Ultimate Reading Madness 2.0

[iamnotachicken]

I keep on forgetting that I want to read Watership Down. I should get it from the library.

[Jim North]

About halfway or so through The Vampire Lestat now. My transformation is almost complete.

[Decker]

About halfway or so through The Vampire Lestat now. My transformation is almost complete.

*Readies the crucifixes, stakes, and garlic.*

[Exploding Pigeons]

Don't forget the holy water! You can never have enough holy water.

[Noc]

Fear not! By the time his transformation is complete, he shall be to lame to harm us!

[mixofsunandcloud]

Good thing too, since if I recall correctly, none of those would work on an Anne Rice style vampire.

[Jim North]

You remember correctly. In fact, from what I've seen so far, Anne Rice style vamps are pretty much god-modders. Even the really destructive stuff for 'em - like burning with fire and getting caught in sunlight - can be just temporary setbacks.

[Noc]

In fact, if I remember correctly, the only real weakness Ann Rice vampires have is their crippling angst.

[Jim North]

And their slightly odd predilection for small children. Just throw a pretty kid in as bait for a bear trap, and you'll be stringing vampires up left and right.

[iamnotachicken]

I am somewhat of a vampire fan, albeit a rather new one. I love the original Dracula novel by Stoker, and while I've only seen a few, generally like vampire shows/movies. The most promising of my comic concepts I am slowly developing is basically centered around vampires and their ilk. But from what you guys are saying, my interest in the Anne Rice novels are shrinking. Vampires need those weaknesses! That's what allows the interesting human vampire battles of might and wit. The best vampire stories aren't vampires versus some sole super individual, but against regular people who have to use cunning and, skill, teamwork etc.

At least that's my opinion. (Oh, and I wasn't that interested in her stuff anyway, because I really like the vampire as the adversary, mysterious and dangerous, much more than as the POV character. But who knows? It took me a long time to decide to read Harry Potter, and I was pretty biased against it at one time.).

[Jim North]

Mmm, well, it's not really like all that, to be honest. I think I'll try out the spoiler tag for the first time!

Spoiler: show

See, a Rice vampire can survive being burnt to ashes or getting caught in sunlight (which also burns them to ashes, natch), but it ain't easy, and it doesn't always work out. If the ashes get spread out, for instance, then it's highly unlikely that they'll manage to reconstitute, if not downright impossible. A number of vampires have been killed this way so far as I've read.

And when I said "temporary setback", it can still take them years, decades, or even centuries to get over said setback. Until then, they're all covered with scars, severely weakened, and more than a little bit insane from the ordeal. From what I've read so far, due to his severe injuries and (supposed) inability to cope with the world's changes, Lestat actually spend about three quarters or more of the twentieth century deep underground as a mostly lifeless and completely rotted, twisted corpse before coming back to the surface and trying to get back into the swing of things.

While crucifixes, stakes to the heart, and other common vampire weakness aren't a part of their makeup, they can be hurt several other ways. Physical trauma (bullets, beatings, bombs, etc.) will cause them to bleed just like a human (or worse, depending on how much blood they've drunk that night), which can severely weaken them. They're susceptible to some poisons and drugs . . . Lestat is severely weakened by a mixture of absinthe and laudanum in Interview. Unlike most vampires in other fiction, Rice vamps aren't just burned by the sunlight, they actually can't stay awake during sunlight hours. If they don't make it to their coffins or some other completely dark place in time, they fall asleep right where they're standing and burn. While they can live without drinking blood, going without for even a single night can drive them completely insane with the thirst, and going for extended periods of time can send them into a sort of coma until they sense blood nearby. While they are super-strong, super-fast, and have up to several centuries of experience and knowledge, but they still have their limits . . . some of which end up being self-imposed.

They are for all intents and purposes truly immortal, but still, Rice's vampires can still be beaten through various means, even if they can't be killed. And in the end, most vampires don't actually live past three or four hundred years anyway, throwing themselves into the fire out of ennui. Even if someone else doesn't "kill" them, they generally end up killing themselves. I've only just gotten to the part in Vampire Lestat where they're talking about the Millineum Vampires, but they're supposedly very very rare for this reason.

Oh, and there's also a breed of vampires living in Transylvania which are like sickly cousins to the rest. Louis supposedly kills one for good just by smashing its head in with a rock in the first book. So they're not all god-modders.

Anywho, you shouldn't have any real worries about vampires being the mysterious and dangerous bad guys in Rice's books, since that pretty much describes both the protagonists and antagonists.

[Noc]

WoD vampires, which I'm currently screwing around with (They're the ones from the Vampire: The Masquerade and Vampire: The Requiem RPGs) function much the same way. If they get suffer enough physical trauma, they'll fall into a catatonic, death-like state - though fire and sunlight kill them permanently.

However, I've never really liked vampires too much. In a horror scenario pitting mere mortals against some sort of supernatural evil, vampires (with a few exceptions) tend to fall to the wayside in favor of more interesting or daunting foes. The only times people tend to use them is when they need an angsty antihero. And I've developed a rather strong distaste for stories that cast an angsty antihero as a protagonist. Not that internal conflict is a bad thing . . . but I've quickly gotten tired of hearing "Oh, no, I'm a vampire, it sucks to be me, I'm damned for eternity and am terribly conflicted about having to feed on people to survive, but am going to act try and act like a badass whenever I'm bored with being emo" as a plot device.

I actually really, really don't like vampires . . . and one of the perks of playing a tabletop RPG with a bunch of gothly kids that want to play as them is that I get to figure out lots of really, really fun ways of killing them. Like firing magnesium-tipped arrows out of a compound bow. It's probably the most entertaining way I've ever had to take out my frustration with a subgenre.

[iamnotachicken]

The reason I like vampires is as villains, they can represent so much. There can be lots of sexual, religious/spiritual, psychological, etc. symbolism or meaning. In my (potential) comic, the protagonist is something of a vampire hunter, or perhaps more accurately researcher. Vampires are not angsty, they are pure, demonic evil.

[Bronze]

Vampires are not angsty, they are pure, demonic evil.

As they should be.

[Ben]

I never got why Vampires are angsty "Oh look at me, I'm an uber imortal bad arse with super powers, Woe is me"

Werewolves always have and always will be vastly superior.