The Real Vampires?
Jan. 6th, 2007 08:45 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kokopelleThis article is a bit disjointed, but I really wanted to get these thoughts down.
Recently I was in the bathtub and my thoughts strayed to vampires while I was thinking about masks people wear. The cause of my thoughts straying was a joking LJ conversation about a ninja zombie looking for a companion. I commented that the only zombies I knew were pirate zombies, complete with barnacles and seaweed. The whole ninja-pirate incompatiblity thing aside, I later realized that a cursed pirate zombie would be a quite unappetizing romantic companion for most.
So, last month I read most of the book Vampires Amoung Us by Rosemary Guiley. The text is an interesting study of several aspects of the vampire world. I learned that the folklore of the vampire holds them to be undead creatures. This means that they are dead, deceased, and not living. While the vampires looked more alive than the truly dead, they still smelled of death and the grave. Truly unattractive, kinda like the urchin encrusted pirate zombies.
Before I go any further with these thoughts I wish to acknowledge a particular type of vampire - the psychic/energy vampire. The comments I am making do not apply to these guys (and gals). They can look like the person on the street. IMO they exist. OK, they're off the table.
Back to the other vampires. It seems that the self identification to being a vampire was truly kicked off when the vampire stopped being the grave stinky apparation. The "Vampires Amoung Us" laid some (much) of the credit at Ann Rice's feet. Her "Interview with a Vampire" made the undead suddenly alive and sexy. People were awoken to the fact that they were vampires. Being dead was no longer a requirement. Most of these are labelled as "vamproids" (I think I go that right) by Guiley. The vamproid emulates the vampire in dress and habits, but does not claim to be a true vampire. A much smaller subset of people do make the claim of being a true vampire. There are few that claim to be hundreds of years old while continuing to operate in society. No grave smell for these guys. These claims are largely unsubstantiated, perhaps at the benefit of the said vampires. More numerously, there are vampires that acknowledge that they are alive in body, but claim an otherkin connection to the vampire. Part of their soul, perhaps all of their soul, is inhabited by that of vampire. Personally I feel there are some valid metaphysical explanations of this. All are difficult to prove.
Is sincerely being a vampire, a non-stinky live one, a modern mask? Would the vampires and vamproids exist if there was not the mindset of Ann Rice and others? Are (most) self-declared vampires "real", or are they a product of that part of the psyche that needs to be both special and different? These the questions that came to my mind.
Here's a final spin of thought. I believe that self-declared vampires are real. They exist in the realities of the participants. Fanciful? Perhaps. In contrast, I find realness of vampires as easy to accept as the realness of many more people who believe that they will be lifted up in to the sky on a special day, and the only prerequisite for this action is their belief in Jesus. To each there own. I'm just glad that the modern vampires have better hygiene than their folklore ancestors.
Recently I was in the bathtub and my thoughts strayed to vampires while I was thinking about masks people wear. The cause of my thoughts straying was a joking LJ conversation about a ninja zombie looking for a companion. I commented that the only zombies I knew were pirate zombies, complete with barnacles and seaweed. The whole ninja-pirate incompatiblity thing aside, I later realized that a cursed pirate zombie would be a quite unappetizing romantic companion for most.
So, last month I read most of the book Vampires Amoung Us by Rosemary Guiley. The text is an interesting study of several aspects of the vampire world. I learned that the folklore of the vampire holds them to be undead creatures. This means that they are dead, deceased, and not living. While the vampires looked more alive than the truly dead, they still smelled of death and the grave. Truly unattractive, kinda like the urchin encrusted pirate zombies.
Before I go any further with these thoughts I wish to acknowledge a particular type of vampire - the psychic/energy vampire. The comments I am making do not apply to these guys (and gals). They can look like the person on the street. IMO they exist. OK, they're off the table.
Back to the other vampires. It seems that the self identification to being a vampire was truly kicked off when the vampire stopped being the grave stinky apparation. The "Vampires Amoung Us" laid some (much) of the credit at Ann Rice's feet. Her "Interview with a Vampire" made the undead suddenly alive and sexy. People were awoken to the fact that they were vampires. Being dead was no longer a requirement. Most of these are labelled as "vamproids" (I think I go that right) by Guiley. The vamproid emulates the vampire in dress and habits, but does not claim to be a true vampire. A much smaller subset of people do make the claim of being a true vampire. There are few that claim to be hundreds of years old while continuing to operate in society. No grave smell for these guys. These claims are largely unsubstantiated, perhaps at the benefit of the said vampires. More numerously, there are vampires that acknowledge that they are alive in body, but claim an otherkin connection to the vampire. Part of their soul, perhaps all of their soul, is inhabited by that of vampire. Personally I feel there are some valid metaphysical explanations of this. All are difficult to prove.
