Make honey, others don’t.

This was somewhat intended to be a review of the Resident Evil-movie series, which then morphed before fingers hit keyboards into a contemplation of zombies in general, then turning into a review of a completely different zombie-movie-staple (Night of the Living Dead, in fact) and back to Resident Evil. In the end, it’s zombies.

I hate zombies. Used to be a time not so long ago where I couldn’t see a trailer for a zombie-film without suffering really quite horrid nightmares for days after. Watching “Shaun of the Dead” even though I really, really liked it, meant not really sleeping for about three weeks. Zombies, they freak me out. I do occasionally sit through zombie-movies or read zombie-related material on- or offline, suffering the insomniac results, because it pays to keep track of the enemy, and to run through scenarios of an “break glass in case of zombie-apocalypse”-nature. It also, for such is my nature, forces me to consider the mechanics of zombie-ness.


Traditional living corpses, at least in mainland-Europe, where not needfully as freaky. They tended to be corpses that were “left alone” and therefore open for possession, after which they would mimic their former lives by trying to move back into their old homes, communities and, in most more icky cases, loved ones (yes, that said they tried to move into their loved ones. Think about it). The reasons they were “left alone” would be any of the usual things that would leave you outside the standard medieval community. Suicide, being a horrid criminal, going against the wishes of the local clergy, that sort of thing. They tended to result in being buried outside of the graveyard (get it, get it?) which meant you were *cough* wide open for any demon or otherwise looking for a place to stay.
Now, I agree, obviously, that this is somewhat creepy, but since traditional European animated corpses got Stokered into attractive, slightly but derangedly bisexual pretty things the creepiness swiftly dissipated, with the new breed of vampires taking over all the “living dead” symbolism of “just because it looks familiar does not mean it does not want to hurt you” and “we don’t talk about uncle Bob because of what he did which we will also not discuss but it can be contagious so stay away from what looks like uncle Bob but isn’t” (also known as “Fear of the outsider”, “Uncanny Valley” and “the monster in our midst”)

Modern zombies (and the term “modern” absolutely and irrevocably does not, in any way, shape or form, apply to zombies nowadays, but hey, license) have a completely different symbolic value. They actually represent not the fear of the slightly known, but the fear of being fully known. The great, blind, grasping masses that nonetheless have you completely in their power, and if they do get you, they get inside your head and take everything of value out of it, turning you into one of them, and all of them, in a little way, into something that is a little more you.

Less original movie-makers, even in their time, tack some sort of consumerist commentary onto the standard “there is tons of us, you cannot escape”-creep-factor but since we have, as a planet, accepted the tenets of capitalism a while ago now you could tack that little inkling of a good idea onto everything and get away with it.


So what freaks me out about zombies? Idiocy.

After more than a quarter century of having a brain that works somewhat different than the brains of most people I meet on a daily basis, I live in a constant fear that I am going to turn out to be more than slightly retarded but with most people around me thinking I’m being very brave about the whole thing and it would be callous commenting on my obvious problems, and only discussing them when I am safely out of earshot. And zombie movies bring home that “you are only a few steps away from mindless drooling, we all know it even if we are not saying anything” feeling to an extent that I can only assume my Shadow has been dead for ages but refuses to lie down for fear of being ridiculed. Strangely enough, only actual zombie-movies do this to me. Movies in which people merely exhibit zombie-like characteristics due to a virus or otherwise-invasion based affliction do not as such affect me at all, but as soon as people need to have died before shambling pitifully ‘long once child-filled streets and whatnot I am gibbering behind the couch.

But lately, that has been changing. And quite a bit, as evidenced by the fact that I have recently seen the first three parts of the Resident Evil-series without actually gibbering in fear even once. Gibbering in wordless anger, suuuure, and even in amazement in some ways, but not fear. Nor have the traditional dreams surfaced. This is always a bonus. Well, this is usually not a bonus, but this time, it is.



Something did get me though.
In the Resident Evil series, it is explained that the virus responsible for all this crap basically re-animates dead tissue with all their base instinct in tact, especially their hunger. And this is ok, I can get with that, even though we thankfully not see any zombies in full rut, and the zombie-folk do respond as a pack of very hungry animals, preferring to prey on the weak and alone first and only really attacking en masse. What gets me here is that we see zombies. Multiple ones. There shouldn’t be. Not really.

