ZOMBIE ESCHATOLOGY
APOCALYPSE: (Courtesy of Wikipedia):
An
apocalypse (
Ancient Greek:
ἀποκάλυψις apocálypsis, from
ἀπό and
καλύπτω meaning 'un-covering'), translated literally from Greek, is a
disclosure of knowledge, hidden from humanity in an era dominated by falsehood and misconception, i.e., a lifting of the veil or revelation, although this sense did not enter English until the 14th century. In religious contexts it is usually a disclosure of something hidden. In the
Revelation of John (Greek
Ἀποκάλυψις Ἰωάννου, Apocalypsis Ioannou), the last book of the
New Testament, the revelation which John receives is that of the ultimate victory of good over evil and the end of the present age, and that is the primary meaning of the term, one that dates to 1175. Today, it is commonly used in reference to any prophetic revelation or so-called
End Time scenario, or to the
end of the world in general.
ESCHATOLOGY: (Courtesy of Wikipedia)
/ˌɛskəˈtɒlədʒi/ (from the
Greek ἔσχατος/ἐσχάτη/ἔσχατον, eschatos/eschatē/eschaton meaning "last" and
-logy meaning "the study of", first used in English around 1550) is a part of theology, physics, philosophy, and futurology concerned with what are believed to be the final events of history, the ultimate destiny of humanity — commonly referred to as the "end of the world" or "end time".
PART ONE: Zombies: Apocalyptic Supernature or Virulent Biological Event?
I've coined the term "Apocalyptic Supernature" to assist in differentiating my opinions regarding the fictional undead outbreak and it's many different theories of origins. I define apocalyptic supernature as that part of zombie mythological eschatology that presents the idea that the origin of the event is something of a supernatural or religious nature.
Of course the majority of other theories can be categorized into, basically, biological anomalies usually based around some form of viral infection, radiation or engineered bio-weapon. These I incorporate into "Viral Theory".
I'll be using movie & TV references only in this short article as to avoid some 'armchair biologist' from pointing out some odd real fact and totally derailing the purpose of talking about fictional zombies! Further, I'll be dealing with human undead only, as going into undead animals will also derail the discussion.
So, what defines a zombie? Well, it's actions of course, so let's distill down the essence of what a zombie is so we can better eliminate what it is not. (Again, I've noted the most frequently used depictions to ascertain these characteristics and not individual movies or TV series.)
Zombie Characteristics:
1- They're dead.
2- They're recently deceased.
3- They feed on human flesh and animals.
4- They have very limited intellect & virtually no reasoning abilities.
5- They seem have simple motorized instinct, with some residual memories of life.
6- They cannot communicate with each other.
7- They can shamble quickly, but cannot run due to deterioration of the muscular-skeletal system.
8- A bite can expedite death & conversion to the undead.
9- They can be stopped by various methods en masse, i.e. firebombing a horde, but generally destroying the brain or separating it from it's body will stop the individual zombie. (I'll get around to living heads later.)
10- Anyone who dies will come back as a zombie, bitten or not.
So, we have now set the basic, most used 'rules' in media for depicting the undead. Lets take a look at each individually now and see what adds up.
1- They're dead.
Yep, zombies are dead people alright. An infected living human may exhibit symptomatic signs of zombie behavior, but they're simply infected humans. So, despite some very good movies being made depicting infected humans, they are not considered zombies for the simple fact that they are not dead. This zombie fact definitely supports the supernatural idea within the modern myth.
2- They're recently deceased.
Zombies digging themselves up from their graves doesn't seem plausible or realistic, although many movies have depicted this scenario. Civil War zombies? Roman Centurion zombies? I would think that the bodies of such old corpses would literally be dust, especially the soft tissues and it would not be realistic or even believable that they would or could dig themselves up. This aspect of the zombie mythos could be a supportive idea for the bio-weapon or engineered viral theories of re-animation - as it affects those who die recently and are unburied.
3- They feed on living human flesh and animals.
These zombies love to eat living flesh. Think about that for a moment. Living flesh. They do not eat each other or cold, dead flesh. Only the living have a target on their backs. This lends some credibility to the supernatural origins theory in that it pits the dead directly against living. How could a virus, be so philosophically specific in it's intentions?
4- They have very limited intellect & virtually no reasoning abilities.
Zombies seem to display only the lowest intellectual capacities. They infrequently use objects such as rocks as bludgeons, but not to any degree that we would consider intelligent usage. They show no outward sign of problem solving capabilities, no sign of purpose (other than feeding), or any humanistic sign of intellectual progression at all- only de-evolution, both mental & social. This idea could go for either school of thought both apocalyptic supernature or biological.
5- They seem have simple motorized instinct, with some residual memories of life.
