Define Vampire... :)

[Minor Axis]

Currently me and the wife are watching Vampire Diaries. It's good enough to watch, but not great. However it has gotten me thinking. The vampire is a creature that once a human, preys on humans to survive. They started off as horrid monsters, but have transformed into incredibly beauties as a mechanism of seducing their prey. Our culture has performed this transformation, why?

When I was a kid, I read Dracula. What an incredibly good story from 1897. The original vampire, Dracula was a sociopath who used and murdered people for his own ends and was happy to do so. He was on the ugly side (I think) but he kept a trio of hot vamp babes in his castle, he did! Step forward to 1976, Interview with a Vampire (Ann Rice) the story of the reluctant vampire Louis, struck down with grief due to the loss of his family, not caring whether he lived or died, but somehow became vampire, ridden with remorse and guilt (btw, Lestat= Tom Cruises greatest role. ).

The transformation of Vampires from monsters to action figure, supermen, sex goddess heros is interesting one and how attractive must it be to humans? Sure you have to suck a little blood, but you don't have to kill if you don't want to, depending on the story, you could be transformed into a beautiful, physically flawless creature with super abilities.

As far as morality and being damned by God, the vast majority of vampires don't ask to become vampires. Events transpire in such a way to become forced on them one way or another. In the Vampire Diaries, overflowing with vampires, so far there has only been one character I can remember (the school teacher's wife) who went looking to become a vampire. So how would God judge a vampire?

Are vampires inherently evil or do they just display human frailty when handed great power?

For more insight, checkout The Allure of Vampires

 

[darkcgi]

you have to take this into account
http://www.draculascastle.com/index3.html

 

[Zorak]

Carmilla was probably the first important vampire novel in English. The titular Carmilla being a bisexual and attractive super-being. Dracula, as Stoker frequently pointed out, owed a lot to Carmilla; the first drafts of Dracula maintained the setting of Carmilla's Styria rather than Transylvania.
The Gothic vampire novel was primarily a reaction against French realism and naturalism. In the late 1800's, realism was the big movement, and Zola, Balzac, Flaubert led it. Think of it as naturalism vs supernaturalism. As if often the case in counteracting literary movements, their plots and structures diverge with great polarity. The above mentioned authors all set their novels amidst realistic settings and times, usually Paris just after 1789 (the first French revolution) and concerned the unspectacular. The English (and to some extent the Hispanic) vampire novels took place in unspecified eras, often in strange lands like Transylvania and Styria (to a 19th century audience, Styria, modern-day Austria, might as well be Outer Mongolia) and of course concerned supernatural, beautiful beings. They touched in to some other concerns too, such as increasing secularism, evolution, and colonialisation.

The modern vampire interpretations, are actually not too far removed. The big difference is, as you say, the humanisation of the monster. Bit this in itself is an old concept, and Frankenstein's monster has never been bettered in this regard, imo.

 

[Minor Axis]

you have to take this into account
http://www.draculascastle.com/index3.html

That castle looks exactly as I imagined it.

Carmilla was probably the first important vampire novel in English. The titular Carmilla being a bisexual and attractive super-being. Dracula, as Stoker frequently pointed out, owed a lot to Carmilla; the first drafts of Dracula maintained the setting of Carmilla's Styria rather than Transylvania.
The Gothic vampire novel was primarily a reaction against French realism and naturalism. In the late 1800's, realism was the big movement, and Zola, Balzac, Flaubert led it. Think of it as naturalism vs supernaturalism. As if often the case in counteracting literary movements, their plots and structures diverge with great polarity. The above mentioned authors all set their novels amidst realistic settings and times, usually Paris just after 1789 (the first French revolution) and concerned the unspectacular. The English (and to some extent the Hispanic) vampire novels took place in unspecified eras, often in strange lands like Transylvania and Styria (to a 19th century audience, Styria, modern-day Austria, might as well be Outer Mongolia) and of course concerned supernatural, beautiful beings. They touched in to some other concerns too, such as increasing secularism, evolution, and colonialisation.

