Pre-internet, if someone wanted to learn a magic trick they would hunt down an old book or ask uncle Bob to teach the card trick he always does at family gatherings.
Now, however, both the learning and performing of magic tricks has been dramatically changed due to video hosting and streaming sites. Scarcity is not the dominant obstacle in the pursuit of deceptive knowledge; rather it is the reverse: there are so many tutorials online that finding a trick which is both good and taught well is like playing 'Where's Waldo' x 100. Do these sites also remove the motivation for magician's to sell their original material online if it will only be pirated or taught for free on YouTube? Furthermore, if anyone can search the secret to a trick immediately after seeing it performed, what point is there for the magician to perform at all?
This impact would be most interesting to explore.
I'm not sure if this is helpful since it's anecdotal, but my great-grandmother would read tarot, except through interpreting normal playing cards, while I learned most of what I know online. The internet not only makes knowledge access easier, but a magician can get paid for demonstrations and tutorials presented to a worldwide audience, not just their town. The differing generational techniques because of evolving technology are intriguing to study, and very relatable to other advancements, such as the invention of the radio introducing people to music outside their regional traditions. But as you said, the counterpoint to accessibility is that what seems secret and reserved becomes less so, and this can disrupt the novelty for some. With magicians, knowing the intricacies may make it seem less mystical, although this also means others can participate and learn perhaps more quickly. – Emily Deibler8 years ago
Like Gob Bluth said (of his favorite magic magazine?), "I should've been in that Poof." – Tigey8 years ago
Examine the influence the JRPG series Mother has had on recent indie games, with examples being Undertale, Lisa, OFF, Space Funeral, Ib and Anodyne. Talk about how it's atmosphere and mix of quirky humor and cosmic horror has been modified and utilized by modern indie developers.
Why do some great fantasy/sci-fi series, great children's or young adult novels, get launched into the film world only to fall flat and disappoint fans? There was one film made of A Series of Unfortunate Events (with Jim Carrey and Meryl Streep). One film of The Golden Compass (with Daniel Craig). One film of the City of Bones, and then a reboot into a TV series. All of these films arguably had great elements, some well-known actors, and were adapting a charming, exciting story, something that should be great on film. What went wrong? Did the movies just not sell enough at the box office? Did the filmmakers not see it as worth their time and money to make a follow-up sequel? Fans will always be disappointed when this happens – even if the movie did not live up to the book in some ways, they still want to see their beloved stories onscreen. There are still so many fantasy novel series out there that readers would love to see made into movies, but that never happen. Tamora Pierce is a major one – medieval fantasy has become a massive hit with Game of Thrones, so why wouldn't her books make great films? What about Scott Westerfeld's Uglies or Malorie Blackman's Noughts and Crosses series: wouldn't these make timely adaptations to follow on from the success of the Hunger Games and Divergent? Perhaps certain writers need more support from their fans if they really want some film studio to get behind it. Arguably, young readers have had more power to catapult a book series and subsequent movie adaptations to success in recent years, so this is a relevant issue.
