The document discusses how zombie stories became popular after 9/11 as people sought an escape from feelings of loss and helplessness caused by disasters. It analyzes Max Brook's novel World War Z and the zombie movie Dawn of the Dead, noting they both relate to the zombie renaissance. The document argues people prefer stories that give them hope to forget pressures and live longer, as hope acts as an antidepressant when people are depressed. Zombie narratives provided an escape for audiences seeking hope after experiencing real-life horrors.

1. 1
Defiance of Convention through the Frame Narrative
The Princess Bride by William Goldman is an example of
masterful utilization of
rhetoric and literary devices to convey a tale of true love and
high adventure. Written in the
1970s, the novel is often labeled a fairy tale, but differs with
respect to the literary narratorial
conventions of that genre. Some elements that make the story
unorthodox include the
purposefully overemphasizing of the narrator’s presence and the
obscuring of the identity of the
original storyteller. These literary devices tie into Goldman’s
prolonged and complex frame
narrative, which is used to resurrect the tradition of oral
storytelling and call attention to the

2. importance and power of the audience’s role of interpretation in
the narratorial process of
storytelling.
Inherently, oral fairy tales have characteristics that remind the
audience of their role in
the storytelling process. Brian Attebery, a scholar on fantasy
and science fiction, states that oral
tales are communal property (not owned by or traced to a
singular teller), narrated by an actual
person, and heard by and meant for the community of people
who created the tale (17). Because
of the strong relationship between audience and narrator, the
communal audience is aware of the
impact they have in the story-making process. Attebery uses
“Snow White” as an example, and
he speculates how after creation, it entered the oral tradition
and “began to be recreated anew at
each telling.” There is a transmission process, “from community
memory through performer
back to community again” (18). The audience, based on the
cultural norms and social issues of
their time, modify the story to suit particular messages they
wanted conveyed. Phyllis Frus, an
associate professor of English, and Christy Williams, an

3. instructor of English, argue that this
2
method keeps the text relevant and appealing (Frus). From this
continued relatability, the next
generation of audiences will pick up the story, modify it to suit
their needs, and continue to pass
it on, thereby continuing the cycle of storytelling. On the other
hand, literary fairy tales tend to
be static in nature, because once one is written, verification of
the original tale is always
possible. This causes the stories to lose the ability to be
“slightly different each time it is told,
even by the same storyteller,” which Heidi Anne Heiner, a
literary fairy tale analyst and manager
of SurLaLune Fairy Tales, calls the “the beauty of actual
storytelling.” However, many
techniques can be used to keep aspects of the oral tradition
alive. Goldman implements several of
those methods, including reference to communal knowledge,

4. usage of a frame narrative to create
an actively participating narrator, and concealment of the
original storyteller.
In The Princess Bride, Goldman extensively mentions Florinese
history, geography, and
politics to create communal validation. Even though obvious
and commonly used verbal
formulas such as “Once upon a time” are not utilized, the novel
contains many allusions to past
and current events that draw upon communal and reality based
confirmation. For instance, the
narrator describes his father as “next to illiterate. In English”
and “from Florin” (Goldman 7), a
country that does not actually exist. The reader, even if he/she
realizes this, still can accept the
narrator’s statements because of the invocation of a sense of
communally accepted authenticity.
Another instance is when the narrator remarks how The Princess
Bride, an abridgement of the
novel by S. Morgenstern, marginalizes “real” Florinese history.
The narrator states that when this
abridged version of Morgenstern’s book “comes out, I expect
every Florinese scholar alive to
slaughter me. (Columbia University has not only the leading

5. Florinese experts in America, but
also direct ties to the New York Times Book Review...” (67).
The narrator’s statements are based
on the assumption that Florin is real, and “scholars” and
“experts” of Florin would be critical of
3
the narrator’s dismissal of important Florinese history due to
the abridgement’s focus on true
love and high adventure. Once again, Goldman’s persistent
commentary regarding the existence
of scholars and experts, generally believed to be respectable
figures of great historical expertise,
facilitates the reader’s acceptance of the “truth” of the
narrator’s statements. To further drive
home the point, the use of a real life, well established
organization (the New York Times Book
Review), forces the reader to stop, reevaluate the disparity
between reality and the fictional world
of the novel, understand the similarities of operation between

