Vampire Glamour

For discussion of John Ajvide Lindqvist's novel Låt den rätte komma in
Post Reply
User avatar
gattoparde59
Posts: 3242
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:32 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Vampire Glamour

Post by gattoparde59 » Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:30 pm

Glamour:

1. An air of compelling charm, romance, and excitement, especially when delusively alluring.
2. Archaic. A magic spell; enchantment.

It is really the second definition of glamour that I want to talk about, although it is interesting how it evolved into the first definition of “delusively alluring.” I first ran across the archaic use of the word in a book by Katherine Briggs, one of several she wrote about magical critters. The word originates in Scotland and is a corruption of “grammar” meaning special learning or knowledge possessed by the “educated.” It reminds me of J.K. Rowling’s educated wizards and their Latin incantations. Glamour is magic, magic often used to create illusions. A troll might steal your baby and then leave a log in its place, glamour being used to make it look like your baby. Better yet, a troll might take your baby and leave a troll baby in its place, with glamour leading you to see your baby in the cradle. Only later do you discover that you have a troll baby, a “changeling.”

Vampires are very much creatures of glamour in both the modern and archaic sense of the word, in fact they are famous for it. How else do we explain how a blood-sucking undead monster could be seen as so very sexy? It is their glamour, their power to enchant their victims. I have been thinking for a while about how this works in Let the Right One In. Glamour is definitely a part of the story. More recently I have read Twilight, another vampire story where the glamour is very striking. Both novels feature vampire glamour, but they use that glamour to very different effects and for very different purposes.

In Twilight the vampires are the very definition of glamour. Edward Cullen appears as the impossibly perfect stud muffin. In one scene Edward sees Bella being sucked in (so to speak) by his overwhelming glamour and remarks “I really am the perfect predator.” Perfect indeed. Edward literally reeks sexy, as well as talks sexy, looks sexy, drives sexy etc. What part of Mr. Edward is not sexy? There is the lack of body temperature, and then there is that whole “I might kill you” thing, but that does not seem to be a problem for the giddy Bella. “Oh, well I guess you might kill me, maybe. Tee Hee!” Which brings me back to my original point, Bella’s attraction to Edward is unnatural, supernatural to be precise.

By making Edward so “glam” Stephanie Meyer creates a problem for me. Does Bella really love Edward, or is this all just an illusion? How can Edward tell whether Bella’s attraction to him is real, or just the result of his supernatural adaptation as a blood sucking predator? This creates a problem in my mind at least, but it does not seem to be a problem that Meyer is worried about. What Meyer is interested in is the idea of vampire glamour as a metaphor for sexuality. Twilight is really a very mild moral tale about adolescent sexuality to help proper young ladies and gentlemen to deal with the powerful urges that over take them when they come of age. You can give yourself over to your animal lust and “fatal attraction” or you can be civilized about it, courtly actually, like the Cullen family. That was what Meyer was trying to do, and that is why she does not really go any further with the problem that I see in vampire glamour: Is this love for real, or is it all a matter of glamour? Glamour is sex for Meyer and that is as far as she wants to go with it.

Let the Right One In also features vampire glamour, but in this story it serves a very different purpose. Where Meyer is really uninterested in the illusory nature of glamour, John Lindqvist is fascinated by this particular question and makes it a central, and disturbing theme in his story. This is because, leaving aside any questions of writing skill, or lack thereof, ;) Lindqvist is a more ambitious writer than Stephanie Meyer. Where Meyer wants to write about the problems of adolescent lust, Lindqvist is posing universal questions: What does it mean to love someone? What does it mean to be a human being? Most disturbing is this question: how do we know when illusions end and reality begins?

Lindqvist is deeply interested in what James Barrie described as “the film that obscures the Neverland” and what happens when that film is rent. Vampire glamour is present in Let the Right One In, but not as a matter of simple attraction. Instead the illusory nature of glamour becomes central to the plot, a troubling enigma. Early on Oskar notices this as Eli gives him the advice to hit back:
With her other hand she touched his wound and that strange thing happened. Someone else, someone much older, harder, became visible under her skin. A cold shiver ran down Oskar’s back, as if he had bitten a Popsicle.
That “someone else” haunts both the reader and Oskar as the story unfolds. Is Eli a friend, or a “nursery goblin” come to steal away the innocent Oskar? Is Eli a boy or a girl? Is Eli a child, or an ancient demon? Is Eli even human? In the movie, as all this sinister enigma dawns on Oskar he asks: “who are you?” In the novel Oskar demands:
“Prove it to me.
“Prove what?”
“That you are. . . who you say you are.”
Is Oskar’s love a true love, or is it simply demonic glamour? Oskar is tormented by this kind of doubt. Eli is also tormented by Oskar’s doubt to the point where it becomes an absolute nightmare for this vampire crouching alone at the very edge of humanity.
I have already written too much. Hopefully I have made my ideas clear, but if not feel free to disagree or ask questions.

