Twilight Logic (The History of the Vampire)

[Houndoom_Lover]

I love vampires.

I don't love vampire novels.

Though I guess I shouldn't say that, since a majority of my character will hopefully be. Only casual. Not al hyped up like Ann Rice Vampires or Meyers. But to the point at hand.

I just had an arguement with a Twilight fan. If pretty sparkle boy can't bleed (The Fan said he can't therefore would not die) then how would he have semen.

So, hey! Let's talk about vampires we like, why some vampires just don't work so us...and stuff...

I'm gunna go find a Halloween Paintbrush for my Gelbert on my side acount now :k <-Vampire fangs.

AAaa way!

[Asilynne]

I like the vampires in Vampire Hunter D, and the traditional vampires (the REAL ones from folklore and shit). I hate almost every other type of vampire, which includes the anne rice ones and is TOPPED ON THE LIST BY TWILIGHT I HATE THAT MOTHER REFFING SERIES! Ahem...anyway yes lol

[Houndoom_Lover]

Ann Rice has too much attative sex vampires and she writes too stiffly. I like vampires that send chills down your spine-

The kind you want to me just to get see- to glimps at real power, but are afraid too 'cause they'll kill you. I heard Vampire Hunter D is great, but I havn't watched it or read it yet.

But Blood is becoming a LIVE ACTION MOVIE :3 What joy. I love Blood for some reason. I always felt mind raped after an episode. Seriously, it felt like nothing happened even though you watched an episode and made you feel...ya know, uncomfotable. I hope they capture that in the movie ^_^

Traditional vampires are the best. The kind that don't give a damn.

I would really like to go to New Orleans. They have some 'killer' (Eheheheeee!) vampire myths.

[Blademaster]

I'll put it simply...


http://www.playworksonline.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/300px-dracula1_small.jpg
This is a vampire.


http://images.elfwood.com/fanq/m/i/mit2/alucard.jpg
This is a vampire.


http://blog.rifftrax.com/wp-content/uploads/thecount.jpg
Even THIS is a vampire.


http://www.sugarslam.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/b-edward-cullen-4caf9f5953a6.jpeg
This... THIS is NOT a vampire.

[Houndoom_Lover]

True that!

The Count always made me nervous :o He even has vampire lore though. They say vampires are o-sessed with counting. Yaaay.

Twilight vampire boy has an odd shaped head. Mm I right?

Vampires should have nice capes- they'll live forever- The world is their Salvation Army!

[Master Rudy]

Blade's post is win ^_~
Don't know about Blood going live action......I've always felt the original movie was overrated. Series was a little better but still.

Oh and five points if you guess who said the quote:
If every vampire who said he was at the crucifixion was actually there it would've been like bloody Woodstock! Now I was actually at Woodstock. Man that was a weird gig! I fed off a flower person and spent the next six hours watching my hand move.

[Weasel Overlord]

I know I know! It's Spike. :D My favouritist vampire of alllll. Well, he ties with Angel and Armand. Anyway, I do believe it's from his first episode in season, uh, 2? Either way, I'm sure it's his first episode.

What's with all the Anne Rice hate? Her writing is beautiful, and her vampies are soooo angsty I love them so much! (Yes, I adore angst, it's the best thing evar.) Gotta say though, her later stuff got shit (as soon as Lestat went religious, blergh) and I didn't care a jot about the witches. Anyway. Lestat is badass, especially when he comes back from burning and marsh-drowning and blood-poisoning. Oh, and Marius is badass too. Moreso cos he's all Roman and stuff. :D

I refuse to read Twilight, mostly cos it seems like over-hormoned teenage pap, from what I've heard. Blech. I didn't even read that pap when I WAS a teenager, so no thanks.

EDIT: I forgot to mention my undying adoration and love for Blood+. It's AWESOME. :3

[Houndoom_Lover]

Ugh. No it's not. Did you have eye surgery while you were reading her books. Its written like those porn novels old women read. My Mom loves Ann Rice, I read all her crud so we could talk about the books.

