Gothic Musicals? - Places To Get Started

The entire Gothic subculture has much more in common with theatre than might be thought by the casual observer. Theatre is all about magic and whimsy, being transported to a world more exciting than societal life. Theatre is melodrama to the extreme, with extravagant costumes, the focus on strong emotions, and bombastic music. But, what if you're looking for musicals that will really whet a Gothic desire? Here are a few of my favorites. Yes, pretty much all of them are non-English. But, hopefully that won't make you go "Ugh, FOREIGN!" and stomp off (It better not...*cynical eye*). And besides, many nice Internet denizens have given us the gift of English subtitles.

1. Tanz der Vampire

Yup, it's that show I've been writing those ridiculously overanalytical essays about. It's my favorite musical, and for a reason. Based off the film Dance Of The Vampires  (fellow Americans might recognize it better as The Fearless Vampire Killers), this show is drama at its most dramatic, and almost purely Gothic. Not just for the sweeping orchestrations, lush costumes, vampires, and dramatic sets, but for the dark humor and self-parody inherent in the show. All staples of Goth at its best. 

2. Elisabeth

Elisabeth, by the same writer who made Tanz, is based off the historic empress of Austria, Elisabeth of Bavaria (AKA Sissi). Now, wait - come back! It's not boring! First of all, it's turned into a fantasy - her tragic life is depicted as the result of a struggle/romance with Death himself, who is personified as a handsome man determined to "win" her. The story is narrated from beyond the grave by Luigi Lucheni, her assassin, in an attempt to prove that Elisabeth deserved to die.

Even ignoring the fact that we have freaking Death as a main character, the show is filled to the brim with Gothic elements - again, the lush music with a heavy focus on the tragic emotions of each character, dramatic costumes, and extensive sets. But even more than that, this musical is very much laden with symbolism of decay, and focuses on the allure of death to a person with problems in their life. (And face it, we all have problems.)

There's also literal Angels Of Death and a Stairway To Heaven/Hell/Purgatory. Awesome.

3. Rebecca

If you call yourself a fan of Gothic literature, you should immediately realize why this is on the list: It's an adaptation of Daphne Du Maure's Gothic classic of the same title!

It's a third musical by that same Tanz and Elisabeth  guy, Michael Kunze. Unlike the former two, though, this musical's dark focus is, like the novel it's based on, more concerned with emotional and psychological drama than the physical aspects of it.

4. Rómeó És Júlia

This is the Hungarian adaptation of the French musical "Romeo Et Juliette" which, in turn, is an adaptation of Romeo And Juliet. Why the Hungarian version instead of the original? The Hungarian, while the music is largely the same, has many more Gothic elements - more darkness, the costumes are both dark and weird (this is not Verona - this is some out-of-any-era steampunk world), and the show is just generally more dramatic. The spirit of hate is more intensified between characters.

5. Lestat, The Musical

After you've gotten over your initial shock of "This actually exists?", the music from this show is actually pretty darn good. Could it be better? Of course. But it's a fun show to listen to nonetheless. Also, Drew Sarich. Just him.

 I haven't read any of Anne Rice's works in a long time, so I can't say how faithful the show is to the books, but from what I remember it sticks pretty close.

6. Carrie, The Musical

And now I can hear everyone out there instantly doubting my taste. After all, wasn't this supposed to be "the worst Broadway show EVAR!!!"? Well, you should really listen yourself. The music is sheerly amazing, the singers (in the pro productions, at least) very suited. And it's faithful to the book. "And Eve Was Weak" is the most powerful song I've heard in any  English-language musical, ever.

This is actually the least Gothic musical on this list, but it still bears inclusion. In addition to those couple very dark songs, the story is of course still that of Carrie, arguably the most famous story of telekinesis.

(...And "In" is really catchy, darn it!)

Now, how about some adaptations of the most beloved vampire story in history?

7. Dracula, Das Musical

The most faithful stage adaptation of the story I've seen, and my personal favorite. What can I say, literally everything  about this show is Gothic! The musical was originally written by Wildhorn, but don't run away - the music is dark, perfectly suited to the story, and the sets, while sometimes a little sparse, work. I really cannot stretch how awesome the music is here. You never thought Renfield's madness could be put to song? Bah!

8. Dracula, El Musical

I'm on the edge about this show. Some of the songs are nice, but there doesn't seem to be enough drama or emotion in the music. But it's still rather dark and worth a listen, so I'm putting it here.

9. Drakula

Yay, a Hungarian musical! This production is very much love it or hate it - I actually didn't like it the first time I watched it, but now I've come to love it. It's not faithful to the book (Renfield and Seward are completely gone, and the plot has been shortened and simplified), but it's very good if you just think about it as its own story using the characters of Jonathan, Mina, Lucy, Dracula, etc.

Honestly, the opening song is the best part of the show for me. It's catchy, epic, driving, and just awesome. And Hungarian, which automatically makes it cool.

And as for Gothic elements: The entire show. Sets, songs - everything. It's like Tanz's little sister.

10. Drákula (The long mark is important, here.)

This is my second-favorite Dracula musical. The music is simply fantastic, the atmosphere gloriously Gothic, and the sets well-used. A bit of a disclaimer for anyone expecting a faithful book adaptation: This is not the story in the novel, but rather the story of Dracula's life through the ages - how he became a vampire, his existence in different time periods, etc.

Similar to the concept of the Death Angels in Elisabeth, here death is personified by three incredibly creepy dancers, who might seem at first a little unnecessary, but which really enhance the show overall.

These are only a few of the great Gothic musicals out there, and they're all worth more attention.

Also, the first person to ask about Phantom Of The Opera gets shot.

My Fantasy Novels Shall Tear Down Your God!