I will finish with a quote that illustrates a different type of glamour, the one that most interests Lindqvist:
For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli’s eyes. And what he saw was . . . himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love.
For a few seconds.
Here again is a magical transformation, a transformation that is not simply glamour, but the real magic of true love.

I'll break open the story and tell you what is there. Then, like the others that have fallen out onto the sand, I will finish with it, and the wind will take it away.

Nisa

User avatar
covenant6452
Posts: 1649
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:37 am
Contact:

Re: Vampire Glamour

Post by covenant6452 » Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:45 pm

Fantastic piece! Well said! Well written!
I could never have put it that well or have come to those conclusions myself but it makes perfecet sense to me.
Not once was I sent running for a thesaurus and no hagiolatry!
Seriously though, I think that's the best post I've read in a while.
Du måste bjuda in mig...or else!

User avatar
a_contemplative_life
Moderator
Posts: 5896
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 2:06 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Vampire Glamour

Post by a_contemplative_life » Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:53 pm

I did not see Oskar's love of Eli being deluded by, or drawn to, Eli's vampire nature. It seemed to me, instead, that Eli's vampirism was almost an impediment that Oskar had to overcome in his mind in order to truly love Eli. As the story unfolds, more and more of Eli's vampirism is revealed to Oskar. At first, he grapples with even believing it; then later, as it finally sinks in (in the novel, this is when he is about to drink a glass of milk in Eli's kitchen the morning after he falls asleep on her couch), he struggles with her nature as he continues to crave her friendship, which from Eli's perspective, is always genuine and heartfelt. This comes across in the novel as Oskar wonders whether Eli is merely pretending to like him, so the "anciient" person inside her can do bad thing to him. Apart from a brief smile when Eli flies to her bedroom after his mom comes home, Oskar shows little or no attraction to Eli as a vampire. And when Lacke is killed, Oskar clearly finds the whole thing unsettling as he realizes firsthand just how violent Eli can be. It would therefore be my conclusion that what we see in LTROI is very much the opposite of Twilight--it shows us a love that is true between Oskar and Eli, not because of the fact that Eli is a vampire, but in spite of it.
Image

User avatar
sauvin
Moderator
Posts: 3410
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 5:52 am
Location: A cornfield in heartland USA

Re: Vampire Glamour

Post by sauvin » Sun Jan 31, 2010 12:05 am

gattoparde59 wrote: Lindqvist is deeply interested in what James Barrie described as “the film that obscures the Neverland” and what happens when that film is rent. Vampire glamour is present in Let the Right One In, but not as a matter of simple attraction. Instead the illusory nature of glamour becomes central to the plot, a troubling enigma. Early on Oskar notices this as Eli gives him the advice to hit back:
With her other hand she touched his wound and that strange thing happened. Someone else, someone much older, harder, became visible under her skin. A cold shiver ran down Oskar’s back, as if he had bitten a Popsicle.
That “someone else” haunts both the reader and Oskar as the story unfolds. Is Eli a friend, or a “nursery goblin” come to steal away the innocent Oskar? Is Eli a boy or a girl? Is Eli a child, or an ancient demon? Is Eli even human? In the movie, as all this sinister enigma dawns on Oskar he asks: “who are you?” In the novel Oskar demands:
“Prove it to me.
“Prove what?”
“That you are. . . who you say you are.”
"I don't want to."
"Why?"
"Guess."
I've just begun rereading the novel, and am doing so in nonlinear fashion. This is one of the tidbits I ran across just a couple of days ago.

I could almost buy into the movie Eli as being a carefully disciplined and practised seductress, am in fact considering writing some internal monologues synching with the movie to explore this possibility, but I have serious problems with such a position. The novel Eli is just too playful, too child-like - movie Eli is far too serious at times, too guarded, but novel Eli is downright FUN! Too spontaneous and at times too erratic to fit this mold.

