Article on Britain, Egypt, and Mummy Narratives, re Doyle's Lot. No. 249: Ailise Bulfin, "The Fiction of Gothic Egypt"

The article on British "Egyptian Gothic" covers considerable ground, but see especially pp. 419-21; 431; 437-8 for items releveant to the historical-cultural interpretation of Doyle's story and the Mummy's Curse tale more broadly.

Article on Britain, Egypt, and Mummy Narratives

The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar (1845)

Edgar Allan Poe,

THE FACTS IN THE CASE 

OF 

M. VALDEMAR.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OF course I shall not pretend to consider it any matter for wonder, that the extraordinary case of M. Valdemar has excited discussion. It would have been a miracle had it not — especially under the circumstances. Through the desire of all parties concerned, to keep the affair from the public, at least for the present, or until we had farther opportunities for investigation — through our endeavors to effect this — a garbled or exaggerated account made its way into society, and became the source of many unpleasant misrepresentations; and, very naturally, of a great deal of disbelief.

It is now rendered necessary that I give the facts — as far as I comprehend them myself. They are, succinctly, these:

My attention, for the last three years, had been repeatedly drawn to the subject of Mesmerism; and, about nine months ago, it occurred to me, quite suddenly, that in the series of experiments made hitherto, there had been a very remarkable and most unaccountable omission: — no person had as yet been mesmerized in articulo mortis. It remained to be seen, first, whether, in such condition, there existed in the patient any susceptibility to the magnetic influence; secondly, whether, if any existed, it was impaired or increased by the condition; thirdly, to what extent, or ­[page 122:] for how long a period, the encroachments of Death might be arrested by the process. There were other points to be ascertained, but these most excited my curiosity — the last in especial, from the immensely important character of its consequences.

In looking around me for some subject by whose means I might test these particulars, I was brought to think of my friend, M. Ernest Valdemar, the well-known compiler of the “Bibliotheca Forensica,” and author (under the nom de plume of Issachar Marx) of the Polish versions of “Wallenstein” and “Gargantua.” M. Valdemar, who has resided principally at Harlem, N. Y., since the year 1839, is (or was) particularly noticeable for the extreme spareness of his person — his lower limbs much resembling those of John Randolph; and, also, for the whiteness of his whiskers, in violent contrast to the blackness of his hair — the latter, in consequence, being very generally mistaken for a wig. His temperament was markedly nervous, and rendered him a good subject for mesmeric experiment. On two or three occasions I had put him to sleep with little difficulty, but was disappointed in other results which his peculiar constitution had naturally led me to anticipate. His will was at no period positively, or thoroughly, under my control, and in regard to clairvoyance, I could accomplish with him nothing to be relied upon. I always attributed my failure at these points to the disordered state of his health. For some months previous to my becoming acquainted with him, his physicians had declared him in a confirmed phthisis. It was his custom, indeed, to speak calmly of his approaching dissolution, as of a matter neither to be avoided nor regretted.

When the ideas to which I have alluded first occurred to me, it was of course very natural that I should think of M. Valdemar. I knew the steady philosophy of the man too well to apprehend any scruples from him; and he had no relatives in America who would be likely to interfere. I spoke to him frankly upon the subject; and, to my surprise, his interest seemed vividly excited. I say to my surprise; for, although he had always yielded his person freely to my experiments, he had never before given me any tokens of sympathy with what I did. His disease was of that character which would admit of exact calculation in respect ­[page 123:] to the epoch of its termination in death; and it was finally arranged between us that he would send for me about twenty-four hours before the period announced by his physicians as that of his decease.

It is now rather more than seven months since I received, from M. Valdemar himself, the subjoined note:

“MY DEAR P——,

“You may as well come now. D—— and F—— are agreed that I cannot hold out beyond to-morrow midnight; and I think they have hit the time very nearly.

“VALDEMAR.”

I received this note within half an hour after it was written, and in fifteen minutes more I was in the dying man’s chamber. I had not seen him for ten days, and was appalled by the fearful alteration which the brief interval had wrought in him. His face wore a leaden hue; the eyes were utterly lustreless; and the emaciation was so extreme, that the skin had been broken through by the cheek-bones. His expectoration was excessive. The pulse was barely perceptible. He retained, nevertheless, in a very remarkable manner, both his mental power and a certain degree of physical strength. He spoke with distinctness — took some palliative medicines without aid — and, when I entered the room, was occupied in penciling memoranda in a pocket-book. He was propped up in the bed by pillows. Doctors D—— and F—— were in attendance.