I found this directory of various books that people (pretty much always adults) had asked be banned from libraries fascinating. Fascinating...and really, really sad. Honestly, the reasons these people give are more than ridiculous - a dictionary was banned for having definitions of sex! Isn't that what a dictionary is supposed to do? (Tangent: The Linguistic Mystic's Take on why censoring dictionaries is really, really stupid.) Predictably, there was a lot of depressing "It has gay characters!" reasons and "OMG...it talks about sex!". However, the thing I found most ridiculous was how many books were banned for having "anti-religious messages". It's a sad day when a book can be banned for having "criticisms of Christianity" or having subtext of "anti-Catholocism". Because honestly? These are fiction books. I would say "Yes, you can be offended" if a library had a book like "Christians, You All Suck", but really. To see what I mean, "The Golden Compass" was called anti-religious.

"(2007) Philip Pullman's book The Golden Compass was challenged at the Shallowater Middle School because of it's [sic] 'anti-religious messages.'"

What...the...huh? Alright, I have read The Golden Compass. I wasn't a big fan of it, but there was nothing "anti-religious" in there. And several of these books are simply fantasy books without religion in them at all, or with different religions in the fantasy world. Do religious people really think that the residents of Oz need to believe in God? Do they not realize how idiotic that is? Just because the people in Abarat swear to "A'zo and Cha" doesn't mean that the book is anti-religious!

Also, so many of the books on here are great, and/or classics. The people who are trying to ban Anne Frank's Diary remind me of the people trying to ban Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn - look, uptight parents: They're good, historic books. AFD is an important part of education for many young people. And guess what? Many of us want to read books. Shocker, right? I don't care if books have "objectionable content" or are "harmful to minors". (Second tangent: Isn't it amusing how adults, who are not minors, are deciding what's right for minors?) I want to read them, damnit.

I know at least one story about how "White Fang" was challenged for being so graphic about the violence against White Fang. I read this book in third grade, and it's been one of my favorite books since, so much that I've re-read it twice since then. And guess what? The violence in the book not only did not bother me, but was necessary. People did, and do, abuse animals like this. Yet, adults want to censor everything and keep us in the dark about anything that's not "RELIGION IS AWESOME!" and "bunnies and unicorns...happy world!"

Oh yeah, and I really didn't care about profanity or sexual content either. We're not all delicate little flowers who will break down at the sight of vehement language. But of course, we're minors, so how should we know what's right for us, right guys?

The Worst Health Textbook In History - Part 1

So, in our school, we're being taught out of the book "Lifetime Health" from Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. The book "Lifetime Health" is an utterly terrible source of health advice, thriving off of and teaching stereotypes, outright telling young people that we're idiots, and generally giving terrible advice. In a multiple-series post, I'll be talking about some of the book's lowest points - and in a book that's one big lowpoint, that's impressively low. And I'm going to say the name in this post as many times as possible, in hopes that teachers Googling the book will know:

Do not teach your students out of the book "Lifetime Health" from Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. "Lifetime Health" is one of the worst education sources you can give to a class, and "Lifetime Health" is awful. Avoid "Lifetime Health" at all costs.


Okay, now let's get started, shall we? I will providing (low-quality, I know) pictures of the text I'm quoting, because I know that many people wouldn't believe this crap otherwise. Of course, this book is all abstinence only. The chapter "Benefits of Abstinence" spends 15 pages trying to scare teenagers about how horrible sex is, how it will make you a mental and emotional wreck, and how you can't have sex because you will automatically get a disease...unless you're a good lil' citizen and get married, of course! Marriage fixes everything!  I wish I was exaggerating.

WARNING! This post contains overwhelming amounts of sarcasm, as yours truly finds it the only way to address such mind-numbing stupidity as you will find within the pages of "Lifetime Health".

1. Married people's bodies are magically protected from sexual diseases!

This...is the most stupid, ridiculous, and misinforming quote I have seen in the history of education:

"Married individuals who were not sexually active before their marriage don't have to worry about sexually transmitted diseases."

Seriously. I could not make up a quote that dishonest if I tried. So, perfectly-pure-virgins who get married have no chance of getting a STD/STI, because married people are just better than those unmarried heathens, so their bodies are perfectly healthy, and everything's safe! Sigh. Earlier in this same book, it also mentions that the only people at risk for sexual diseases are those "outside of a committed monogamous relationship". So...only sleeping with one person grants you and that person automatic immunity? The logic fails me.

2.If you don't look serious enough when you say "no", you're confusing the poor rapist, and it's not rape!

"Your body language should match what you are saying. Stand up straight, and look the other person in the eyes while talking. Avoid laughter or other nervous behaviors, such as fidgeting. Good nonverbal skills are important because sending a mixed message may confuse the other person and weaken your refusal."

This section tells you that if someone is trying to force you to have sex, you can say "no" - but if you act "nervous" then you're "weaken[ing]" your refusal and "confusing" the person who's trying to force you to have sex. See, if you have the audacity to be nervous when you have a possible rapist in front of you, well then it's just all your fault!

No. If you indicate that you don't want to have sex, you can be standing fully naked in front of a person, making a "come-hither" gesture - you have still said no, and that person is still a rapist if they continue. Body language alone (without speaking) is how someone should first and foremost realize whether someone is willing or not, but if there is a verbal refusal, that is that. I don't care how "nervously" or 'uncertainly' it is said - it IS said.

3.Fat people have no self-control and will eat anything in front of them.

"...Your new goals should not contradict your earlier ones. Let's go back to the goal of losing weight. But now you have another goal. You want to learn how to bake fancy desserts. Something should tell you that these goals might not work well together."

Because, y'know, if you're fat and there's unhealthy foods nearby, you're just going to  eat them. Otherwise, why would you be fat, duh?

