Vampires Are Not Supposed to Sparkle
Last evening, a friend of mine initiated a Facebook thread about not going to see New Moon (the second Twilight movie) at midnight.
I inadvertently hijacked the thread when I commented that vampires aren't supposed to sparkle, and that got me thinking about different literary and theatrical versions of vampires.
In light of that, I thought I'd put together a list (admittedly incomplete) of literary and film vampires, with a few comments about what makes them stand out in my mind. I don't intend for this to be exhaustive - it's based on works that I'm personally familiar with, and in many instances I'm working from the memory of things I read or watched many years ago.
I'm not going to go too far down the path of vampire mythology - there are far too many to do that in the space of one post, and in any case the typical American vampire archetype goes back to Bram Stoker's 1897 novel, Dracula.1 (The link will take you to Project Gutenberg's page for Dracula.)
Literary Vampires
Dracula, in Stoker's novel, is portrayed as a proud nobleman. He's well aware of his power and influence, and isn't slow to use either. His characterization in the novel also represents a counterpoint to repressive Victorian-era sexuality, although it's not presented anywhere near as explicitly as it would be if the book were written today. Dracula could create new vampires from his victims, but that was a fairly rare occurence.
Prior to Stoker, one of the foundational literary vampires was Lord Ruthven, in John William Polidori's 1819 short story, The Vampyre. (Again, the link goes to Project Gutenberg.) Rutheven, too, was a nobleman, and like Dracula, The Vampyre has quite a bit of sexual subtext.
Stephen King's 'Salem's Lot, written in 1975, is in many ways a reimagining of Dracula set in a small New England town. Kurt Barlow, the vampire, is powerful and arrogant, much like Dracula. 'Salem's Lot is the first book I can recall where every victim of a vampire was turned into a vampire - by the climax of the book, the entire town had been turned.
In 1976, Anne Rice started her Vampire Chronicles series with Interview With the Vampire. Rice introduced angst to the literary vampire, and made the vampire characters (mainly Lestat) the focus of the books rather than simply the villains.2
Brian Lumley's Necroscope series, which started in 1992, took a science-fiction turn with vampire Thibor Ferenczy and his descendants. Necroscope-world vampires (or wamphyri) were virtually indestructible extra-dimensional parasitic creatures that infect their hosts. This series got more and more convoluted as it went on, and vampires (as a category) gained or lost powers almost at random depending on the needs of the story, and by the time I quit reading at around the fifth book or so, the series had lost just about every shred of internal continuity or coherence.
The Southern Vampire Mysteries, by Charlaine Harris, started in 2001 with the publication of Dead Until Dark. Harris' vampires have recently made themselves known to the world at large following the development of a synthetic blood substitue. Vampires are revealed to have a complex social/political structure that has developed over thousands of years of hiding from humanity. Initially, Harris used her vampires as a metaphor for social acceptance of marginalized groups, but as she introduces more supernatural societies in later books, she seems to have shifted focus somewhat.3
Stephenie Meyer's Twilight series, based on what I've heard, ratchets the angst way up and introduces sparkles to vampires. I don't have any plans to read these books. My observation is that they're insanely popular among teenage girls.
Film (and TV) Vampires
The movie and TV worlds are replete with vampires. Many of these are of literary origin, but at least as many exist only on-screen.
Count Orlock
The vampire in the 1922 silent film Nosferatu: eine Symphonie des Grauens, directed by F.W. Murnau is an unauthorized adaptation of Dracula. Max Schreck played Count Orlock, the bald, rat-like vampire. Orlock is basically a bringer of pestilence and death, and is destroyed by the rising sun at the end of the film. Orlock was played by Klaus Kinski in Werner Herzog's 1979 remake of the film, and in E.E. Merhige's Shadow of the Vampire, Willem Dafoe played Max Schreck playing Count Orlock in the 1922 film, the catch being that Schreck was really a vampire. Got that?