After pressing Valdemar’s hand, I took these gentlemen aside, and obtained from them a minute account of the patient’s condition. The left lung had been for eighteen months in a semi-osseous or cartilaginous state, and was, of course, entirely useless for all purposes of vitality. The right, in its upper portion, was also partially, if not thoroughly, ossified, while the lower region was merely a mass of purulent tubercles, running one into another. Several extensive perforations existed; and, at one point, permanent adhesion to the ribs had taken place. These appearances in the right lobe were of comparatively recent date. The ­[page 124:] ossification had proceeded with very unusual rapidity; no sign of it had been discovered a month before, and the adhesion had only been observed during the three previous days. Independently of the phthisis, the patient was suspected of aneurism of the aorta; but on this point the osseous symptoms rendered an exact diagnosis impossible. It was the opinion of both physicians that M. Valdemar would die about midnight on the morrow (Sunday.) It was then seven o’clock on Saturday evening.

On quitting the invalid’s bed-side to hold conversation with myself, Doctors D—— and F —— had bidden him a final farewell. It had not been their intention to return; but, at my request, they agreed to look in upon the patient about ten the next night.

When they had gone, I spoke freely with M. Valdemar on the subject of his approaching dissolution, as well as, more particularly, of the experiment proposed. He still professed himself quite willing and even anxious to have it made, and urged me to commence it at once. A male and a female nurse were in attendance; but I did not feel myself altogether at liberty to engage in a task of this character with no more reliable witnesses than these people, in case of sudden accident, might prove. I therefore postponed operations until about eight the next night, when the arrival of a medical student, with whom I had some acquaintance, (Mr. Theodore L —— l,) relieved me from farther embarrassment. It had been my design, originally, to wait for the physicians; but I was induced to proceed, first, by the urgent entreaties of M. Valdemar, and secondly, by my conviction that I had not a moment to lose, as he was evidently sinking fast.

Mr. L —— l was so kind as to accede to my desire that he would take notes of all that occurred; and it is from his memoranda that what I now have to relate is, for the most part, either condensed or copied verbatim.

It wanted about five minutes of eight when, taking the patient’s hand, I begged him to state, as distinctly as he could, to Mr. L —— l, whether he (M. Valdemar,) was entirely willing that I should make the experiment of mesmerizing him in his then condition.

He replied feebly, yet quite audibly, “Yes, I wish to be mesmerized” ­[page 125:] — adding immediately afterwards, “I fear you have deferred it too long.”

While he spoke thus, I commenced the passes which I had already found most effectual in subduing him. He was evidently influenced with the first lateral stroke of my hand across his forehead; but although I exerted all my powers, no farther perceptible effect was induced until some minutes after ten o’clock, when Doctors D—— and F—— called, according to appointment. I explained to them, in a few words, what I designed, and as they opposed no objection, saying that the patient was already in the death agony, I proceeded without hesitation — exchanging, however, the lateral passes for downward ones, and directing my gaze entirely into the right eye of the sufferer.

By this time his pulse was imperceptible and his breathing was stertorious [[stertorous]], and at intervals of half a minute.

This condition was nearly unaltered for a quarter of an hour. At the expiration of this period, however, a natural although a very deep sigh escaped the bosom of the dying man, and the stertorious [[stertorous]] breathing ceased — that is to say, its stertoriousness [[stertorousness]] was no longer apparent; the intervals were undiminished. The patient’s extremities were of an icy coldness.

At five minutes before eleven, I perceived unequivocal signs of the mesmeric influence. The glassy roll of the eye was changed for that expression of uneasy inward examination which is never seen except in cases of sleep-waking, and which it is quite impossible to mistake. With a few rapid lateral passes I made the lids quiver, as in incipient sleep, and with a few more I closed them altogether. I was not satisfied, however, with this, but continued the manipulations vigorously, and with the fullest exertion of the will, until I had completely stiffened the limbs of the slumberer, after placing them in a seemingly easy position. The legs were at full length; the arms were nearly so, and reposed on the bed at a moderate distance from the loins. The head was very slightly elevated.

When I had accomplished this, it was fully midnight, and I requested the gentlemen present to examine M. Valdemar’s condition. After a few experiments, they admitted him to be in an unusually perfect state of mesmeric trance. The curiosity of both ­[page 126:] the physicians was greatly excited. Dr. D—— resolved at once to remain with the patient all night, while Dr. F—— took leave with a promise to return at daybreak. Mr. L —— l and the nurses remained.

