elucipher-deactivated20151112:
from a very odd book called The Last Werewolf, by Glen Duncan. it’s a pitch-black supernatural comedy heaving with violence & sex & murder.
The tag comes from a moment when the narrative takes a self-conscious turn, after one of the characters is made a werewolf:
“[Talulla] understood the genre constraints, the decencies we were supposed to be observing. The morally cosy vision allows the embrace of monstrosity only as a reaction to suffering or as an act of rage against the Almighty.
Vampire interviewee Louis is in despair at his brother’s death when he accepts Lestat’s offer. Frankenstein’s creature is driven to violence by the violence done to him. Even Lucifer’s rebellion emerges from the agony of injured pride.
The message is clear: By all means become an abomination—but only while unhinged by grief or wrath. By rights, Talulla knew, she should have been orphaned or raped or paedophilically abused or terminally ill or suicidally depressed or furious at God for her mother’s death or at any rate in some way deranged if she was to be excused for not having killed herself, once it became apparent that she’d have to murder and devour people in order to stay alive.
The mere desire to stay alive, in whatever form you’re lumbered with—werewolf, vampire, Father of Lies—really couldn’t be considered a morally sufficient rationale. And yet here she was, staying alive. You love life because life’s all there is. That, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, was the top and tail of the case against her.”
I know tumblr is very keen on monster-girls; but you have to be careful because it’s a contradiction in terms: that which is “monstrous” can’t also be “a girl”, a concept bound up with humanity and femininity and cultural norms. that sort of “monster” is acceptable because it’s the response to a moral or spiritual violation, because we can accord it some narrative of humanity, and thereby rehabilitate it, control it. it’s not really a monster.
when in fact “monstrosity” is, by definition, that which is abject and taboo and unspeakable and not-human. (which is why using “monster” to describe a person is both dehumanising and self-defeating.) as soon as you’ve begun to explain it in human terms, you’ve begun to surgically extract its teeth and claws. that sort of monster is what fascinates me—it’s a little prompt to myself to think about why a monster looks monstrous to me, what is being subverted or inverted or transgressed, and therefore to extrapolate what my very deepest ugliest monsters are.
Inspiration Haven 