VAMPIRES

What is a vampire? The answer is not as simple as one might expect. Vampires have appeared in news reports, scholarly studies, and local legends, and popular culture for at least 300 years. Each new incarnation of the vampire brings with it new characteristics, new rules, and new definitions that are always birthed by the old myths.

A quick survey of the most famous bloodsuckers of today quickly reveals that no two vampire stories are the same. While most vampires appear only at night, the idea that sunlight will kill them varies. For example, the vampires in Buffy the Vampire Slayer’s world burst into flames in direct sunlight, but Blade and other vampires are day-walkers. Many of the vampires found in nineteenth-century literature, including Bram Stoker’s Count Dracula, could conduct their business during the day, although they preferred night activities. Other storylines allow vampires to participate in daytime activities with the help of enchanted gems, industrial-strength sunscreen, or (in the case of a recent adolescent series) the cloudy skies over the town of Forks.

Susceptibility to sunlight is just one example of the variations. Many classic vampires are shape-shifters who can turn into bats, rats, serpents, large cats, or wolves. Some vampires are weakened by religious objects, while others scoff at them. In some stories, vampires can be warded off by garlic, wolfsbane, and other natural repellants. Other legends claim that vampires cannot cross running water, come into contact with silver, or sleep without dirt from their native land. However, for every story that limits the vampire’s ability to exist in the world without hindrances, there are just as many tales that give vampires almost total reign over the human world, including endowing them with superhuman strength, the power to mesmerize, and even the ability to fly.

Despite the differences among the tales produced over several hundred years, there are a couple of traits that follow vampires from story to story. No matter the myth, the author, or the filmmaker, all vampires share a thirst for blood and the gift—or curse—of immortality. These two basic, defining characteristics are inextricably linked in vampire lore. Vampires are not subject to aging, disease, and death via the simple passage of time; however, their survival is wholly dependent on drinking blood as their only source of nourishment. Without blood, the vampire withers away. Therein lies the thematic juxtaposition that defines the vampire’s earthly existence: life depends on death. Well, sort of.

The vampire tradition in literature and film certainly suggests that life and death go hand in hand. The most popular nineteenth-century vampire stories always described the vampire’s kiss as simultaneously deadly and irresistible. Twentieth-century vampire films followed this logic, and it remains the dominant understanding to this day. In most of these narratives, the need to consume human blood implies a need to kill humans. However, over the last 30 years this condition has become less standard in vampire lore. The last three decades have seen a marked increase in the popularity of “vegetarian” vampires who feed off of animals because they are ethically opposed to killing humans. These are vampires that shun their instinctual desire to kill humans and find ways to negotiate the needs of the animal, demon, and human within. Sure, all of these vampires exist alongside other vampires who do not share their philosophical concerns, and they are often shunned by their undead peers. Nevertheless, these new incarnations of the modern vampire are some of the most well-known and well-liked characters of today.1 Their popularity points to the need to understand today’s vampire alongside more classic examples.

Today’s vegetarian vampires are popular because readers and audiences see them as “human.” They are loved not because they are different from us, but because they remind us of ourselves. This simple premise guides scholar Nina Auerbach’s understanding of the vampire’s popularity in Our Vampires, Ourselves (1997), a must-read for anyone who seeks to understand the vampire as cultural icon. Auerbach’s argument rests on the observation that vampires, unlike other popular monsters, are mutable creatures who are as adaptable as they are fascinating.

Ghosts, werewolves, and manufactured monsters are relatively changeless, more with eternity than with time; vampires blend into the changing cultures they inhabit. They inhere in our most intimate relationships; they are also hideous invaders of the normal. . . . [T]hey can be everything we are, while at the same time, they are fearful reminders of the infinite things we are not. (Auerbach 6)

Unlike other monsters, vampires live among humans. Their existence depends wholly on their ability to blend into society. They must mirror the period they inhabit, blend into the places they stay, and superficially mimic the people they meet. The vampire’s existence depends almost entirely on his or her ability to adapt. Their adaptability is perhaps the main reason for their ubiquitous presence in popular culture. Their stories can be set against almost any backdrop or situation whether historical, political, or social. They are monsters with human faces. Although they are rumored to cast no reflection, they reflect the ugliest aspects of human nature by holding up a (metaphoric) mirror to society and force humans to confront the monster within.

How can vampires act as mirrors to society when most of them do not cast a reflection? Let’s look at an example of how this works. A common modern cliche that is often invoked when hearing news of a horrible murder, mass bombing, or similar tragedy is that “times have become more violent.” However, anyone who makes this statement in earnest clearly does not know

History. Murder, massacres, war, torture—these have all been part of the world’s history for as long as there has been a record of human acts. The modern world was built on bloodshed. And while it is true that modern technology has increased people’s ability to kill each other in massive numbers at alarming speeds, today’s weapons and wars are merely new and improved versions of old methods and modes of governance.

Count Dracula, the most famous of all vampires, embodies humankind’s history of bloodshed. He kills almost indiscriminately; he quenches his thirst for blood by any means necessary. His most effective weapon against his prey is his ability to remain cool, calm, and collected while his victims find themselves incapacitated. The historical Dracula, the medieval ruler whose name Bram Stoker borrowed for his villain, also exemplifies the violence that humans are capable of enacting in order to control their world. His reign resulted in thousands of deaths—both on and off the battlefield. In creating the fictional villain for his vampire novel, Stoker stitched together two stories of terror and torture. Scholar Stephen Arata summarizes the convergence of these dual narratives in Dracula as follows: “The Count’s ‘lust for blood’ points in both directions: to the vampire’s need for its special food, and also to the warrior’s desire for conquest” (Arata 630). In other words, Count Dracula—both through his folkloric roots and through his historical name—has managed to teach us at least one thing over the last hundred or so years. The vampire’s blood thirst is the history of the world.