We left M. Valdemar entirely undisturbed until about three o’clock in the morning, when I approached him and found him in precisely the same condition as when Dr. F—— went away — that is to say, he lay in the same position; the pulse was imperceptible; the breathing was gentle (scarcely noticeable, unless through the application of a mirror to the lips;) the eyes were closed naturally; and the limbs were as rigid and as cold as marble. Still, the general appearance was certainly not that of death.

As I approached M. Valdemar I made a kind of half effort to influence his right arm into pursuit of my own, as I passed the latter gently to and fro above his person. In such experiments with this patient, I had never perfectly succeeded before, and assuredly I had little thought of succeeding now; but to my astonishment, his arm very readily, although feebly, followed every direction I assigned it with mine. I determined to hazard a few words of conversation.

“M. Valdemar,” I said, “are you asleep?” He made no answer, but I perceived a tremor about the lips, and was thus induced to repeat the question, again and again. At its third repetition, his whole frame was agitated by a very slight shivering; the eye-lids unclosed themselves so far as to display a white line of a ball; the lips moved sluggishly, and from between them, in a barely audible whisper, issued the words:

“Yes; — asleep now. Do not wake me! — let me die so!”

I here felt the limbs and found them as rigid as ever. The right arm, as before, obeyed the direction of my hand. I questioned the sleep-waker again:

“Do you still feel pain in the breast, M. Valdemar?”

The answer now was immediate, but even less audible than before:

“No pain — I am dying.”

I did not think it advisable to disturb him farther just then, and nothing more was said or done until the arrival of Dr. F—— , who came a little before sunrise, and expressed unbounded astonishment ­[page 127:] at finding the patient still alive. After feeling the pulse and applying a mirror to the lips, he requested me to speak to the sleep-waker again. I did so, saying:

“M. Valdemar, do you still sleep?”

As before, some minutes elapsed ere a reply was made; and during the interval the dying man seemed to be collecting his energies to speak. At my fourth repetition of the question, he said very faintly, almost inaudibly:

“Yes; still asleep — dying.”

It was now the opinion, or rather the wish, of the physicians, that M. Valdemar should be suffered to remain undisturbed in his present apparently tranquil condition, until death should supervene — and this, it was generally agreed, must now take place within a few minutes. I concluded, however, to speak to him once more, and merely repeated my previous question.

While I spoke, there came a marked change over the countenance of the sleep-waker. The eyes rolled themselves slowly open, the pupils disappearing upwardly; the skin generally assumed a cadaverous hue, resembling not so much parchment as white paper; and the circular hectic spots which, hitherto, had been strongly defined in the centre of each cheek, went out at once. I use this expression, because the suddenness of their departure put me in mind of nothing so much as the extinguishment of a candle by a puff of the breath. The upper lip, at the same time, writhed itself away from the teeth, which it had previously covered completely; while the lower jaw fell with an audible jerk, leaving the mouth widely extended, and disclosing in full view the swollen and blackened tongue. I presume that no member of the party then present had been unaccustomed to death-bed horrors; but so hideous beyond conception was the appearance of M. Valdemar at this moment, that there was a general shrinking back from the region of the bed.

I now feel that I have reached a point of this narrative at which every reader will be startled into positive disbelief. It is my business, however, simply to proceed.

There was no longer the faintest sign of vitality in M. Valdemar; and concluding him to be dead, we were consigning him to the charge of the nurses, when a strong vibratory motion was observable ­[page 128:] in the tongue. This continued for perhaps a minute. At the expiration of this period, there issued from the distended and motionless jaws a voice — such as it would be madness in me to attempt describing. There are, indeed, two or three epithets which might be considered as applicable to it in part; I might say, for example, that the sound was harsh, and broken and hollow; but the hideous whole is indescribable, for the simple reason that no similar sounds have ever jarred upon the ear of humanity. There were two particulars, nevertheless, which I thought then, and still think, might fairly be stated as characteristic of the intonation — as well adapted to convey some idea of its unearthly peculiarity. In the first place, the voice seemed to reach our ears — at least mine — from a vast distance, or from some deep cavern within the earth. In the second place, it impressed me (I fear, indeed, that it will be impossible to make myself comprehended) as gelatinous or glutinous matters impress the sense of touch.