Clockwise from top left: Lugosi (1931), Lee (1958), Oldman (1992), Langella (1979)
The 1931 version of Dracula, directed by Tod Browning and starring Bela Lugosi as the titular vampire, remains (in my mind) as the exemplar of old-school vampire films. Lugosi had played the role on stage, and brought basically the same characterization to the film. England's Hammer Films remade Dracula in 1958 with Christopher Lee in the role. A 1979 remake starred Frank Langella as the Count, and in 1992 Gary Oldman turned in an excellent interpretation.
Kurt Barlow from 'Salem's Lot (1979)
1979 saw King's 'Salem's Lot appear as a TV miniseries starring David Soul (from Starsky and Hutch) and James Mason. Barlow has been reinterpretted as an Orlock-esque monster (portrayed by Reggie Nalder), and is presented more for his shock value. ('Salem's Lot was remade in 2004, and was somewhat more true to the book's interpretation of Barlow.)
The 1980's saw some unusual twists on the vampire. David Bowie, Susan Sarandon, and Catherine Deneuve starred in The Hunger (1983), a stylish film that tried to add some depth to the vampire characters. (In my opinion it was more style than substance.) In 1985, Tobe Hooper directed Mathilda May in Lifeforce. This film could best be summarized as "sexy naked space vampire runs amok."
Vampires met music videos in 1987 with Joel Schumacher's The Lost Boys, starring a pre-24 Kiefer Sutherland and a bunch of late-80's stars that haven't done a whole lot recently. This film firmly established the concept of a nest of vampires that hang around (hah!) together for companionship and support, and in so doing introduced some sympathetic aspects to vampires that usually didn't show up in movies.4
Angel and Spike from Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV)
The 1990s gave us the first appearance of Buffy the Vampire Slayer in 1992, starring Kristi Swanson as Buffy and Rutger Hauer as the head vampire, Lothos. This film played the concept mostly for laughs, and is mostly forgettable. Buffy didn't really come into her own until the TV series of the same name kicked off in 1997 with Sarah Michelle Gellar in the title role. The series was much truer to creator Joss Whedon's vision, and allowed Buffy's trials and tribulations to stand in for the challenges of growing up and dealing with life. It also introduced us to two of the more interesting vampires to-date: Angel (as played by David Boreanaz, now on Bones) and Spike (played by James Marsters). The detailed development of the interconnected back-stories of these two gave them much more character depth than most vampires, and the complex relationships with the other characters on the show (and later on Angel's spin-off series) have influenced subsequent characterizations of vampires on film.
1992 also gave us Innocent Blood, directed by John Landis and featuring Anne Parillaud as the vampire Marie. Innocent Blood is, in my opinion, a forgotten little gem of vampire cinema. It doesn't really add anything new to the genre, but it does feature Don Rickles as a blood sucking lawyer (hah!).
1998 marked the big-screen debut of the Marvel Comics character Blade, the half-human, half-vampire anti-hero. Wesley Snipes did a respectable job bringing Blade to life, although the sequels didn't hold up as well. Blade signalled the start of the transition of vampires from horror characters to action characters. Also released in 1998 was John Carpenter's Vampires. Thomas Ian Griffith played Valek, the original vampire created by the Catholic church in an exorcism gone awry. (The church creating vampires was the main new element here). The film is most memorable for James Woods' over-the-top characterization of Vatican-backed vampire hunter Jack Crow.
Moving into the 2000's, we've seen vampires reimagined as sexy, vinyl-clad gunslingers such as Kate Beckinsale's Selene in the Underworld series, or as Victorian superheroes (Peta Wilson's Mina Harker in 2003's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen).5
This brings us up more or less to today. In 2008, HBO began adapting Charlaine Harris' books into the series True Blood. The series is enough of a departure from the continuity of the books that it deserves to be considered separately. The tension between prejudice and acceptance is much more visible in the HBO series than in the books, in my opinion. The show has also featured some interesting contrasts between the behavior of the vampires (the monsters) and that of the humans, demonstrating that morality in many cases depends on your perspective.
