the positive side as well. The part I found most helpful was about atheism and its scientific foundings, something I plan on talking a lot about in the essay.

Ragnarok

"The grief of the gods was appalling. They broke down. They could not speak for weeping. Most affected of all was Odin: gods did not fall dead, and when the loveliest and gentlest god could be killed in a game, worse was still on the way. For a long time the assembled gods stood stupidly, unable to touch the body, or to move it. The bright hair ruffled in the light wind. Dark Hödur stood alone, listening to the sobbing. The thing child closed her eyes and tried to imagine the inside of his head and failed." (96).

This passage perfectly illustrates the point that A.S. Byatt is trying to make about gods, war, and destruction on earth (or in this case, in the mythical world). It is a beautiful passage because it illuminates so clearly how the gods feel about the death of the gentle, beautiful Baldur. The way it is written makes the grief and sheer shock palpable. It emphasizes that which is impossible can become possible. It is a paragon of incredulity. This is further emphasized with the fact that thin girl herself cannot even begin to imagine what is going on. 

This all ties in to the themes of the book. It makes a statement about the carelessness of the gods and those with power. The gods act reckless and thus pay for it. Furthermore this passage sheds light on the futility and fleeting nature of life. With these themes in mind, as well as the craftily composed syntax and imagery, this is one of the strongest passages I found in reading this book.

Quran Response

I have had no previous experience with the Qur'an so I was very unsure of what to expect. As a person who went through semi-formal Jewish education, it really surprised me how many similarities there were between the Old Testament/Torah and the Qur'an. I definitely identified with the part about how if people were so aloof that they refused to change their sinful ways (like in the story of Sodom and Gemorrah), God had the right to punish them. 
It was sort of hard to get into the cadence of the Qur'an translation and from what I've heard, it is completely different than it reads in its original, intended language. Obviously this is unrealistic, but I want to know how to speak it so I can hear it in its original cadence. 
Like Alex said, I was a bit off-put by how male heavy this reading was. Everything seemed to be about males or regarding males and, while I understand the patriarchal nature of these religious texts, it is definitely somehing to make note of.  

Book of Daniel

After the past few readings, I'm almost convinced the Bible might be good leisure reading...but I am not going to get ahead of myself.
This reading, had I not known it came from the Bible, might not have even seemed like a biblical text. Chapter 2 was very interesting and easy to read. The symbolism of the crushing and destroying of the kingdoms leaving nothing but God's eternal kingdom was very powerful.
Chapters 7-11 were a little repetitive in my opinion. I was sick of hearing about all of the dreams by the end of it.
Like Alex said, it was interesting to read a biblical story told from a first person perspective. I don' think I've ever read one that is in the vein.

This is pretty irrelevant, but when I was reading chapters 9, 10, and 11, I couldn't stop thinking about Game of Thrones with the King in the North, and the King in the South and all of the wars going on. Textually speaking, it was really similar, but I couldn't help but draw that connection.

Babel

Although I am not a religious person, I am fascinated by this story. I think it absolutely one of the coolest in the bible.
I love that it openly addresses the ideas of hubris, something that is consistently referenced in not only the bible, but also in many Greek and other ancient writings. The idea that man was capable to the point of frivolity due to the fact that everyone spoke the same language almost frightened God--an interesting notion. The people of Babel were building a tower so high that it was feared it would reach the heavens and man would, in turn, be on the same plane as God.
Although many believe this story to be admonition of hubris and pride among mankind, I almost see it/it could be interpreted as a celebration of multiculturalism. I know this is not the traditional belief, but when you consider the story, it makes sense.
Up until this point all of mankind lived in the exact same place and spoke the exact same language--very single faceted. Then God decides it might be nice if there was some diversity among his people, so he creates language, and spreads everyone all about the land, rather than in their one condensed place...I don't know, but I kinda like that interoperation better.