There are two possible answers to your initial question that you seem to ignore here, as many before you have. The first being that perhaps the film adaptations that have never gotten a sequel were simply badly produced or badly executed films and didn't succeed in captivating audiences the same way the book versions did. Or the second possibility, being that the books themselves simply cannot be adapted into films, because their structure simply will not allow it. A film has to be a certain way in order for the story to flow and make logical sense. Also, narrative description must be rendered into visuals in order for the existence of a narrator, in most cases, to be rendered unnecessary: as the old adage "show-don't-tell" is extremely important to keep at the forefront of any film project. Books like "Inkheart," "Ender's Game," "The Spiderwick Chronicles," "The Giver," and "The Golden Compass" make for captivating reading material, but they're often so dense in their descriptive language, strange and otherworldly in their tone and atmosphere, and sometimes very heavy-handed in their subtext and messages, that trying to adapt them into film results in much of these elements either feeling very off-putting and creepy because of how serious and gritty they are, or certain story elements and character interactions becoming laughable if not presented in the best possible way compared to how the book version does it. It's a difficult tight-rope to walk when you want a book adaptation to do justice for the fans, but you also want it to entice new audience members enough to warrant a sequel or two. The Chronicles of Narnia got two sequels, but the subject matter was such that even Disney gave up on it after two films and chucked the license over to 20th Century so they could try their hand at "Voyage of the Dawn Treader." But did that lead to films for the rest of the books? No. And that was likely in part due to the other books not revisiting the same characters from the previous stories, which is an issue that a couple of book series have: that being that later installments follow completely new characters from the last book, even if the world is the same. And doing that sort of thing in film is much more difficult, because you market films on the characters, not on the world or the writer's style. I could go on, but I'm rambling on as it is. Just a few possible avenues to go down when looking deeper into this subject. – Jonathan Leiter9 years ago
I know that The Giver was in production for what? 20 years before it was made into a film? A lot of it is about money, interest, timing. – Jaye Freeland9 years ago
A big factor here is that most novels - especially a series, such as The Golden Compass rely on progressive/continued reading for it to be interesting. Meaning, one film is not provocative to those who have not read the book, because it doesn't end in a logical manner the way other films do; they don't wrap up neatly at the end. Therefore, audiences would be forced to go see subsequent films for it to ultimately make sense and end in a satisfying way. Ending the first film on a cliffhanger or with unresolved questions does not hold their interest. Additionally, many series are just too long and detail-oriented for them to transfer successfully to film. Peter Jackson had to stretch the LOTR trilogy over three movies - about nine hours total - to get the full story in there, and there were still Tolkien zealots who were upset about missing elements left out, such as Tom Bombadil (with those films, I believe they were just so darn exciting that even viewers who hadn't read the books were interested in subsequent films anyway). In the case of Harry Potter, Rowling's first three books ended in a satisfactory fashion; they appeared to be stories in and of themselves, and didn't necessarily indicate there was more to come (we didn't hear "Voldemort is back" in any definitive sort of way for a while. Initially, we assume he is defeated entirely). Therefore, audiences who had not read the books saw them and enjoyed them as a complete entity in and of themselves. By the time the story progressed to the point where they knew there was a continuing story that was not complete, audiences were already hooked on the characters and unique fantasy universe, and wanted more. – Katheryn9 years ago
I think it has also got to be mentioned that the intent behind a film is very important - those films that flopped (Golden Compass - which should have been the Northern Lights! - and a Series of Unfortunate Events in particular) were clearly more money driven and dulled down, and did not appreciate and respect the original sources. – Francesca Turauskis9 years ago
Another question might be: does the film industry respect fantasy/sci-fi as a genre on its own, or is it simply adapting these books because they were popular?
I hate to bring up the Sign Seeker film, but that in my opinion was the pinnacle of young adult fantasy butchery...(I am a huge Susan Cooper fan, so I may be biased)
However, I would love to see this topic written! – sophiacatherine9 years ago
I think a lack of promotion or too much promotion adds to the question you pose. The City of Bones film was so over promoted to the point that I would change the channel anytime a related commercial would air, and I'm sure many other TV viewers would as well. Sometimes shoving something down someone's throat has the opposite effect promoters hope - it just makes people annoyed rather than intrigued. A lack of promotion also plays into this as not seeing enough of a film before its release will have less people showing up because they either never heard the film was coming out, or they simply forgot. – llsebben8 years ago
They scrap. They fight. They backstab. They even kill. They also are supposedly liberal, proving woefully inept at actually carrying across consistent legislation but crafty and deadly in the underworkings of the American political sphere. How are the Underwoods exactly liberal?
I definitely think this is an interesting topic, as I have wondered about this myself watching the show. Frank is a "Liberal" from South Carolina no less. I think it might be interesting to examine the various policies he pushes, and to what end: power or belief? – MichelleAjodah8 years ago
That's opening a can of worms for sure. Another interesting topic ,and one that this topic will eventually lead to, could be the similarities between American policy in the 21st century and Underwood's policies in House of Cards. You might have to embrace the very real conclusion that the terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' might just be name tags politicians stick on before just doing whatever they want. – EarlGreyTRex8 years ago
They are the Clintons: whatever it takes to win, do it. Hillary supports private prisons - no conflict of interest affecting justice there - and other conservative mistakes. Also, anyone else notice how there's no intimacy between the two, but after they've screwed the world, they share a cigarette? Seems more fitting of a captain of industry than a liberal representative. – Tigey8 years ago
Frank and Claire seem to be on the more progressive side of political topics like foreign and domestic policy, they are also part of the democratic party.