And then, just to be complete, we have Twilight and New Moon, wherein vampires sparkle and teenage girls swoon.
Jay
----------
1And even then there are some differences. Most people either forget or don't realize that in Stoker's book, vampires could walk in the sunlight without bursting into flames. They were weaker, but still formidable. And they didn't sparkle.
2ObDisclosure - I tried to read Rice's books. I really did. I just couldn't get into them. If anyone who has read them would like to add any elaboration on them, feel free.
3The biggest complaint I have about Harris' books is that she throws way too much sex into them. I have absolutely no objection to sex in books or movies so long as it serves to advance the stories, but the vast majority of the sex in The Southern Vampire Mysteries doesn't need to be there. Pre-teens and younger teenagers could get a lot out of the social acceptance themes present in these books (particularly the earlier ones), but the graphic sex knocks them right out of consideration.
4The Lost Boys is one of those films that I still can't decide if I like or not. The concept isn't bad, but the comedic elements of the film don't sit well with me.
5The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was a loud mess of a film. Alan Moore's original comic book is vastly better.
Ugly
Last evening, I noticed my cat hunkered down at the bottom of the basement stairs. She was looking intently at something, and making that low throaty growl that cats make when they feel threatened.
Curious, I went down to see what she was after.
I turn on the light and see this:
Gaaaaaah!
After retrieving a suitable implement of destruction from the utility room, I cautiously returned to dispatch the hideous invader.
By this time, it had shrunk to a smaller, but not much more attractive, size:
I. Do. Not. Like. These. Things.
As long as they stay outside, I'm content to leave them alone. But when they display the temerity to enter my home and menace my cat, I cannot let that pass.
The weapon of choice in this situation was a broom handle, not unlike this one: 
In retrospect, a shorter weapon with a broader business end would probably have been better.
It's worth mentioning that wolf spiders are really, really fast, especially when they're getting chased with sticks. You have to hit on the first attempt or the damn thing will be halfway across the room and headed under the couch before you get a chance to reset for a second jab. You do not want to let it get out of sight, because then it might be able to sneak behind you, leap onto your head, bite you with its huge, venomous fangs and turn your internal organs to soup.
I managed to divert it back towards the open floor, where I was able to slow it down by smashing a few of its legs. It made it to the wall and took a left turn to go behind a table, but now that I'd drawn blood (well, hemolymph), I wasn't going to let that stop me.
Dragging the table away from the wall, I was able to put stick to spider and eliminate my foe once and for all, flushing the remains for good measure. (ObTMI: when a spider audibly pops when you smash it, you know you've been dealing with a big freaking spider.)
I just hope it didn't leave young...
Jay
Nothing Says “Weekend!” Like a Little Dental Surgery
Of my mother's contributions to my gene pool, one trait in particular has annoyed me for years - thin gums.
My dentist has been on me for years to do something about it, and after much needling, I finally set up the first of what will probably be two graft procedures to repair some of the damage that nature has wrought upon me.
I had considered writing this post as a live-blog of the event, but the nice lady with the sharp objects that was going to be poking around in my mouth suggested it might be better if I wasn't moving around while she was working. After some consideration, I decided she was probably right.
What follows, then, is a reconstruction of the process to the best of my recollection, as told through the slight mental gauze of the pain meds my periodontist thoughtfully prescribed.
The assistant, who I'll refer to as Inga, started the afternoon off working through the list of do's and don'ts - do rinse with the special mouthwash we'll prescribe, do sleep somewhat upright for a couple of days, don't eat chips or other crunchy foods, don't drink anything through a straw. (They didn't specifically say to avoid fizzy beverages or alcohol, which was unexpected. "Fizzy" and "sutures in your mouth" usually don't go together well...) You might be sore, there might be some swelling, there will be blood...
OK. Got all that. Time to get down to business.