Bill Maher's Religulous

I'm preparing for the worst with this post...but here goes.
I absolutely loved this movie. And I don't mean any offense by saying that. I have struggled with the idea of religion and ascribing to one set of beliefs ever since I was 14/15 years old. I grew up in a reform (light) Jewish household. I celebrated all of the big holidays, and I was Bar Mitzvahed when I was 13. But in confirmation class when I was 15, the rabbi asked if I believed in God. When I said I wasn't sure, but that I was leaning more towards no, he told me flat out "you cannot be a Jew if you don't believe in God." And I never went back.
These staunch viewpoints held by so many people in the world have turned the idea of religion sour to me. And I think Bill Maher's documentary is a poignant, hilarious, and sacrilegious take on these ideas.
Sure he's an asshole, yeah he laughs at people's beliefs outright. But that's all part of his character. Like Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart, they appeal to a cynical and fed up audience. His qualities in no way make him a less intelligent person. In fact, that he is able to do these types of things makes his points even more effective in my mind.
I know many people will disagree with me, but the types of things Bill Maher said, the outright flaws he pointed out, and the unbelievable frustrations he has with the religious world happen to be many of the same things I believe.

Y: The Last Man

Although I said this about the last reading we did, this was absolutely my favorite reading of the year so far. It was not only an entertaining and fast-paced read, but also a very poignant and unique storyline.
From page one I was totally hooked. The dialogue was quick, the art was beautiful, and the way it kept jumping between minutes was very intriguing. In fact, the whole chronology of the story was very interesting to me. I have never read something that, in between pages, jumps anywhere from a second, to a minute, to a day, to a month. That was something that took some getting used to.
As for the characters, each one was so unique and interesting. Yorick's quirkiness and incessant optimism (or mockery of the situation) made him incredibly likable. Dr. Mann and Agent 355 were both incredibly mysterious in their own ways.
The authors do a great job of keeping the reader guessing all the way until the end. When Hero revealed she was an Amazonian I verbally said "oh shit!" while reading. When it ended I was almost upset and I googled Y: the Last Man to see if the other volumes were available online...they were not.
I also loved all of the references thrown in all over the place. First of all, I am huge shakespeare fan and the addition of Yorick and Hero made me laugh. My favorite reference was when Yorick says to 355 "if you'll be my bodyguard, you can call me Al" referring to the Paul Simon song.
The part that really got me was at the Washington Monument (phallically the memorial for men) and Yorick bonds with the woman over all of the dead musicians. That hit me deep and it all felt very real at that point. It was something I would never have thought of in a million years. It was such a simple thing, but it was so sad at the same time.
In general this was an incredibly fast paced read and it kept me guessing until the very end. I have never in my life considered myself a comic book person, but I just might go out and find the rest of the volumes to this amazing story.

My Imaginary Bunker

This was probably my favorite reading we have done so far this year. While it was not challenging in any way, shape, or form, it was incredibly poignant, well written, and entertaining. Additionally, I found myself nodding in agreement many times while reading this article.
Meghan Matthew Bergman is essentially a paranoid environmental cynic. She is unable to escape the horrifying reality that is climate change and the environment. I found that I shared many of her disenchantments with the current state of the earth.
Like Bergman, I often wonder "what can I do to save this doomed planet?" I know that I should be doing something, but I find I don't truly take legitimate and meaningful action.
Coming from an environmentally conscious place like Denver, Colorado, I have grown up with Bike-to-Work days, recycling, and locally sourced, organic produce. These things are all part of my reality. Yet when I read something like "My Imaginary Bunker" I realize that pretty much everything I have done to "help" the planet is for nought. The problem is, an 18 year old boy can not make a monumental change alone. And when I marvel at the beauty of the planet as Zizek and Allan Gurganus, I find myself forgetting that the polar bears and penguins are nearly extinct.
This is the harsh reality our generation is faced with. I realize that as I am writing this blog post, I am doing absolutely nothing to save the planet...
Oh well, I guess I will just go recycle this water bottle I have next to me.

