Kim Mauck English 1213.

8 Instructor Kimberly Mauck 15 February 2012

Hammer Time

At one time or another I think we all have had the pleasure of catching a classic British Horror film on midnight T.V. or Sunday lazy matinee. Old, creepy villages, horse driven carriages, bad makeup and fangs. If Caroline Seiferts article, "Bite Me!" were as good as one of these schleppy boob fests we would at least have been entertained. Bite Me! That colloquialism heads the article by the Associate Professor from Westminster, UT. By the time one has filtered through the morass that is this type-o-negative journalistic assault on our generations "Tromeo & Juliet", Bite Me! is an apt response. Hemlock, wolfsbane, nor eye of newt could repel the vampirous presumptions, lack of scholarship, and dogmatic caterwauling of Seiferts "Bitch" article. In the Hammer productions, this would be Act I, Scene, I. Taking a "bats eye view" of this attack piece, the overall schema is a derogatory, fantastic, 13 year old trapped in the bitter adult casket of middle age letdown, disappointed

fan rant. All through the piece Seifert comes across without expert backup from a purely emotional and complainant position. Her negativity drips like blood from plastic fangs throughout the entire tome. The only saving grace or shining crucifix of the submission really comes from verbiage, construction and targeting of speech. Sieferts thesis seems to be that "...feminist Readers have to ask ourselves if abstinence porn is as uplifting as some of its proponents seem to believe." There is absolutely nothing wrong with a rant, as this article is, what troubles me is that Asst. Prof. Seifert assumes from the "quiet village" or beginning that abstinence is an inherently good thing. This assumption is made with no supporting material, or backup opinion either. While there are those in our society who agree, there are a few of us, myself included who find abstinence preaching to be un-natural. The other assumption Ms. Seifert makes is that somehow, 1950's housewives are unhappy or that being one is negative in nature. It would have helped her case in these instances to insert some referent material which she failed to do, not only here but in nearly every instance. Throughout the article Seifert attempts to distance herself from being counted amongst the "fans" of Twilight but her verbiage belies her fandom. She utilizes words that give away her own involvement in the series such as "we" and "us". On page 347 we read, "Of course the paradox is that the more Meyer sexualizes the abstinence, the more we want Bella and Edward to actually have sex." (Emphasis added). Couple this with the fact that the author admits to attending mock weddings, openings of film and book, cruising fan sites on the web, etc. and I think we see there's no reflection in the mirror. These instances let

her own jilted fan syndrome come creeping out like Christopher Lee from behind a cardboard head stone. In the opening of every vampire movie there is the "establish your protagonist" setup. Background information, "the village is peaceful", times are good, life is quiet, are typical scenarios. In Seiferts' essay this would translate to her supporting materials one would hope. The "village scene" that is painted for us is one of little credibility as most references are opinions and not scholarly references, i.e. "Twilightmoms.com, Jezebel.com". This may or may not be a forgivable sin of omission if one keeps in mind that this is after all a zine article. Not all is forgivable throughout the article, however. The usual plot progression in our Vampiri flick would be the introduction of the "heavy", our title character, the undead. In this area some slack may be extended as the author comes across in a knowledgeable manner. The only highlight of the entire piece is the fact that "in the know" lingo is utilized from beginning to end. When talking about the books, movies, extraneous events and so on, she comes across as well versed. Transitions are utilized in such a way as to be nearly invisible and the author uses technical verbiage where appropriate. Coining one's own phrase, "abstinence porn" is anohter achievement that any writer should/would kudo. Act II, Scene III. The battle of Good and Evil. This climax is inevitable in the construct of all Horror nosh, not just the blood sucking variety and the old Hammer flicks were especially adept in this venue. Here Seifert drops the stake, or loses the crucifix or forgets the garlic. The essay seems to have a difficult time deciding to follow her thesis. She jumps from abstinence porn, to rape

allegations, to physical abuse implications, to poor self esteem for the heroine. One is lead all over the proverbial map in the course of the succubi hunt as it were. What does become apparent in the course of events, above all, is that Seifert's personal opinion of men is very low. Through the voices of sources she refers to men as "dicks", "controlling", and "calculating vampires". (pg. 346-347). Final Showdown, Act III, Scene III. A new day...the Vampire has been vanquished, good has triumphed over evil, all is well with the world. Our story ends as usual with the main object of Vampirish delights coming out on top, whether it's by stake or bake(sunlight killing the vamp). We are left with a hope for a better tomorrow, a brighter day, a world without vampires or creatures of the night. Unfortunately Christine Seifert offers us no such hope in her article. While she spends a good deal of time running down men, the Twilight series progression and ironically, women, she offers no alternative or plan to change this stereotypic culture. We are left hanging like the tense few moments at the end of the horror movie while we wait for the vampires hand to come plunging out from the earth. In this instance, when the hand finally does arise, all we see is a crumpled up copy of this article and one would swear they hear the faint, dirt muffled cry, Bite Me!