Ok. Zombies have an incredible hunger, and can still process what they used to be able to process. This works. It also stands to reason that they would try to go after things that they can most easily ingest, which is what every animal does. You go for the best average where it comes to personal risk versus gain. This ensures that it stands to reason that zombies would eat human. After all, zombies are basically made of human, and this would imply that human meat would have most of the building blocks you’d need. Also, when you have one cornered and worked to the ground, there is very little personal risk left over and you can eat to your hearts content. They are more nutritious than a chocolate bar and you don’t run the risk of being crushed by a vending machine you just tried to work open with your little ineffective zombie-paws. Combine that with the fact that being bitten by a zombie makes you a zombie, a nice and continuous string of infections and more zombies seems to be the only logical conclusion. Only it isn’t, because there is no reason to stop eating the other person after you have started. Even a zombie is still made of human meat and leaving it shambling around is just competition. So logically the first person to turn Z-side should have eaten the second one, and the third, and so on until they infected one that was bigger/stronger/faster which would then eat them and continue on. You’d have dozens of zombies, not millions, and a few piles of maybe animated but certainly just mushy and well-chewed flesh.

In the Day/Dawn/Evening/Twilight/Shortly before sunset/Whutever of the Dead series, it is somewhat established that hell is full, and those who die come back and inhabit their old bodies, albeit murderously insane. I am ok with this, as it clearly explains everything that happens in the movies given some liberties with basic tendon-strength, as most other issues have been waved away with a generic “they cannot re-die, unless you give them no body to re-inhabit afterwards”. In the Night/Day/Return/Whutever of the Living Dead (one word difference, entirely different universe) it is established that the zombies in question need the energies of living beings to maintain their own organic processes, preferably the brains, after being re-animated by a chemical substance. I am also ok with this, as it makes at least some sense. By all means humans are propelled ever onwards by some biological mechanism, and expressing this in a basic “energy” equivalent stored in human organs in such a way as to be harvestable by chemically altered corpses might be effectively ludicrous but basically somewhat sound within the confines of your story. I ask for no more. In this last example, there should also not be any other zombies, and to be honest, there aren’t. There are a few, but mostly contaminated with the same chemical (which is excreted by the zombies, in fact). It is also established that zombies can, and do, eat other zombies but that the return on investment is so much lower that it makes very little sense. This same argument is not, however, made in Resident Evil.

Even going from a starting point of a few hundred zombies with not enough time to start eating each other before fresh human flesh, which is arguably preferable over dead zombie flesh, shows up there are literally miles and miles of zombies who have had no chance of even sensing the human snacks that somehow just sit there and wait until a human pops by, usually in groups, and NOBODY eats ANYBODY. This makes no sense.

Retro-actively making the argument that the deceased flesh becomes immediately inedible or all zombies are part of one bigger organism that does not feed itself is obviously an option, and one that I cannot imagine the writers shying away from at all, but then why not give us that explanation in any of the first couple of movies? It would explain why zombies usually (but not always) stop attacking after somebody has been bitten, at least. So I’m sure that would be what they would go for to ultimately explain it but then what? What were zombies supposed to eat? If their new genetic make-up makes them attack humans only to propagate itself, a perfectly acceptable evolutionary action, what were they supposed to use for food? Never do we see zombies attack other species to then finish them off, they express only a mindless hunger for meat but nothing else seems to interest them overmuch.

I am going so far as to say I would accept the explanation that the virus only wants to maintain itself by jumping from host to host, uncaring of what happens to the host apart form the fact this host needs to be able to continue spreading, as most viruses ultimately do, but then why re-create them in the image of rotting corpses? Surely altering their make-up to make them all resemble skinny people with good skin that smell nice must also be on the list of possibilities, and would be a lot more effective where world domination is concerned. Or at least more fun to look at.

the bridal issue (2)

“Later this week” freely translates into “next month, apparently, but I have a sense of style, not time. So, on with the show.

Last time I promised to discuss the last few topics when it comes to bridal dresses, patterns, advice and friends. Let’s get cracking.

Patterns
I find it difficult to talk about tradition when it comes to bridal wear, as most of what we now consider traditional in the dress only really started happening in the last 70 years or so, which means that “traditionally” really means “before wedding dresses”. In that sense, patterns can be considered tradition, as patterned fabrics were a part of daily life and therefore used in wedding dresses.