– luminousgloom8 years ago
Usually we talk about who Shakespeare influenced, but never the other way around. I recently learned that the story of Romeo and Juliet was borrowed from the old Greco-Roman myth of Pyramus and Thisbe, the tragic tale of two star-crossed lovers (likewise a rather shallow depiction of romance). Who and what else influenced Shakespeare, the greatest writer of the English language?
i really like this topic! it will be interesting to see what pops up (shakespeare being my favorite playwright) I like that you leave it to the writer to choose the plays instead of being tightknit on certain ones so they can do some research as well – scole8 years ago
I think this will make a great topic to approach. Since there was no actual law of copyrights, there are numerous and familiar literature pieces that have borrowed from ancient stories. – Arazoo Ferozan8 years ago
As You Like It's influence is incredibly interesting, for anyone who decides to tackle this beast of a topic. – chandlerwp8 years ago
It's actually not true that we never talk about who influenced Shakespeare. By reading his plays and poems we can see clear influences from Homer, Plato, Virgil, Ovid (who was his source for the Pyramus and Thisbe legend), Dante, Petrarch, Boccaccio, Chaucer, Plutarch, Holinshed, Montaigne (particularly from the 1603 translation by John Florio), Spenser, Marlowe, and countless others. His works also illustrate that he had an extensive knowledge of a wide array of non-literary subjects, including (but not limited to) medicine, law, court politics, geography, sailing, witchcraft, falconry, and fencing, which surely necessitated a lot of reading. In the appendix to her book Sweet Swan of Avon, american scholar Robin P. Williams (no relation to the late comic) compiled a list of nearly every literary source which the poet must have read - as evidenced by references to them in some capacity throughout his body of work, thereby not counting anything that he may have read for pleasure without making any allusions to - and it wound up being eight times more than the total traceable sources of Ben Jonson, who is considered by many to be the second smartest playwright of the age. – ProtoCanon8 years ago
Many of the plays were not original ideas, but rather based on several source materials. Troilus and Cressida is a great example for instance as an Italian writer expanded of of Homer and the story got rewritten a couple of times--even by Chaucer!--before the Shakespeare even wrote his version. Focusing on a couple plays might help narrow the focus – ckmwriter8 years ago
Another thing to consider is that many of Shakespeare's plays were "work shopped" in the Globe Theater. He would write the greater chunk of the script, pulling from Classic sources, but he would revise them with both cast a crew. Also, as ProtoCanon mentioned earlier, many of his plays were directly influenced by classics and to put it lightly, many of them could be considered adaptations or "fan ficitons" (to put it bluntly). I think a better question would be, although greatly influential and a master of language in his own right, how much of Shakespeare's material was directly his own? Considering the work shopping, the borrowing from other sources, etc. how much did Shakespeare actually create? Perhaps this needs to be better worded (I'm struggling myself to plot this question out correctly) but I still think these things should be considered when writing for this topic. – Mela8 years ago
Analyze the difference in your mind and the mind of critics when a break in filming conventions such as the 180 rule is an intention subversion or a simple mistake and what it says about the film and the filmmaker.
The characters on The Wire are hardly new, novel, or interesting, but are regurgitations of other cop shows.
So much of entertainment is derivative. I think this will be a good critique. I haven't watched the show but the ad looked so boring. It is funny to see you talking about it. – Munjeera8 years ago
The genius of The Wire does not lie in the originality of its characters (nobody would ever make such a claim), but rather in the ways in which each and every one of them represents a facet of the real-life war on drugs in the American urban landscape. To call them cliches feels simplistic; they're archetypes that make a greater picture when they all come together, like individual dots in a pointillist painting. PM me if you'd like further clarification, or to discuss the subject in greater detail. It's a really great show that I feel isn't being accurately represented by your stance. – ProtoCanon8 years ago
I must publicly confess here that ProtoCanon is correct that The Wire is special. I'm now seeing what I missed in the haze of my post-Breaking Bad viewing. Omar is an especially amazing character. I'd like to share a spot of tea with him... behind bullet-proof glass. – Tigey8 years ago
Then again, I've lost interest early in season four. – Tigey8 years ago
A paper that examines the psychological aspects of hypersexuality's presence in horror movies, and a historical timeline of its escalation.