The modern vampire interpretations, are actually not too far removed. The big difference is, as you say, the humanisation of the monster. Bit this in itself is an old concept, and Frankenstein's monster has never been bettered in this regard, imo.

Thanks for the perspective. My impression is that the "modern vampire" owes a lot to Ann Rice. I assume Carmilla was a sociopath too?

 

[Peter Parka]

 

[Alien Allen]

Thanks for the perspective. My impression is that the "modern vampire" owes a lot to Ann Rice. I assume Carmilla was a sociopath too?

Not so sure I would agree with that.

Vampires had been at times humanized well before Rice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire_film

 

[Minor Axis]

Not so sure I would agree with that.

Vampires had been at times humanized well before Rice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire_film

I admit I'm not that well read when it comes to vampires. I do know that Interview with a Vampire was published in 1976 and looking at the list of movies from the original Dracula to the 70's it looks like most of the movies, accept for the Abbot and Costello movie (which was a comedy, I loved) focused mostly on Dracula and did little to humanize the vampire portraying them (mostly?) as a one dimensional predators. Interview with a Vampire made the vampire subject to human emotions, desires and the ability to choose although a consistent obstacle to human morality is their blood lust.

This might be of interet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire

 

[zen]

Back in my day, Vampires sucked blood, not dicks.

 

[BornReady]

Currently me and the wife are watching Vampire Diaries.

You sound like me. My wife loves vampire books and movies. I've suffered through many of these movies by her side. But it's probably good for me. I tend too much toward realism. She flavors my life with fantasy. She made me watch Lord of the Rings too. But I put my foot down on Narnia. Well, okay... yeah I watched it with her too.

I share your intrigue. It used to be a curse to be a vampire. Now it could be considered a blessing. The humanizing of vampires perhaps speaks to the human desire to be more than we are.

 

[Minor Axis]

Back in my day, Vampires sucked blood, not dicks.

Once they discovered vampires had sexual desire, well...

You sound like me. My wife loves vampire books and movies. I've suffered through many of these movies by her side. But it's probably good for me. I tend too much toward realism. She flavors my life with fantasy. She made me watch Lord of the Rings too. But I put my foot down on Narnia. Well, okay... yeah I watched it with her too.

I share your intrigue. It used to be a curse to be a vampire. Now it could be considered a blessing. The humanizing of vampires perhaps speaks to the human desire to be more than we are.

I sometimes suffer at the chick flicks I am obligated to view on occasion. There are exceptions though. Recently the Help and One For The Money were watchable. Vampire Diaries is mildly entertaining, overall it lacks the type of sincerity and intrigue, I'd expect in a serious vampire story and leans towards it's audience, teenage girls. I admit it has moments where I get involved with the fate of characters. We are a little behind working on Season 2. One gorgeous vamp just died from a werewolf bite. She was hot! I also enjoyed the Twilight series, but in the spectrum of vamp stories, it was near the bottom of my enjoyment range. I thought the Bella whined way to much about being dumped in the second book of the series while she worked on her werewolf relationship, lol. I absolutely loved the Sookie Stackhouse novels upon which HBO's True Blood is based but they have ruined that story. Many story elements are switched around, relationships that never existed, things that never happened, and Alan Ball's need to accentuate the "gayness" of story elements. The novels are narratives and the primary element missing in True Blood is Sookie's wit.

 

[skyblue]

to me vampires should feed on misery not blood,as did vlad the impaler

 

[Zorak]

to me vampires should feed on misery not blood,as did vlad the impaler

I think he probably ate a lot of potato and cabbage based dishes too. When he wasn't fighting the Ottoman empire of course.

 

[skyblue]

I think he probably ate a lot of potato and cabbage based dishes too. When he wasn't fighting the Ottoman empire of course.

but he did cause alot of misery which he thrived on.....and whats wrong with cabbage and potato dishes?...especially if its savoy cabbage

 

[Zorak]

Thanks for the perspective. My impression is that the "modern vampire" owes a lot to Ann Rice. I assume Carmilla was a sociopath too?

Depends on how you define a sociopath. Would a lionness hunting a gazelle be considered sociopathic?

