What vampires MUST be
- Thread starter Torkuda
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Old Eastern European and Chinese (I think, might be wrong) folklore say that Vampires have some sort of OCD when it comes to counting things so they'd leave millet or poppy seeds (In Europe) or many grains of rice (Asia) on the grave of a supposed vampire to give them something to occupy themselves with during the night instead of attacking people.Bestival said:
Its old and so far hasn't been used in any kind of modern media. So sorry no, it isn't from Twilight and its older than even the stake through the heart way of killing a vamp
As long as the creature in question sustains itself by sucking the life energy (blood or otherwise) from living things, then I'm fine with just about anything being called a "vampire" in any work of fiction, no matter what other factors are present. The "vampire" could be attractive and brooding, an alien monster, or a blood-sucking fish mutant, and it can burn or melt or sparkle in the sun for all I care. As long as the story itself is well-written and interesting, I'll accept anything regardless of how well it follows the ill-defined "rules" of some fictional monster mythos.
I don't really think that vampires have to be anything in particular. They've become a metaphor for the marginalized and the socially awkward - which in and of itself is fine - and the only really regrettable aspects the last few years have stuck on them have to do with Twilight's casual treatment of abusive relationships.
If you stick yourself to a very specific definition, you're pushing away large swaths of the Fantasy and Horror literary and cinematographic productions. The same way witches went from John Updyke victims to Frank L. Baum antagonists and back to hip suburbanites, vampires come to mean different things to different people from varying time periods. It's pretty much inescapable.
I remember liking the more Social Justice-oriented aspects of True Blood, for instance. Gay vampires who don't have the good fortune of having Lestat's bod and who look strikingly average are one of the several little interesting ways I've seen the series handle that angle.
As for the OP's concept - I'll agree in saying that there's no really nice way to put this. This feels like the kind of super-enthused brain fart I'm still prone to occasionally let out and that I've learned to be wary of. It's a little overwrought and, well...
Aliens? Dragon blood?! In what genre is this being placed? It's a hodgepodge of "Oh my God, this sounds so cool!" moments, but there's nothing tying them together.
If you stick yourself to a very specific definition, you're pushing away large swaths of the Fantasy and Horror literary and cinematographic productions. The same way witches went from John Updyke victims to Frank L. Baum antagonists and back to hip suburbanites, vampires come to mean different things to different people from varying time periods. It's pretty much inescapable.
I remember liking the more Social Justice-oriented aspects of True Blood, for instance. Gay vampires who don't have the good fortune of having Lestat's bod and who look strikingly average are one of the several little interesting ways I've seen the series handle that angle.
As for the OP's concept - I'll agree in saying that there's no really nice way to put this. This feels like the kind of super-enthused brain fart I'm still prone to occasionally let out and that I've learned to be wary of. It's a little overwrought and, well...
Aliens? Dragon blood?! In what genre is this being placed? It's a hodgepodge of "Oh my God, this sounds so cool!" moments, but there's nothing tying them together.
No, its actually an old thing. Many of the original legends describe them as having what is now known as arithmomania, a type of OCD that manifests as an obsession with counting things.Bestival said:
In any event, the story goes that spilling a large quantity of something (beans, beads, seeds, whatever) in a location where you expect the vampire to go will compel it to stop and count them all, wasting the time it has to get back out of the open before the sun rises.
I have no bloody clue where those superstitious peasants got the idea that an undead monster of the night would have OCD...
P.S. Yes, this is indeed where Sesame Street's Count Von Count comes from.
To me, a vampire must have these three qualities:
-They drain blood (or sometimes a more abstract life force) from nonvampires for sustenance.
-They are harmed by sunlight. It need not be lethal, simply weakening or tiring them is enough, but none of this sparkly bullshit.
-They are very hard to kill, usually being only vulnerable to a small number of specific threats such as silver, stakes through the heart, and the like. Or maybe they're just exceptionally durable and heal quickly.
Feel free to go nuts with the other stuff, but these aspects are what I consider intrinsic to vampires.
-They drain blood (or sometimes a more abstract life force) from nonvampires for sustenance.
-They are harmed by sunlight. It need not be lethal, simply weakening or tiring them is enough, but none of this sparkly bullshit.
-They are very hard to kill, usually being only vulnerable to a small number of specific threats such as silver, stakes through the heart, and the like. Or maybe they're just exceptionally durable and heal quickly.
Feel free to go nuts with the other stuff, but these aspects are what I consider intrinsic to vampires.
I know it isn't a popular opinion, but I think the best part of Twilight were the vampires. I'm serious.
The design and imagination of these things are a fresh breath of air compared to other vampire incarnations that are very similar to each other. (your well-dressed 'Interview with the vampire' pretty boy, or the monsters from 30days of night, pick one)
The movies suck balls, but it's not because of the vampires themselves.
The design and imagination of these things are a fresh breath of air compared to other vampire incarnations that are very similar to each other. (your well-dressed 'Interview with the vampire' pretty boy, or the monsters from 30days of night, pick one)
The movies suck balls, but it's not because of the vampires themselves.
Depends - sometimes immortality does extend to cover these. Sure, you may end up with a head that is still alive after being separated by the body but still. As for the steak to the heart, it usually has a reason to work on vampires - it's symbolically pinning them to the ground where they belong[footnote]the heart can be the representation of the whole, or sometimes it's literally pinning a corpse to the ground and the location has no meaning[/footnote]. So staking does tend to hold special meaning for vampires, as opposed to other creatures, like, for example, werewolves (assume they have the healing factor) in which case while a stake through the heart would probably hurt, they'll be able to recover.Bestival said: