There's an argument that the flukeworm monster in the famous early X Files episode has more in common with at least a certain historical depiction of vampires than a lot of post-Victorian, post-Gothic vampire fiction.
-
-
Replying to @dreamingnoctis @social_scifi and
Yeah, that makes sense. I mean, a LOT of it dates back, not even just to Bram Stoker, but to Bela Lugosi specifically.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @mssilverstein @social_scifi and
To a degree, yeah. And the folklore is interesting, but here's a new blazing cursed sun hot take from me; The "ackshually historical folklore vampires were like X" has become the vampire equivalent to "Frankenstein is the name of the doctor!"
2 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @dreamingnoctis @mssilverstein and
*makes condescending noise while adjusting glasses* aakchshoehually....Victor Frankenstien wasn't a doctor, he just went to university Awwwlseeew, diid yuew know that Mary Shelly and Lord Byron bibble bibble, John Poliadori's "The Vampyre" blib blib same house one weekend.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @social_scifi @dreamingnoctis and
Lol yeah Victor was a goddamn undergrad, when he made the Creature he'd only completed his *freshman year* That was the point, once he started getting obsessed with babbling nonsense about creating artificial life he started failing his classes and alienating his professors
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @social_scifi and
Even hotter take; Victor was just the equivalent of a modern day pseudo-intellectual logic/debate/econ brok, who gets some 101 knowledge then fancies themselves the world's greatest genius even though their ideas are actually horrible and dangerous.
3 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @dreamingnoctis @social_scifi and
Shelley's book, unlike the adaptations, doesn't specify how he makes the monster - it doesn't describe the stitching body parts together and zapping them with electricity at all What little it does say says that his theory doesn't make any SENSE
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @dreamingnoctis and
All his teachers tell him that he's just grabbing stuff from long-disproved authors from hundreds of years ago and putting it together in contradictory ways, he's a total crackpot For the sake of the story this is necessary, Victor's discovery is more madness than reason
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @dreamingnoctis and
Yeah. I mean, it’s an odd one too, because there’s no traditional monster to match a Frankenstein. It’s from one book, and known from one movie
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @mssilverstein @arthur_affect and
There are analogs - golems, robots - but not quite a mythos
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
Unlike Dracula, where the theme is that Dracula is this ancient folkloric tradition from this creepy primitive country invading the new modern world, the whole theme of Frankenstein as a work of literature revolves around the horror of modernity creating a truly brand new thing
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @mssilverstein and
You can call Frankenstein's monster a kind of zombie or "flesh golem" or whatever you want to call it but by doing that you're destroying the whole point of the story All of the angst and horror is because Victor supposedly did something that's never been done before
3 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @mssilverstein and
Even the whole "It's just called Frankenstein's MONSTER" joke is about this fact The Creature is so angsty because not only does he personally not have a name, he doesn't even have a name for THE KIND OF THING THAT HE IS
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.