Literature

How can a character, such as Shakespeare's' Othello, be compared to characters in film. For instance, what similarities (physical, psychological, etc) does Othello have to characters that kill on film, such as the characters from the 1995 film, The Usual Suspects.

The focus here should be on what drives these people to kill. Explore economics, manipulation, and corruption. Obviously, these two works have easily identifiable differences, but the objective is to dig into the psychological to show how their different circumstances leads them down the same road. In other words, think of Othello as a character in The Usual Suspects (or vice versa, one of the characters from The Usual Suspects in Othello's place).

Many of famous horror author H.P Lovecraft's work contains themes and language indicative of racism towards indigenous and black communities. Even the famed "Call of Cthulu" retains aspects of racism when referring to the activities of indigenous and black communities. They are labeled as practicing "Voodoo", and often referred to as savages. How has the work of H.P Lovecraft aged? Is something like this acceptable for fans of the genre to hold as an example?

In H. P. Lovecraft's "Supernatural Horror in Literature" (1927), Lovecraft describes a horror that distances itself away from anything physical and attempts to attack the psyche of the reader through cosmic mystery, ancient folklore and culture as well as our primal instincts. Themes such as space and the deep ocean, primordial Gods and mythology and their respective mysteries seep into literature to create a profound sense of dread and isolation from the real world.

With the advancement of computers and networks, a new theme in horror fiction has found its footing amongst the aforementioned ideas: the theme of technology and the mystery of cyber data, the disposable nature of human flesh, its replacement by better and stronger artificial prosthetics and the paranoia of human-made machine rising against its own creator after achieving consciousness, something only humans so far possess. Works such as Harlan Ellison's "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream" (1968), Mamoru Oshii's "Ghost in the Shell" (1995) or Frictional Games's "Soma" (2015) explore this newfound horror with different methods, but with great success.

The question therefore lies within the nature of this trope. Is technological horror part of the weird and the supernatural as it treats technology as its own entity and its own vast realm of mystery, similar to that of the endless space and the deep ocean? How does technological horror fit with the ghost, thriller or other forms of scary themes? What other modern fictional stories bring forth technology as a truly terrifying aspect that attacks the mind of the consumer and isolates them from their world, rather than cause brief shock or superficial scares?

The ancient philosopher Plutarch wrote a famous essay on how to tell the difference between a friend and a flatterer. In this essay, he lists several qualities associated with a flatterer, including:
1. being inconsistent and willing to change into whatever seems most attractive to the victim;
2. appealing to the worst angels of the victim's nature and copying their vices rather than their virtues;
3. seeking to please the victim in the moment, even if it will cause the victim greater problems later on;
4. seeking to separate the victim from their real friends.

With this definition in mind, what are some examples of flatterers from fiction, particularly modern fiction? What traits, if any, do they and their victims have in common? Are there any stereotypes associated with fictional flatterers, either in terms of physical features or psychological makeup?

A film version of the classic and often banned Judy Blume novel Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret, is scheduled to hit theaters September 6, 2022. Not much is known about the plot itself, which raises a lot of questions. For instance, when the original book was published in the 1970s, it was unusual for children to be raised without religious affiliation, as Margaret is. Will this be the case for a Margaret of 2022? Will a 21st-century Margaret's explorations of puberty be treated as scandalous?

These and other questions bring up just how relevant Judy Blume's coming-of-age story, as well as her other stories, such as the Fudge series, Blubber, and Deenie, still are. Millennial adults who grew up with them still consider Blume's books classics and have introduced their own kids to them, and some Gen Z kids still read and enjoy them. However, Judy Blume doesn't seem like quite the gold standard of coming-of-age stories she once was. Her plots don't read as "cutting edge" because they're not as controversial anymore. You could call them downright tame.

Blume is definitely still relevant, but the question has become, just how relevant is she? In the case of Blume and her books, what does "relevant" mean? How is she similar to or different from today's hottest middle-grade and young adult authors, and can she maintain her place as a classic author, or will her books eventually lapse into obscurity? Discuss.

In recent years, fictional stories in literature, TV, video games, film, etc. have begun to incorporate elements, characters, and situations from various ancient mythologies to great success. Greek and Norse mythologies have been especially featured (such as the popular Percy Jackson series or Marvel's Thor and his stories), but other mythologies have seen an increase as well, including Irish, Japanese, Mayan, Egyptian, Hindu, and various native mythologies. The most successful examples are not simple modern retellings of ancient myths, but original stories.

One large area of untapped potential seems to be Christian mythology. As the most widespread religion on Earth, one would think the varied stories, traditions, and fantastical parts of Christianity would be ripe for use in stories on a level comparable to any other mythological system. There are some notable examples of where this has been implemented well in fiction, such as the Left Behind series of books or the Darksiders video game series (which both draw heavily from elements of the biblical book of Revelation), as well as elements being incorporated into popular works such as the TV shows "Supernatural" or "Lucifer." For the most part, however, fictional works set against a backdrop of angels and demons tend overwhelmingly to be overtly religious or evangelizing in nature. Compare this to works that incorporate other mythologies into their stories, which almost always do so purely for entertainment value rather than to promote the religions they feature.

Why is this material so underutilized? Is there anything inherently different about Christian mythology compared to any other mythological system? With the sheer volume of fiction with mythological elements out there, might we see a surge in works that drawn upon elements from Christian mythology as the public tires of yet another story with Zeus or Thor?

The abject female has arguably been a principal Gothic subject. Explore the ways that the female and the female sexuality is demonised and othered in The Monk (by Matthew Lewis). Consider the different female characters that appear in The Monk and compare how they are each treated/viewed throughout the novel. How are they viewed through the male gaze compared to the female gaze?

An increasingly important conversation in the book industry is that of diverse representation, both in the characters and stories we promote, and in the authors whose work we publish. Central to this discussion is the question: who has the right to write? Can a neurotypical author write from an autistic perspective? Can a white American write about the experience of growing up Chinese-Indian?

A key part of this discussion also comes down to authenticity: the effort and care put into representations of particular cultural groups and their experiences. Take, for example, Mark Haddon's 'The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time' (2003) and John Boyne's 'The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas' (2006).

Both of these texts received great acclaim in relation to their representation of Asperger's/autism and the holocaust respectively, to the point that both have been included in school curriculums and other education programs since their publications. However, both authors have publicly stated that they did minimal research into the experiences they wrote about, choosing to focus more on the narrative at hand than the accuracy of their work. Does this diminish the texts' cultural influence/importance? What responsibility do authors have to ensure authenticity (and accuracy) in their works, especially when they're not part of the community they're writing about?