The modern, tradition, however, shies away from patterned materials to an extent. You find laces, which are obviously but subtly patterned, and some applications of the decorative arts around waist, hemline and shoulders, but one does not really often find patterns, as such, in bridal couture.

Which leaves us with simpler pattern-based questions, or really, line based questions. Most people will tell you that horizontal lines are fattening, and vertical lines are slimming. This is, regretfully, false. Horizontal lines actually make you look taller, and vertical lines make you look wider, especially if the lines are really close together.

Now before everybody starts rushing towards the oft-neglected horizontal line, there is such a thing as taste, and most wedding dresses I have seen with a horizontal pattern seemed to lack a good deal thereof. The charming lady in my little image up there might look tall and statuesque, but imagine that same picture in yards of white satin and frills and it looks suspiciously less charming.

As with almost everything when it comes to fashion, less is usually more. Any combination of lines can be flattering, providing you follow the following simple steps:

• Your body cinches in around the waist, upper breast, wrists and ankles. If any lines are in your dress, they should be there. So your hemline, waist, shoulders and sleeves can have a definite horizontal line, either in embroidery, contrasting fabrics or thread. Everywhere else will more than likely make you look shorter.
• Your body has natural vertical lines in your legs, arms, and torso. If you already have a cinched waist, your legs will look longer, and you need to do nothing to make them appear even longer than that. The same goes for your arms, as the lines of the fabric will likely already give you long, slender arms. Your torso, however, might be in want of some help, as you have probably cut it in two already with a sash or the shape of a corset. If you feel your torso does not get enough attention, I would suggest going for simple corsetry or stitching, not straight up and down and in a color that in no way contrasts with the rest of the bodice.

This is bad

This is better



This is good

•  A straight thin line looks like a cut or slit, a broad straight line will distract from the shape of your dress. There really is no perfect width here but if you are going for a definite pattern, make it definite, and don’t wimp out on the last stretch, as it will look cheaper than just getting it wrong.

Your friends, and the advice you should take.

None, obviously, as this is your day and nobody is going to stand in the way of how you really want it and live.

But, if you do decide to take advice from anybody, avoid the following :

• Friends who are soon to get married : as they will either steal, or graciously allow you to copy ideas, and you might end up with two weddings that look too similar by half. Subconsciously, they will likely try to sabotage your wedding in favour of their own.
• Friends who have “opinions” on the state of matrimony : Need I explain this?
• Friends who are bitterly single : Again, you are not seeing this one yourself?
• Friends that make you feel somewhat uncomfortable in the area of appearance : Not just your too skinny model-friend, but also your slightly overweight best mate from college. If at any point during the picking of the friends you think “But I/She/He might be uncomfortable when I get undressed in front of them or try on several outfits” just scrap them. You will be discussing and trying on a lot, and you don’t need the aggravation.
• Outrageous friends : As you want timeless and stylish, not hip and happening but ultimately tacky.
• Sales-clerks between the ages of 20 and 45, and older if clearly unmarried : because they combine the annoyances of the outrageous friend with the persistence of a shark smelling a good deal. Even as a mixed metaphor, you should be able to see this is a bad thing.

Advice you should take :

• Mine : Obviously
• Friends who have been married for a while or are not “in that place” right now : They can have a clear eye unclouded by jealousy or subterfuge, and can bring experience and honesty without losing too much ground themselves.Sales-Clerks over the age of 45, clearly married or working in an established salon : they have experience, they have seen women get married before and if it is a good establishment, they should not be more interested in their commission than your happiness.
• Someone who makes you laugh : Not for their advice, necessarily, but bring them along to keep bride-zilla at bay.
• Your parents’ : Nowadays they will not be paying for the thing anymore most likely, but they have paid for a lot of things up to now, and they have a vested interest in seeing their little one look pretty, and jealousy or uncaring commercialism is probably far from their minds. They also have some experience, have probably been to some weddings with well- and badly dressed brides and can tell you what other’s did wrong so you don’t have to.



Obviously the lists above are not definite, carved in stone or immutable. You probably know who you are going to ask for advice and who not, and if it feels good, go for it. But from my first category I would take most things they say with a grain of salt, most definitely.

This ends my two-piece on bridal wear, I hope you find what you are looking for, or put it on and you’ll “just know”.

I am certain you’ll look beautiful, and radiant, no matter what, and if not, that nooooobody will let you know until yonks later.