6. the two, and readjust his or her
notions to fit the story’s description of events. This blurring of
fact and fiction further assimilates
and immerses the reader into Goldman’s fantastical story world,
while drawing attention to the
necessity for the reader to interpret the events of the story.
To replicate an oral tale experience, a literary tale must also
implement an active and
relatable narrator. The narrator in an oral tale “is not a fictional
agency but an actual human
presence” (Attebery 17). Goldman solves this problem by
creating a persona of himself as the
narrator of the story and by referencing his father as another
story teller. The narrator is no
longer a faceless presence, and Goldman further defines the
humanness of the storyteller by
giving the narrator a prolonged backstory. The narrator
discusses his childhood, the discovery of
the wonder of books, his later adult life, and the eventual
realization that real life often lacks the
wonder and excitement always presented in books. His
realization and resulting cynicism is
reflected near the end of the preface. The narrator states, “I
don’t think there’s high adventure

7. left anymore. Nobody takes out a sword nowadays and cries,
‘Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya.
You killed my father; prepare to die!’” (Goldman 32). The
narrator, like the audience, is aware
and critical of the lack of the romanticism so often portrayed in
conventional fairy tales. The
narrator critiques the story alongside the audience, thereby
becoming an active presence and a
4
facilitator of interaction. Furthermore, this humanizing aspect
of the narrator makes the reader
believe that this persona of Goldman is indeed an understanding
and sympathetic human being
and not just a superficial presence. Goldman then uses this
persona to interact with the reader,
the first time being right at the end of the preface. “Anyway,
here’s the ‘good parts’ version. S.
Morgenstern wrote it. And my father read it to me. And now I
give it to you. What you do with it

8. will be of more than passing interest to us all” (32). The
narrator, although aware and cynical of
the gap between grandeur in stories and that in real life, appears
optimistic. Despite being a
literal story-teller, the narrator appears to be offering the story
to the reader with great care and
weight. This gesture can be seen as a direct appeal toward the
reader in order to elicit an
emotional response and course of action. Hopefully, the reader
too will want to believe in and
pass on to others the values that the narrator at one point
resolutely believed to be true.
Throughout the novel, Goldman constantly influences the reader
through reminders of the
active role of the narrator. At times, the narrator accomplishes
this goal by directly addressing
the concerns of the audience, which usually is only possible
through the presence of an actual
person. For instance, during the scene when Buttercup is in the
water surrounded by ravenous
sharks, the narrator interjects with an anecdote of when he was
told this part of the story by his
father:

9. She does not get eaten by the sharks at this time,” my father
said.
I looked up at him. “What?”
“You looked like you were getting too involved and bothered so
I thought I would let you
relax. (98)
During that moment in time, Billy (the narrator’s younger self
as a child) is the audience, and his
father is the narrator. This parallels the present situation, in
which Goldman is the narrator and
5
the reader is the audience. Referencing a past but relevant
occurrence of storytelling interaction
reminds the reader that the narrator is not faceless and
irrelevant, but personable and integral to
the telling of the story. He has not left the reader nor will stop
interacting with him/her, because
in oral storytelling, the audience is also part of the storytelling
process. The audience decides

10. what to accept, reject, and pass on in future iterations of the
story. Thus, it is crucial that the
audience is actively interpreting and critically thinking about
events that occur in the story.
Furthermore, the narrator is also aware of the possible diversity
of the audience. Take for
example the instance when the narrator Goldman stops abruptly
talking about Buttercup’s
nightmare to directly address them:
Look. (Grownups skip this paragraph). I’m not about to tell you
this book has a tragic
ending. I already said in the very first line how it was my
favorite in all the world. But
there’s a lot of bad stuff coming up…The wrong people die,
some of them, and the
reason is this: life is not fair. (218)
The narrator assumes not just a particular composition of people
in the audience, but also a
configuration of different opinions. Adults, or the “grownups,”
already do realize that life is and
may never be fair. Adolescents, and especially children, usually
are unaware of the hard truths of
life and believe that life is, if not should, be fair, because the