Funny. I know how to cook meat, and occasionally cook 'fancy meat dishes' for my family. Remember that whole vegetarian thing? But of course, anything you cook you've gotta eat, because, y'know, a little thing called "self-control" does not exist.

4.Teenagers are irrational, arrogant, idiotic whiny brats incapable of making good decisions while adults are perfectly reasonable, calm, and intelligent.

This entire textbook is chock-full of ageism, but the section on "growing up" has some of the worst examples. There's a lot to talk about here, some of which isn't in those three pictures, but believe me, it's in there. Let's start with those pictures:

"Teen says: 'You just don't understand!'. Parent says: 'Of course I understand, I was your age once too, you know'. Teen says: 'All my friends get to stay out late as they want. I'm the only one with a curfew!' Parent says: 'I'm not their parent - I'm yours.'"

And of course, everything is illustrated with an image of a teen shouting, while her parents speak calmly. The picture is captioned "Most adolescents feel that their parents don't understand them. Hang on, because these feelings will pass."

Of course. You see, we teenagers are physically unable to have a proper conversation, as all we do is shout at our poor, reasonable parents. Those parents never shout or swear at us, nuh-uh. Because their brains are "more sophisticated and complex", they can "make logical, mature decisions" and "are also able to view situations from another person's perspective". But not us teens, no - we're just so  irrational, am I right guys?

And as for "these feelings will pass": I don't doubt that there are some teens who wrongly think people misunderstand them. And guess what else I don't doubt there are? Some adults  who wrongly think that people misunderstand them. Irrationality is not determined by age. It is determined by people. Also, "pass"? What if *gasp* - these teens are right - their parents actually don't understand them?  I know, shocker, right? How could the rational parents, who can "view situations from another person's perspective", be wrong? Well guess what - my mother does not understand that I cannot simply turn off my vocal tic, and that I'm not being 'selfish' when I refuse to go to therapy for it. (Therapy that causes physical pain to me.) I don't think that feeling is going to pass anytime soon.

This quote (not shown in the pictures) is both gold mine of ageism and ridiculous:

"During the middle adolescent period, teens often believe that nothing bad will ever happen to them. For example, teens believe that others may get into accidents but they themselves will not."

Yes, you read that completely right. The idiotic authors of this book think that adolescence brings, along with a load of other hormones, some magical mental shift that makes us think we're invincible.

Here's the thing: When I turned 13, I did not jump in joy and think "Woohoo, nothing can ever hurt me! I'll never get into an accident now!" And when I do turn 16, I will not jump in joy and think "Yes, drunk driving, here I come!" (I'll give more on the ageism in the drunk driving section later.)

Honestly, dear David P. Friedman, Curtis C. Stine, and Shannon Whalen: I would love  to be able to believe that nothing bad can happen to me. I would be ecstatic if I could walk my dogs in the park and not be constantly looking over my shoulder. I would be overjoyed if I could get back on my bike and ride through the city, but I can't, because I'm too damn scared of getting into one of those accidents that you think I think I'll never get into. I would love to not form my life around a rape schedule. You know what I believe? I worry that bad things will happen to me all the time. I hate having this constant anxiety.

And I really  don't fucking appreciate you writing a book that not only insults teens everywhere in general, but tells us what we believe. You are adults. You do not know what we feel. You do not know how we think  (here's a hint: it's not "in a simple way"). And it is as simple as that.

Okay, now that I got that anger out, there will be more installments of this coming. Because this poor excuse for an educational material is over 600 pages long.

Musical-Character Relationships In Tanz der Vampire - Part 5

            (This is the last post in the Musical-Character Relationships series. This might seem a little brief and obvious when compared to the other parts, but I was on deadline, and I just wanted to get it done.)

            And on the subject of vampires, we finally reach our last character to examine: The count himself. He parallels Sarah, not only for being manipulative, but doing it through those masks. His music (and voice) is very important. Throughout the show, he shows three different people to different groups. He knows what they want to see, and becomes it. The three are:

            1.The monster, the uncaring predator. He acts like this around the graveyard vampires, and around the Professor and Alfred once he’s realized that they’ll never do anything unless he gives them a reason to. Here, his songs are all fast, with pounding drums and a heavy melody, and his voice is loud and strong.

            2.The “gentleman predator”. A nice, caring person who just happens to be a vampire. He initially does this around the Professor (and definitely to Alfred), but it’s most obvious around Sarah, in “Totale Finsternis”. To me, watching this song is almost comical, because the situation is: Both of them are pretending to be something they’re not because they think it’s what the other wants, they both have somewhat  underhanded motives for pretending that they’re attracted to each other, and they both think they’re fooling the other, having the upper hand. I suppose it’s a case of dramatic irony, where you, the audience, know that they’re both trying to manipulate the other. He seems to also act this way in front of his son, although it’s not a long exchange. These songs are slow, but also powerful – self-assured enough that there’s no need for a fast tempo. And what’s the other side?

            3.His real self – miserable. Unlike the graveyard vampires, though he is bitter to the extreme about his existence, he doesn’t want to make humans suffer as well. He blames himself completely. The music he sings to himself when he is alone is vastly different from the other songs – delicate, slow, sad, and with no trace of power or confidence. Though he puts on a front of confidence for everyone else, in fast or slow song, “Gier” is revealing of the own self-loathing and hopelessness in him. Though not every show has done it, when the actor is good enough, he will be crying by the end of the song.

            It can be shocking to see this man who, just minutes ago was arrogantly proclaiming “Your soul has belonged to me for a long time”, suddenly reveal weakness, then immediately come in a minute later acting as the vicious monster the other vampires want to see.

            Masks. Power, and masks – that is what Tanz is, for the most part, all about. If these nuances of character are lost, or ignored by actors, the whole show falls apart into just a kitschy Austrian musical about vampires. But when you take the time to look at them, care about the characters – it’s amazing what you can find.

