Eli as an animal you can't trust?

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

Re: Eli as an animal you can't trust?

Post by gattoparde59 » Sun Sep 11, 2016 12:02 pm

I want to tweak Ash's comparison. If domesticated dogs were a real menace to people there would not be so damn many of them hanging around humans. Dogs that attack people, like people that attack people, don't have much of a future.

I would rather compare Eli to an undomesticated animal, like a wolf or a racoon. Taking one of these wild animals into your home is really asking for trouble, even if you hand raised it yourself.

Not so much in the novel where Eli comes across at first as a cynical monster "Audrey Hepburn's face with Samuel Becket's eyes," but in the movie I got the impression that Oskar was unwittingly luring a feral predator in from the wild.

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
metoo
Posts: 3677
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:36 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Eli as an animal you can't trust?

Post by metoo » Sun Sep 11, 2016 6:18 pm

Ash wrote:The flaw in the "starving Eli" position is that she doesn't necessarily have to be hungry to pose a threat to Oskar. She almost nommed him in the cellar when she was obviously well and had recently fed off Hakan.
Not true. At the incident in the cellar Eli was severely starved, at least in the novel. I believe, though, that Eli was well fed when he visited Oskar's bed.
Ash wrote:I doesn't take much other than the sight of a few drops of blood or the feel of a warm neck to kick her into feeding mode. Albeit while she was intimate with Oskar in bed she could remain in control, but the imminent danger was ever-present.
Assuming that vampires don't (can't) feed off each other, then the only sure way of protecting Oskar was to make him like her, which became a mutual decision.
According to the memory Eli pushed onto Oskar, the vampire lord fed on Eli several times. Since Eli must have become infected at the very first occasion, the novel strongly contradicts your assumption.

This, however, raises the question of how (or, indeed, whether) Eli and Oskar manage not hurting each other when starving. It's a subject well worth investigating in fan fiction...
Ash wrote:Note that I speak in the present tense because I'd love to think they're still out there somewhere in Europe living happily, and still very much intensely in love with each other.
I do as well.
Last edited by metoo on Mon Sep 12, 2016 4:46 am, edited 2 times in total.
But from the beginning Eli was just Eli. Nothing. Anything. And he is still a mystery to me. John Ajvide Lindqvist

User avatar
dongregg
Posts: 3937
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:58 pm
Location: Atlanta
Contact:

Re: Eli as an animal you can't trust?

Post by dongregg » Sun Sep 11, 2016 8:45 pm

Well acquiring sophistication requires developing maturity, and seeing as E&O, after being turned, no longer mature both psychologically and physically, I can't see them changing much in the sophistication department.
Hakan tried to impress on Eli the danger of immature impulsiveness with no more effect than adult lecturing has on today's adolescents. The fact is they are incapable of sophistication at their age.
Well, Ash, let's rethink this. First -- Right, they will still be immature at the charming age of 12. Additionally, they will add no more neurons to their brain. But sophistication doesn't depend either on maturity or on more neurons -- It depends on new connections, which throughout life continue to be made. Only brain damage that we see in Memento can stop learning. Their sophistication will come from navigating new situations and acquiring new knowledge. Eli wasn't challenged to do that as long as she could survive in a semiferal state or have helpers in town who would interface with the day-to-day things that arise in the modern, urbanized world. When she meets Oskar, she's so unsophisticated that she doesn't anticipate the awkwardness of trying to carry on a normal discussion with him. But she grows.

"You're a little gross, you know that?"

"I can change if you like."

"Good. Do that."

Oskar is unsophisticated, even compared to some of his schoolmates, perhaps because his mother babies him.

Therefore, the kids will attain some level of sophistication just by living in various urban environments, acquiring new language skills, and so forth.

And that's a good thing. Otherwise their story would continue to be nothing more than hide, kill, split when things get too hot.
“For drama to deepen, we must see the loneliness of the monster and the cunning of the innocent.”

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

Re: Eli as an animal you can't trust?

Post by sauvin » Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:21 pm

We can't say with any confidence just how feral Eli might or might not be, in part because we can't claim to understand the the beast within (with variance from a reference to the pathogen's resembling brain cells, its behaviour could almost be compared fancifully to that of a fungus that turns ants into zombies, an extrapolation of which is a major element in the novel The Girl with All the Gifts whose protagonist strongly resembles Eli in many ways). The novel contains very clear indications that her socialisation hasn't kept up with the changing times, but this doesn't necessarily make her 'feral' so much as 'weird'. On the other hand, the kind of danger most children face from other children is best addressed in relatively extreme circumstances with a punch in the nose, whereas the level of threat Eli can expect from other people is often of the "kill or be killed" sort, whether or not it's the beast making this assessment.

