Please respond to either or both of the below questions.
Richard Matheson’s I Am Legend is set in a post-apocalyptic world and the events of the story unfolds as a third-person narrative, whereas Bram Stoker’s Dracula is [partly] set in the East European principalities of Transylvania and Bukovina and the story is told through a series of letters and diary entries written in first-person from the perspectives of various individuals. How does the choice of setting and stylistic approach contribute to the author’s overall vision of vampires in these respective works? (Think about how Stoker uses folklore and history in justifying the existence of vampires, whereas Matheson attempts to explain them in scientific terms) What similar elements emerge? What elements are different? (Alex I.)
In I Am Legend Neville is a prisoner to the new society. Too much killing and misunderstandings have occurred in order for the infected and uninfected to coexist. He realizes that he is an outcast to the world he used to know and understands that he cannot live side by side with the infected. In Chapter 2 of Dracula, the Count tells Harker, “I long to go through the crowded streets of your mighty London, to be in the midst of the whirl and rush of humanity, to share its life, its change, its death, and all that makes it what it is.” The Count is also an outcast to this new society because of his lifestyle and what he is.
With that being said, do you believe that it is possible for vampires and humans to coexist in the same society as equals? Or are they too different of creatures to be occupying the same space? What would need to change in society in order to make this a possibility? (Rosalinda R.)
With that being said, do you believe that it is possible for vampires and humans to coexist in the same society as equals? Or are they too different of creatures to be occupying the same space? What would need to change in society in order to make this a possibility? (Rosalinda R.)
Vampires and humans appear to be very similar in a lot of aspect while still being different. I think, like with any differentiating groups, it’s a matter of understanding one another. One thing that people tend to fear is the unknown. I feel like a lot of what causes the inability for people to coexist is their fear of or lack of understanding the opposition. This is evident in I Am Legend as Neville ended up being the bad guy by killing all of the supposed vampires because he didn’t want to be killed by them. Because of his crimes against them, they went on to kill him. Ruth eventually understood why Neville did what he did which caused her to not resent him for his actions. For humans and vampires to coexist it would take some form of understanding by both parties, while eliminating the fear aspect as much as possible because how can you comfortably coexist with something you fear.
ReplyDeleteAs I was reading the second question, the difference between the vampires and humans appeared to me as the difference among various ethnicities. I felt the novel "I Am Legend" depicts vampires quite different from what many of us expect them to be. The issue of majority versus minority represented in the novel reminded me of racial discrimination in many different situations. As the American history showed us, we can make a society where people from different background co-exist and live in harmony. Despite the fact that vampires have thirst for blood, as long as it is kind of vampires that are depicted in "I Am Legend," I believe that the vampires and human can live in perfect harmony as once Stevie Wonder sang in the past.
ReplyDelete(Response to second question) I believe that the situation in Richard Matheson's I Am Legend is quite different than that of Stoker's Dracula. I find it easier for the infected and uninfected to coexist in I Am Legend because the vampires used to be regular uninfected humans. As the story unfolds, we learn that the bacteria is continually mutating in the vampires; therefore, enabling the infected to re-establish some norms of past society, even if it is for a little while, for example: being able to stay out in the sun light for a limited time. Since I Am Legend is based on a post-apocalyptic setting, I believe that there could be a chance to bring back some degree of normalcy for humans and vampires to coexist; especially since there are pills that help relinquish the mutation. On the other hand, I do not think that vampires and humans in Stoker's Dracula could coexist because the image of the vampire is more mysterious and doubted more often than in I Am Legend. The number of vampires in Dracula is greatly limited, compared to the majority of the population in I Am Legend; therefore, it would be more difficult to obtain any degree of normalcy when skeptical, superstitious humans occupy the majority of society.
ReplyDeleteI think that Neville's character was a lot closer to us and that's why Matheson could get away with the third person narrative. In Dracula, however, the count is a vampire and thus we connect less to him - leading into a first person narrative. Obviously later, we find that Neville is actually a 'vampire' himself, but that was the point. Matheson wanted us to connect to Neville on a human level and make us more understanding of everything that pans out. I think Stoker's use of folklore and history is better preserved through diary entries and letters. A lot of folklore is based on oral tradition or solely on what he said, she said. The third person narrative, to an extent, is someone telling us the story; someone around the campfire telling us about Dracula through someone's first person POV. Another point with Matheson and the scientific terms - if it were third person and scientific terms were thrown in, it would feel like a science book. But, through the first person narrative we get to be the same eyes as Neville's and learn with him, instead of being taught at.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that it is possible for vampires and humans to coexist in the same society as equals. With current society, there is too much mistrust and bad connotations with the word vampire. Psychologically, people would just not accept it because of the legend of vampires and the fear they instill in most people. The TV show, True Blood, I believe showcases this scenario very well. Not all vampires want to “mainstream” into society because they enjoy the killing and violence too much. Also, with their food source being blood, how could they survive unless somebody donated blood to them; however, blood donations are extremely important for humans too. I feel like vampires are too headstrong to ever want to work completely together to form a society without any violence. This is also showcased in I am Legend when Ruth’s new society uses force and violence to kill all of the living dead vampires. I do not think there is anything society could change in order to make this a possibility.
ReplyDeleteKim K.
I believe that the stylistic choice of narration through "Dracula" is very interesting. It's a close perspective from one point of view, even though by chapter v we begin to have Mina's and Lucy's point of view through letters emerge. The reader has to rely on the narrator to learn about the vampires and we have to understand them at their pace. The history and folklore used in the book was very much similar to "I Am Legend" in the sense that the vampire is still some kind of legend. However, it seems to be something that people don't like to talk about or rationalize, which is what John Harker experienced when he was first on his way to meet Dracula. I think that the first person POVs do have an interesting effect when looking at the way humans come to process and understand things, but I think the way that "I Am Legend" is written is stronger.