This sounds like an extremely interesting article and I hope you go forward with it! It will definitely take a lot of dense research regarding information and studies on the psychological effects of hypersexuality in horror films but I think you have a wonderful, intriguing idea to jump off from! I can't wait to read what you come up with as I think this is a very important topic. – leahw8 years ago
This can certainly prove to be a new horror era if really done well, but what you have to make sure that you write in manner that one reading it can still relate it to a horror movie and not a porn. – EmilyWrites8 years ago
Watterson's strategic use of nomenclature when it came to naming his famous comic (and its two central characters) is well known, as its evocation of two historically significant philosophers guides the reader to look beyond the comic's perceived childishness to discover deep-seated philosophical themes. However, might there be a special reasoning as to why he chose these two specific thinkers? Does the character of Calvin in any way represent post-Lutheran Christian reformational dogmatism? Does Hobbes illustrate the necessity of Social Contract theory to maintain civilized order in light of mankind's inherently brutish nature? In what ways might these philosophical outlooks be reflected in the young boy's imaginative adventures with his stuffed tiger?
This is a great topic and you have raised so many excellent points here to discuss for a true CH fan. I would look forward to reading this article. – Munjeera8 years ago
This would be cool to read. I once wrote an exegesis of Green Eggs and Ham for a hoot. This would be fun too. – LisaDee8 years ago
My daughter just told me that Calvin once told Hobbes he was trying to trick Santa by writing a letter claiming to be Calvin's nicer brother, Melville. Hmm... – Tigey8 years ago
Even a small dose of coincidence is needed in a work as lengthy and comprehensive as the novel, but Victorian novels seem more comfortable using it than many modern writers. Some consider that a defect, or put up with it as the artifact of a bygone era: but it might it be more than that? First, examine what "coincidence" actually entails, is it really a bad thing? Second, consider specific cases, such as Dickens, Dracula and Dostoevsky, whose brilliantly constructed novels sometimes make liberal use of coincidence. Might coincidence be an integral component in the success of these novels?
This sounds like an intriguing topic and I like the idea of using specific cases of literature to prove your thesis. For whoever chooses to write this topic, it might also be useful to examine how exactly coincidence is seen as a detriment in literature and what made it appear to be undesirable to use for modern writers. – MAG958 years ago
Perhaps the Victorians were big on fate. There's so much coincidence in Dickens thwt I can picture people,rolling their eyes at a retell ins of one of his stories, but his stories are wonderful and believable. – Tigey8 years ago
You might also examine whether modern writers or genres still use coincidence and if so, how. I'm a published writer for the inspirational market, and in that circle there is a bit of the attitude, "You can pull off anything as long as you explain God was behind it." I tried that in college Creative Writing, and my very understanding professor introduced me to the term deus ex machina. Now I avoid coincidence like the proverbial snake in the garden, but have seen it used successfully. It might be an angle worth exploring. – Stephanie M.8 years ago
At this years, E3 Capcom reveal a trailer for the upcoming Resident Evil 7. They also released a demo for the game. The Resident Evil series has been criticized for seemingly abandoning it's horror aspect. Resident Evil 4 was hailed as a masterpiece for changing the third-person shooter genre. The change is centered on the introduction of "offset camera angles that fail to obscure the action."
However, by adding these aspects to the game, Capcom appeared to ruin the "survivor horror" series. One reason for this seems to be the abandonment of zombies all together. Replacing them with a cult called "Los Illuminados." The cult members were infected with a parasite, and so were "mindless." They cool use tools unlike zombies, like guns, axes and/or vehicles.
To counter this the series shifted to become more action oriented. The horror element gave way to the action. This continued for Resident Evil 5 and 6, although there were other complaints. Resident Evil 7 promises to return to what made the series a great survivor horror series. Capcom's reveal of Resident Evil 7 demo was meet with mix reviews. The demo doesn't play like the last 3 games or the original games. It played more like the Silent Hill series. It was first person and featured less action.
The demo however will not be part of the "main series," according to director Koushi Nakanishi. He stated that it was more of a "tonal preview." He stated that the demo was designed to show the "fear/horror," elements and the "exploration of an environment." Some of the gameplay elements were left out of the demo. Koushi clarified that "puzzle solving, resource management, and combat," will return to the series as well.