There are a few reasons a cat or dog might turn on its owner. Physical disease is an obvious possible cause, since rhabdoviral infections basically turn brains into hot head cheese and usually have a "furious" stage. Another possible cause is mistreatment ("son, there ain't no such thing as bad dogs, only bad owners"). Hunger might cause a cat or dog to turn on its owner, but I've never heard of this happening except in cases where the owner had died and left the animal locked in. I'm living in a town of roughly twenty thousand people, with absolutely nothing within a fifteen mile radius but a sea of corn, and it seems every other house has at least two dogs and three cats, and I can't remember the last time I'd heard of any of these animals turning on their owners at all.

Oh, and for the folks who love to debate the virtues of dogs over cats, or vice-versa, bear in mind that a cat's prefrontal cortex constitutes some 1% to 3.5% of its brain (by volume, and depending on whom you ask, apparently), compared to that of a dog at roughly 7% and a human at some 29%, with total brain weights (roughly) of 30g, 72g and 1400g, respectively. This gives cats (roughly) 1 gram of prefrontal cortex power, dogs with five times as much at 5 grams, and people with 420 times as much as cats and 84 times as much as dogs.

But Oskar doesn't really own Eli, does he? Ownership implies domestication, in turn implying control. I can't personally see anybody or anything controlling Eli's beast except Eli. What's more, we still have a few people on the board who insist on Eli being "evil and manipulative", an argument that cannot be definitively dismissed and under which Oskar needs to learn how to sit up and beg or roll over and play dead. Under this argument, it's Oskar who may eventually "turn", and if that happens, Eli isn't likely to survive.

Animals become aggressive for a number of reasons, and people are animals even without a resident behaviour-modifying pathogen. Wikipedia has quite a bit to say on the subject:
Wikipedia wrote: Aggression can take a variety of forms, which may be expressed physically, or communicated verbally or non-verbally: including anti-predator aggression, defensive aggression (fear-induced), predatory aggression, dominance aggression, inter-male aggression, resident-intruder aggression, maternal aggression, species-specific aggression, sex-related aggression, territorial aggression, isolation-induced aggression, irritable aggression, and brain-stimulation-induced aggression (hypothalamus). There are two subtypes of human aggression: (1) controlled-instrumental subtype (purposeful or goal-oriented); and (2) reactive-impulsive subtype (often elicits uncontrollable actions that are inappropriate or undesirable). Aggression differs from what is commonly called assertiveness, although the terms are often used interchangeably among laypeople (as in phrases such as "an aggressive salesperson").
Some of these reasons are directly applicable, and others less so. Eli might show some kind of aggression, for example, if she were to be put into the position of having to rebuff an unturned Oskar's sexual overtures, but she's not likely to become sexually aggressive herself (at least, not because she actually wants to have sex for its own sake), and I seriously can't see Eli and Oskar getting into a [CENSORED] match to see who's got the bigger [NSFW].

Given the hypothesis that Eli is always of two minds, I'd say "stuff" gets very complicated.
Fais tomber les barrières entre nous qui sommes tous des frères

User avatar
dongregg
Posts: 3937
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:58 pm
Location: Atlanta
Contact:

Re: Eli as an animal you can't trust?

Post by dongregg » Sun Sep 11, 2016 11:22 pm

Oh, and for the folks who love to debate the virtues of dogs over cats, or vice-versa, bear in mind that a cat's prefrontal cortex constitutes some 1% to 3.5% of its brain (by volume, and depending on whom you ask, apparently), compared to that of a dog at roughly 7% and a human at some 29%, with total brain weights (roughly) of 30g, 72g and 1400g, respectively. This gives cats (roughly) 1 gram of prefrontal cortex power, dogs with five times as much at 5 grams, and people with 420 times as much as cats and 84 times as much as dogs.
Thanks, Sauvin. I'm amused at owners who tell their pets, "I'll be back," as though the animals could project actions into the future. I have a caring relationship with the two dogs and two cats that live with me because I treat all of our interactions as just right now. :)
“For drama to deepen, we must see the loneliness of the monster and the cunning of the innocent.”

User avatar
ltroifanatic
Posts: 557
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 1:35 am
Location: Australia

Re: Eli as an animal you can't trust?

Post by ltroifanatic » Mon Sep 12, 2016 8:14 am

Somewhere deep inside a little 200 year old vampire is a spark of something he/she can't even define.Stoked by a little blonde boy.Love.Eli would never hurt Oskar.She would rather lay down her life than do that.She means it,knows it when she tells Oskar.I know it sounds cheesy but without love what have we got left?Nothing.Oh by the way I thought they were in Australia.Way down south in Tasmania.Long nights,not very populated,perfect hunting ground.lol.Love this forum.So filled with love for this beautiful story. :wub:
Please Oskar.Be me for a little while.