I have spoken both of “sound” and of “voice.” I mean to say that the sound was one of distinct — of even wonderfully, thrillingly distinct — syllibification [[syllabification]]. M. Valdemar spoke — obviously in reply to the question I had propounded to him a few minutes before. I had asked him, it will be remembered, if he still slept. He now said:

“Yes; — no; — I have been sleeping — and now — now — I am dead.”

No person present even affected to deny, or attempted to repress, the unutterable, shuddering horror which these few words, thus uttered, were so well calculated to convey. Mr. L —— l (the student) swooned. The nurses immediately left the chamber, and could not be induced to return. My own impressions I would not pretend to render intelligible to the reader. For nearly an hour, we busied ourselves, silently — without the utterance of a word — in endeavors to revive Mr. L —— l. When he came to himself, we addressed ourselves again to an investigation of M. Valdemar’s condition.

It remained in all respects as I have last described it, with the exception that the mirror no longer afforded evidence of respiration. An attempt to draw blood from the arm failed. I should mention, too, that this limb was no farther subject to my will. I ­[page 129:] endeavored in vain to make it follow the direction of my hand. The only real indication, indeed, of the mesmeric influence, was now found in the vibratory movement of the tongue, whenever I addressed M. Valdemar a question. He seemed to be making an effort to reply, but had no longer sufficient volition. To queries put to him by any other person than myself he seemed utterly insensible — although I endeavored to place each member of the company in mesmeric rapport with him. I believe that I have now related all that is necessary to an understanding of the sleep-waker’s state at this epoch. Other nurses were procured; and at ten o’clock I left the house in company with the two physicians and Mr. L —— l.

In the afternoon we all called again to see the patient. His condition remained precisely the same. We had now some discussion as to the propriety and feasibility of awakening him; but we had little difficulty in agreeing that no good purpose would be served by so doing. It was evident that, so far, death (or what is usually termed death) had been arrested by the mesmeric process. It seemed clear to us all that to awaken M. Valdemar would be merely to insure his instant, or at least his speedy dissolution.

From this period until the close of last week — an interval of nearly seven months — we continued to make daily calls at M. Valdemar’s house, accompanied, now and then, by medical and other friends. All this time the sleeper-waker remained exactly as I have last described him. The nurses’ attentions were continual.

It was on Friday last that we finally resolved to make the experiment of awakening, or attempting to awaken him; and it is the (perhaps) unfortunate result of this latter experiment which has given rise to so much discussion in private circles — to so much of what I cannot help thinking unwarranted popular feeling.

For the purpose of relieving M. Valdemar from the mesmeric trance, I made use of the customary passes. These, for a time, were unsuccessful. The first indication of revival was afforded by a partial descent of the iris. It was observed, as especially remarkable, that this lowering of the pupil was accompanied by the profuse out-flowing of a yellowish ichor (from beneath the lids) of a pungent and highly offensive odor.

It was now suggested that I should attempt to influence the ­[page 130:] patient’s arm, as heretofore. I made the attempt and failed. Dr. F—— then intimated a desire to have me put a question. I did so, as follows:

“M. Valdemar, can you explain to us what are your feelings or wishes now?”

There was an instant return of the hectic circles on the cheeks; the tongue quivered, or rather rolled violently in the mouth (although the jaws and lips remained rigid as before;) and at length the same hideous voice which I have already described, broke forth:

“For God’s sake! — quick! — quick! — put me to sleep — or, quick! — waken me! — quick! — I say to you that I am dead! “

I was thoroughly unnerved, and for an instant remained undecided what to do. At first I made an endeavor to re-compose the patient; but, failing in this through total abeyance of the will, I retraced my steps and as earnestly struggled to awaken him. In this attempt I soon saw that I should be successful — or at least I soon fancied that my success would be complete — and I am sure that all in the room were prepared to see the patient awaken.

For what really occurred, however, it is quite impossible that any human being could have been prepared.

As I rapidly made the mesmeric passes, amid ejaculations of “dead! dead!” absolutely bursting from the tongue and not from the lips of the sufferer, his whole frame at once — within the space of a single minute, or even less, shrunk — crumbled — absolutely rotted away beneath my hands. Upon the bed, before that whole company, there lay a nearly liquid mass of loathsome — of detestable putrescence.

