P&P ^ Zombie Power

Dear Reader,

I just concluded my reading of Pride & Prejudice & Zombies, and I am struck by two main ideas for "musing" here: first, the "controversy" or interest that the ab/use of literature welcomes; and secondly, the embedded criticism provided by this literary mash-up of a beloved classic.
Throughout reading this delightful "Quirk Classic" I couldn't help thinking about the power this "mash-up"-zombie-narrative (for it is certainly not an adaptation nor a "sequel" - two extension genres of fiction and film that have ravenously devoured the Jane Austen canon in particular - not unlike zombies!) could hold for readers new to Jane Austen. On the one hand, I could see those ever-mercurial creatures - namely, teens - enjoying this "mash-up" concept - for it is a language art and movement they understand and respect (I think...) - from hip-hop to rock, popular music and fashion have become allusive-bordering-on-complete-plagiarist in their constant recycling and meshing of material. In fact, I think teens could understand the substance generated by interweaving a familiar subplot with an old novel. However, could they understand and enjoy this second version without tromping through the original? How could a teacher use this new text? It would certainly take too much time to read them side-by-side (for it takes too much time already to read an Austen novel a la carte). Juveria suggested that a final unit in a class could consist of a variety of extension genres and students could both analyze the extension genre and write their own extension pastiche. This sounds like a great idea, however, I consider extension and adaptation pieces to be helpful in reviving interest and comprehension in the work while the class is studying it. And then a teacher must consider answering the question: Why are we reading this? Why do we have to read the Zombie version to make it seem relevant to us? Which requires that the teacher explain the "integrity" of the canon precedes the class, and that the newer genre performs the same new labor that the original performed for audiences contemporary to it and since. Which is difficult to understand, and which is a lame explanation without recourse (in the case of P&P&Z at least) to a basic understanding of Marxist, Feminist, New Historicist and Queer theories of literature. I just had a great idea! According to readiness levels, students could form extension/reinforcement literature circles during a unit. High readiness level students (those who read quickly and may have been exposed to the work or other works by the author previously) could tangle with this "mash-up" and begin to consider what the co-author reveals or brings to the foreground through their intervention on the original, while low-readiness readers could review and analyze graphic adaptations of the original. Mid-readiness readers could consider a variety of adaptations or extensions. Overall, I do not think that I can solidly propose a home for this genre in high school curriculum apart from a model of active reading on behalf of a "co-author."
Considering the work as an act of criticism, I enjoyed the premise - that the Bennett sisters had been trained by their father in the "deadly arts" at home and abroad in China. Likewise, the militia of Great Britain are likewise trained in order to fight the rise of "Satan's children" across the great isle. In this way, a real substance behind Elizabeth's powers are made apparent. In other words, while Austen allows the reader to identify with and understand the amazing depth of Elizabeth's character (a kind of narcissistic pleasure, given that we love Elizabeth precisely because we are allowed to understand her every thought and invited to identify with her on every page), Grahame-Smith awakens us to her awesomeness with concrete, humorous and graphic illustrations of her prowess at slaying the un-dead. As a lover of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I immediately warmed up to this concept of the proud yet inwardly suffering warrior searching for another warrior. And yet I wondered if a revelation outside of inducing pleasure and entertainment awaited me in this project. Sure enough, Grahame-Smith's version makes maudlin the silliness of Mrs. Bennett and the social norms for women - where Austen nimbly criticizes through irony and sarcasm. Those women who do not fight nor respect the female "deadly arts" meet embarrassing fates the reader of Austen's original will laugh out loud to read about: Charlotte Lucas is stricken with the zombie plague just before marrying Mr. Collins, and this zombie-state goes unnoticed by all except Elizabeth and Lady Catherine throughout her demise, Lady Catherine is almost decapitated by Elizabeth in their final meeting, and Lydia's fate has her cleaning the bed pans of her dissipated beloved, Wickam, due to Darcy's brutal paralyzing of his body in a fake accident. Clearly, the zombie narrative is critical of gender norms while promoting the strength and equality of Elizabeth and Darcy's warrior skills. However, I found that the zombie narrative replaced those very sporadic allusions to poverty and the rising imperialism of Great Britain (which all of the wealth and cross-class "struggles" in Austen's novel rely upon for their frictions) with allusions to the zombie plague infesting the land. The rural poor and unlucky servants of Austen's novels, are converted to zombies and ninja slaves, whereas the rising military are responsible for squelching zombie uprisings. In this way, Grahame-Smith's narrative connects colonization and the rise of the military power (indeed, Darcy and the Bennett sisters had been trained in Japan and China, respectively) to the increase in fear in the middle and upper classes due to wealth stratification in London and outside of London due to Industrialization. Everyone is either a zombie or - according to the end - laboring to keep the rising zombie world at bay, as "England remained in the shadow of Satan." Clearly, no one in the novel nor in any zombie movie wishes to consider what zombies represent or where zombies came from in a society, which is similar to how characters in Austen novel assiduously ignore the "white elephants in the room," namely the origin of wealth disparity (imperialism and industrialization). Ironically, the most progressive character is beloved for her ability to slay the undead (symbolizing colonial subjects and the poor denizens of early Victorian England) - not so progressive, but definitely true to history.
I must retire to prepare for Buddhas on Bikes - we will meditate, bike and visit Buddhist "hot spots" and finally dine at a Buddhist restaurant. Fun! - I hope it does not rain!

Happy Summer Solstice to all!