And if either Eli is actively pursuing a design of whisking away an innocent Oskar, is it necessarily true he'd become her thrall? Think in terms of a lonely man "pursuing" an attractive woman: successfully accomplished, it doesn't always mean taking from her what she wouldn't give voluntarily. He just wants to be with somebody, and Eli is very, very lonely. She, too, may just want to be with somebody, and so the "seduction" itself may be entirely innocent if it in fact exists at a conscious level on her part. The only "delusive" element, as we've seen in both versions, is in getting Oskar to overlook her monstrosity.
gattoparde59 wrote:
For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli’s eyes. And what he saw was . . . himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love.
For a few seconds.
Here again is a magical transformation, a transformation that is not simply glamour, but the real magic of true love.
Thus, if the projected image is true, the refutation of malicious seduction.

If Twilight is all about the dangers of premature sexual relations, then what do you suppose LTROI is all about, given that sexuality of any sort seems to be something of a foregone conclusion for both major characters at least for the foreseeable future?

The whole concept of glamour in both definitions given fits very well with the vampire genre because without the urbanity and charisma generally ascribed them, vampires would be far less effective predators. Instead of being compellingly attractive either for their obvious wealth or their seemingly implicit "sexiness", they'd merely be fearsome, repellent and fearsome. They'd be forced to hunt the way Eli seems to: hang out in a tree or from some building or bridge, and wait for somebody to pass by.

LTROI is very much separated from the bulk of vampire fiction for me precisely because Eli seems to eschew glamour of any sort. She maintains anonymity, the appearance of poverty almost to the point of abject homelessness, seems to prefer population centres whose denizens are mostly generally considered "low lifes". She doesn't try to be charismatic or charming or urbane.

For this, and for very many other reasons, I find nearly nothing in common between Twilight and LTROI.
Fais tomber les barrières entre nous qui sommes tous des frères

User avatar
lombano
Posts: 2993
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:56 pm
Location: Xalapa, Mexico
Contact:

Re: Vampire Glamour

Post by lombano » Sun Jan 31, 2010 1:46 am

To me, rather than a duality of delusional glamour vs. the true Eli, what for me works best is something from Peer Gynt : that Eli is like an onion, each layer of which must be peeled away to reveal Eli's 'true being.' Each layer is something Eli is or has been or some role she has held (vampire, child, ancient person, etc); Oskar must peel/explore each layer to reach the core of the unique person Eli is (saying that someone is a child or a killer tells you something about him, but does not reveal in itself the inner core - in Peer Gynt's case the inner core is nothing). To take the analogy further, if we ask when Eli has truly been himself, Oskar could well reply, like Solveig, 'In my faith, in my hope, in my love.'
sauvin wrote:LTROI is very much separated from the bulk of vampire fiction for me precisely because Eli seems to eschew glamour of any sort. She maintains anonymity, the appearance of poverty almost to the point of abject homelessness, seems to prefer population centres whose denizens are mostly generally considered "low lifes". She doesn't try to be charismatic or charming or urbane.
This is a key reason why I can respect LTROI: it avoids the romanticised cliches and brutally examines what a vampire's life would really be like. Vampirism in LTROI is disgusting, not sexy.
a_contemplative_life wrote:I did not see Oskar's love of Eli being deluded by, or drawn to, Eli's vampire nature. It seemed to me, instead, that Eli's vampirism was almost an impediment that Oskar had to overcome in his mind in order to truly love Eli.
Yes, his initial reaction is one of revulsion.
Bli mig lite.

User avatar
cmfireflies
Posts: 1152
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:39 pm

Re: Vampire Glamour

Post by cmfireflies » Sun Jan 31, 2010 6:33 am

sauvin wrote: I could almost buy into the movie Eli as being a carefully disciplined and practised seductress, am in fact considering writing some internal monologues synching with the movie to explore this possibility, but I have serious problems with such a position. The novel Eli is just too playful, too child-like - movie Eli is far too serious at times, too guarded, but novel Eli is downright FUN! Too spontaneous and at times too erratic to fit this mold.
I would love to read that, being that a brilliantly evil Eli is my second-favorite interpretation of the character. I would imagine that the serious problems you have are somewhat related to the fact that such an interpretation adds absolutely no depth to the character, in fact raising more questions than answers. Why Oskar? What does she really think of him? Why would Eli go that far just to manipulate him? Just how much does the plot consists of Eli's lies?

I'm guessing that any scene of Eli showing remorse would have to be attributed to us actually misinterpreting the expressions of an animal. (It's true, pet owners actually see "emotions" such a shame that the animals don't have.)

