Bloodsucking Fiends - Response

Please respond here for the second part of your test:

Comments

Keyla H said…
First of all, I would like to say that I did not like the ending, it could have been better and more creative, it felt like the story wasn't over yet. In other terms Dracula movies or books sex played a major role in them and in Christopher Moore’s book he had a lot of sex also another thing he had in common with other authors is that he had incorporated the whole idea of a vampire falling in love with a human. He also put like there is always the idea that most vampires are bad and he included that in his book with the vampire that turned Jody into a vampire but it also showed how vampires need a companion like in most vampire folklore. Also he showed how vampires could get killed by sunlight. One thing he does different is that he made the vampire or the stronger half of the human vampire relationship a female rather than making the vampire a man. He also put that she was good and that she could kind of draw away from blood most of the time and survive by Tommy's blood and not kill him or turn him, so that was different. Also the part where she turns into mist was also different. Another thing he did different is the whole idea of a coffin, she slept in the bed with Tommy but he did one thing similar in that she couldn't get up until dark. Another different thing is that the book wasn’t as romantic as most vampire stories are. Moore used his advice because he said that you got to sell your book and that your basically a salesman and that shows in his writing because reader’s want to read something hot and entertaining and that was what his book was because it had a lot of sex and mystery about who that vampire was and what could Jody do. He also said that you should have fun writing and be silly and Bloodsucking Fiends was pretty hilarious especially the relationship between Jody and Tommy. You could kind of see how he had fun with the book especially in the part of the five Chinese men Tommy was living with in the beginning. He also said that he wanted to stay away from the whole idea of a dark and depressed vampire and he showed that by his comical book and making Jody such a comical vampire by showing all of her imperfections rather than just making her the sexiest predator alive like in most vampire stories. One thing that he also showed that was different was that his story was AIDS in most vampire stories AIDS plays a major role but in this book it didn’t play that much of a big role the only person in the novel with AIDS was Simon but the other people in the book who were sick he did not specifically sate what they had. So the whole AIDS idea was there but it wasn’t that big of a deal like in most vampire novels. Although Moore tried to shy away from most vampire folklore, he did show some similarities but his book left you wanting more and more like he stated that you have to have the reader wanting more, so I think that he did sell his book to his readers.

-Keyla Hernandez
Anonymous said…
Of all the books we’ve read this year, this is definitely my favorite. My favorite kind of book is the trashy romance novel and as soon as I read the back cover for Bloodsucking Fiends I knew I would enjoy it. This book is really just a trashy romance novel, except perhaps not quite so trashy, with a twist. I really like the third person point of view, which you always find in romance novels, because it allows you to connect more with the characters and see their actions and how they view other characters’ actions through their own eyes. In this aspect Christopher Moore took his own advice from his writing hints on his website. Another way he follows his own advice from writing hints is his use of dialogue. He, quite passionately, gives the advice that you don’t have fill your dialogue with adjectives and adverbs and I think he follows that advice well; I think this book had great dialogue.
He also gives the advice that “Each scene should accomplish something.” This I do not think he followed very well. At a lot of points in the books I found myself coming to the end of a chapter totally and utterly confused. A lot of these moments were found, especially, with The Emperor’s chapters. Every time we see him he’s going after the vampire and talking about this great battle he’s going to have and it doesn’t even happen until the very end of the book. Throughout so many of his sections I just kept wondering if what I was reading was totally necessary to the story, and I don’t believe all of it was.
I think Bloodsucking Fiends is a very good modern take on the whole Dracula and vampire idea. You could see similarities in the fact that Jody as a vampire never eats or drinks or uses the bathroom and, of course, that she will live forever. Also, she has super human strength and heightened senses and still acts upon emotions, as does the vampire in Dracula. Some differences were that Jody was not alive during the day and could be burned by the sunlight while in Dracula the vampire is always up and about. You can definitely see the influence of Dracula and other vampire novels, especially in the part where Tommy is conducting all these experiments on what is and is not true of vampire’s from vampire literature.
All in all, I really enjoyed this book. I liked how Moore has made being a vampire into something more lady like and not as grotesque as turning into some kind of savage beast and sucking the blood out of everyone it sees. I thought the ending was sort of bizarre and crazy, but overall it was an interesting light read. I would definitely recommend it to others as well.
-Cassie Pavone
Islah Munirah said…
In the novel Bloodsucking friends I noticed that it contains the traditional vampires that Dracula portrayed. A vampire, who rest during the day in order to avoid the sun, which would burn a vampire. There was also the usual fang white teeth the sucking of blood. The heat vision with the vampire in Bloodsucking fiends is new with me and I thought that only the predators had that ability. Moore’s vampires are different in a way because they some in exactly at sunrise and go out exactly at sundown. In Dracula the movie, it was dark when Dracula could come out and when it was sunrise he was burned. Moore creates humor in the a novel that is usually suppose to be scary, however he say that the reason for the humor is because “For me it's the core of everything I do, but that's just me.” Moore uses the right tone and imagery to hit comedy into this novel. Like for instance the Wong’s sending him flowers because they wanted him to marry them was hilarious.
Khari said…
~Jewels White