Course Syllabus

Spring 2014

English 281-06, TTH   Topics in Literature

Zombies in Text and Film

Dr. Gerald Majer Coop 1 (building below the Exchange, in the Meditation Center)

Office and Voice Mail: 443-334-2467

E-mail: gmajer@stevenson.edu

Office Hours: w 1:30-2:30; TTH 1:40-2:40; and by appointment

Course Description

Studies selected topics that recur in literature across time and/or across cultures. Students read texts closely and analyze them as representative samples of the literary treatment of the topic. 

Course Objectives: 

Upon completion of this course, students will have demonstrated the ability to:

1. Solve a problem appropriate to the study of a specific topic whose context has been delineated to the point that several possible definitions can be inferred.

2. Read texts closely and analytically

3. Locate sources suitable for problems appropriate to the study of the specific topic and for an audience schooled in the literature of that topic.

4. Write competently and to the standard of the discipline in the academic style

5. Produce an effective organizational pattern with careful language choices during class participation and/or oral presentations

6. Read texts as complex interactions of values

Our broad guiding questions in this course:

What meanings, values, and affects attach to the Zombie narrative in literature, cinema, and contemporary culture? 

In what respects is the Zombie about us, about “us and them”, and about ourselves as bodies with histories? 

In what respects is the Zombie narrative always a story about work, labor, and economics? 

In what respects does the Zombie figure make possible a meditation on the human as inhuman or “post-human”?  

How can we place the Zombie narrative in the larger contexts of the Gothic genre, the modern Horror genre, and emergent genres of postmodern Horror?  What specific features of literary form and language, both continuities and innovations, can we delineate in the construction of the modern and postmodern Zombie narrative?

For each reading assignment and film discussion, students must answer, in written form, 3 from the following list of interpretive questions.  Your responses will be used for class discussion and will count toward your participation/contributions grade.  Be prepared with these short written responses; missing one will impact your grade.

1. What references to the broader historical/social world does the zombie figure in the story suggest?  That is, does the zombie figure connect to anxieties about nation, race, social class, or gender?  Consider where and when the story was published, the story’s likely audiences, and what kinds of fears and prejudices, and perhaps hopes and dreams, the Zombie tale may be speaking to. 
2. How do the form and language of the narrative support and heighten the meanings and affects associated with the zombie figure (for example: fear of a racial other, of an immigrant outsider, of a lower-class invader, of a gender outlaw; for example, privileging by contrast an “insider” racial, national, social-class, gender, or other group).  Form and language include story chronology (linear or fragmented); story point-of view (first person, third person, etc.); authorial tone (satirical, tragic); imagery and figures of speech (descriptive language); and narrative frames (forms like the diary, the letter, the journal, the report, the case-history).   
3. What meanings and values are underscored by the narrative’s dramatic question and story climax (that is, its plot construction)?  Does the story, for example, promulgate ideas about the normative and “the good”—certain models of the person, the family, the nation, what it means to be properly “living”?
4. What is the place of work, labor, and profit-and-loss in the narrative?  Is the story in any way an allegory of economics? 
5. What happens to bodies in the story?  Are there moments that disturb, stretch, or revise our sense of what it means to be a living body?  Try to observe very closely the descriptive and figurative language that focuses on bodies, zombie and non-zombie both.       
6. After week 3, you also may consider how the story incorporates main features of the Gothic genre and the Horror genre as aspects of the story’s articulation of specific meanings and values.  Gothic: the female imprisonment/liberty scenario; the exposure of male/traditional power/tyranny motif; the male-exile motif; the Sublime excess/overwhelming motif.  Horror: the Uncanny familiar/estrangement motif; the category-breakdown motif; the doubling motif; the multiplicity/swarming motif; the archaic/materiality-chaos motif.

Required Texts:

John Skipp, Ed., Zombies: Encounters with the Hungry Dead

Max Brooks, World War Z

(Online texts from Shelley, Stoker, Lovecraft, and Rohmer, as well as critical articles on Zombies, also will be assigned.)

Course Work Requirements

30% Midterm essay

35% Research-based final project

15% Final exam

10% Oral Presentation

10% Class participation/contributions

Class Policy

*Regular attendance and active class participation are expected. This means more than one unexcused absence is unacceptable in this class. If you are going to miss class meetings, you should not be in this class because the heart of it is the process of your ideas being presented and discussed.  Deficits in attendance, participation, and presentations will affect the participation/contribution grade.  

