Are We Doing A Disservice To Vampires?

Question

Okay, I admit I love Edward Cullen and his lovely vampire family as much as the next person. I think Louis and his struggle to embrace his nature is interesting. What I wonder is, are we doing a disservice to vampires when we make them all cute and cuddly, or at least able to control their appetites when it suits them, feed on animals, fall in love with mortals, etc.?

To me, the truest vampire in literature remains Stoker's Count Dracula. He's a very complex fellow. He still feels human emotion, in my opinion, but he has fully embraced his nature, and he knows exactly where he fits on the food chain. He's at the top. He likes it there. And I like that he likes it there. A creature with such great powers, a perfect predator, belongs at the top.

Vampires are such interesting creatures, but to me, it robs them of part of their majesty and grace when writers "dilute" them and make them more human than not.

What are your feelings? Please cite works, if possible.

Thanks.

God_Lives_Underwater:

I read "The Historian" when it came out. Not the best vampire book ever, but definitely interesting--read it if you get a chance.

BClovis:

Captain Ahab is fictional, too. That doesn't mean we can't have a discussion about him and his motivations, and try to figure out what Melville was trying to communicate to his readers. Just a thought...

Artist:

Which cold cereal was the one like chocolate Rice Crispies? That's the one I liked. Count Chocula was little balls, wasn't it? And here's a secret--sometimes I still buy that stuff, stir in the cereal, dump the cereal, and drink the milk ;)

Sorry it has taken me so long to pick an answer. I re-read Dracula, as well as several other vampire novels to help me make up my mind.

Hellecat:

We will have to agree to disagree on whether or not he likes it at the top of the chain. We can agree, however, that conventions should be followed. When writing noir you don't create a detective with a fear of guns, or the inability to decide when to use one--that's a key part of noir fiction.

Answer 1

I think you are correct. Most books and movies about vampires today have no understanding of the complexity and beauty of the horror that is a vampire. Vampires are human beings existing in a literal living hell. They are forced to feed off on humans like animals and at the same time live through countless ages and generations, experiencing humanity and culture like most of us would dream: They are both brute animals and enlightened super-humans.

Lately, movies like Blade have focused on their animal nature. The last film to actually embrace their intelligent and reflective side was Interview with the Vampire.

A contemporary book you might enjoy is The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova. I cannot provide a heartful recommendation as it remains on my bookshelf unread.

A fantastic cult film is White Zombie (1932) starring, once again, Bela Lugosi as the vampire. In this film, what it means to be a vampire is to be a plantation owner. The "zombies" in the film are slaves. Very mediocre production, but it's still a nice adaptation of Stoker's vision of vampirism.

Answer 2

I agree with you. They are fictional, but still, I believe that an author should be true to the characters they write. Bram Stoker very carefully set up a series of conditions under which Viovode lived. I believe that anyone who writes a vampire book should follow those conditions. I have no problems with vampires who feed off animals or rob blood banks, as long as they follow in the traditions Stoker set up.

Twilight was an OK book, but there were some major offenses in accordance with the traditional vampire. Alice could NOT have flown to Italy. Vampires can only cross water at noon and midnight.

I feel the same about all types of fictional creatures. Shapeshifters cannot shift into mice. Simple physics tells you that matter cannot be created or destroyed. They have to remain the same amount of mass.

If you write in the traditional Gothic style using traditional Gothic creations, I believe you should stay true to their creator. In the case of Vampires, that creator is Mr. Stoker.

And yes, you are absolutely correct with everything you say about Dracula with one exception. I see no evidence in the novel that he "likes it there" on the top of the food chain. The Count is a victim. He was the tenth scholar in the House of Dracule - and the legend says that the devil claims the tenth scholar as his own. The Count did not ask for this curse. He was a war hero in his country. He leaves Transylvania as a broken man - one who has to resort to being his own chambermaid as well as coachman - because he can no longer obtain the services of others. He is a complex character but he is not a happy man. He is a hunted man. He lacks free will. If you read it again and think about those things, I think you might get a different picture of the Count. He is very much like Frankenstein's Creature - a victim of circumstance.

Angela Carter also wrote a very nice vampire tale - The Lady of the House of Love for her Bloody Tower anthology. What a marvelous story that is - and not widely known.

Pax - C

Answer 3

Stop and consider the various vampire legends prior to Stoker's novel. In a way, Stoker himself was both elevating the vampire and at the same doing it a disservice with his portrayal of Dracula. But he was humanizing the vampire more so than any of the legends before him had.

Answer 4

Well, myths change with time.
We don't nowadays often tell children the older and bloodier versions of fairy tales.
The current consensus "styles" of vampirism presumably sells books, and that generates its own momentum.
"We want a new different bestseller that's very like the bestsellers we've just had." Its an effect noticeable in several genres.

If you want a truly different take, you might try Tim Powers' "The Stress of Her Regard" which takes an original line on the nature of vampires and other spirit creatures.

Answer 5

I would say .. Each vampire is different in its own way. (being fictional there). I mean, no one person is the same, so does it matter, in fiction, that all vampires should be the same?

Example here: Lets say you're a veggie-erin(i dont care if you are or not.) Does everyone else have to be one too? No.

Do all vampires have to be "monsters"? Or Should they be sweet, and caring, or cuddley, as you put it? No.

I think that a character is a character. With its own choices, and its own opinons, and ways. and that the author made that character a certain way.

Just how i feel about it.

Answer 6

Bella is slightly of rainy lettuce. However, women who learn Twilight pass mad for Edward Cullen, and he naturally fulfills their fantasies approximately the ultimate boyfriend. Everyone demands slightly of fable of their lives. The indisputable fact that those books are so vastly trendy indicates that Stephanie Meyer is aware the tastes of youngster women. It would possibly infuriate feminists, however many teenage women naturally select fantasising approximately having the ultimate boyfriend to fantasising approximately being company legal professionals, or some thing it's feminists thingk women will have to fantasise approximately.

Answer 7

I am with ya on this one. I like a good old fashioned scare. I could never understand the hype about Anne Rice. (PS....I did, however, eat Count Chocula cereal as a kid and it was pretty darn good....I liked when the milk got all choclately when the cereal was gone...sometimes I would throw in more cereal and make it.....oops, sorry, I went off on a tangent didn't I?)

Answer 8

well i think beauty is in the eye of the beholder. so to speak. people will have different opinions on the matter. and in a way edward is as ferocious as the next vampire. but there are books were vampires are monsters and if your looking for tha go watch buffy or something

Answer 9

The whole idea of vampires has become appealing to many and even sensual to some. It makes sense that we've romanticized them in order to make ourselves feel better about our attraction to such a gory concept.

Answer 10

Just so you do remember that Louis was created by the same person that gave us Akasha, the most bloodthirsty of Vampires, even rivaling that of Vlad, the impaler. At least Vlad only wanted to protect his people, Akasha wanted to be reverred as a God...