Yeah, so I finished my book review for Western Civilizations 101. The book I read... er... partially read... was Slayers and Their Vampires: A Cultural History of Killing the Dead by Bruce McClelland.
The object of the paper was to basically give critique on the book without using first or second word writing. I wrote it in WordPad since my computer didn't come with anything to write in but WordPad and NotePad, so I didn't put it through Spell Check yet. That will be done Tuesday before I double space it and print it out.
This is so terrible.... I think I'll be extremely grateful to get a C on this...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Slayers and Their Vampires: A Cultural History of Killing the Dead by Bruce McClelland is a truly impressive work. It illustrates the mythology, media, and everyday references to vampires through history to present day. There were many good and bad points throughout the book. Many useful references to the mythology of the vampire were made, as well as references to works as recent as the early 2000's, to show the changing of the species since they were first "created" back in the time of the Balkans.
McClelland has a very unique writing style, in which the general mood and tempo of the writing changes very often. For example, in the introduction, the tone was rather flat, and very boring. However, in some areas, such as the area in which vampires are made, how they were the "scapegoats" of Christianity, and also in which the idea of the vampire slayer himself seemed to be slightly more "upbeat", so to speak, and were very attention grabbing. The variation of the writing styles can either be considered a good thing, because it can keep the reader interested, or it can be considered a negative thing, because at times, it can be a little confusing.
A rather ingenius idea was to use modern day vampire works, such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Interview With the Vampire, and the old and new versions of Van Helsing, along with the expected reference to Bram Stoker's Dracula to give examples of how the vampire has changed throughout history. For example, he illustrated the history of the "beast". The first ideas of turning into a vampire were rather simple, and seemingly unlikely. The first method were to be that if a cat or a dog jumped over a coffin ready to be buried, the person inside was doomed to become a vampire. Nowadays, in vampire novels, movies, and comics, the "victim" is chosen by a vampire, drained of their blood to a point in death's grasp, and then given whichever amount of the sire's blood that he or she wishes to use in the creation of his or her fledgling, which in turn determines the new vampire's power, and thus leads into a rather complicated process, compared to the simple "cat over the grave" method developed by the Balkans. To put it simply, McClelland should be praised for his use of modern day media to illustrate the drastic changes history has developed on the vampire myth.
Along with the ideas used to show the changing of the vampire species in the introduction, there was another aspect of the book that had the critics saying made it very unique: The fact that the book actually focused on the vampire hunter rather than the vampire himself. The reason this fact is being brought up is that it is actually a vital piece to own or read if the study of vampirology, or even the love of the vampires themselves, is the motive of the reader. Most vampire books focus on narratives, facts, legends, and such of vampires, only mentioning the slayer occasionally, or even as the main villain. Slayers and Their Vampires: A Cultural History of Killing the Dead goes beyond the mere antagonist role of the slayer, and elaborates on different theories on how he or she came to exist. McClelland uses a vast majority of detailed, unexpected examples, such as the slayer being the vampire's mirror image.
Staying with the subject of the focus on the slayer, who is often seen as a hero, a protecter, a saint, etc., another remarkable point has been made. Modern society actually knows very little about the slayer. McClelland has done an amazing job illustrating this, and clearly shows how terrifying, unsettling, and disturbing the slayer actually is, therefore, making the reader think about who the "monster" truly is- the bloodsucking, "evil" vampire, or the "good guy" and "savior", the slayer.
However, along with all of the positive points about the book, there were some negative areas as well, the first of these being the "readability" of the book. As the tone of the writing was often changing, this undoubtedly made the work rather difficult to read and follow. It was hard to read more than one section per sitting due to the constant change of pace, and the slightly odd ordering of the events mentioned throughout the book. McClelland could have used better chronology in his writing, rather than seeming to skip back and forth in some areas.
Another thing that added to the difficulty of reading the book was the lack of visual aids throughout. Out of the eight illustrations given, only two were actually useful, and both of these were maps showing the mentioned towns, and the areas populated by specific religious groups. Five of the remaining images were merely of people, and the remaining one was a scan of an "Anti-Vampire Prayer". Images such as more maps, historical works of art or book illustrations featuring the vampires and slayers, and also photographs or drawings of tools and weapons used by the slayers would have been much more helpful than the provided photographs of Hugh Jackman as Van Helsing from the 2004 movie Van Helsing and Buffy with her trusty "Mr. Pointy" from the 1997 series Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The images of those two characters, along with the 1931 character Van Helsing and a character called Carl Kolchak from The Night Stalker, were highly unnecessary, and seemed out of place, giving the book an unneeded modernized mood.