*Plagiarism is a serious academic offense and will result in an automatic F for the assignment. All cases of plagiarism will be reported to the Dean.

*All texts must be typed, double-spaced, 12-point Helvetica or Times New             Roman font.

*Essays and presentations will be graded in accordance with Stevenson University Department of English standards, which evaluate content (ideas, argument, and evidence), organization, and grammar and style.  

English 281 Schedule 

1/14  Part One: Pre-Zombie

The Gothic Genre and the Undead.  Film excerpts: Whale’s Frankenstein, Murnau’s Nosferatu.

1/16  Discussion of The Monster and the Vampire: based on assigned online readings including excerpts from Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and from Stoker’s Dracula (tba via blog/email).   

1/21 Discussion of assigned reading, online texts, “The Facts in the Case of M.Valdemar” and “Lot Number 249".” (tba via blog/email).   

1/23  Discussion of assigned readings, Herbert West, Reanimator” (tba via blog/email).

1/28  Film excerpt: The Mummy.  Discussion based on assigned excerpt from Roger Luckhurst article on Victorian mummies (tba via blog/email).

1/30   Part Two: Zombie Modern

Discussion based on assigned reading: Seabrook’s “Dead Men Working in the Cane Fields.”

2/4    The 1930s: White Zombie and I Walked With a Zombie, film excerpts.  Read critical article on “Zonbi,” tba (on blog).

2/6     Discussion based on film excerpts.   Midterm essay assigned, due 3/6/14. 

2/11   The 1950s and After.

Discussion based on assigned readings: Stephen King, “The Return of Timmy Baterman” and Ray Bradbury “The Emissary.”    

2/13    Discussion of assigned readings: Robert Bloch, “A Case of the Stubborns” and Neil Gaiman, “Bitter Grounds.” 

2/18    Discussion of assigned reading, Theodore Sturgeon, “It.”

2/20   Discussion of assigned readings, George Saunders, “Sea Oak” and Dennis Etchison, “The Late Shift.”

2/25  Part Three: Postmodern Zombies

Discussion of assigned readings, Adam Golaski, “The Dead Gather on the Bridge to Seattle” and Mehitobel Wilson,
“The Quarantine Act.” 

2/27   Discussion of assigned reading, Joe Lansdale, “On the Far Side of the Cadillac Desert with Dead Folks.”      

3/4    Discussion of assigned readings, Robert McCammon, “Eat Me” and Kathe Koja, “The Prince of Nox.”

3/6      Film excerpt: TheWalking Dead, Season One.  Midterm  essay due in my email gmajer@stevenson.edu) in word.doc file attachment. 

3/10-3/12: Spring break; please read Poppy Brite, “Calcutta, Lord of Nerves” and Lisa Morton, “Sparks Fly Upwards” for discussion in class 3/17.

3/18   Discussion of readings, above.

3/20  Discussion of assigned readings, Terry Morgan and Christoper Morgan,,” Zaambi” and Adam Troy-Castro, “Dead Like Me.”

3/25 Postmodern Zombies, Case 1: viewing of George Romero, Night of the Living Dead. 

3/27  Discussion of Romero; excerpts from The Living Dead trilogy.

4/1  Postmodern Zombies, Case 2: viewing of 28 Days Later.

4/3  Discussion

4/8 Postmodern Zombies, Case 3: viewing of I Am Legend.

4/10 Discussion.  Read article on Zombies and “bare life” (tba; on blog).

4/15  Discussion of assigned reading, Max Brooks, World War Z

4/17 World War Z.

4/22 Film excerpt and concluding discussion of World War Z. 

4/24  Viewing of Zombieland.

4/28-4/30 Finals Week; Final exam tba.

4/30 Final project due in my mail (gmajer@stevenson.edu)         as word.doc file attachment. 

Female Gothic and Male Gothic briefly defined

An interpretative heuristic, among others, for analyzing the zombie narrative in text and film:

With feminist scholarship, critics have delineated two modes of Gothic which dramatize the social and political contradictions of modern experience via fantastic and extreme situations:

Female Gothic: wrought upon by villains and monsters often resembling tyrannical fathers and oppressive mothers, and given to ghostly apprehensions and terrors, a young female protagonist suffers imprisonment and attempts escape, on the road to liberty and a happier world.

Male Gothic: wrought upon by monsters that often resemble devouring mothers and judgmental fathers, and given to violent, bloody, and disorienting horrors, a male protagonist indulges in forbidden knowledges, suffers exile and solitude, and attempts escape, reparation or return.