Musical-Character Relationships In Tanz der Vampire - Part 4

(Remember to check Part 1 if you aren't sure what these essays are about.)

Now, it’s time to come to that “group” I mentioned a long time back – the one that is similar to Alfred? It may seem odd, but they actually are: The graveyard vampires.

Obviously, Alfred and the non-von Krolock vampires are very different. However, they all do one thing: Not masking themselves. Alfred is very open about what he wants, and so are the vampires. The difference is what those wants actually are: The vampires want to make humans suffer to get revenge for their own miserable existence.

Someone could argue that they’re putting up a front in “Carpe Noctem”, in which they tell Alfred that being a vampire will free him and is wonderful. Originally, I thought this too. However, after taking a closer look at the translation (thank Gods for translations) I realized that, once again, I was wrong. The vampires aren’t telling him that their lives are fun – they’re telling him that the power they have to do wrong and torment people is fun. (Once again, everything comes back to power.) To quote from the fan translation: “Out of graves and ruins, the dead will rise again. And all fears will come true, and all hope must die. Our order is chaos…We want to live for our greed, and belong to the predators.”

            So, they’re actually pretty darn honest with him: Eternity sucks, big time, but it’s fun when you can make humans suffer! 
            To me, one of the best examples of character being shown through music is that big "Eternity sucks" number, "Ewigkeit". In the song, they sing about how things will never change for them, they're doomed to repeat a dull existence forever. And the music those lyrics are sung to? An unchanging, repetitive rhythm, repeated identically throughout the entire song. (I believe it's a Bolero rhythm, but I'm not 100% sure.) Not a very subtle connection, perhaps, but still effective.

Musical-Character Relationships In Tanz der Vampire - Part 3

Now we come to the leading lady. Sarah - at first I thought she was such a simple character. The archetypical bored teen wanting a better life, oppressed by her parents, and attracted to the local "bad boy" (even if, in this case, that bad boy has fangs). But, as I grew to love this musical more, I quickly found I that I could not have been more wrong. Sarah is a character with many facets, and I'm disappointed that, despite being a main character, she doesn't have much song time.

Perhaps the most interesting thing I observed about the musical was the following: Even though the musical revolves around Sarah's actions, she did not have a solo song until "Die Roten Stiefel" was added. That's a bold decision for a musical - she comes second to last in the bows, and yet she relies on duets and group songs for her musical expression? Even when her short solo was added to the show, it was just that - short. And she's quickly joined by von Krolock, negating the solo aspect. What's so interesting about this?

Sarah is a very manipulative character. Whether that makes her a bad person is up for debate, but it’s a fact that she’s using other characters. Many others have talked about how, instead of loving either von Krolock or Alfred, she is only using them to gain what she wants. (In this case, freedom.) I agree with that, and I don't want to waste time talking about it. What I do want to do is talk about how her duet-mode proves this.

Both Alfred and Sarah metaphorically attach themselves to various characters throughout the show, albeit in different ways. Alfred does it by the attribution of his independence. Sarah shows people what they want.

Let me elaborate on this. Remember when I talked about masks, the two-faced nature? Sarah is a perfect example of this. In the beginning, we see that the conflict she has with her father came about because she refused to wear the guise of the daughter he wanted (a modest little girl hiding herself away from the world). So, she already knows that in order to get someone's help, she can't be just Sarah. For Alfred, she has to be an ideal woman and lover - strong-willed enough to get him to follow her, yet still give him the pretty face that he's infatuated with in the first place.

Now, the problem is that she also has to present herself to von Krolock in the way that he wants. What does he want? An innocent, clueless girl, too lovestruck to understand the dangers she's going through - a perfect victim. And so....she gives him that. Compare the way she sings in "Draußen Ist Freiheit" to "Totale Finsternis". In "Freiheit", she knows that Alfred doesn't mind her confidence - wants it, even. But during "Finsternis", she all but plays dumb, with soft, tentative vocals, letting the vampire overpower her when he comes in.

And now, let's put both of those methods of singing together and compare them with two songs - both the original dance number performed after "Draußen Ist Freiheit", and "Die Roten Stiefel". Even though Sarah doesn't sing in the original, the style of music is still vastly different. More energetic, driven. The difference in styles is far clearer in "Stiefel", which is a rock number, high-energy, almost frenetic at times. Now that Sarah doesn't have to change her presentation for someone else, this is the real her - and it's quite different from everything else she sings in the show.

So, when there's someone else around that she can get something from, she goes to them with their style of duet - it's the only way she can get what she wants from them, in her eyes. And honestly, she's probably right.

Great Gothic Picture Galleries Around The Internet (Clickity-links!)

I can't draw at all. Honestly, it's pathetic - my stick figures barely even resemble anything comprehensive. However, I do love looking at art, whether it's painting, photography, or digital art. This is where I really love the internet - it's so easy to lose yourself browsing across the many dark picture galleries! Here are a few of my favorites:

Specific Artists


Anne Stokes' Art Gallery

Nene Thomas' Art Gallery

Joseph Vargo's Art Gallery (Click on "Art Gallery")

Assorted


Gothic Pictures.org

Darkmus

Art Of Fantasy

Dark Pictures

Gothic Arts

Angels' Art Gallery

Gothic Art Gallery

Focus On Fashion


Viona Art

...And of course these are only a few. But these are a wonderful way to start on the voyage to ooh and aah at pretty Gothy stuff on the 'net.