Overall, the demo has sent the message that the series horror aspects are returning. Can this entry revive the series? Can Capcom find a balance between action and horror, while satisfying new and old fans? What do you think made Resident Evil 4 – 6 "abandoned" the horror. What would you like to see in the series of the future?
Analyse and explain the similarities between Professor Xavier from the X-men comics and Martin Luther King Jr. Do the same for Magneto and Malcolm X. Finally, analyse the relationship, ideals, and tensions between the two fictional characters and how it might relate to the ideas and relationship between Martin Luther King Jr and Malcolm X.
This looks like it is going to be a really good compare and contrast topic. – Munjeera8 years ago
Never thought of that. Maybe also relate to the time period the comics were written in and possible influences given when they were being written.
– Jutor8 years ago
I agree with Munjeera. It's a comparison I've heard mentioned before, but I think by comparing and contrasting the fictional characters with their corresponding historical figures, you can give an in-depth take on the idea. – akb19948 years ago
This comparison occurred to me when I read an article on the Artifice about Magneto Testament and its take on the Holocaust, although I can't remember where I initially came across this way of thinking about the two characters. Of course, we're talking about a specific phase in Malcolm X's thinking, and exaggerated to a more extreme and theatrical degree. If Magneto can be read as a parallel to Malcolm X's "by any means necessary" philosophy, then Xavier becomes the representative of Dr. King's "I have a dream." It's an engaging way of thinking about it, but not perfect. For one, Dr. King was non-violent. While Xavier has some resistance to the idea of violence, the X Men wouldn't be the X Men if they were simply advocates of peaceful protest. In fact, their main interest, by and large, is in keeping bad mutants in check, rather than mobilising fellow mutants to fight the oppressive status quo. Obviously, this does not parallel MLK. – TKing8 years ago
X-men was written and modeled to represent these two men exactly. It's not a coincidence; that was the original intent. The story is supposed to be the race struggle. – CharmieJay8 years ago
On what grounds, though? Any reasoning behind this specific comparison? – T. Palomino2 years ago
Is Orientalism, as posited by Edward Said, still alive and well in the West's new fascination with all things Korean? The skyrocketing popularity of kpop and kdramas, the flood of Western youtubers and vloggers living and working and documenting their time in Korean, are these healthy signs or signs of a distorted obsession?
A case in point would be the new tv series named Dramaworld, where a kdrama obsessed American woman is transported to the world of one of her beloved dramas. This fusion show, while a comedy, suggests that Westerners love the version of Korea that is presented in these fictional worlds. But is the version that Westerners have fallen in love with warped their ability to appreciate the actual Korea?
Interesting topic, but if someone were to attempt to write it, I think it would be wise to have a little more focus. I like your use of the example (although I'm not sure if I'd call it "a case in point" just yet) of Dramaworld, so perhaps a better way to frame the article would be as something along the lines of "Dramaworld: Korean Orientalism in 21st Century Television". This still allows the freedom to touch on all of the key points you've addressed (Said's theoretical framework, the rising popularity of kpop and kdramas, increased fascination by vloggers, the warped perception of culture from the Western gaze, etc), but they all become supplementary examples to support a more concrete thesis surrounding one very tangible example. Examining the subject through the lens of this show would be a strong way of tightening this otherwise broad topic. – ProtoCanon8 years ago
Interesting topic as orientalism is still very prevalent today. You've got great points in those questions and seem well-informed with Said's theory - you're off to a good start! One thing you could add at the end is to discuss where the fine line between this obsession becomes orientalist or simply a celebration of their culture. – Joie8 years ago
Since the success of Marvel's "The Avengers" and the films connected with it, the series of crossover superhero films has become the next big thing. Analyze and discuss this phenomenon in connection with DC's less than stellar efforts to establish much of the same (including possible missteps such as refusing to put the TV versions of their characters in their films), as well as compare with other properties of these companies that are distinct from their "cinematic universes" (e.g., the X-Men series, the Dark Knight Trilogy). Why was "The Avengers" a success, but "Age of Ultron" and "Batman v. Superman" met with middling or downright negative response? When does it work and when it is too much too soon? Is the complexity inherent in this concept ultimately worth it? With many suffering "superhero fatigue" from the glut of comic-book films in theaters, is this ultimately a concept worth pursuing in the future?