The doctor, who shall be referred to as Frau Blucher, provides me with some sunglasses. At first I am puzzled until it clicks that I'll be spending the next hour with the glaring dental lamp shining in my face. The shades have the little pink breast cancer awareness logo on them. For some reason Frau Blucher apologizes, as if either the concept of breast cancer awareness or perhaps the word "breast" is a problem. I divert the conversation by mentioning the bright pink shirt my daughter bought me a few years ago for my birthday.
Sunglasses and disposable bib in place, my chair is reclined and Frau Blucher produces a large swab containing the topical anesthetic. Immediately I wish that topical anesthetics came in a flavor other than "vile".
Next, she produces a large syringe. By my estimate, it's about 14 inches long and probably holds about a gallon of what I assume was lidocaine. The needle appears to be at least 4 inches long. I'm fervently hoping that she doesn't intend to drive the entire needle in anywhere.
She starts the festivities with three shots to various places in and around my lower lip and gum. Given how long she left the needle in for each one, I suspect that the lower part of my face probably looks like a cantaloupe. I can feel the numbness spread through my jaw, and when she subsequently started poking around with a probe, I could honestly answer the question "can you feel anything pointy now?" in the negative. So far so good.
Next, she turns her attention to the roof of my mouth. It is from this area that the tissue to be grafted is harvested. I like that term. Harvested. It reminds me of the scenes in The Matrix movies with the people-farms.
She srubs the roof of my mouth with something. It's a different flavor of vile than the other stuff, but not much of an improvement. Frau Blucher informs me that she's going to give a couple of shots into the harvest area, and that they're going to hurt (really?). She also says that to distract from the pain, she's going to press really really hard on the area with the handle of a probe, so that it'll hurt MORE than the needle, so when the needle goes in I won't notice it. Wait, what? I suppose I should be glad that she didn't tell me she was going to drop a bowling ball in my lap.
Anyway, again with the needle, and a couple of extra shots into my gum just for good measure.
While we're waiting for everything to get good and numb, it's time for a little conversation.
Frau Blucher: Did Inga go over everything with you?
Me: Mrphgy.
FB: Great! Do you have any questions?
Me: Pvneprygpslayg?
FB: Well, normally that's not a problem, but for some people the harvest site stays sore for a few months.
Me: Mrapguahputparhaicaoyugheia?
FB: Probably about an hour.
At this point, Inga returns. Inga's role will be the blotter. The significance of this role becomes apparent to me in about 10 minutes.
Frau Blucher begins the actual procedure by prepping the area to be grafted. My view of this is, understandably, limited to the top of her head and her gloved forearms. I do, however, notice that the first tool used in the prepping looks disturbingly like a rasp. As near as I can tell, she was roughing up the surface of the existing gum to make it more receptive to the graft. Unfortunately I was not in a position to make a detailed enquiry. More unfortunately, I could hear the scraping. At this point, the vital nature of Inga's role is driven home, as she produces a gauze pad which, when it finally exits my field of view, leaves no question in my mind that cruel trauma has been inflicted to my gum.
The next step is the harvest. This promises to be the most entertaining part yet, because the geometry of the situation demands that I have a parts of four hands crammed into my mouth. Four hands and a scalpel.
I am very grateful for good anesthetics. Did I mention that?
As Frau Blucher is beginning her assault on the roof of my mouth, I note that she's whistling along to the song on the radio. The song is "One of Us", by Joan Osborne, from her 1995 album Relish.
I will give Frau Blucher credit. She is deft with a scalpel. In under a minute, she has completed her harvesting. As she removes the harvested piece (to put it on ice, I hope), I catch a glimpse of it. It reminds me of sashimi.
Inga is diligently blotting, but she's not fast enough. I become aware of the warm, coppery taste in the back of my mouth, and absentmindedly wonder which one of my brothers has my set of True Blood Season 1 DVDs.
Frau Blucher begins to suture the harvested site. They are using dissolving suture, so I won't have to make an appointment specifically to have the stitches removed. While I cannot actually feel the needle, I can feel the thread move through the tissue. It's a little weird. From my perspective, it seems that she uses about eight feet of suture to close up the site. In reality it is only a few inches.
