Vu 1 Amy Vu Dr.

Lynda Haas Writing 37 12 November 2013 World War Z: A Zombie Fiction In his novel World War Z, Max Brooks presents numerous collections of individual interpretations on how different diversity and cultural aspects affect how people respond and react to the zombie outbreak. (Inside of giving a basic summary, I will need to provide more details on what the novel is about.) Each of these distinct recounts gives the audience a prospective view in humanity under pressure; they either react to the outbreak in a normal way or they simply do something outrageous. Such circumstances may either convey a story that is truly considered smart or, on the other hand, despicably stupid. Essentially, it is ideal to say that Brookss book leads us through a catalogue of the worlds failings and more importantly, a few scenarios where characters are actually successful (Schaefer). Simply put, Brooks ties each of the stories together to show humanity at its best and worst. (I dont necessarily have to compare stupid and smart responses. I can state that both of these characters reacted in ways that they thought was a good idea, but they both made fatal mistakes in the end.) Although it may not seem like it, Brooks was able to embed a few general rhetorical situations within each of the different stories to create a seemingly different approach to the zombie fiction. (I will need to elaborate more on the rhetorical situation and maybe include the audience target or how it was received by critics.) Through each of these individual recounts, the audience can effectively comprehend how Brooks wants to communicate through his text by providing an underlying zombie genre convention of how humans are able to face challenges and decisions within the

Vu 2 apocalypse. (Strong point for a thesis statement, but I will have to include what will be expected throughout the essay and include how differences in culture and diversity affect the outcome.) Throughout the novel, it is evident that Brooks provides a different perspective view on how humanity deals with such a sudden disaster; in this case, from Jesika Hendricks point of view, the audience can obviously see how her and her family responded to the outbreak in any logical manner that society would. Jesika remembers constantly seeing the catchphrase of go north across the bottom of the TV (Brooks 122). Even though they didnt give any instructions on what to do and how to survive, the most reasonable reaction would be to listen to the newscast. Of course, even though they did face the harsh cold weather, the endless occurrences of fights, and scarce supply of food, they werent being bothered by the zombies because the living dead freeze solid (Brooks 122). Additionally, Jesika and her family were able to outsmart all the other families because of their survival knowledge in the wild. Instead of doing what others thought was the right thing to do to survive, they did the exact opposite. Despite the fact that Jesika recalls that eleven million people died that winter, these people didnt die from being infected by a zombie, they died from natural causes such as hypothermia or starvation (Brooks 129). (Although this is a good point, it has to be analyzed more deeply.) From this, Brooks explores how basic survival necessities and knowledge play a crucial role in understanding how to survive. (Need to relate this sentence to main idea and expand more on it in details. And for this whole paragraph, I will try not to just summarize but also analyze as well.) Conversely, individuals with nothing on their mind but benefiting from the outbreak clearly cause consequences that are severely regrettable. Told by T. Sean Collins, he observed a remarkably stupid response to the panic where one of his clients provided safety for those who

Vu 3 could raise his image during and after the war (Brooks 84). This foolish yet surprisingly realistic plan set celebrities and people of influence to fall for his trap because all they wanted was safety. In reality, Collins client made the mistake of flaunting his survivalists dream house because even though he was safe there, the real threat was the swarm of people ruining the protection that they once thought was invulnerable. As a result of this, Brooks provides an opportunity to offer insight into present-day social decay since the super-richbroadcasts their lives for the less-rich to watch as the world is exploding around them (Schaefer). (Credible source, but I will need to introduce the author differently.) These high-class celebrities were senseless to not realize that he was only playing the good guy because all he wanted was fame and not to protect them from the zombies. They didnt take a chance to look back and think of what they were going to do; they were so caught up on being able to find safety that they were unmistakably taken into a death trap that ultimately caused their lives. (Another sentence or so to close up on how these ideas relate to my thesis statement and also analyze more on the story instead of summarizing the main points. And of summarizing the stories in two paragraphs, I will include a paragraph after the introduction and give a brief description of it.) Certainly, these two encounters all revolve around one specific aspect of genre: humanity all have different views on how to respond to the issues of the zombies. In other words, Brooks is able to show how different cultures dealt with the zombie menace and how the zombies, who are essentially mindless, react to different environments (Silver). (Credible source again, but I will need to introduce Silver in the beginning to create a more reliable description of Silver.) Provided with these two stories, both of the characters act in behaviors as to what their specific class would normally do: the rich and upper-class would find immediate safety in any way possible, while the others would drive for shelter. Within all of these insights,

Vu 4 Brooks is not only trying to tell them directly, but he also trying to convey a message: we are not prepared for disasters and because of that, why we are not prepared is one of the many subjects of [the] book (Silver). Brooks message is clear indeed; through the views of the survivors, we see the struggle for basic survivaland the dispassionate planning for the annihilation of masses of people by the powers (Silver). (Again, introduce Silver in the beginning.) Derived from the horror and zombie genre, the struggle that are faced from the zombies themselves are not only part of the genre, instead it can come from the reaction of the living humans involved, and how they respond to the state of fear and violent chaos brought about by the zombies (TVTropes). Perhaps these characters reacted in the way they did because they didnt know how to necessarily respond to a zombie outbreak. Brooks implements in his novel that what people think is the best way to survive will sometimes, ironically, end up being a foolish and ridiculous action. (I will have to analyze my first two body paragraphs without being redundant to this paragraph. Furthermore, I will break my paragraphs down into different parts: the initial solution to surviving the apocalypse, what they didnt know beforehand that caused problems, and then conclude about the outcome of each case.) In each of these recollections, Brooks is able to provide the audience views on how individuals first experienced the outbreak. As a result, he established his claim by suggesting that World War Z is, in fact, a zombie fiction because of the numerous voices that give us several sides on how they approached it. With Jesika Hendricks story, the audience can visibly see how her and her familys choice of responding to the outbreak was the outcome of a keen approach. In comparison, Collins story persuaded the viewers that despite similarities or differences in cultural background or region, people will always have an absurd answer as to what to do. World War Z serves as an excellent example on contrasting and establishing humanitys response

Vu 5 because it doesnt only give a specific perspective point-of-view on how one experienced the apocalypse, but rather Brooks use an endless supply of voices to tell how the world dealt with the calamity (Chappell). (I will introduce Chappell in the beginning of the sentence to make him more credible.) Given all of these, the audience can magnify deeper within the text and finally grasp Brooks communication of a zombie genre through World War Z. (I will conclude by making sure that I frame my essay within the big picture of the rhetorical analysis of a zombie fiction based on the two stories and evidences that I provided. Also, I will have to mention an insightful statement about how the novel communicates based on my analysis.)

Vu 6 Works Cited Brooks, Max. World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War. New York: Broadway Paperbacks, 2013. Print. Chappell, Les. "Book Review: World War Z." The Lesser of Two Equals. N.p., 5 Feb. 2007. Web. 11 Nov. 2013. Schaefer, Christie. "World War Z: Monsters of This Societys Own Making." World War Z: Monsters of This Society's Own Making -. International Committee of the Fourth International, 25 Oct. 2007. Web. 11 Nov. 2013. Silver, Steven H. "The SF Site Featured Review: World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War." The SF Site Featured Review: World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War. SF Site Reviews, 2006. Web. 11 Nov. 2013. "Zombie Apocalypse." TV Tropes. TV Tropes Foundation, LLC, n.d. Web. 05 Nov. 2013.