A few things to consider...there are moviegoers who are well-versed on the comic book series of these films and take the material very seriously. As with book adaptations, audiences become frustrated when a film is untrue to the original story. As for "The Avengers,"...part of the appeal, in my opinion is the numerous characters featured that lead to audiences to find a connection with a particular character(s). As for "Batman v. Superman," I do believe part of the problem was the characters--especially that of Batman--not staying true to his perceived persona, as previously established. When a character that is beloved acts differently than what people expect, audiences become angered. Now, "The Dark Knight Series," with met with exceptional critical and viewer praise. Why is this? Well, the films were exceptionally done, and the moral conflicts, the human turmoil, and the complex multi-dimensional villains provided audiences with not only a high-octante film, but one that viewers connected with on an emotional level. – danielle5778 years ago
In addition, it might also be interesting to discuss X-Men, and 20th Centurty Fox's lack of continuity throughout not only their trilogies, but the whole movie franchise. – Maureen8 years ago
Part of what sets Marvel apart from other production studios is that they spent more time building their universe. I can't remember there being any shared universes in major studio movies before Iron Man came out, and Marvel had a game plan that they were working from. Now that other studios have seen how successful a universe with multiple connected properties can be, they're jumping on the bandwagon, but without enough time to sufficiently build the worlds that their characters exist in. Also, and danielle said this, Marvel was working with B-level comic characters, so they had to make sure the characters and they're stories were engaging before relying on the spectacle of a superhero fight. DC/WB knows that the names Batman and Superman will sell tickets, so they felt confident in throwing the two together without taking into account their core characteristics or how they would deal with the world around them (which has been done fantastically in several animated movies and TV shows). A lack of widespread familiarity with characters like Iron Man or Captain America meant that marvel could define these characters in stand alone stories, and then put them on a team knowing what the dynamic of that team would be. – chrischan8 years ago
Analyze the way in which the film industry has changed over the past 10, 20, or even more years, focusing on the ways in which the changes in audience preference have led to changes in Hollywood, and the films we see in today's society. Consider the ways that society has changed over the years, and how as things become more/less prevalent in society, they become more/less prevalent on the big screen. Contemplate what drives current films to be made, and what impact we, the audience, have on these films. For example, pick a genre of film such as spy or superhero, and consider how they were filmed based on the times (ex. films made in WWII vs films made now), how the societal norms have changed (ex. more/new technology, civil rights), and how the political and social actions of the time period in which the film was made and how that played into the way the film was created.
Lily could you give some examples which may help clarify the direction you would suggest the writer of this topic should pursue? Thank you. – Munjeera8 years ago
Of course! I just updated the topic with some examples. Thank you for your input! – LilyaRider8 years ago
I'm fairly new to the world of comic books, and I'm really curious in the effect of distinguishing between graphic novels and comics. I have heard the suggestion that graphic novel is a gentrifying term that prioritizes one type of expression over another. Art Spiegelman, for one, dislikes the term graphic novel.
I'm wondering what people more knowledgeable than I am on this topic think about this suggestion.
Normally "graphic novels" nowadays are a series of comic books all in one that come out after the first part of a series has finished. So, Deadpool 1-9 would all be together in one huge comic book (hints, also, why they are 30-40$). Rather than buying the separate issues 1-9 for 3$ or so. I don't know if that is a millennial thing that changed it and made it like this. But, I mostly would buy it for that reason. A graphic novel could also be a longer version of a comic book as well, more novel formation rather also. But, I'm not sure what other people think about the topic. I know that comic books more so have issues that come out weekly or monthly. But the art style I assume is also different and etc., which can be explored upon as well. – scole8 years ago
I think graphic novel as a term also refers to the length as well as the binding of the book itself. Comic books have a kind of lighter and more fragile binding, and are more cheaply made which is how the cost can be as low as it is to sell them. Graphic novels are longer and are usually bound with a paperback or hard back cover in some cases. I think the Westernization of graphic novels is in some part of the influence of manga translations over to the Western world. Just my opinion though. – Nayr12308 years ago
A graphic novel may well have a beginning, middle, and end, just as most novels do. It is likely to have narrative completion. Comic books are more likely to have an open ended narrative when you take them as a whole. That is, they do not necessarily constitute a completed whole. It's not just a matter of which is longer (graphic novel versus a comic book or a series of comic books) or that X number of comic books might go together to make a novel. A series of comic books (about a given superhero, for example) could conceivably go on forever. The series may well end not because the hero's story is "finished," but because the artist died, the publisher dropped the series, or the public tired of that hero. – JWHorton8 years ago
The way I understand it graphic novels are comic narratives that reveal everything from the characters to the message of the story, while comic books use episodic segments to get their point across. – RadosianStar8 years ago
William Langland is not a well-known writer due to having spent the entirety of his life working on a single work–Piers Plowman. He did write three versions: A text, B text, and the C text. There were revisions made to each text, but the one text with the most revisions is the C text, in which the political language is toned down.