Eli would have to appreciate Oskar on some level even if it's just jealousy of a possession. You think it's so sweet that Eli entwines her hands with Oskars after he's asleep? Ha that's just a vampire enjoying her trophy :twisted:

But none of this actually goes any closer to explaining the true Eli. Is she doing this solely for survival? Does she make herself whatever her current helper wants most to assuage the guilt of taking so many lives? Is she doing the thing she learned from her sire, constantly stealing what was stolen from her? Does she treat people like Rubik's cubes to shape and twist into something she likes better? Or is the vampire virus something so alien that Eli's actions and motives are different from anything the human imagination can come up with?
lombano wrote:This is a key reason why I can respect LTROI: it avoids the romanticised cliches and brutally examines what a vampire's life would really be like. Vampirism in LTROI is disgusting, not sexy.


I don't think that's quite a fair statement. I think LTROI on some level is only possible because of the romanticized cliches and every vampire story that came before. From Dracula to Anne Rice to Buffy to Twilight vampires stories are always borrowing and changing. So I think LtROI owes something to all the previous vampire stories, even if JAL wasn't aware of it.

I can't wait to read the great stories inspired by LtROI (actually this site already has a lot of them) So thanks peoples.
"When is a monster not a monster? Oh, when you love it."

User avatar
Aurora
Posts: 757
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 6:58 pm
Location: London England

Re: Vampire Glamour

Post by Aurora » Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:41 am

Excellent post/topic gattoparde59, I'm glad that you've read Twilight and understand the underlying message in it, too many people are too quick to dismiss it without bothering to read it at all. Staying on topic there was this short dialogue between Bella and Edward in a diner shortly after he'd saved her (for the second time). The book is written from Bella's perspective btw.

"You really shouldn't do that to people," I critcised. "it's hardly fair."

"Do what?"

"Dazzle them like that - she's probably hyperventilating in the kitchen right now."

He seemed confused.

"Oh come on," I said dubiously. "You have know the effect you have on people."

He tilted his head to one side and his eyes were curious. "I dazzle people?"

"You haven't noticed? Do you think that everyone gets their way so easily?"

He ignored my questions "Do I dazzle you?"

"Frequently," I admitted.

Which is an example of a vampire using 'glamour' as a way of infuencing people to get their own way. The exchange above suggests that Edward is unaware of this, but it's undermined by the fact that he can read minds (except for Bella's) so he has to know the effect that he has on women. It's also true as gattoparde59 says that Bella never questions if this is what makes her 'love' him, technically it could be considered the same as a love potion or spell.

Eli doesn't appear to have the same effect on Oskar, he's never dazzled by her, He is intrigued, fascinated, confused, scared, repulsed and attracted (amongst other things) by her however. Possibly it's because Eli is pre-puberty and that is one of those things that she's never going to get as a gift or skill so she has to work on it the same as us mere mortals do...
Team Eli

User avatar
sauvin
Moderator
Posts: 3410
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 5:52 am
Location: A cornfield in heartland USA

Re: Vampire Glamour

Post by sauvin » Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:04 am

cmfireflies wrote: ... a brilliantly evil Eli is my second-favorite interpretation of the character. I would imagine that the serious problems you have are somewhat related to the fact that such an interpretation adds absolutely no depth to the character, in fact raising more questions than answers. Why Oskar? What does she really think of him? Why would Eli go that far just to manipulate him? Just how much does the plot consists of Eli's lies?
Just to play the contrarian, let's speculate. What, indeed, could Oskar offer Eli that she doesn't already have or could get with the snap of a single neck or swish of an underaged tail?

She strikes me as being very like a cat, valuing quiet, secrecy and stealth, and I have a half-baked notion these would be partly to conserve as much energy as possible. It's far more efficient to just drop on your dinner rather than chasing it on foot, claw or wing across a couple of zip codes. What good is it to have to eat again immediately because the meal just eaten leaves her drained?

Eli is a predator, and her prey is the most dangerous imaginable.

Many predators have camouflage, patterns of different pigmentations on their furs to help them blend in with their native environments. Some are even concerned with odours - I've heard cats bury their wastes to avoid alerting their prey of their presence in the area.

Eli has camouflage, too. She's a waif living in villages of people poor enough and often disenfranchised enough that she can hunt for weeks in a single area before general alarm forces her to seek new hunting grounds. She smells, dresses in discarded rags, and generally fits in very well. She's mostly invisible.

However, even if her prey doesn't have a keen sense of smell to warn people she's not human, even if they don't have the kind of vision that can detect cold bodies against a warm backdrop, people do have ways of ferreting out foreigners. We're very sharp that way, usually, and it often doesn't take much: a badly or awkwardly turned phrase, a mispronounced word, not wearing a hat of a certain kind or in a certain way, not knowing something about the local culture that anybody else could be reasonably expected to know, and you've got all the hint most people need to suspect that our predator isn't from the local area. Suddenly, twelve year old Eli who sometimes "talks a little too much like a grownup" isn't quite so invisible.