The last major thing to do is to place and secure the graft. It will go over several of the teeth in the front of my lower jaw, and will be held in place by a number of stitches. My teeth will be used as anchors for the stitches, since (as Frau Blucher helpfully pointed out) they tend not to move much. A lot of time, perhaps 20 minutes, is spent on this step. during which the anesthetic begins to wear off slightly. I alert Frau Blucher to this development, and she informs me that we're almost done. Again, I seriously overestimate the amount of suture that she's using. This time it's about a foot, total.
Finally, Frau Blucher mixes up the material that will serve as the bandages in my mouth. It is pink, and resembles Silly Putty. It does not have, as far as I can tell, a distinct smell. It is pressed into place over my lower teeth, and then over the wound in the roof of my mouth.
A bit of final blotting, and we're done. I am slightly lightheaded when I stand up, but that passes quickly. The anesthetic is starting to wear off everywhere, and I have a pretty good idea of where I'll be sore later. My face feels swollen and puffy, but it really isn't. I notice that my speech is somewhat distorted as I make the follow-up appointment for next week, where Frau Blucher will evaluate my progress and we will presumably decide when to do the second graft. I suspect it will be early November.
As I leave to drop the prescriptions for the mouth rinse and the painkiller off, I mentally calculate that I've got about 30 minutes before the anesthesia completely wears off. (A calculation that, I might add, was spot-on.)
Fortunately, my pharmacy works quickly.
CB
15 Books
I saw a post on Greg Laden's Blog about the 15 Books Meme circulating on Facebook.
It works thus:
List 15 books you've read that have stuck with you. Don't take more than 15 minutes to come up with the list.
Dracula
The Stand
The Lord of the Rings trilogy
The Hunt for Red October
A Brief History of Time
Misquoting Jesus
The Elegant Universe
The Red Queen
The Ancestor's Tale
The How and Why Wonder Book of Dinosaurs
The various essay collections of Stephen Jay Gould
How to Read Literature Like a Professor
Banvard's Folly
Your Inner Fish
The Great Mortality
I cheated a little at #11, since Gould's essays have been packaged in a couple of different ways through the years.
Have at it!
CB
Contact Me
Recent Comments
- Steviepinhead on Mini Book Review: The Millennium Trilogy by Stieg Larsson, Translated by Reg Keeland
- Clever Badger on Mini Book Review: The Millennium Trilogy by Stieg Larsson, Translated by Reg Keeland
- sirhcton on Mini Book Review: The Millennium Trilogy by Stieg Larsson, Translated by Reg Keeland
- Steviepinhead on Mini Book Review: The Millennium Trilogy by Stieg Larsson, Translated by Reg Keeland
- Steviepinhead on Montreal Police Finally Investigating David Mabus (UPDATE)
Recent Posts
- Mini Book Review: The Millennium Trilogy by Stieg Larsson, Translated by Reg Keeland
- Montreal Police Finally Investigating David Mabus (UPDATE)
- Biblical Inerrancy
- That’s Offensive!
- Movie Review – Speed Racer (2008)
Meta
Archives
Shelfari
Critical Thinking
- The Skeptic's Dictionary
- Stop Sylvia Browne
- Skepchick
- The Accidental Historian
- The Lippard Blog
- The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe
- Chaoskeptic
- Respectful Insolence
- The Adventures of Skippy the Skeptic
Film
Friends and Acquaintances
Science
- National Center for Science Education
- Scienceblogs
- The TalkOrigins Archive
- The Public Library of Science
- Ptak Science Books
- The Austringer
Religion
- The Oremus Bible Browser
- New English Translation of the Septuagint
- Encylopedia Mythica
- Berea College - Science and Faith home page
- Exploring Our Matrix
- Talk 2 Action
- Religion, Sets, and Politics
- Atimetorend