Arts

Throughout the years following the publication of the novel, the character of Carmilla has influenced popular culture in a way that it’s been used a lot of times. Some writers have even written a sequel to the original novel, whilst others have included the iconic character in other forms of media; films, television, video games, comics.

Carmilla’s character seems iconic in the way that she seems to represent a symbol of Gothic literature and the Gothic genre in general, on the same level as Dracula. She is depicted differently in other forms of media, so much that her lore seems to evolve from one author to another. Even her personality varies, depending on how she’s meant to fit in the media that wishes to see her in another way. For example, the 2000 Japanese movie "Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust" has depicted Carmilla as a noble vampire that was known for her vain and gluttonous tyranny by bathing herself in the blood of virgins. She’d even been named the "Bloody Countess" as a result. Her acts had disgusted Dracula so much that he’d destroyed her himself.

It’s quite a far cry from Carmilla’s original depiction. But somehow, she fits the tone wanted by the author.

Why would other artists choose to depict Carmilla as differently as possible? Examine the reasons why her character has such a great influence in popular culture to the point that she needs to be modified to fit in the tone of another story.

The slogan "art for art’s sake" arose in the 19th century with the core ethos being that art, true art is divorced, separated, alien from function, any and all functions.

But with this philosophy, there is room for critique, after all nothing is created in a bubble and artists are influenced by their society and as such so are their works.

Does art always have a message? Should it?

Many Marxist thinkers would argue art must have a meaning and purpose but even non-Marxists have levied criticism at this school of thought.

Is Art for Art’s sake a philosophy that is unfairly maligned? Is it a cynical defense from critique?

Disney’s Frozen burst into our theaters and onto our small screens in 2013, and no one has "let it go" since. The film became a franchise, with rumors of a third installment coming in 2023 or later. But Frozen is not the only wintry tale media consumers love. "Winter tales" can be found across mediums, from TV series like Game of Thrones whose tagline is "Winter is Coming," to a plethora of books with titles like The Snow Child, WinterFrost, and Girls Made of Snow and Glass. Many of today’s super-powered or "chosen one" protagonists also have winter-related powers; Queen Elsa might be the most obvious, but there is also Jack Frost from Rise of the Guardians, as well as Freya from Snow White and the Huntsman.

Winter permeates the arts, no matter the season. Yet what is it about this season, out of four, that captures the imagination of writers, filmmakers, and other artists? Analyze a few prevalent winter tales across mediums, looking for commonalities among characters, character arcs, plot threads, powers, and more. Could the other three seasons garner this kind of attention, and if yes, what would it take to make that happen? Are artists, authors, and others who craft "winter tales" trying to make a statement about their art, themselves, or humanity through winter? If yes, what is it? Discuss.

With the rise of virtual influencers like Lil Miquela and Bermuda, brands are increasingly turning to computer-generated characters to promote their products on social media. These virtual avatars are popular with younger generations who are more likely to trust and engage with them than traditional human influencers. However, there are ethical concerns surrounding the use of virtual influencers, such as transparency and authenticity. This article will explore the pros and cons of virtual influencers, and examine what their increasing popularity means for the future of advertising and influencer marketing.

"I Don’t Like ****, I Don’t Go Outside" is the sophomore album by Odd Future Alum, Earl Sweatshirt. Despite maintain a level of darkness in his tone and instrumentation, Earl is distinctly alien from his former self. Gone are the edgy shock-lyrics of cannibalism and murder, replaced instead by a vulnerable young man drowning in depression reliant on drugs and alcohol to keep himself going.

What is it to be a celebrity? A chosen one at that, to be the idol of millions of people you’ve never met while isolated from your friends and family. The album speaks to the thin veneer of happiness success can really be.

Earl was often a center piece of the fandom from the "FREE EARL" days and yet it doesn’t seem as though the freedom was very liberatory. The lack of hope and overwhelming sense of abject bleakness from Earl speaks to the hollow nature of what was gained by his fame and his regrets seem innumerable as each song on the album falls further in further into an inky blackness of despair.

That then begs the question, what does this album serve? Is it just a self-exploration or can there be some universal message garnered from the album? What can be said of Earl and his developments as an artist? What of the raised awareness about depression and how it can shape and distort a person’s view not just of themself but of the world around them.

Art in its classical sense and form has a soul. A human puts a part of their soul into something that later can be highly appreciated by society. Digital art, where all images generated by neural networks can be attributed without direct human participation, is soulless. It will acquire a soul only when it is created by artificial intelligence. One can be sure that the first picture painted by AI will be costly.

In the 19th century, Oscar Wilde wrote in ‘The Decay of Lying’ that, "Life imitates art far more than art imitates life… results not merely from life’s imitative instinct, but from the fact that the self-conscious aim of life is to find expression, and that art offers it certain beautiful forms through which it may realize that energy." According to Wilde, what people find in life and nature is actually not there, but what people find is what artists have taught them to find through art. So, does life imitate art or does art imitate life? In light of these questions, is it possible for art to predict the future? Which artwork by which artist do you think predicted the future?

Ever since Schubert abandoned his 8th Symphony in 1822, six years before his death, after writing the first two movements, composers, musicologists, and general lovers of classical music, have wondered why the symphony was left unfinished – was Schubert ill? Was he distracted with other compositions? But mostly we have wondered about what the final two movements would have sounded like.

In 2019, Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, answered this conundrum by completing the famous "Unfinished" Symphony by feeding thousands of Schubert’s works into the software that would hopefully produce material in the style of Schubert – as he would have thought it himself. This process was guided by the film composer Lucas Cantor, but still the result was heavily criticised.

AI has since been used in music to generate pop songs, many of which are indistinguishable from human-made hits we hear on the radio. Is the use of AI in musical composition just like any other technological innovation in that it aids the composer in their process, automating tedious tasks, and so on? Or are we facing a real fear of being stuck in a ‘loop’ of the same musical tastes, without the extra push of human creativity and invention, since AI runs on analysing pre-existing examples?

The author could further discuss the differences and similarities between AI software recognising patterns, and how humans often compose from well-studied patterns also.