11. stories they have read since
childhood have not told them otherwise. These implications
remind the reader that the audience
is not one conglomerate mass of people. Instead, they are
individuals with different
understandings and life perspectives, which the narrator
categories and addresses differently. By
realizing the diversity of opinions and individuality of the
audience, the reader may contemplate
about his/her own outlook on life and current interpretation of
the story. Furthermore, the
narrator’s constant interjections, which are in italics, are
another method of reminder. Phrases
6
such as “This is me,” “This is my first major excision,” and
“Me again” consistently remind the
reader of the narrator's presence and the existence of the framed
narrative. Even more extreme an
example is all of Chapter 4, which is solely comprised of

12. Goldman’s commentary and tells of
how Goldman allegedly removed an entire hundred pages worth
of text because it did not
progress the plot. The reader begins to realizes that the novel,
although an “accurate retelling” of
a satire of an “actual” country, is being changed, like stories
carried down through oral retellings.
As a result, the reader beings to interpret events on his/her own,
especially when it becomes
unclear whether the narrator Morgenstern, the supposed author
of the unabridged book, or
Goldman is the true narrator of the story.
Goldman further pushes the reader’s realization of the existence
of his/her interpretation
by obscuring who the narrator actually is. Starting in the
preface, Goldman establishes that the
story he tells is not actually written by him, but by S.
Morgenstern (a fictional construct). By
placing accountability for what is said in the story on another
person, Goldman escapes scrutiny
from the reader as well as responsibility, while maintain his
credibility as a narrator. Because the
story was not “created” by Goldman, any factual inconsistencies
are not his fault. Albeit a subtle

13. reminder that this novel is a made up story, this distinction sets
up the pretext for the narrator
Goldman to act as an interpreter of the story. As a critic, he has
the ability to make certain
judgments, such as what course of action to deal with the
factual inconsistencies that appear in
Morgenstern’s novel. In one of his characteristic interludes, he
comments about Morgenstern’s
factual inconsistences by stating that “either Morgenstern meant
them seriously or he
didn’t…The facts, anyway; no one can say about the actual
motivations.” (Goldman 42).
Goldman dismisses Morgenstern’s inconsistencies, and this act
of narratorial power once again
blurs the distinction as to who is actually telling the story. The
factual inconsistencies,
7
Goldman’s interjections, and ambiguity of who is the actual
narrator creates for the reader a

14. murky distinction of fact vs fiction, original vs created. This
situation mirrors the retellings of
oral tales. The audience never truly knows if the current version
is faithful to the preceding one.
The expected clichés and themes may have been altered, and the
content may be radically
different from the first iteration of the story. The reader is left
deciding what parts they are
willing to accept and reject. And this decision is based on
his/her understanding of the story, its
mechanics and logic, and the truth of that compared to reality.
The reader, like the listener of an
oral tale, takes up the reigns of what is described as the “the
narrative transaction” (Attebery 17).
Based on the reader’s understanding of the story, the cultural
norms and social issues of his or
her time, and the validity of how the story world operates
compared to reality, the reader adjusts
the story to what is believed to be most meaningful for future
audiences, thereby continuing the
cycle of storytelling.
The process of adaptation and change is most likely another
reflection of an overarching

15. and reoccurring phenomenon of the human condition. Like
moths drawn to the moon’s light to
calibrate their flight around the Earth, so too are humans drawn
to the effervescent glow that
radiates from meaningful stories that inspires us. We use it to
make sense of our purpose and
place in the ever-changing world around us. Moths may not
know the difference between
moonlight and light emitted from the one’s porch step, but
people do. Reality appears like
moonlight, enigmatic but natural; while stories remain lucid yet
synthetic. Nonetheless, as long
as stories, however incredible and different from reality,
continue to persist, people will continue
comparing them against reality and passing on their
interpretations for generations to come. The
next generation of audiences will become story tellers, and
those who listen to their stories will
8