Shock Doctrine

I found this reading to be incredibly poignant and interesting. Having never heard of the Shock Doctrine or Disaster Capitalism, it was very cool to learn about this and the ideas of Mira Klein.

The part I found most interesting in the first part of Shock Doctrine was her comparison of the economy to torture and the ideas of Ewen Cameron. It was very interesting how Klein asserts that Cameron's essentially lay the groundwork for what the CIA did to prisoners of war and war criminals.  I completely agree with Klein's conclusion of torture: the economy is like the victim--left completely confused and blank. The victim, or economy, is ready for new information. And the free market is imposed on the tortured economy as a way of fixing it. This kind of blew my mind. In that way disaster capitalism is almost an exact parallel of Cameron's torture tactics.
Overall this was an incredibly stimulating read and I am interested in reading the entire book.

Response to Burroughs Four Horsemen

In his address to the Ecotechnic Institute in 1980, William S. Burroughs argues the case that the proverbial Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are Famine, Plague, War, and Death. Burroughs argues that human beings are in control of all four of these aspects, as opposed to the four horsemen proposed by Zizek. Burroughs discusses the practical applications of the four horsemen in terms of alliance in modern times. For example, he argues that War and Plague are in alliance and have been exerted most notably in the form of chemical and biological warfare. He argues that we have created the problem by merging these forces.
   Arguably the most salient point that Burroughs makes is that human beings are not operating at full capacity. He equates humans to the example of the first airplane. While this was a revolutionary invention at the time, the Wright Brothers' invention was incredibly limited in scope. Now, compared to the modern jetliner, this is a completely rudimentary device. Burroughs believes that human beings will never truly reach full potential.
I disagree.
In our era, humans strive to outdo those who came before each and every day. With so many advances in the fields of medicine and technology, human beings are constantly surpassing yesterday and moving towards a stronger tomorrow. Although Burroughs makes a very compelling point, the fact is that at the rate we are moving, it is very feasible for humans to operate at full capacity.

Slavoj Zizek

Out of all the radical ideas Slavoj Zizek conveys in his apocalyptic thinking, one that stood out to me most was his idea of accepting the flaws of human society. As an ecologist, going to the landfill and seeing the trash was an incredible experience for Zizek.
As a society, we have completely alienated ourselves from the heaps of garbage we have created. He articulates it very well with the idea that, even though we logically understand that our poop goes down into the sewer, in the "most elementary" way, it is "disappearing." Such is the case with our garbage. We hold nature to be this perfect and harmonious environment destroyed by the mistakes of humans. Yet until we can learn to see the beauty in these imperfections, we cannot change anything.
Additionally, the human race has inhibited itself from fixing these catastrophic problems like global warming. The assumption that it will all fix itself and the failure to truly recognize the gravity of the problems is where the problem persists.
Also, the idea of the apocalypse being a revelation rather than a catastrophe really fascinates me.

What Disasters Reveal - Jesse Aaronson

Junot Diaz makes poignant analysis of the effects of Apocalypse in his essay Apocalypse: What Disasters Reveal. The point that stood out most to me was that of the class imbalance in Haiti. Diaz states that, "the world's goodies are basically getting gobbled up by a tiny group of gluttons while the rest of us...are being deprived even the crumbs' crumbs."
This quote speaks volumes not only to the imbalance in disaster stricken countries like Haiti, but also of the current situation and growing schism in America.
The problem lies in the fact that others countries sit dormant and do not put forth the necessary funds to salvage countries after devastating natural, or social disasters.
Although much of what Diaz asserts is grim, it holds high merit. Rather than turning a blind eye to disaster, we must "stare into the ruins--bravely, resolutely--and we must see."
There will be more Haitis and we must look at these disasters not as sob stories, but rather as valuable lessons to advance our world and prevent the devastation from striking again.