Musical-Character Relationships In Tanz der Vampire - Part 2

(See Part 1 for the explanation of this essay.)
In fact, the subject of strength warrants a whole discussion of its own. It's already established that our hero wants to be strong. Certainly, who doesn't? But what's important is the fact that he also doesn't want to be required  to be strong. He wants the ability to laugh in the face of monsters, but not actually have to confront those monsters. This, I think is crucial in his relationships with the professor and the count - and the conflict which lies therein. As merely an assistant to Abronsius, of course Alfred doesn't have to be too strong - until  the professor starts leading him into these confrontations and dangerous situations, forcing him to face the monsters (both literally and figuratively).

What von Krolock offers to Alfred which is so seductive is the prospect of never having to face any more monsters. Being on the side of the humans, Alfred will constantly face danger and have enemies. But, if he were to join the count and become a vampire - well, what monsters would there be left to face? He would be stronger than humans, so no one could oppose him any more. He would no longer face danger from the vampires, since he's on their side now. Even if he somehow got into trouble, Krolock would be there to defend him.

This, I think is Alfred's biggest internal conflict. Completely disregarding Sarah from the equation, this would be an absolutely perfect proposal. I'll discuss this offer more in-depth when it comes time to talk about the villains, but for now I shall continue on the "good" side and get back on my former track.

Alfred's devotion to the professor (and reliance on him) shows quite clearly in other songs. Whenever Abronsius is present (and awake), he steps aside and allows his mentor to take the head, never singing unless sang to. What is particularly revealing to me is the fact that, when Alfred has his own idea (following Chagal to the castle instead of killing him), he does not sing one of his own melodies - instead, he reprises "Wahrheit" the professor's song about the professor's intelligence. It's a subtle but clear way to show that Alfred accredits his accomplishments to Abronsius, not himself.

In fact, Alfred's reliance on others for strength most definitely does not end at the father figures of the professor or the count. Here I finally reach our hero's big solo: "Für Sarah".

There is a lot to analyze with this song, but I'm going to focus on the reliance/strength aspect right now. In the course of this song, he gains strength...by singing about how wonderful Sarah is. Not about himself - ways he could inspire his own courage - but how he can be brave "For Sarah". As he cannot find the power within himself, he must attribute it to another. Id est, "I'm not succeeding on my own. Any confidence I gain is because of Sarah."

This presents an interesting paradox. In my eyes, by the end of this song, Alfred has not actually grown stronger, but weaker. He has placed his emotional status on another, completely given it to Sarah - If Sarah needs me, I'll be brave. If she does not, then it is her will: I won't. In an attempt to not have to be independent, he has made Sarah (against her knowledge and will) into his leader. She is now the unwitting leash to his loyal dog, if you will pardon an awful metaphor. In doing so, he compromises himself. He doesn't have to make his own decisions and be strong, but he also has pretty much lost the rest of his independence with it. 

Alfred's independence is a central factor in his development. For most of the show, it is in the hands of Abronsius. The teacher tells the assistant what to do, he doesn't have to think too much/be too brave. By the end of "Für Sarah", that independence now belongs to Sarah. It seems to me that von Krolock would be perfectly willing to be the next holder of that independence - admittedly, Alfred would be the easiest vampire to control in history - but Sarah beats him to it. My first impression, at the beginning of "Der Tanz Der Vampire" [the finale], was that perhaps Alfred has finally taken his will into his own hands. But, as Sarah drags him like a ragdoll offstage, I quickly realized better. Now, not only does she have more control over Alfred than ever before, she knows  it.

A couple last notes on the subject of strength and "Für Sarah". It is very, very important to note something about Alfred's songs: He has no fast songs...until the very last section of "Für Sarah", when he has established Sarah's dominance over him. It's almost an unspoken rule that faster, louder songs are associated with strength, power, and emotional control, while ballads and slow songs are the material of weakness, indecisiveness, and uncontrolled emotion. While most other characters get at least one chance to belt the night away with an up-tempo melody, Alfred stays solely in slow territory, as a reflection of his weakness and insecurity. This is presented in stark contrast to the professor's Gilbert and Sullivan-esque speedy tunes. He only gains momentum slightly before he's cut off by Abronsius's book song, leading me to believe that, at this point, he's fully fooled himself into thinking that what's he's done to himself in terms of his free will is making him stronger.

Speed actually brings in another part to analyze about the conflict of Alfred's choice, and the struggle for his own independent identity. Obviously, the professor's songs are all fast. He never slows down to really be on the "same plane" as Alfred, in addition to never really listening to him in the actual dialogue. On the other hand, the count knows exactly how to get into Alfred's head.

In the way von Krolock presents himself to Alfred, his songs are slow, but still powerful. Through the speed, he's showing the student, "Why, I understand you better than that old fool. I know your feelings, what you want." It's a way of bridging the gap between one who views you as an enemy, and one of the count's most manipulative (yet admittedly brilliant) moves. After all, don't we all want someone who will slow down to listen to us?

Alfred's wrestling with this decision (Abronsius, von Krolock, or myself?) appears a couple more times throughout the show. The most clear has to be when he, upon waking up from his nightmare, sings a medley of two songs. He begins with a reprise of "Finale Erster Akt" (which was also reprised in Carpe Noctem, of course) - the count's song. But before long, he switches to reprising "Wahrheit" - the song of his current authority figure and independence-holder. He switches back and forth between the two prospects (and people) for a while, until eventually a third factor comes in: Sarah, coming in with his reprise of "Draußen Ist Freiheit" [a song sung between Sarah and Alfred]. Unable to decide between the two men, he views Sarah as the "third option" - ignoring the fact that she is merely another way for him to not have to be strong.

           A slightly more subtle connection comes at that earlier-mentioned fast last verse of "Für Sarah". Alfred is just beginning to gain strength (even if it is improperly-gotten), when the professor returns and interrupts, ever faster than his student. It brings Alfred's problem up again: He (wrongly) believes that Sarah will allow him to be free, but can he really bring himself to leave the security of the older mentor/authority figure?