"Lust is a plot device, love is a story," Christopher Moore said fairly recently in an interview. When he said this, he was talking about Bloodsucking Fiends. Moore has a point and follows this throughout his story. Just as Bram Stoker's Dracula had love so did Bloodsucking Fiends. The only difference was that Jody was not manipulating Tommy's mind. Tommy loved her without some freaky mind control or the addition of being the reincarnation of a dead past lover. That is why he incased her in bronze when she told him she had to leave.
"You can write about staking-out vampires all day, about gunfights and space ships and pirates and bank robbers and most of your readers will have absolutely nothing, but other fiction to compare with your portrayals, but when you write sex, they know" (Moore). Christopher knows what he is talking about in this quote. A novel, a story no matter how funkadelic, needs something that the audience can relate to. Whether heterosexual, homosexual or necrophilia the audience understands sex. Sex is a common link that people have. "He finally got the message and returned her kiss and tried to match her urgency, then didn't have to try it all" (103). The thing that is good about Moore's sex scenes is that they are not over the top with too much information. However there is also not too little information.
There are several other similarities that Christopher Moore's novel had with Dracula. Just like in the typical Vampire legend, Jody can turn into mist like Dracula could. It took her until the end of the novel to figure it out, but she could none the less. "Vapor was streaming out of the ear holes in the brass and swirling into a cloud in the middle of the room," (299).
Jody also could not eat. In Dracula, Dracula just watched others eat like Jody does with Tommy at the restaurant.
"'I can't eat,' she said.
'Not at all?'
'Not as far as I know. I can't even keep a glass of water down,'" (112).
Jody also shares the similarities with Dracula that she can't go out during sunrise and can't get up until sundown. Jody also represents the original Vampire folklore when her arm gets burned from the sunlight. She also heals quickly, just like a "typical?" vampire.
Also just like in a “typical” vampire book or movie, there are vampire hunters. Usually Van Helsing shows up, but this time it was a hobo named the Emperor with his faithful companions. The vampire hunters, the Animals, are a little out of the ordinary in Moore’s novel however. It is a delightful change however.
The differences are wide and varied. Dracula could basically do anything a vampire was ever told to be able to do. Therefore there is much room for difference.
"She stepped back from the mirror and tried to fight the self-criticism-tried to look at herself objectively" (54). Jody could see herself in the mirror. Vampires in folklore could not seen themselves in the mirror. This was a classic symbol to tell if one was a vampire or not.
Another difference was the bite marks. In Dracula when a person was bite, the bite marks were still visible afterwards. When Jody bit Kurt, the bite marks disappeared. “There were no marks on his neck where she had bitten him” (25). In Dracula Lucy’s bite marks were very noticeable to Van Helsing when he looked for them. The bite mark was evidence of vampires. The bite marks not being shown helps the vampires to not be found. That is why the police had such a problem trying to figure out why there were people drained of blood with no wounds.
One final example of difference was the vampires in the city feeding on the sick. The AIDS epidemic was approached in this novel, obviously unlike Bram Stoker’s Dracula considering that when the novel was written AIDS wasn’t around yet. Christopher Moore played with the idea of this blood born disease. Moore way of using Tommy helped the reader understand the city more. The fact of Jody being able to see the dying, helped express this view also. “In my vampire book, Bloodsucking Fiends, it was important that my protagonist, Tommy came from a small town in the Mid-West because the book is set in San Francisco and I wanted to portray the city through new eyes.”
This book was an enjoyable read (I finished it in less than a week) that I would recommend.
doughnutt said…
Bloodsucking Fiends was an interesting novel about vampires obviously referring to the title "BLOODSUKING FIENDS". Author Christopher Moore uses very optimistic distinctive scenes to describe his characters suspenseful actions and hilarious features and insane dialogue and thought on provocation. It also, in the form of contrasting reminds me of Dracula just opposite a hilarity version. These novels’s is very similar, because both novel's focus in on taboo (forbidden) ways about the personality of vampires point of view. Although since these books are both based on vampires, you would think they would have no differences. That’s where you’re wrong. In this novel Moore is much more creative with his characters unlike the real image of vampires’ perspective of non-direct sunlight to the surface of the skin, which causes instant mind boggling death. The setting of the story takes place in San Francisco. Tommy one of the main protagonist characters writes books and haven't yet to be published and he works at the local Safeway Jody is Tommy girlfriend another protagonist/antagonist. Jody and Tommy has a dead human guy in there freezer. The vampire that bites Jody is trying to wash away his plate and place the murders that he convicted on Jody and Tommy. Jody is having problems, throughout the novel and it ends in complete chaos and drama. (:doughnutt:)
angela said…
Over the years, modern society has created a variety of images of fictional vampires. Most novels, short stories, and films however are based off of the original version of "Dracula." The stereotypical vampire is portrayed as dangerous, seductive, dark creatures of the night; the folklore that we have created of vampires holds the interest of many people. Vampires have come to represent a sexual fancy in many cases. Different interpretations of these creatures have opened the imaginations of many writers and filmmakers and allowed them to take these stereotypical images and shape them however they want to in order to make them their own creation.