But I have to agree, her early stuff is good. I didn't mind reading that. I'm not one for angsty vampires to start with is all- And then her stuff got worse, where it should have gotten better. So, you know.

That and I never cared for Lestat for some reason. Ir that large brested vampire chick from Rome. Too much angst for me to handle :3

I love Blood+ too! I can't wait for it to come out!! :3 That show, ever though so much was going on, was so calm. Like a snowglobe.

Oh, Buffy. Where would we be without you?

Anyone read the Historian? Now that was a good vampire story!

[Crystal Mew]

Well I read all of the books (well not the last one) before they got this popular, and way before I knew a movie was coming out. Sooo...yeah, I guess I'm proud to say I for once did not jump on a teeny bopper bandwagon.

But I must say after I read them it got me into reading again, so whatever lol

[Houndoom_Lover]

As long as you're reading, I don't really care. But the whole Twilight thing is just like Flowers in an Attic

If you didn't like you, you didn't read (apparently) and were a horrible writer yourself. Even though it was the books fault that it was so bad. I read the first one, in one day, in three hours from midnight to around three (duh :P) and was like "Eh, that was long," and had to go find something else to read because I was still awake and unsatsified.

But I'm glad you missed the bandwagon.

But the point still remains. The word dumpster shouldn't be capitalized in the middle of a senetece. Vampires don't sparkle, and if they don't have blood, they don't have sperm.

They can't made living babies via sperm then. And stuff :3

[Blademaster]

If a vampire has a baby, the baby would be undead. So... does that mean vampires can create zombies? If the mother is a vampire and the father is a vampire, would those vampire genes be dominant or recessive...? Would the baby be a zompire? What if the MOTHER was the vampire and the father was alive? That'd be like a coffin baby... Developing alive and healthy inside of a dead husk. It'd probably come out deformed and shit. Maybe harlequin ichthyosis or something.

This demands further research.

[Houndoom_Lover]

It does! QUICK, someone become a vampire and get knocked up.

I personally beleibe they're sterile and 'reproduce' by making others. Sucking lifeforce/blood and trasfering it back with theirs, like a tag. You know what I mean?

[reign.santiago2]

I don't really like vampires it sucks blood. But I like there ability like they fast run and get invisible in the dark. But live in long time I don't like that.

[Telume]

Anyone ever watch Nightwalker?

If a vampire had to be a pretty boy, then THAT'S a real example.

Not Edward Cullen.

[Lady Vulpix]

Anyone ever watch Nightwalker?

If a vampire had to be a pretty boy, then THAT'S a real example.

Not Edward Cullen.Watched, and posting in agreement. Even though the effects of the sunlight on vampires were confusing in that series (did it just hurt their eyes or what?), at least it wasn't something absolutely ridiculous like sparkles.

[Blademaster]

I don't really like vampires it sucks blood. But I like there ability like they fast run and get invisible in the dark. But live in long time I don't like that.

^Why's this guy's name in red like an Admin's?

Also, fun fact for those who don't know yet: The guy in the movies that plays Edward Cullen... What's his name? Robert Pattinson or something? You know who he's supposedly descended from?

...

Vlad "The Impaler" Tepes.

Yeah, that's right. Sparkles is a descendant of the real-life COUNT GODDAMN DRACULA.

[RedStarWarrior]

If a vampire has a baby, the baby would be undead. So... does that mean vampires can create zombies? If the mother is a vampire and the father is a vampire, would those vampire genes be dominant or recessive...? Would the baby be a zompire? What if the MOTHER was the vampire and the father was alive? That'd be like a coffin baby... Developing alive and healthy inside of a dead husk. It'd probably come out deformed and shit. Maybe harlequin ichthyosis or something.

This demands further research.

The whole 'undead' term has existed as a part of the English language long before the term 'alive' or the concept of 'not dead' did. It is a broad classification that includes many other creatures (such as mummies, liches, ghosts, and wraiths). To even suggest that two vampires, should they even be capable of reproduction, would give birth to a zombie is ludicrous. That's like saying if two cats were to mate, they would give birth to a dog because they are both animals.