Another interesting vampire story is The Feather Pillow by Horacio Quiroga. The vampire in that is an invertibrate parasite. Quiroga was a Uruguayan I believe, and a lot of his stories focus on the horrors of the natural world - and are inspired by the strange creatures found in the jungles and rainforests.

 

[hart]

It's funny, I think my first exposure to Vampire was "Dark Shadows". Everyone was intrigued by it......watched it years later, what a BORING show......LOL.

When I think of the Dracula I think of Vlad the Impaler........

If teenage girls want to think being a vampire is romantic, fine. Not something I care to read or watch. I'd rather watch a good flick on superpower heros if I want fantasy.

 

[skyblue]

You sound like me. My wife loves vampire books and movies. I've suffered through many of these movies by her side. But it's probably good for me. I tend too much toward realism. She flavors my life with fantasy. She made me watch Lord of the Rings too. But I put my foot down on Narnia. Well, okay... yeah I watched it with her too.

I share your intrigue. It used to be a curse to be a vampire. Now it could be considered a blessing. The humanizing of vampires perhaps speaks to the human desire to be more than we are.

when i was about 10 we read the lion,the witch and the wardrobe at school....it was magical,so i bought the DVD and it was fantastic,they'd captured the magic

 

[Zorak]

but he did cause alot of misery which he thrived on.....and whats wrong with cabbage and potato dishes?...especially if its savoy cabbage

I never said anything was wrong with them . But don't mythologise the guy too much. He was a Prince who resisted the Ottoman expansion for a while, and one of the techniques he used to do so was impalement. But that wasn't uncommon, you'd be hard pressed to find any major conflict before modernity that didn't utilise the psychological warfare of human mutilation.

 

[skyblue]

I never said anything was wrong with them . But don't mythologise the guy too much. He was a Prince who resisted the Ottoman expansion for a while, and one of the techniques he used to do so was impalement. But that wasn't uncommon, you'd be hard pressed to find any major conflict before modernity that didn't utilise the psychological warfare of human mutilation.

now vlad isn't someone i've read much on to be honest

 

[BornReady]

when i was about 10 we read the lion,the witch and the wardrobe at school....it was magical,so i bought the DVD and it was fantastic,they'd captured the magic

My daughter loved it. I thought it was okay. But I'm with hart. I prefer superheros if I'm going to watch fantasy.

 

[Minor Axis]

Depends on how you define a sociopath. Would a lionness hunting a gazelle be considered sociopathic?

How about a lion endowed with super abilities who instead of living in lion society, hunts other lions as food? The point is that vampires depending on the author, are monsters completely devoid of their human origins or they are still hold redeemable remnants of their human past, and are able to act in a way which would be considered moral vs complete self serving sociopaths. There are similar themes presented in X-Men. Mutants have to deal with the notion of being homo-sapien or homo-superior...

Another interesting vampire story is The Feather Pillow by Horacio Quiroga. The vampire in that is an invertibrate parasite. Quiroga was a Uruguayan I believe, and a lot of his stories focus on the horrors of the natural world - and are inspired by the strange creatures found in the jungles and rainforests.

That would be much more of a horror story. Hmm, give me hot vamps instead.

It's funny, I think my first exposure to Vampire was "Dark Shadows". Everyone was intrigued by it......watched it years later, what a BORING show......LOL.

When I think of the Dracula I think of Vlad the Impaler........

If teenage girls want to think being a vampire is romantic, fine. Not something I care to read or watch. I'd rather watch a good flick on superpower heros if I want fantasy.

This May you can relive it all again! Dark Shadows/Johnny Depp. Modern romantic depictions of vampires allows for more depth in exploring human emotions, but removes it from being the traditional monster story. It's been a while since I've read Dracula (twice), but I remember him as being a straight forward creature, possibly able to maintain relationships with vampire brethern, but I don't remember an opportunity for him to express remorse or loss, a sociopath only concerned about his own well being. Everyone else were tools to be used and discarded.

My daughter loved it. I thought it was okay. But I'm with hart. I prefer superheros if I'm going to watch fantasy.

The Lion, Watch, Wardrobe was not a bad movie. I never read the book.