Consider characters and storylines in light of these sub-genres, and perhaps in light of how contemporary writers may run changes on them.

The Gothic and Gothic Monsters, briefly defined

THE GOTHIC: a category of the ROMANCE genre, which includes medieval romances, science fiction (originally, “scientific romances”), horror fiction, ghost stories, among others.  A minimal definition of Romance: a quest plot, along with elements of the fantastic or supernatural. 

Of specific interest for us is the GOTHIC further defined by contemporary scholarship as a   narrative/dramatic meditation on modern POWER in all its forms.  Around 1800, the GOTHIC genre takes off in popularity and literary production.  Its early practitioners used elements of Romance and the fantastic to expose in high dramatic relief social and political inequities and injustices (for example: economic exploitation, class divisions, sexism).  The social-critical, rebellious, revolutionary spirit of Gothic continues to the present day, albeit the Gothic also can elaborate xenophobic, reactionary or conservative attitudes; or, as is often the case, conflicted and ambivalent social values.     

1. In reference to SOCIETY, the Gothic often implicitly criticizes dominant ideologies as represented by tradition, authority, everything that is assumed and reinforced as “natural” and “normal” and “the way things have always been” (targets: aristocratic/upper class power; church and religion power; later, middle-class ideologies, free-market capitalism, corporate and institutional power and systems). 

2. In reference to THE FAMILY, the Gothic often exposes in a critical light the family's socialization functions and its enforcement of social and gender roles; the unstable dynamics of modern “nuclear” and postmodern family; also highlighted are familial psychosexual tensions including bad and good mother and father figures (targets: patriarchy and male domination; confining /imprisoning social and gender roles, heterosexism; insecurities of the postmodern family).

 3. In reference to the NATION, the Gothic critiques and/or participates in the imaginative process whereby nations and nation-states are defined against various demonized and marginalized “others” inside and outside their boundaries (targets: imperialism/colonialism; racism, ethnocentrism, xenophobia).

 4. In reference to a given SOCIAL CLASS or SOCIAL group, the Gothic critiques and/or participates in defining a superior position by projecting various “lower”-class others as fearful monsters and projecting as well various “higher”-class monsters of all kinds (targets: class domination and privilege; in-groups and out-groups; social and economic injustice).

 5. In reference to SEX and SEXUALITY, the Gothic exposes and/or critiques a system of things in which eros/desire is regulated and channeled by social norms into dominant constructions of gender, marriage, the family, “normal” sexuality (targets: family, society, and state as rulers over sexual desire and its unruly energies).

 6. In reference to KNOWLEDGE, the Gothic exposes/critiques the power/knowledge in society, family, and state.  The monster as category-shaker and the intensity of affect in terror and horror highlight the political investments involved in knowledge, how knowledge supports power (targets: society, family, state, dominant paradigms in Western philosophy, religion, and the sciences.)

 7. In reference to PSYCHOLOGY, the Gothic has been interpreted in terms of fundamental psychological structures: the power of parental figures in constructions of selfhood and identity; the Oedipal triangle and the “family romance”(Freud); good and bad father and mother figures; femmes fatales and tyrant males; infantile complexes; intersection of sexual energies and language/ideology (targets: dominant ideological/cultural constructions of self, gender, eros/desire) 

GOTHIC MONSTERS--

Rebellions, Subversions, Hat Tricks

Gothic monsters are excessive signifiers, in one definition WRONG in terms of established social categories (a human cannot also be a wolf; or a zombie both dead and alive). Therefore the monster TESTS and UNSETTLES cultural and ideological formations.  The abnormal messes with what everybody assumes is normal. 

The game: the monster opens the door to criticizing and questioning ideology, the way things always have been or the way the majority says they always have to be.    

With its affective charges of TERROR and HORROR, the monster proposes a zap, a jolt, a rush, and, so to speak, a "deprogramming" of standard ways of thinking and feeling. Subversive and transgressive Gothic follow this track.

However, the monster may shake up the social norms only to RESET and REINFORCE the dominant social program. There is a strong conservative strain in Gothic even as it is a rebel genre. Much Gothic storytelling does both: shakes up the program in subversive ways, but reinforces its categories. An ideological workout, say.