[DivineAll]

In the world of literature and in fiction overall, there are three general genres people tend to use for creatures: supernatural, magical, and scientific. Anything that is considered undead is considered part of both the supernatural and magical categories. However, if you are part of the supernatural category, there's a list of unwritten rules one must follow in order for the creature to be considered "proper". Since vampires are technically undead, they must follow the unwritten rules they have set in store for them.

Unfortunately, Ms. Meyer has practically broken all of them into atom-sized pieces and bits. She has come to the unfortunate conclusion that vampires are more magical than supernatural. That is not the case. Most, if not all, supernatural creatures with magical abilities and properties, like transformation, enchantments, and rituals, tend to fall more onto the supernatural side than the magical side. Why? The supernatural, like the scientific, tends to follow more on basic facts and mythos we humans have developed over the years over those types of creatures, while the magical have constantly changed throughout the years.

For example, a dragon is considered a magical creature. It's mythos has been changed so much throughout the centuries that's pretty difficult to tell whether or not the Eastern version of the dragon is considered remotely related to the Western version. Vampires have, and always will be, considered supernatural creatures over magical. Their mythos haven't changed much since the first tales of them were told until Ms. Meyer showed up and decided to change everything about them. While there have been books, video games, movies, T.V. shows, etc. that have changed some aspects of supernatural creatures, their changes have only been minimal at best. Example: the Castlevania series. In the series time-line, the story of how Dracula came to be and his half-vampire son Alucard broke some rules, but kept a vast majority of them to be considered proper vampires. The Twilight series practically threw all the rules out the window and made up new rules as the series went along.

In short, Twilight vampires don't follow the unwritten rulebook of what vampires should be. Same goes for their werewolves and any other supernatural creatures I might have missed. That's why J. K. Rowling never touched on vampires beyond book 2 of Harry Potter. She practically knew she was breaking the rules on elves in book 2 given the Lord of the Rings series, so she decided to go onto werewolves starting with book 3 and she actually portrayed them quite accurately, with some additional magical information in the Harry Potter world. My advice to Twilight fans: go see, read, and/or play something that follows the actual rulebook of supernatural creatures. And to Ms. Meyer, if she is reading this, which I highly doubt, do what J. K. did and move onto a new supernatural creature, like zombie or mermaid, and try to not rip the unwritten rulebook for them into shreds. Please.

[Mew Master]

I agree that there's tradition, breaking from tradition, and then throwing tradition out the freakin window to the jagged rocks below.

What Meyer did was try to ret-con what a vampire has traditionally been through folklore into something completely different from what it is. The issue here is that the pop-culture reference of vampires has been changed over time mostly by artistic license. Good thing ppl laugh at sparkly celibate vampires.

The basic sense of what a vampire is/was is one that feasts on the lifeforce of others (living or dead), commonly considered to be blood, which at that time was commonly thought as one of four substances that made up the human body and tied to life. Vampire folklore and Fiction are different things. Bram Stroker's Dracula set the basis for Vampires in fiction as well as one of the catalysts for the Gothic culture. So there's your framework right there.

The other issue, is the origin material itself. Since vampire legends are found on all continents, it's fair to say that the generic theme of "blood sucking demon" can have many variants, and countless legends spawned and twisted over the years. Thanks mostly to our storytelling culture and trying to add things to said stories.

For Meyer's werewolves, they aren't true werewolves to be honest. The tribe of Native Americans who are "werewolves" are merely shapeshifters who's other form happens to be bigger than a Dire Wolf. They even admit this in the Second book of the series.

Original werewolf legends often revolve around a curse, or other such calamity that befell someone, turning them into wolves with bloodlust. Another way is simply making a deal with the devil in a ritual to gain the powers. This was also commonly consisted with witchcraft. Other times it was simply the dawning of an empowered wolf pelt would bring about the transformation. Again, the legends differ in where the ability came from (if you were Lycon, you got cursed by Zeus by trying to feed him human flesh).

Sometimes the full moon would force the transformation. Other times the change was of conscious choice, day or night. Others the person was in the guise of a wolf permanently until the curse was lifted. Ever think about the Big Bad Wolf in Little Red Riding Hood? A wolf that could talk? Werewolf anyone?