Musical-Character Relationships In Tanz der Vampire - Part 1

 (Explanation: This is an extended essay I starting writing for fans of the musical Tanz der Vampire. Parts 4 and 5 were written as a continuation for a school project. Though I attempted to make this accessible to those who haven't seen the musical, it is a whole lot more interesting, and easier to understand, if you watch it.)

The Austrian musical Tanz der Vampire  is most well-known for two things: Having an epic rock-opera score, and having an incredible amount of alternate character interpretation options for the heroes and villains. Both of these elements have been examined individually, but there is an undeniable relationship between the characters in this show and the music they sing. While not every character has enough music-time to warrant an analysis, the major players will be put under a microscope to find out what their big numbers reveal about them as characters.
             The first thing I noticed upon examining this show was that it's all about masks and deception. We're quite two-faced - the person we present to others in not the person we show to ourselves. (Or, in some cases in this show, not the vampire we show to ourselves.) Tanz  not only takes that manipulative ideal and runs with it, it puts it into song form. But before I go deeper into this theme, I want to talk about one of the characters that proves an exception to it: The main hero himself.

Alfred, fearless vampire killer extraordinaire (not really) is the character that is the most straightforward, but shows the most over the course of the story. He doesn't reveal secret "sides" to himself or veil is true nature; instead he's honest to everyone, including himself.

His music matches his mind - every single thing he sings is simple, open, and sweet. In "Nie Geseh'n", he's dreamy, hopeful happy. Unworried that this desire of love might not be what he really wants, he's simply childlike in his optimism. In "Draußen Ist Freiheit" (for the purposes of this essay, I'm considering that separate from the rest of "Stärker Als Wir Sind"), he hides nothing from Sarah, telling her directly what he thinks, hopes and wants. In stark contrast to all of the main characters except a group (which I'll get to later), he doesn't try to ensure his success by lying or changing himself for Sarah. Even though he knows that he could falsely present himself to her, as a more successful, daring, or wealthy person, and thus get what he wants much easier, he just gives himself as is, and hopes that Sarah will accept him.

He never really does get rid of that directness throughout the show. Even at the darkest, most inappropriate moments, he will remain in that honest spirit. For example, in the middle of von Krolock's "Wohl der Mann", he actually cuts off the song to bring in a reprise of "Du Bist Wirklich Sehr Nett". Unable to falsely present in the same way that the vampire does, his only option is to sing the "nice" song again.

"In Der Gruft" presents him as naïvely trying to be brave, even in the face of danger. He wants  to be strong. (He's just, you know, not very good at it.) A similar message is conveyed in "He, He Professor", in which Alfred's desperately trying not to succumb to the fear and panic of losing his mentor, the man that likely allowed him not to have  to be strong.

"Oh, But You're So Mature!"

I hate the word "mature".

No, not because it sounds ugly. When you're under 15, this word will haunt you. The thing is, most people don't realize how offensive it is to use it. I know an explanation is needed, so let's get to explaining.

For as long as I can remember (back until I was 7 - my memory is not the best), I've been called "mature" by adults. When talking to one, I would reveal my age, and they would always say "Oh, you're so mature! I thought you were older!" Some common variations: "You're so mature for your age!" "Wow, you're so mature, you seem older than you are."

And the thing is, these people are well-meaning. These adults were genuinely trying to complement me. But the thing is, there's a problem with how they're using "mature": Conflating age with being an intelligent, good person.

These people were not complementing me because I seemed to them to be literally older - they were complementing me because it seemed like I was an intelligent/well-spoken/polite person. (Whether I actually am is another issue entirely...) However, rather than say that, they use words that mean "old". My dictionary defines "mature", as it relates to humans, as "having reached full development".

The thing is, I had not, and have not, reached full development. Any skills I have come not from my age, but from what I do. Moral values I have come not from how long I've been on the earth, but from me looking inside myself and deciding what I believe. And most of all, intelligence does not come from age. Intelligence comes from hard work, from research, from practice and self-control, self-awareness, and any number of other factors - but those factors don't include your age.

The reason age is frequently made out to equal intelligence is that older people have had more time to develop those skills and factors. But age alone does not an intelligent person make. And frankly? It's insulting. By telling me I'm "mature", or "you seem mature for your age", you are not only taking away all the work I've done in my life to gain whatever skills I have, suggesting instead that everything was just handed to me by a biological number, but you are also insulting young people everywhere. What you're saying is that young people are incapable of being intelligent, rational, well-spoken, polite, or any other skill. That if a young person has these traits, it means they are "old".

It's quite tiring. Through these attempted "complements", adults are further enforcing false notions about youth and intelligence. They're giving themselves one big pat on the back - "Intelligence/skill is an adult  thing, kiddos - so when you're skilled, it means you're like us adults!"

So, if you're an adult who has used "mature" in the positive sense, think of what you're actually  saying when you say it. Are you saying that a person has reached full development, or that they're an intelligent, good person?

I will be writing more about this topic later, don't think I don't have much more to say. For now, though, read Chally from Feministe's article on Having Been A Teenage Writer, in which she talks about ageism and adults' perceptions of her intelligence, merely because of her age, and how hard it is to be taken seriously as a teen writer.

Compulsory Coupling: The Sad Truth About Duets

So, I was watching this video of my new favorite song:

And looking at the translation of the lyrics. Keep in mind that I had listened to this song many times before without looking at a translation. And when I looked at the translation, something struck me as odd. I couldn't quite put my finger on it. I only just realized it today:

It's a man and a woman singing to each other, and they're not singing about love!*


It's a sad, sad fact that if you put a male and a female in a duet, the song is pretty much always going to be about love, whether it be about how much they love each other or breaking up or whatever romantic crap. Think about it, really think about it - when was the last time you heard a male/female duet that wasn't in the least about romance? Yeah, good luck with that.