User avatar
Ash
Posts: 1656
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2011 10:10 am
Location: Australia

Re: Eli as an animal you can't trust?

Post by Ash » Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:37 am

It doesn't take an animal to be sick to revert to its primal instincts. I can play with my cat and she will play and playfully bite me without wanting to cause injury. But at some point something will click and she will go into full attack mode biting and scratching full on, because underneath she's still a wild animal under a thin veneer of domestication. And the same can be said for children and adults as we're only a shade away from our primal ancestry. You only have to look at how supposedly "civilised" people become savages in war situations (Abu Ghraib) to see how thin our own domestication is....like Lord of the Flies.
As for Eli, I had always supposed when she said "...I'm little again" after her sleeps to mean her clock was reset and she lost all her maturity and wisdom (and sophistication) and reverted back cognitively and emotionally to where she started some 200 years ago. While she retains the knowledge of her life to date, she is none the more mature or wiser or sophisticated from its experiences beyond that of a 12 year old. All that is reset with her sleeps.
If this doesn't happen then Eli isn't a child at all, but someone who has maturity and the wisdom that comes with age and is clearly in a position to use that manipulate Oskar, who is a real child. And that would never do... would it?

User avatar
metoo
Posts: 3677
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:36 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Eli as an animal you can't trust?

Post by metoo » Mon Sep 12, 2016 8:43 pm

Ash wrote:As for Eli, I had always supposed when she said "...I'm little again" after her sleeps to mean her clock was reset and she lost all her maturity and wisdom (and sophistication) and reverted back cognitively and emotionally to where she started some 200 years ago. While she retains the knowledge of her life to date, she is none the more mature or wiser or sophisticated from its experiences beyond that of a 12 year old. All that is reset with her sleeps.
What was actually meant with "I'm little again" is uncertain. Still, in some important, plausibly mental, way Eli is reduced back to a less developed state. Perhaps he grows and matures normally during the months he "lives", and is able to recognise the loss of that maturity, as small as it would be, when he wakes up after the long rest? He might feel that he used to think about certain things in a slightly different, less childish way, but now is back where he once was. That this has repeated about once a year for two centuries might have helped him recognise the effect, even if it is small.

Anyway, Eli apparently keeps his memories intact, and thus also knows most of what he learnt. In that respect he would grow wiser, or more "sophisticated" as time passes. Furthermore, Eli appears to be quite introspective in the novel. He spends time contemplating his situation. He is also more than averagely intelligent, which would help him to analyse and learn stuff from his experiences. This wouldn't be taken from him when he is reset during the long rest.

What Eli wouldn't gain is the maturity of an older brain (apart from those few month's worth). He would always think like a child of about twelve. But he would be something we have never seen, a child who has lived for very long and seen a lot. He would have an immense experience, which would make him very different from any normal child of about twelve. He would therefore, I believe, at the same time appear very wise and perplexingly childish.
But from the beginning Eli was just Eli. Nothing. Anything. And he is still a mystery to me. John Ajvide Lindqvist


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

Re: Eli as an animal you can't trust?

Post by cmfireflies » Tue Sep 13, 2016 4:18 am

Ash wrote:It doesn't take an animal to be sick to revert to its primal instincts. I can play with my cat and she will play and playfully bite me without wanting to cause injury. But at some point something will click and she will go into full attack mode biting and scratching full on, because underneath she's still a wild animal under a thin veneer of domestication. And the same can be said for children and adults as we're only a shade away from our primal ancestry. You only have to look at how supposedly "civilised" people become savages in war situations (Abu Ghraib) to see how thin our own domestication is....like Lord of the Flies.
Bah, Eli's more than a cat though.
As for Eli, I had always supposed when she said "...I'm little again" after her sleeps to mean her clock was reset and she lost all her maturity and wisdom (and sophistication) and reverted back cognitively and emotionally to where she started some 200 years ago. While she retains the knowledge of her life to date, she is none the more mature or wiser or sophisticated from its experiences beyond that of a 12 year old. All that is reset with her sleeps.
I always thought that Eli has centuries of experience as interpreted by a 12 year old mind. Meaning that she still thinks like a 12 year old, just one who has gone through a lot. She's not corrupt like the vampire lord or empty like the other woman with the "wonderful idea."

If this doesn't happen then Eli isn't a child at all, but someone who has maturity and the wisdom that comes with age and is clearly in a position to use that manipulate Oskar, who is a real child. And that would never do... would it?[]
Bleh, please save that for Abby and Let Me In. It's so distasteful to even think that of Eli....
"When is a monster not a monster? Oh, when you love it."

Post Reply

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