What's worse is not knowing her prey, which would be a natural consequence of our becoming increasingly more technologised and experiencing accelerated rates of cultural change. A cat in the jungle might lose its prey, but unless it'ss unfortunate enough to have its jaw broken after getting kicked in the face, the cat just fears losing its meal, but Eli is keenly aware that her prey can bite back - hard.

Do you ask a Hakan to bring her up to speed with the times? Maybe. He could explain things she's not gotten familiar with yet - maybe it takes Eli a while to get caught up with radios and televisions and taxi cabs with automatic transmissions. A literate Hakan could explain the minds and the moods of the people whose histories Eli might have lived through but not really experienced or understood. He could cover superficial detail.

What a Hakan can't explain is what it is to be a child in 1980's Sweden. Eli wouldn't need to be any kind of genius to perceive that children are in different positions than even a mere twenty years before, let alone two hundred. Different challenges, different customs, different toys and games, different culture entirely, and...

Guess what? That which she most needs to emulate if she wants to maximise her camouflage would be that which she least understands.

Enter Oskar. When she first spies him, he's acting out what appears to be a revenge fantasy. He has an inner darkness, just like her! If she could just find a way to form some kind of alliance with him, even some kind of echt friendship, she could learn from him what she needs to know about the life of the average twelve year old of that time and place.

How far would she go to manipulate and seduce Oskar? That rather depends on just how much she values this aspect of her camouflage, and how afraid she is of exposure.

This was just the first thing to come to mind.

Can anybody think of other purely pragmatic reasons for elaborate seduction that do not design Oskar as another hunter?
Fais tomber les barrières entre nous qui sommes tous des frères

jetboy
Posts: 609
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Vampire Glamour

Post by jetboy » Sun Jan 31, 2010 12:21 pm

good post. i think ltroi does deal with this doubt quite a bit and no other type monster could do that. not so much with the death of lacke or jocke, those were done out of desperation. i think this has to do more with the seduction of oskar. this goes hand in hand with the whole inviting in theme. a vampire has to be seductive in order to be invited in which is different than say a werewolf who is all power with no need or brain power to seduce or manipulate.

eli is the most beautiful girl in the world according to the book. that is not a coincidence
Can anybody think of other purely pragmatic reasons for elaborate seduction that do not design Oskar as another hunter?
This is an edit but seeing this quote reminded me the way Eli killed Jocke under the bridge. That was total seduction.
Last edited by jetboy on Sun Jan 31, 2010 12:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
a_contemplative_life
Moderator
Posts: 5896
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 2:06 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Vampire Glamour

Post by a_contemplative_life » Sun Jan 31, 2010 12:29 pm

On the issue of motivations to seduce/manipulate Oskar: let's not forget good old-fashioned boredom. That makes a lot of people do things that don't appear rational, or things that would not be expected to advance their self-interests. I think this is especially true of children.

I think it may also be true that children seem to have a higher threshold for cruelty than many adults. Often they do things purely for selfish reasons, without the slightest notion of how it is hurting the other person. So if you are going with an 'evil Eli' concept, this could play a role, too. Although, I personally did not see much about Eli that was deliberately cruel, or cruel for cruelty's sake.

The passage from Twilight about Edward's dazzling someone reminded me of some passages in the novel. There were at least four times in the novel when other characters were somehow influenced by some form of interaction with Eli.

This happened to Oskar twice, the first time shortly after he met Eli, and she was close to biting him. Oskar felt paralyzed, drawn in by her eyes. Then later, just before Eli took him for a flashback, she brushed his ears with her hands and it influenced how he felt.

When Eli encounters the receptionist at the hospital, she immediately feels the need to give Eli something, but she's not sure what. I think the implication was that somehow, Eli was influencing her to give her information about Hakan's whereabouts in the hospital.

The other person was the woman with cancer, who became completely passive as soon as her leg touched Eli's. So powerful is this influence that the woman even puts her head on Eli's lap and asks to be told a story--something that is extremely bizarre for an adult to do with a child.

So I think it is clear that Eli does have some power to influence people, just by being near to them, or touching them, and that she knows how to use this power to kill folks.

But I still don't see this power as something that drew Oskar to Eli, or changing what I said in my first post on this very interesting thread.
Image

Post Reply

Return to “Let The Right One In (Novel)”