Is sincerely being a vampire, a non-stinky live one, a modern mask? Would the vampires and vamproids exist if there was not the mindset of Ann Rice and others? Are (most) self-declared vampires "real", or are they a product of that part of the psyche that needs to be both special and different? These the questions that came to my mind.
Here's a final spin of thought. I believe that self-declared vampires are real. They exist in the realities of the participants. Fanciful? Perhaps. In contrast, I find realness of vampires as easy to accept as the realness of many more people who believe that they will be lifted up in to the sky on a special day, and the only prerequisite for this action is their belief in Jesus. To each there own. I'm just glad that the modern vampires have better hygiene than their folklore ancestors.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Sexy Vamps - A mask(?)
Date: 2007-01-07 04:40 am (UTC)because of Rice's popularity there is a whole rapidly growing fiction genre of preternatural sexy beings now...vampires, shapeshifters, lamias, faeries, trolls.. I view this as a symptom of human need to stand out or to be special in some way. On another point if you believe that Vampirism does exist, there are so many theories about weaknesses and and strengths, but one point of agreement is that death must occur before one becomes a vampire. I would think if, at time of death, one undergoes changes to the body/mind there really shouldn't be any smell because there would be no decay. Even if you hold with the "it takes three days to rise" school of thought. Scientists are finding/excavating sites where there have been cases of death occurring in low temperature environments and months/years/centuries have passed without organ or body decay. Also since you would no longer need to ingest food in solid form there wouldn't be digestion and elimination.
no subject
Date: 2007-01-07 03:05 pm (UTC)We are vampires who have lived in these physical bodies for hundreds of years, and are batshit insane and more often than not spotty teenagers who live in their parents' basement playing White Wolf games and studiously not working or getting an education (when we're not trolling vampire forums trying to get laid).
That? Just cracked me up, and I wanted to tell you just how much it did. So nothing to contribute to the conversation this time, either, except to thank you for giving me a laugh this early in the morning.
no subject
Date: 2007-01-07 04:04 pm (UTC)Here's where my curiosity is peaked. Non vampyres also have powers/abilities, reincarnate, and have lead impressive past lives. Non vampyres gravitate to like people to form social networks, sometimes at the cost of disregarding people around them. How do I know? I could claim to be one of those people. I know of others. We don't (actively) need the energy of living things, but I'm sure the incidental tapping occurs. Does this make vampyres a subset of a larger group, with the only difference being their attraction to the energy of others? Hmmm...
Regarding that last group... yep, Stoker gets a lot of credit. Anne Rice was his modern "descendent". The vamproids that Guiley studied were of the Goth variety instead of the White Wolf type.
no subject
Date: 2007-01-07 08:22 pm (UTC)I was thinking about your two branches. There is a societal elegance in which all people face these branches, no matter what abilities and talents they may hold. This dualistic struggle is increased when a person stands outside of many traditional support structures. In response they must abandon the traditional and/or embrace new support structures.
Here's the wrinkle. IMO everyone must find a support structure. There is no such thing as a "traditional" support structure anymore than families have 2.5 children. In our lifetimes we create or find the unique tribes that fully support who we find ourselves to be. Those who acknowledge both their averageness and uniqueness can live in the resulting multiple worlds with greater ease. This is your first branch. Those who fight who they are, or even who they are destined to be, find themselves in the second branch. Spoken like a true S. eh?
no subject
Date: 2007-01-07 10:14 pm (UTC)Shift "need" to "enjoy", as in, those around me bring some spice to my life. I enjoy spice. That may put the words in a different light.
"Support" doesn’t necessarily imply a need to earn respect. BUT, it can be fun to play the game. Part of my spiritual involvement was the conception of the Hindu game of life. Good, bad and ugly mix together in a drama of life. Some of these guys are harmonious to us ("allowing" for making a living, shelter, warmth, good sex, and children to dote on, etc.) and other guys are just bad news. The "support" networks we form are part of our personal dramas. Some people are under the illusion that the dramas (aka support networks) are necessary. Others see the drama for what it is.
How'd I do with that bit of blah blah?