In the novel, "Bloodsucking Fiends" by Christopher Moore, the image of vampires has taken some similarities to the original creation. However in Moore’s novel, the vampires seem to be somewhat more fascinating to me than the image in "Dracula." Although they share some similar traits such as not being able to go into direct sunlight, being immortal, and the obvious sucking blood, Moore has made his vampire characters more realistic by setting specific times that the vampires are able to roam during the night and also bringing in a love story between a mortal and an immortal.
I believe that Moore did follow his advice about writing when he wrote this book. He definitely follows the guideline of "The Art of Fiction" in order to construct his novel and uses many literary devices that contribute to it. I enjoyed reading the novel and I think that Moore was very clever in his depiction of a modern-day vampire.
Anonymous said…
Kelly McBride!
The archetype for many films, literary pieces and opinions for most vampire fiction have been based off of the famous, Dracula written by Bram Stoker, which, although is not the first of its kind, seems to have left the stereotyped impression of vampirism on society. We associate a vampire being dark, mysterious, and sexy, yet untouchable. We know vampires are representation of evil-doing and are casted as breakers of social mores, which include not only killing others, but sucking their blood and specifically choosing their prey before attacks. All of these associations and opinions have been accepted through this film and made their way through time. Vampires and their doings became a common interest centuries ago, when which they were begun to be written of, and their influence have persisted into modern times. Vampirism behavior as we know it, has evolved from folklore and made its way into pop culture- into a universally interesting theme of mystery, suspense, and horror used frequently.
Bloodsucking Fiends, written by Christopher Moore is a novel written with traditional values of vampirism based off its folklore roots, but placed in modern time as pop culture. With the influence of Dracula apparent throughout its text and characters, this book is a modern interpretation of vampirism and its tradition. Jody, the main character, who is a vampire in Bloodsucking Fiends, has many similar characteristics as Dracula himself. Jody, not unlike Dracula have similar characteristics of vampires: are both sensitive and may be killed by the sunlight, come out only during the night, possess fangs in which they suck humans’ blood, are portrayed as mysteriously sexy and handsome creatures, and prey on human being’s livelihood. Jody and Dracula not only possess similar characteristics, but, also, both are struggling with a similar theme. Both vampires are casted in the dark of society, and are seeking a way to fit in and relate to normal human beings in their lives. They both desire to involve themselves romantically with other characters: In Dracula, Mina, and in Bloodsucking Fiends, Tommy, but struggle enormously since they are very different creatures to their lovers, and have drastically different lifestyles than them. Moore’s depiction of vampirism is under different circumstances than that of the original Dracula, but both pieces agree upon the characteristics of these creatures, and are based on similar themes and struggles for the main characters.
Moore’s writing and tone throughout his novel, Bloodsucking Fiends, is rather matter-of-fact, frank, and to the point. His writing style does, indeed coincide with his website advice. In agreement with his advice, he writes in third person omniscient, uses dialogue realistically and as a key factor in his book, writes his chapters like scenes, and uses description directly, without being excessive. Like his tone on the website, his novel is interesting, entertaining and, humorous. Like he states on the website, Bloodsucking Fiends seems to be researched and well thought out. It alludes to many aspects in Dracula, and this six month period of which he states he researches his theme before actually writing the book is obviously true. Christopher Moore’s interview responses and advice to readers very much agrees with his novel. This book is seriously entertaining and a very interesting take widespread theme of vampirism in modern culture terms.
Unknown said…
In the novel Bloodsucking Fiends by Christopher Moore there are many similarities to Dracula. In The Webpage interview on chrismoore.com he explains how he used characters other authors created such as the vampire Lestat as his basis of a vampire. Though Lestat was his basis for a vampire Christopher Moore modernized the vampire by giving the vampire “heat vision.” This novel can also be compared to Dracula there are many similarities to Jody (the protagonist in Bloodsucking Fiends) but there’s also many differences.

Similarities between Bloodsucking Fiends and Dracula are obvious. Like Dracula, Jody can also drink blood by biting on the neck of the victim with their fangs such as what had happened on page 103 when Jody and Tommy first moved in together.
Like Dracula Jody can only come out during the night and can not go out during the sunlight. A last example of how Dracula and Jody are alike is when Jody is on the ceiling as on page 104 where Jody hangs on the ceiling to prove to Tommy that she is a vampire.

Differences between Bloodsucking Fiends and Dracula are as obvious as the similarities. In Bloodsucking Fiends Jody can not grow wings as shown on page 143 when Tommy was putting Jody through experiments. She didn’t have to carry dirt with her where ever she went unlike Dracula.

Popular posts from this blog

The Namesake Analysis/Discussion Chp. 1 & 2; How It Feels To Be Colored Me

Clash of the Titans (Conclusion); Creation Myths

Wilderness Tips - Examination & Analysis