Many scholars have speculated that C text, written in 1390, was toned done in political language due to the Peasant Rebellion that occurred in 1381. This is due to the rebels actually calling out the name of Piers Plowman while rioting. Piers is a fictional character in Langland's visionary poem who undergoes numerous tasks in attempting to find the road to salvation, alongside Will. The poem, broken up into 20 passus ("steps") highlights and personifies vices as all powerful, and the virtues are strong, at moments, yet quickly overcome by the battle between the vices.
The poem appears to end on a triumphant note in which Will, the character attempting to find the road to truth and knowledge, learns that caritas (charity) is man's salvation. Yet, the poem ends with an apocalyptic tone with the vices building in strength and the virtues giving up the fight.
The end of the world in which Piers exists seems doomed…and then the poem ends. Though this is a visionary poem, was Langland more concerned with the sanctity of religion, or with the unsettling state of England? This was at the time when famines and plagues were rampant, and parliament became increasingly greedy and cruel with taxation and land seizure. Or, was Langland simply connecting these two facets to show how the vices of Parliament would eventually lead to the destruction of man as one is left with nothing…there is nothing to lose?
Discuss the role of the female dragon character from the film Shrek (2001) and its sequels. Do the character's unexpected gender and romantic relationship with Donkey effectively subvert the fairy tale genre's tropes of monstrous (presumably male) dragons, or does her animated femininity – long eyelashes, red lips, mating instinct, etc – perpetuate patriarchal gender ideologies? How might this be related to other ways in which the film attempts to recast female archetypes, most prominently through the character of Fiona? Do these non-normative portrayals of female characters send better messages to young viewers than the standard fairy tale (or "Disney princess") representations?
Perhaps comparing it to another other female dragon might help this analysis, I am thinking of Maleficent in Sleeping Beauty (1959.) Who also has the role of keeping the prince away from the princes. But unlike the Shrek dragon she looks complete masculine. – odettedesiena8 years ago
Since the beginning of language man has entertained himself with storytelling. These anecdotal stories and most popular chronicles at that usually follow the same exact 'hero's journey' formula. But does this form ever truly encompass humanity? We are constantly exposed to the hero's journey and the outcomes of the triumph of one side or another (good or evil, man vs. Nature ect), but does humanity exclude the reality of the accurate human experience for the sake of mass amusement? Analyze why the hero's journey could possibly not truly represent the nature of humanity and why this particular set of storytelling guidelines translates so well to an mass audience who will most likely never amount to heroic status.
I think the hero's journey is flexible enough to encompass the human experience because a character doesn't necessarily have to make it full circle. There are many stories where the hero isn't able to overcome the tests he meets in the underworld - and he doesn't come back with a boon to society. A happy ending is not obligatory in the hero's journey - it's just that the hero *might* come back. Yet, at the same time, even with an unhappy ending, the cycle reminds us of what might have been or of what was possible, if that makes sense. – LisaDee8 years ago
I agree that cliche is such a damning critque. – sktthemes8 years ago
While the quality of its prose is generally considered substandard, E.L. James's Fifty Shades of Grey has topped bestseller lists around the world. The book is also the subject of controversy when it comes to its portrayal of relationships and BDSM, but that doesn't seem to have impeded its popularity. What does the popularity of the book say about society and its views of BDSM? Does everyone secretly harbour a repressed desire for sexual domination? Is that the cause of its popularity?
It would also be helpful for anyone who writes this to see responses from the BDSM community regarding 50 Shades. – Emily Deibler8 years ago