16. eventually take the reins of narrator. The cycle of human
collective learning through storytelling
tradition continues onward, transforming and educating.
9
Works Cited
Attebery, Brian. “Fantasy and the Narrative Transaction.” State
of the Fantastic: Studies in the
Theory and Practice of Fantastic Literature and Film. Ed.
Nicholas Ruddick. Westport:
Greenwood Press, 1992. 15-26. Print
Frus, Phyllis and Williams, Christy. Beyond Adaptation: Essay
on Radical Transformation of
Original Works. Jefferson: McFarland, 2010. Print
Goldman, William. The Princess Bride. New York: Harcourt,
1973. Print
Heiner, Anne. “Answering What is a Fairy Tale.” SurLaLune.
n.p, June 1999. Web. 19

17. January 2014.
Ye 1
Fan Ye
Professor Kat Eason
Essay2 draft 2
5 May 2014
People Prefer to Live with Hope
Some truth will hurt people’s feelings; therefore, a good lie
will keep people to live for a longer time. This situation is
being amplified in a zombie world. Kyle Bishop’s article named
“ Dead Man Still Walking: Examining the Zombie
Renaissance”. There is a turning moment that rise the
audiences’ passion about zombies. After 9/11event, people have
experienced several disasters, they are suffering about people
that they lost, and the feeling about helpless. At that moment,
zombie movies and books become popular than ever. World War
Z written by Max Brook is a memoir book that uses a lot of
interviews to show how World War of zombies happens. Max
Brook is a famous American horror author, especially in zombie
area. “Down of the dead” is a zombie horror movie directed by
George A. Romero who is an American-Canadian film director.
The movie also related to zombie. In the movie, the four
survivors are trying to survive in an abandoned shopping mall,
but there are only one woman survive to the end. In World War
Z, Max Brooks critiques about audience’s attitude towards
Hollywood. He uses Roy Elliot, who is a talented director, to
imply the golden age of Hollywood. The success that Elliot

18. achieves in the book suggests that Americans urged to watch
something to give them hope to lead them forget the pressure.
When people in a depression mood, they need to have hope,
since this is a really good antidepressants for depression, even
though the hope could be a lie. In World War Z Home from
USA chapter, the anonymous interviewer, who travels to
Malibu, California, interview a director named Roy Elliot.
During the initial mouths, many people died in ADS which is a
condition called Asymptomatic Demise Syndrome. When people
get ADS, they will lose their will and fall in sleep, then they
will never wake up again. Roy Elliot was one of the survivors
who are almost gets ADS because he feels the same way that
those sick people do. However, he begins to make movies about
how people beat zombies. This gives a hope to those survivors
who are in desperation and also save Elliot' life. "As it turns
out, the very night after Avalon made its debut, ADS cases
dropped in LA by a whole 5 percent!" This a significant decline
number to ADS cases. The reason why people get ADS because
people feel that they are suffering, even though they will
survive today, they probably will not get over tomorrow.
Therefore, a lot of people give up. However, Elliot gives people
a new perspective. A movie with affirmative content makes
everyone's life brighter. Since they have things to do, they will
not need to or think about waiting for death. The content in the
movie about humanity championing the zombies inspire
survivors. ADS is a mental disease; therefore, regular medicine
will not help people but hope is different thing. Everyone can
have hope, but without hope people will lost their spirit. Elliot
did a right thing at right time. He makes movies about high
technology about killing zombies, how people fight back
zombies. Once there are people start to think about high
technology about killing zombies, some scientists might try to
produce kind of that weapon. People used to not have flight,
right now, everyone take flight to everywhere. Even though
those high technology might not exist in that time period;
however, it is a good sign since it could enlighten people’s