Compulsory coupling - the notion that when two people of compatible sexual orientation interact, they MUST find romance, or else!!! And the truth is, it's always heterosexual. The compulsory coupling in music serves to do two things: 1.Reaffirm the notion that the only things girls should want is to find a partner, and 2.Keep strong the heteronormative form of romance.

So I congratulate Falconer on being not only great musicians, but for once breaking the mold and realizing that women don't only want to sing about love.

*Or sex. I should have mentioned that.

Literary Overload - Some Recommendations

I read way too much. That sounds ridiculous, I know. Most people I know laugh and say, "Any reading is better than watching TV/playing video games/etc.!" (Of course, I agree with Melina Pendulum: Not all reading is good.) But what I do is, I'll start reading a book, be barely twenty pages into it, and then I'll find another book I really want to read and start reading that book at the same time, and this process repeats until I'm reading a dozen books at a time. Right now, I am slowly progressing through literally sixteen books.

But, at least I can give a couple recommendations for people who might not have my problem of "There's too MUCH to read!!!" Here are a few of the books I'm reading now.

(Key: * = Feminist friendly, ** = Goth friendly, *** = Linguist friendly)

Politics, Language, and Thought - The Somali Experience by David D. Laitin. *** As much as I normally fall asleep during discussions of politics, this book is an incredible analysis of the way that Language and Language Policy affects not only our individual thinking, but our government, economy, and social habitat.

Blood Is Not Enough [edited] by Ellen Datlow. ** I have at least eight collection of Vampire short stories, but this one is unique, as the stories (17 of them) don't deal with the literal bloodsucking type of vampire, but rather the psychological type. You know The Hunger? Yeah, those types. Or like the White Vampires in The Dresden Files. A definite welcome edition to those who like vampire stories.

The Secrets Of Droon - The Knights Of Silversnow by Tony Abbott. YES, I LIKE THIS CHILDREN'S SERIES. Got a problem with that?!?! Nah, really, I love The Secrets Of Droon, and through the wonders of Amazon I finally got my hands on book 17. You can tell Abbott's writing has matured - I was genuinely surprised by some of the plot twists in here. And guess what? *. Yep, I'll write a little bit later about how Droon is completely feminist-friendly, which is a rare treat in children's books.

Vampires [edited] by Alan Ryan. ** Yes, I'm reading more vampire books than usual lately. However, this book is not only great (all of the stories are amazing), it has helped me read a lot of the classics I've never been able to find before - Polidori's The Vampyre, The Mysterious Stranger, and an excerpt from Varney. I'm in the middle of Carmilla now! (Yes, I feel ashamed it took me this long to read it.) The book is nice and thick, too, which I always love.

Mastering Finnish by Börje Vähämäki and Stuart von Wolff. *** Well, it's not as detailed on grammar as I would have liked. And it does one of my biggest pet peeves - putting vocabulary lists/grammar explanations after the practices. But, it is a good source of more cultural-sensitive information, which most textbooks are lacking in, so it's helpful in that aspect.

The Purity Myth - How America's Obsession With Virginity Is Hurting Young Women by Jessica Valenti. * Given that this was recommended and praised on just about every single feminist site I visit, when I saw the title poking out from a low shelf in my local bookstore I pounced on it immediately. And guess what? The recommendations are more than right, this book is fantastic! Every point I try to make to abstinence-only teachers that they ignore is eloquently expressed with detail in this book. And Valenti is an amazingly organized writer - I often get lost in my writing when I try to write about these topics. So yes, go out and get this!

Yiipee! Blood Ties Is Back! (With A Side Of Feminism)

Well, my insomnia has reared its ugly head again tonight, and I cannot go to sleep at ALL. However, tonight I'm not actually too upset about staying up until 4:00 AM. Why? For once I actually turned on the TV and looked through the guide (I'm not a TV person), and guess what I saw? Blood Ties, one of my favorite shows of all time, is being aired again on Lifetime Real Women!

Is it a guilty pleasure? Hell yeah. But the show is based off of books by one of my most worshipped authors, has great actors, a great feminist lead (Vicki is an incredibly realistic and powerful heroine, one of the first I was introduced too), and is just overall creative and entertaining. Tonight, at 3:00, 4:00, and 5:00 (all AM, Central time) they'll be showing "5:55" (you know, the one where we all wanted to see a different ending), "Bugged" (my second-favorite episode!), and "The Devil You Know". Tomorrow, they'll also have the episode with the artists drowned in paint, which was the very first episode I saw.

But yes, on the topic of Vicki Nelson being a feminist hero. See, here's what caught me: She's strong, independent, and intelligent, obviously. However, she also is not anywhere near Mary Sue territory - she's realistic, she knows when she can't overcome things like her RP, when she's gotten in too deep to something. But what's important is that she doesn't let anything, including her vision, diminish her effectiveness as a detective. What I see in a lot of books involving one-human and one-supernatural teams is that we'll start off with a relatively strong human heroine, but as soon as the vampire/werewolf/demon/whatever male comes in, she'll take a backseat. It's "Oh, well he's a [insert creature here] and I'm just a human, so I'll let him do everything now."

NO! Heroes should not do that! And that's where the Blood books, and Blood Ties, give a perfect idol: Yes, Henry is more powerful than Vicki, but she doesn't just sit back and let the vampire do the hard work. This is her team, damn it, and she'll be the detective.

We Need More Parents Like This

"Would you rather your son or daughter be gay, or Goth?" This mother answers that question with exactly the answer it deserves.

Really, more parents do need to be like this. I'm sure many Goth/gay children wish they had more supportive parents. I know I'm lucky - though my parents don't like me being Goth (they've said it several times), they at least let me be it (for the most part).