For one, the origin material and artistic license are key. However, breaking even from the basic tradition of vampires, Meyer turned vampires gay and didn't even really use werewolves. I'd be happy if she stopped writing all together.

I've never read the Anne Rice novels, but from what I've heard she set the scene for vampires to be more angsty. I mean it makes some sense, if you were immortal, could only go out at night and had to drink blood, wouldn't you be a bit angsty too?

For Magic and Supernatural. Supernatural is basically "beyond the natural" and Magic certainly fits into that category, at least in my opinion.


I don't really like vampires it sucks blood. But I like there ability like they fast run and get invisible in the dark. But live in long time I don't like that.

Wait... turn invisible? When could vampires do that? I mean break into mist, mess with your mind to ignore them, control shadows to hide themselves sure, but invisible?

The long life thing was probably used like a metaphor dealing with a trade between your humanity and immortality, a common stable in old legends dealing with demons and gods.

I'll be honest, I like having some tradition, and then breaking away from certian parts. I really enjoy the White Wolf World of Darkness take on Vampires, werewolves, mages, the Fae (elves and fairies), flesh golems, and even reincarnation (to a degree). There's enough tradition there to make it nostalgic, but enough breaking away to make it enjoyable.

[Jeff]

Wait... turn invisible? When could vampires do that? I mean break into mist, mess with your mind to ignore them, control shadows to hide themselves sure, but invisible?

The long life thing was probably used like a metaphor dealing with a trade between your humanity and immortality, a common stable in old legends dealing with demons and gods.


Don't worry about that post, it was just a spambot that's been taken care of.

[RedStarWarrior]

Don't worry about that post, it was just a spambot that's been taken care of.
You should report posts not in your forum, nooblet. :)

[Drago]

Vampires have been spoilt for a whole generation now that they've been teeny-boppered. Werewolves to a lesser degree too, and I don't really like this whole vampires vs werewolves theme that's been brewing for the last decade or so. It was cute at first, but it's run its course - let the lores remain their own separate entities.

To me, it was always the class of the vampire that was their coolest aspect. The badassery under a veil of charm and wit. Nifty.

My sister met Spike earlier this year at a convention. He's aging horribly, and looks all rubbery. Poor James.

My favourite vampire is Julius Vilma. ...i made him up

[Lady Vulpix]

I agree with Mew Master.

There are lots of different werewolf variants, even in mythology, so there are not many strict rules about them. And there are several vampire variants in fiction... sometimes the line between what is a vampire and what isn't is blurred (for an example, read the commentary here (http://egscomics.com/?date=2010-05-21), and the quote at the end of the commentary here (http://egscomics.com/?date=2010-05-24)). But in the case of Twilight it went so far away from what is traditionally known as a vampire that calling those creatures vampires is too much of a long stretch.

[Samchu]

I second L_V's opinions and Denny you are right on the mark. Meyer missed a golden rule when she made up her sham of a 'vampire' - justification. Sure if this was some creature pulled out of her arse (and let's face it it was but she had to go and stick a vampire label on it) then she could make up whatever to explain this that and the other. But she's messing with folklore. That means you gotta be able to point me to some little piece of lore, regardless of how small, and tell me 'this is why I did it. This was my source.' Did no one ever teach this woman what research is?

And Twilight's existence really breaks my heart. Not just that, but seeing what it's done to the literary market. The local Waterstone's (biggest UK bookseller chain if I remember correctly) has introduced a section they call 'Dark Fantasy'. It's just Twilight knock-offs and tween fantasy/romance with supernatural themes. There are a few that could actually, in all honesty, be considered as real 'dark fantasy'. As someone who has watched fantasy trying to break away from the sci-fi classifcation and wants to specialise in the fantasy market it's sad to see it being butchered like this. The new literary obsession, whatever it may be, cannot come soon enough.

[crown34]

I second Samchu's opinion about Twilight. Aside from the fact that Meyer's writes like a four year old child , I have had the crap kicked out of me by fangirls for insulting Twilight at school.