19. brain and sprit. All of Elliot’s positive contents inspire
survivors with their own will and makes them feel that they
have hope. The data shows how a art of lie works. Some
technology might not be true, but people start to feel that they
can fight with zombies. Max Brooks tries to tell the audiences
that even though to reality are brutal, but a good lie can make
people happy and become strong again. According to Bishop’s
words “American popular culture has been colored by the feat
of possible terrorist attacks and the grim realization that people
are not as safe and secure as they might have once
thought”.（new paragraph） At that moment, Post 9/11
terrorists’ attack happened, Iraq war started, bird-flue spread
out, earthquake kills a lot of people. There was no security of
tenure in the life. People lived in desperation. This is a good
timing for zombie movie to become popular. Because when
people face a great loss, they prefer to live with hope no matter
the hope is a lie or not, since the only way that strength
people’s will to make them survive. Max Brooks tries to make
audience share the desperation from to book to the reality. It is
hard for a lot of survivors to live like in the book. ADS is not
only happens in the books, but also happens in the real world.
Those attacks kill a million of people. When people are
suffering in desperation, a hope of living can help cure their
pain for a while. Elliot’s movie in the book is one of the cures
for people’s desperation. When people staying in the movie
theater, their emotion will go along with the plot happens. Their
sprit will experience the championship about beating zombies.
This is like people in reality watch those movies that hero beats
terrorists. Their fear of the terrorist attack will decrease, the
life-affirming aspects of art cure people’s broken hearts. Even
though some stories do not happen in the real world, but this
does not matter. Directors show the content that can make
audiences receive antidepressants. This director will be honored
like Roy Elliot in the book.
Though some of his contents are lies, people will not mind since
they prefer to avoid cruel reality. In the “Down of the dead”,

20. there are two scene about doctors. In the beginning of the
movie, there are interviews happening in the TV station. One
doctor and a television presenter are talking about zombies.
There is an ironic part, people are all listen to the television
presenter talking. No one tries to listen to doctor’s truth about
world. Romero critiques about the whole society about living in
a lie world where is no danger happen. When there has a white
lie, people will always try to believe in it since the truth
sometimes is too brutal to bear with it. Roy Elliot in the books
points out “Yes, they were lies and sometimes that's not a bad
thing. Lies are neither bad nor good. Like a fire they can either
keep you warm or burn you to death, depending on how they're
used. ” He notices that lie could be a good thing. In world War
Z, there are too many people die and become zombies, survivors
are deeply fear about death, but they do not have any methods
to stop the zombie disease spread. The fear and desperation
almost can drive everyone crazy, but the lies that Elliot made
help them to stay happy and blind. In that way, people can
finally have a good dream about the lives. He uses a metaphor
about fire. A fire can either keep people warm or burn people to
death. A lie also works on both ways. If a lie can save a lot of
people from death, it is worth to keep lying. Since lives are so
precious, human beings will do anything to make sure that
people stay alive. Therefore, once lies stop people giving up
their lives, it is a good start. No matter if it is lie or not, it is
always a good news that there are more people survive. It
reflects to the real world. People prefer to live in world that is
full of hope. Because people with hope, they can fight for them
and survive from all of the obstacles.
The golden age of Hollywood and nowadays’ Hollywood is
totally different. Roy Elliot is one of the golden age of
Hollywood, because in that era Hollywood gives audiences a
image of hope and distract audiences’ pressure. In the article
“Golden Age of Hollywood”, there is a sentence “Finally,
Hollywood was able to cash in on the novelty of sound to not
only dodge the effects of The Great Depression, but provide a

21. nation with escapist entertainment in a time when they needed it
most.” The golden age of Hollywood happens in 30’s to the late
50’s. At that time, people are suffering in the World War II.
They are eager to release their pressure because they have too
much. Therefore, Hollywood’s movies at that time give people a
hope. Even though the story might not be true, some story
cannot be true, but this makes people happy. In the World War
Z, because of ADS, there are a lot of people die, Roy Elliot’s
movies, which represent the gold Hollywood’s movies in the
reality, provide people a space where they can ignore their
depression for a while. The golden age of Hollywood’s movies
did not have the same high technology like today, but people
still remember that at that time, people loves Hollywood.
Nowadays, Hollywood gives audiences’ idea is all crap and no
things can be valued. Nowadays’ Hollywood, directors do not
prefer to show human beings’ sprit and what audiences’ needs,
they are more focus on how the technology. At the golden age
of Hollywood, Hollywood’s movies gives audiences what they
want, there are movies that can destroy the fear in people’s
minds and saves the world, but nowadays, Hollywood only have
bad influence to audiences and audiences start to neglect the
Hollywood.
Works Cited
Brooks, Max. World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie
War. New York: Crown, 2006. Print.
Bishop, Kyle. "Dead Man Still Walking." Journal of Popular
Film and Television (): 16-25. Print.
"∇ troperville." RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 May 2014.
<http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M