Overall, Slayers and Their Vampires: A Cultural History of Killing the Dead was a decently written, informative work. It belongs in the library of any vampirologist, historian, or vampire fan who has an attention span long enough to keep up with it. Just as any literary work, whether it is fictional or not, Slayers and Their Vampires... has a good balance of good and bad qualities differentiating from the writing style, to the focus of the book, to the lack of useful visual aids to help the reader to understand the spread of the knowledge and mystery of the vampire and its predator.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yeah. Cover page of this brain vomit is done, so I think I don't have to write any more. It'll be about 3 or 3 1/2 pages when it's double spaced.
Sighs. I am so failing this paper...
1. I HAVE KOOL AID! 8D
2. ANIME! ON TV! NO LOADING NECESSARY!
3. My sister FINALLY fell asleep and isn't bitching about her hair colour not being perfect anymore.
4. I finished a picture! And it's a long piece of paper! And I took time to shade and stuff!
5. This is funny:
GO ALUCARD! 8D
6. I can look at all the pictures of unicorns I want without getting screamed at by my mother that I'm creepy! 8D I love unicorns. They is so fluffy and happy and pretty. <3
What things make YOU guys smile at odd hours in the night/extremely early morning? I WANNA KNOW! LET'S SHARE WHAT MAKES US HAPPY!
....And yes, I'm 100% sober, and I don't do drugs. Ew. No alcohol, drugs, tobacco, etc. for Z. CAFFEINE IS THE WAY TO GO! YEAH!
...
...I want Monster...
Okay, so I found the most bestest, awesomest, amazingest quote ever. And it is my favourite. And I would love a shirt of it!
"Even I'm eatable! But that is called cannibalism, my dear children, and is in fact frowned upon in most societies."
Johnny Depp makes the best Willy Wonka ever.
Yes, I am indeed watching Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
Don't blame me. Blame Tim Burton's godliness.
you know those bajillion random useless characters I have?
For some reason, I wanna kill one. Who should I kill?
Kesler or Sarena
Kai
Riki
Gustave
Edgar
Lecter or Kramer
Benjamin
If you don't know, at least read the bios of the human-ish ones. The animal ones... For Edgar, read this.
So, yeah. Who do I get to brutally murder for no reason? Well, if it's a person, it might be brutal. But if it's an animal, it won't. I can't do that.
Maybe I do have a reason. Too many characters.
The torments of babysitting my cousin:
1. Board games. Specifically freaking Sorry! WHY?! And to make matters worse, IT WAS FREAKING DISNEY SORRY! WTF?! Why do people like that?!
2. I found out I suck at Life. Terrible board game. I suck at the real life, too.
3. I had to watch Annie. Over. And over. And over. And over. D: Then she rented Shorts, which was terrible BECAUSE IT DIDN'T GO IN ORDER! D:< Why must the narrator skip sequences?!
4. I didn't know how to work the complicated coffee pot. ...
5. Disney Channel = Suicide.
6. She watched Wow Wow Wubbzy and Yo Gabba Gabba. I had nightmares. I'm not even kidding. Sniffles Those poor crying carrots! They were mercilessly slaughtered! D':
7. There was no Monster.
8. I had to sleep over last minute and didn't have pajama pants. I had jean button imprints in my stomach.
9. Three words: The Wonder Pets. I almost cried. I don't know why, but Nick Jr. and kid shows TERRIFY me.
10. I forgot my drawing stuff.
The good things about watching my cousin:
1. Ruby. The most awesome English Bulldog I ever met.
2. I got to miss my house's two hour power outage. :3
3. I gots money now.
4. I got to think about writing.
Oh, and while playing that terrible game Sorry!, my 6 year old cousin screamed "DAMMIT!" because I got the yellow 12, which would have sent her character directly Home to win, but I moved 12 spaces to my home to win. So, yeah. Nice relatives I have.
So, how was everyone else's Friday night and Saturday?
