• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

METAFICTIONAL MONSTERS AND FOUND-FICTION NIGHTMARES: REALITY AND NARRATOLOGICAL STRATEGY IN HORROR FICTION A Thesis submitted to the faculty of San Francisco State University % In partial fulfillment of Z oi4 the requirements for 6 M L the Degree Master of Arts In English: Literature by Zoe Elizabeth Dumas San Francisco, California January 2019 Copyright by Zoe Elizabeth Dumas 2019 CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL I certify that I have read METAFICTIONAL MONSTERS AND FOUND-FICTION NIGHTMARES: REALITY AND NARRATOLOGICAL STRATEGY IN HORROR FICTION by Zoe Elizabeth Dumas, and that in my opinion this work meets the criteria for approving a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree Master of Arts in English: Literature at San Francisco State University. Associate Professor Geoffrey Green, Ph.D. Associate Professor METAFICTIONAL MONSTERS AND FOUND-FICTION NIGHTMARES: REALITY AND NARRATOLOGICAL STRATEGY IN HORROR FICTION Zoe Elizabeth Dumas San Francisco, California 2019 As technology becomes ever-prevalent in modem society and our lives are documented for all to see on a daily basis, it is more important than ever that we understand the role of narrative in our media. This project explores works of horror fiction that work upon the conceit of being a found text that is in some way representative of the real world. I argue that these texts, rather than just being an adrenaline rush, are able to teach us how to be better readers of the world around us. I study a breadth of horror texts, focusing specifically on the film The Blair Witch Project, the novel House o f Leaves, and the Twitter story “Dear David.” Each text ushers in a new mode of horror, in which we never know who—or what—we can trust. This new, modem horror posits that we must be wary of the nefarious powers that run our everyday lives through technology and social media. is a correct representation of the content of this thesis. Date ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work would never have been possible without the love and support of my teachers, family, and friends. Special thanks to Professors Sara Hackenberg, Geoffrey Green, Summer Star, and Cynthia Elliott. Each of you taught me invaluable lessons as a writer, reader, and student, and I wouldn’t be the same if it weren’t for all of you. Leila and Angela: thank you for being wonderful friends and showing me I wasn’t alone in this intense journey. To my parents, thank you for always believing in me and showing me that it was OK to follow my passion. George and Chris, thank you for being the best older brothers a little sister could ask for. No matter what stress I’m facing, you two are always there to make me feel better. Finally, thank you to Andrew for being the most wonderful and supportive husband. No matter what, you are always there for me to make me smile or bring me a cup of coffee when I need it most. Ultimately, none of this would be possible without your love and support. Thank you, too, for discussing horror with me ad infinitum—this passion would not have grown to what it is today were it not for you. Hail yourself! v TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 1 History of Found Fiction.....................................................................................................5 Affect and the Power to Change Belief.............................................................................24 The Weird and the Eerie....................................................................................................30 Monsters in the Machine: Horror Online...........................................................................39 Haunted by Ghosts of Our Own Design............................................................................50 Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 58 Works Cited 61 1 Introduction Until the 2016 Presidential election “fake news” was nonexistent, at least in name. In the midst of this especially heated news cycle, stories began appearing online with eye-catching headlines like “Pope Francis Shocks World, Endorses Donald Trump for President” and “FBI Agent Suspected in Hillary Clinton Email Leaks Found Dead in Apparent Murder-Suicide.” Of course, these stories had no substance and only existed to generate clicks. Buzzfeed journalists investigating these outlandish stories discovered that a majority of them originated from the small Macedonian town of Veles. The “teens and young men” who wrote the articles had no real interest in American politics, but they wanted to get more eyes on their sites. The writers determined that “the best way to generate traffic [was] to get their politics stories to spread on Facebook—and the best way to generate shares on Facebook [was] to publish sensationalist and often false content that [catered] to Trump supporters” (Wendling). This does not imply, however, that “fake news” is only an applicable term for conservative news, nor that a Trump-positive readership is the only target for outright lies in their newsfeeds. The writers of these articles have little else in mind than the money to be made from unsuspecting users and will write whatever it takes to make top-dollar online. Beyond literal “fake news,” or purposefully false news stories made to seem like they are true for sensationalist purposes, there are countless examples of larger powers using social media and other modem technologies to seize control of large populations. As readers caught on to “fake news” as Buzzfeed describes it, the term experienced a 2 shift in meaning. No longer did “fake news” mean the outrageous news stories coming out of Veles; now “fake news” is a slur aimed at legitimate news sites whenever a claim is made to which the reader is opposed. One of the most famous examples of this is when President Donald Trump replied that information revealed during the investigation of Russian meddling was “fake news.” Now it is fairly common to see users in online communities dismissing legitimate counterarguments with two simple words. “Fake news” does not describe false journalism anymore, but it is instead a marker of someone unwilling to engage with anything that goes against their current line of belief. Returning once more to the 2016 election, this malicious confiscation of media and journalistic power came from automated Russian Twitter accounts called social bots. In the final month leading up to the election, every one in five election-related tweets was published by a bot and not a voting human (Clifton). These bots would hardly matter if they were just voices shouting into the ether, but this is far from the case. USC professor and researcher Emilio Ferrara published a study in 2017 in which he determines that humans are incredibly susceptible to contagious social media messages. As Ferrara puts it, “You’re more likely to retweet something if you see it tweeted by many different sources” (qtd. in Clifton). Election interference was only the start for these Russian bots, though; further information reveals that the goal of the hackers in control of these bots was to destabilize American society through political division. Tom McCarthy, a national affairs reporter 3 for The Guardian, states “The overarching goal, during the election and now, analysts say, is to expand and exploit divisions, attacking the American fabric where it is most vulnerable, along lines of race, gender, class and creed.” These bots worked not by clumsily parroting bi-partisan rhetoric, but instead focused on specific hot-button issues across the political gamut. Some identified imposter pages include “Secured Borders” (anti-immigration), “Texas Rebels” (anti-Clinton, pro-Texas), “Being Patriotic” (anti­ refugee, pro-Confederate flag), “LGBT United” (pro-LGBT), and “Blacktivists” (pro- Black Lives Matter). Russia used the bots to spread disinformation to an unsuspecting audience, secretly gathering information on voters and, eventually, subtly discouraging them from voting at all. Ferrara states that the power of bots is “particularly concerning because there is the potential to reach a critical mass large enough to dominate the public discourse and alter public opinion” (Ferrara). Concerning, indeed. Ferrara’s suggestion that nefarious outside agents could— and do—use our own technology to silently control us sounds more like the terrifying plot of a science fiction novel than reality. The horror which inevitably arises from this knowledge seems like it should be more than enough to turn everyone off technology for good, and yet social media, bots, and other similar technology continues to grow and rapidly pervade everyday life. Users are trapped not only by the conveniences modem technology affords them, but also must interact with this technology in some way to function within modem society. As romantic as it may sound to “go off the grid,” this is a 4 fantasy that will ultimately lead nowhere. Instead, users must fight to take back the technology that ensnares them, and the first step towards this is recognition of being used in the first place. As terrifying as it is that we are edging toward Orwellian chaos, plenty of good can still come from modem technology. Social media itself is often lauded for connecting people who would otherwise be separated by physical space. Researchers have also found ways to leverage technology like social bots for good. An example

Load more

  75

Copy Link