March For Sophie!

These people are awesome.

A march in Plymouth organized in memory of Sophie Lancaster, to work for more action against discrimination. I love this quote: "Isn't this not just about Goths or alternative dressers, it's about all sorts of discrimination, isn't it?" Yes. Yes it is. Discrimination is an issue for everyone, and fighting back against one kind can hopefully inspire fighting back against another.

So, Racial Stereotypes Are Unacceptable, But Age-Group Stereotypes Are A-OK?

A large number of the "RAAAAGE!!! GRR!" moments in my life come from teachers.  Sometimes they're big things, that I'll talk about later (such as my idiotic Christian Latin teacher who insults both vegetarians and Agnostics regularly, or the Health teacher that won't allow same-sex couples in the Marriage Simulation and insists that "Marriage is between a man and a woman"), and sometimes they're smaller, but still damn annoying, and make me go "Are you serious?!"

Here's one such moment from biology class.

One day last week, the teacher was reminding everyone how we aren't allowed to have mp3 players in the school. When she was finished, one student suggested "Why don't you play music for everyone to listen to?"

I thought this was a pretty decent suggestion. My favorite teacher in my elementary school almost always had music playing in the background, and it never "interrupted the learning environment", or whatever other bullshit principals say about music. I prepared myself for the teacher to make one of the many arguments I'd heard before.

Her response was "I don't like what you guys listen to."

I replied "Well, we all don't listen to the same thing..."

She: "Yes you do! I know what teenagers listen to."

While I was busy trying to think of a response that would get past her homogenizing mindset, another voice rang out. Keep in mind that my school is almost all black, and while mostly you never even notice it, there's this one person in biology who constantly announces that everyone is being racist towards him. (Even when they're not.) He said, "Oh, you think that 'cause we're black, we all listen to rap, right? Racist!"

Class: *Rolls eyes*

Teacher(Who, keep in mind, is also black): "What? No, that's a horrible stereotype. I just don't like teenagers' music."

Me: "What do you think 'we all' listen to? Pop, hip-hop?"

Her: "Yes, exactly. Don't try to lie to me, I know what teenagers listen to."

At this point I knew there was no hope in trying to get through to her. I kept thinking, if only she could look through my CD collection, would she be in for a surprise. I wasn't going to say anything else, but a friend spoke up.

Friend(Pointing to me): "Oh yeah? She listens to foreign musicals and stuff from Romania!"

Me(Smiling): "And amateur Polish industrial ambient songs!"

Teacher: ...

So yeah, it's a small annoyance, but the double standard is still there: That stereotyping someone by race is offensive, yet stereotyping the same person by age is perfectly alright.

A Google Images Search For "Goth Pride" Turns Up...

...A couple fun things!

A Primer On Language Use

I understand that there's a lot of people who honestly aren't trying to be offensive, but they honestly can't tell what words to use when talking about certain groups. There are a lot of words most people know not to say, but there are some that are less obvious. So, here's a couple things people in general should avoid saying. Note that these vary from person to person. Think of this as a guide for this site and related blogs:

Don't say: "Mentally disabled" - My mind is different from yours. That is not a disability. Also, this does not specify the type of mind someone has - cognitive difference? Emotional?

Do say: Whatever they are, and want to be called. In my case, "Bipolar".

Don't say: "Non-religious", when talking about an agnostic or atheist. "Non-religious" is a whole denomination within itself. 

Do say: "Agnostic", or "atheist". Or, if they identify differently, their denomination.

Don't say: "Emo". That's a word based off stereotypes, and is offensive to Goths and non-Goths alike. There is no substitute, because you shouldn't be saying it at all.

Don't say: "Kid". - You are dehumanizing me because of my age.

Do say: "Person". I am one, and have a right to be called one, regardless of how long I've been on the planet.

Who Am I? What Is This? Why Am I Writing This?

Who am I?


Well, as said in the subtitle, I am a vegetarian, agnostic, bipolar, queer, female (and feminist), young Goth with some serious problems with nearsightedness. (And I do mean serious - if I was to take off my glasses I could barely tell that this is a computer screen in front of me.)

I'm the author of the blog Notes Of A Pseudo-Amateur Linguist. That blog is my more "professional" side, and more my essay-style writing. I will post some essays here as well, but mostly things that are shorter. Which brings me to...

What is this?


This blog serves two purposes:

1.To write about the problems that people who are in the "groups" I'm a member of face. I'll be focusing on ageism, sexism, anti-vegetarianism, anti-agnosticism (and anti-atheism), misconceptions and prejudice toward the Goth community, and ableism and discrimination towards non-neurotypicality. I will taking many things out of my own experience, as well as the experiences of my friends. This is the "bad" in the world.

2.To celebrate the bizarre mix of culture that is available to me as a Goth! This ranges from my own reviews of Gothic music, movies, theatre, literature, to essays about these things, to simply talking about what it means to others to be Goth. This is the "good" in the world.

So, this blog will sometimes seem like it's unsure of whether it should be formal or informal. That's okay, because I don't want it to be either - I want The Darker Side Of The Light to be a casual, welcoming place where serious issues are also occasionally addressed.
Note that this is much more focused on personal interests than my other blog. We may not share the same tastes. That's fine! But hey - nothin' ventured, nothin' *booed off stage before I can finish the cliché*

Why Am I Writing This?


For the "bad" in the world: I'm sick. I'm sick and tired of getting ignorant remarks all round, from being mistreated, from seeing the absolute idiocy that people are capable of possessing when it comes to the "not being a bigoted jerkass" aspect of life.

For the "good": At the same time, I want more happiness! These are things that make me happy, and I want to share them.

So, if there are any questions, feel free to ask!