In either case, monsters and horror engage by virtue of intense AFFECT:

 TERROR: anticipation, suspense, supercharged affect with an emphasis on MIND and the IDEAL/SPIRITUAL. Exalted, “high” Sublimes (mental/intellectual scenarios of sensory overload and self-loss).

 HORROR: supercharged affect with an emphasis on BODIES and MATTER.  Debased and “low” Sublimes physical/corporeal scenarios of sensory overload and self-loss).

A Note on Zombies and Cannibals

The modern zombie is an individual enslaved by vodun or similar practices.   In contrast, the postmodern zombie, as encountered in post-Romero films and books, is usually an individual affected by some species of infection or plague and, significantly, is a cannibal; i.e., consumes human flesh.  This is not the case with the earlier modern zombie incarnations, nor is it the case with Afro-Haitian traditional zombies; they may be "eaten" or consumed by other entities, but they do not eat human flesh.

The cannibal aspect (really, the "ghoul" aspect, as George Romero remarks) connects to a broader history.

1. European-imperial racist constructions of non-European subjugated peoples characterized colonial subjects as "savage," "primitive," "childlike," and so on, as a means of justifying European exploitation and rule over peoples of Africa, Asia, the Pacific, and Latin America.

2. An especially dramatic image of the non-European savage was that of the "cannibal," the eater of human flesh.  In this imperialist fantasy, here was the utterly inferior race, here was the animalistic savage showing its truest colors: a man scarcely deserving the appellation man, devouring his own kind like a beast.

3. Scholars and critics have argued in recent years that in the repertoire of imperialism and colonialism, the cannibal is a powerful myth.  The horrifying savage and his practices make the white man appear virtuous and just by contrast.  And the white man can imagine he is justified in conquering and subjugating people who are given to such practices.

4. But a further turn of argument suggests that the cannibal figure is a distorted reflection of European values, especially economic ones as embodied in capitalism.  Slavery, the plantation system, forced labor, the whole range of European colonial practices against native populations around the world, may be viewed as the real "cannibalism." Because in essence, capitalism produces surplus value, that is, produces profit, by means of the bodies and the lives of the human beings under its power.  In such a view, capitalism as economic system feeds itself on human flesh and blood.  It is cannibalistic (in Capital, Karl Marx used another monster, the vampire, to characterize the predatory aspect of capitalist economics).

Zombie figures as cannibals as well as the undead present us with interestingly layered connotations and meanings.  Among other things, they can satirize the predatory character of capitalist economies; they also  can depict exploited human forces that are rising up against such economies, a species of imaginative revolution.    

Horror Terms and Theories

Summary: Theories of Horror

Freud

1.       Repression.   What energy, desire, or passion seems repressed, suppressed, maybe oppressed?  How is it manifesting?

2.        The Uncanny.  Do the domestic, the familiar, and the secure turn strange?

3.       Repetition.  Do things repeat, keep coming back insisting, like a broken record, like a desiring-machine?

4.       Animism/animation.  Do dead things, inanimate objects, or other nonhuman things come alive?

5.       Ambivalence.  Does the monster or the horror suggest mixed feelings, attraction as well as repulsion?  (and beyond Freud: potentials for deprogramming standard cultural codes on a track of alternatives, freedoms?) 

Julia Kristeva, Jacques Lacan, Slavoj Zizek

6.       Abjection and the Real.  Any heightening, highlighting of raw life, matter formless or sticky or slimy?  Links to the mother and the feminine? 

7.       Lamella.  Any special emphasis on the formless, amoeba-like, slimy and slippery and boundary-crossing?

Mary Douglas, Noel Carroll

8.       Category disturbance, disordering.  Any mixing, crossover, blurring, distortion of social-cultural classifications?  (human and nonhuman, living and dead, whole and fragment, masculine and feminine, and so on).  Specifically, via Carroll on horror:

9.       Categorically ambiguous—the horror/monster, in two classifications at once?

10.   Incompletion—the horror/monster is missing something, not fully formed?

11.   Formlessness—the horror/monster is fluid, slimy, lamellar, scrambled, dispersed?

12.   Fusion—the horror/monster involves two or more entities combined in one?

13.   Fission—the horror/monster is one entity splitting into two, doubling, changing back and forth?

14.   Magnification—the horror/monster with one feature or the whole expanding, as if to explode identity/category?

15.   Massification—the horror/monster involving swarming, crowding, teeming, as it to overrun category boundaries?

16.   Metonymy—innocuous things turning to horror objects via association with monster/horror?