This idea is directly connected to number four, in as much as it regards the use of the brain in connection with the central nervous system. However, residual memories would simply be mimicking normal human behavior and not a conscious individual thought. These creatures wander aimlessly, or lie dormant in various locations until their senses detect something that might indicate their instinctive drive to feed. Why these creatures appear to sit down, lie down, walk around in certain places is not known. This idea could also support either theory as well.
6- They cannot communicate with each other.
The vast majority of depictions within the genre do not depict individual communication, either verbal or non-verbal, between the undead. With this said, they do have the capability of basic, guttural utterances -usually moaning. I've noted that the moaning can and most of the time does, reflect some sort of instinctual excitement within the undead individual. Example: a single, wandering zombie usually does not make a sound, however, once food is detected- the moan begins and can escalate almost into a louder verbalization approaching a scream. This is fascinating, as it may be indicative of some sort of emotional response. I mean, a hungry dog will growl to protect food, right? Isn't that a type of emotional, albeit instinctual, response? This raises more questions than it answers if much thought is put into it.
7- They can shamble quickly, but cannot run due to deterioration of the muscular-skeletal system.
The general accepted theory concerning living dead locomotion is that the undead person cannot run as a living human would. I accept that for many reasons. The first of which is that the dead individual is constantly deteriorating, even if it seems the genre has imposed an unwritten rule that the decay has been slowed greatly. The deterioration alone ensure that dried muscles & tendons cannot perform efficiently. Further, no genre movie has ever addressed as to whether or not a zombie can derive any sustenance from what it ingests. If there is no metabolism present (which is obviously the case), then no nourishment can be processed and no energy provided to organs, muscles & tissues. This also connects into number 9, as we will see, that the primary motivational force within the creature is the brain and not the internal organs themselves. If there is no breaking down of the food, then in time the zombie will simply burst open. Which brings up the questions as to why zombies are always very skinny, despite the fact that if they gorge- they should at least be bloated up! This lends credence to the supernatural explanation, because even if a virus does re-start the brain- the brain alone cannot make organs, muscles & tissues move in such a behavioral manner. There must be another force at work in conjunction with a viral explanation at the very least, wouldn't you say?
8- A bite can expedite death & conversion to the undead.
Ah, this is a doozey! I noticed this in every genre film that I've ever seen, if you get bitten by a zombie, you will die soon & turn into one yourself. That sounds like an infection spreading and lends validity to the viral theory. However, in most depictions, anyone who dies for any reason will turn. The exception being, of course, a person whose brain is damaged beyond re-animation was the cause of their death. Which is odd, as that suggests that everyone is infected with the re-animation virus before death. If that is the case, there can never be a cure. What is to be cured...death? No, the best case in that scenario is that the living could rid themselves of the virus which would prevent them from turning upon their death. What good is that? It certainly helps those in the immediate vicinity, but it doesn't do squat for the entire problem. The hordes will still be there, whether or not you're cured and you can't cure rotten & dead- even in this fictitious universe without sounding unrealistic.
9- They can be stopped by various methods en masse, i.e. firebombing a horde, but generally destroying the brain or separating it from it's body will stop the individual zombie. (I'll get around to living heads later.)
The generally depicted and favored method for 'putting down' the undead is destroying the brain. OK, that suggests that the brain is the central control mechanism of this lifeless meat puppet, obviously. This raises the question that if it's a virus that reanimates, then it must only restart the brain and not the body or body parts individually. If it reanimates everything, then the undead subject could be dismembered and the parts would still move at the least. However, it's not generally depicted that way- "Head=Dead". So, when we see a zombies head chopped off and it continues to bite, but the body lies still- what does that mean to the viral theory? That scenario suggests that the brain alone is affected by the virus and the brain controls the decaying body.
10- Anyone who dies will come back as a zombie, bitten or not.
Another staple of the zombie genre is that everyone that dies will turn into a zombie (except of course if you destroy the brain before turning). So, we can refer back to numbers 2 & 8. The most compelling genre rule, if you ask me. I, in turn, ask "why"? Why does everyone who dies return as a mindless creature? I've always preferred the Apocalyptic Supernature Theory, as it most easily explains the "why", without delving into some sort of techno-babble pseudo-science, which is just as silly as the supernatural explanation. See, with the Viral Theory, the very name suggests "cure". There's a cure. It's suggests a natural phenomena, something that mankind can wrap his intellect around and solve it. I don't like that. I like knowing that mankind doesn't have all the answers and there are things that happen for reasons that are unfathomable. Of course, a virus doesn't need a reason to exist but it does - but a virus has an origin, a biological origin. A definite starting point. The A.S Theory doesn't have or need that definite point- it simply starts. To me, that's more frightening.
As usual, these opinions are my own and we all know what opinions are like, don't we? I sat down and simply wrote this in one sitting, without note or research. If I have unwittingly left out something important or if you have a take on anything I have written about- please share it with me. I would love to connect!
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)