[Mew Master]

Not to mention she admited that Twilight was based on a wet dream.

FACE IT TWI-TARDS! YOUR BELOVED BOOK SERIES IS A CHUBBY GIRL'S WET DREAM!

[crown34]

[color=orange]Not to mention she admited that Twilight was based on a wet dream.

You're joking right?

[Mew Master]

Nope., Steph Meyer admitted that the idea that spawned Twilight as a dream she had about a hunky guy.

[crown34]

I'm going to be sick...

[Mew Master]

The local Waterstone's (biggest UK bookseller chain if I remember correctly) has introduced a section they call 'Dark Fantasy'. It's just Twilight knock-offs and tween fantasy/romance with supernatural themes.

Well, here's the thing I've noticed. Vampire/werewolf/mage romance fiction has been on the rise well before Twilight came out. My parents were reading supernatural romance novels at least 10 years before by Rebecca... Hunt... No that's not right... Some female author with a different name for her published work. Even at the Dillons up the street there's dozens of werewolf novels and vampire novels, and vampire+werewolf novels, some of which sound like stereotypical plots and not worth it.

Twilight, to be honest, was Meyer getting caught up in the frenzy of supernatural fiction in the popular culture, writing a book so simple a pre-teen could read it and feel herself, and then it turned into a sub-culture all its own with it's fair share of screaming fan-girls and Twilight-Moms cheering for Patterson. Ya know, if a bunch of 40-year old Guys screamed for a 17 year old, someone would call the cops (Which is one hell of a double standard our society has, tbh).

Anyway. Meyer got caught up in the supernatural hype, and then out of the several hundred dozen novels out there (Adult and teen alike) ended up becoming the retarted fan-base it is today.

Let's face it. If her crap can get published and make her rich and (in)famous, then I sure as hell can too! (http://www.pokemasters.net/forums/showthread.php?t=19524)

[Samchu]

I'm not saying they weren't around before or that the theme hasn't been developing, only that since the 'success' of Twilight there's been an influx of (mostly terrible) attempts at a similar idea because agents and publishers are buying up and churning out as many of them as they can as quickly as possible.

I'mmostly just offended that this is what the reading youth is being introduced to as 'Dark Fantasy' when the likes of Stephen King are sitting in 'Sci-Fi'.

[Master Rudy]

My sister met Spike earlier this year at a convention. He's aging horribly, and looks all rubbery. Poor James.[/size]

I think part of the issue there is that many people don't know that James Marsters is actually a bit older than he looks. In fact a quick Wikipedia search told me that he just turned 48 today. Also bear in mind that makeup departments for many TV shows and films do a killer job. Finally many factors contribute to how well or poorly a person ages. One of our drivers at work looks much older than my dad (who is 62) yet he's only 54.

As for fans of fantasy it's getting insulting walking into some bookstores and seeing Twilight and it's knockoffs in the fantasy section. Some people mentioned King being posted in the sci-fi section. Now considering the range of his work I could understand some of his books/films going there. Salem's Lot, The Dead Zone, The Running Man (yes he did the original book that the film with Arnold was based on), It, The Dark Tower, Cell, The Green Mile, The Shawshank Redemption. While he favors horror you can easily see thrillers and sci-fi in there as well. However not all of them should go there. In fact I'll do you one worse: I've actually seen the Wheel of Time series and LotR in the sci-fi section. To me that's a flat out insult to Jordan and Tolken :-/

[Blademaster]

LotR in the sci-fi section

.............

Uhhhhh.....

.........Huh?

[Mew Master]

.............

Uhhhhh.....

.........Huh?

With Blade on this.

Jigga wha?!

[Jeff]

It's amazing what qualifies as sci-fi these days. Horror I can understand somewhat (especially if they give some scientific explanation of where the monsters came from), but fantasy? It's almost as if "sci-fi" has become a euphemism for "geek stuff", and according to a certain cable channel, pro wrasslin'.

[Mew Master]

Yeah, too bad all the wrestling fans are fake though :o

[Blademaster]

Just like the wrestlers! :D