ReplyDeleteMicaela M.
I believe the coexistence of humans and vampires in the same society is impossible. Under the current circumstances of the relationship, the predation on humans by vampires and the humans innate fear of vampires, a separation creates itself amongst the two species. Both humans and vampires are dominant species on top of the food chain, so this competition to remain on top leaves no room for harmony. This is evident in “I Am Legend”, where Neville tries to kill prospective vampires and the new society kills Neville and those alike. We are under the notion that we have been enemies throughout folklore history so this presumption would have to be lifted in order for this peaceful coexistence to be possible. If vampires emerge as those in “I Am Legend” and the condition is bacterial and not a separate species entirely, repression of the symptoms would allow a mutual understanding between the infected and uninfected, but as two different species the misunderstanding between their roles in society would cause the irremovable fear in humans to get in the way of an acceptance of a society consisting of both to occur.
ReplyDeleteGiancarlo L
I believe that it is possible for vampires and humans to coexist in the same society as equals, but at the same time I believe that they are too different to be occupying the same space and we see this in both I am Legend and Dracula. In Dracula, we see that Count and Harker are too different to be occupying the same space. There is something about Count that is just very suspicious and scary. He leaves Harker at his estate all day alone, he tells Harker that he s not allowed to sleep anywhere in the house other than in the room that he was given for his stay. Count keeps Harker as a hostage, he doesn’t let him leave and he tells him to write to his wife as if it were written a month prior, which I find this very suspicious. In this story, not only is the uninfected isolated, but also the infected being Count. As for I Am Legend, we see that the infected and the uninfected could coexist. Neville was able to live with the infected for over three years and some of that time without someone who wasn’t uninfected. I think it is possible for both to coexist in the same space because the infected, were once human so they once did live the same life, making it easier for them to occupy the same space. We also see those who are semi human because they are infected, but not fully infected because they have taken the pill to prevent the bacteria to continue spreading. Ruth, one who is semi infected/human, is very compassion and caring especially when it comes to Neville who once killed her husband. Ruth was able to forgive Neville and through their “short friendship” in the book, we see that they are able to coexist to the point where Ruth wants to help Neville. She tells him to leave because they are going to kill him, although he doesn’t listen or care, she was still caring enough to inform him and help him out.
ReplyDeleteMaira A.
To respond to Rosalinda's question, any sort of contagion that spreads throughout society is already a major upheaval. Because it's an immediate divergence from normalcy, future practices will need to be altered, and people's mindsets have changed. It is memorable, at the very least, and will likely inspire change. Think about the bubonic plague and H1N1 or something. We remember these things. They're in and are likely going to continue to be in our history books--contagions are worthy of credit in the grand human narrative. In 'I am Legend,' this contagion happens to cause vampirism and is described to us in the framework of a post-apocalyptic world, as Melanie noted. In 'Dracula,' there is no catalyst for vampiric change outside of the Count (everything related to vampires is related to him thus far), and the framework of the novel is a society as we know it--ruled by humans, where we are the majority (or singularity, though that is what Stoker's type of vampire novel uses as a tool for its own lore). This ended up being more of a response to Alex's question, then. The emphasis on scientific explanation in 'I am Legend' encourages our understanding of vampires to be an understanding of a phenomena, where the emphasis on historicity and lore suggests vampires are relatable within the context of narratives of human society. I suppose it's getting a little meta to say that each author's stylistic approach is meant to reflect their perception of how we should craft our human narrative, but it fits. Perhaps that is why, to re-address Rosalinda, humans and vampires seem to be able to co-exist in Stoker's world. Lore is history there, and phenomena are not singular in causation, but connected and continuous throughout history. The rambling history of Transylvania as recounted by Dracula, with his lineage pivotal in all its events, is an example of this framework.
ReplyDeleteBoth vampires and humans want similar things, they are just different in each others' eyes and while I don't know what it's like to be a vampire, humans are afraid of things that are different which is clear from personal experiences and history. In a perfect world the two species should be able to coexist, but in the real world that is practically impossible. One can try to understand the similarities of vampires to humans as Neville does in Chapter 3 where he says, "Ah, see, you have turned the poor guileless innocent into a haunted animal. He has no means of support, no measures for proper education, he has not the voting franchise. No wonder he is compelled to seek out a predatory nocturnal existence." Neville tries to put the blame on humans for making vampires what they are and tries to explain that humans and vampires face some of the same problems. But then reality strikes and he says, "Sure, sure, he thought, but would you let your sister marry one? He shrugged. You got me there, buddy, you got me there." (p. 32)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that the setting and stylistic difference between the two stories serve to portray the different functions of their narratives. "Dracula", so far seems to be a story very much concerned with how the figure of the vampire, namely Count Dracula, affects Harker and the others of the story. With its story telling done through letters and diary entries "Dracula" delineates the vampire figure as one would an unfamiliar animal or creature. Something to be encountered and subsequently feared. Here the vampire is also the means through which other aspects of society are examined such as the seemingly incongruous co-existence of modern science and superstition. In "I am Legend" the author uses the main character to affect the vampire figures, and in a sense how he is used as the means to discuss contemporary society such as the shortfalls of science and absurdism.
ReplyDeleteI think for vampires and humans to coexist is a matter of any two groups coexisting. They need to respect and understand one another's beliefs, even if they don't necessarily agree with them. If humans and vampires were to live together, thr only way it could be peaceful would be if they both respected thr other's ways of life and customs. And of course they would need to not constantly try to kill each other
ReplyDelete