in her presentation on bathory erszébet yesterday, daphne tossed out a rather provocative idea: the possibility that, unlike bathory, who might well be classified as a serial killer, the classic vampires of fiction and film [like dracula] deserve our sympathy if not our outright approval: they, like any other predators of the animal kingdom, must feed on their prey to survive. like a lion or a tiger, they are simply doing what it is their 'nature' to do, and, as such, ought not to inspire revulsion -- much less be hunted or destroyed.
so: any responses to this?
3 comments:
I think it depends on which version of vampire that we're talking about. Stoker's vampires are damned - agents of Satan. Since they're classified as evil, I'd say that we don't tend to accept them as part of the natural pecking order. However, as we've seen the trend towards the Anne Rice type of vamp who is simply another class of creature, I think our judgement rests more on whether or not the vampire is...well....mean. Louis fed on plenty of humans but he was such a nice guy (and he felt appropriately conflicted about the whole thing). Lestat, on the other hand, revelled in cruelty and masochism.
I don't think I would agree with Daphne with her idea on a vampire's right to prey upon humans. She mentioned the protection of bears and sharks, known man-killers. But one must ask why such animals are protected. The reason is because we have hunted these man-hunters to the brink of extinction because they kill people. The European Wolf, Great White Shark, Grizzly Bear, etc. how many are left? Are they protected because they are just trying to survive, or is it illegal to kill them because they are only handfuls of these species left? Another important fact to note is that it is found legal and acceptable to kill these animals if they do try and attack you.
People fear what preys upon them and often strive to destroy anything superior. I think it not a revulsion, but a fear of inadequacy. Vampires fall into this category because they are superior.
I agree that we cannot classify Vampires as animals because its exactly what Trejo said, they are the only species that feeds solely on humans (with the exception of a very few who seem to be 'burdened' with their 'humanity' still. One thing I also remember from Daphne's presentation was the fact that Dracula didnt drain his victims of their blood to the point of death immediately and if he "spread it around" it wouldnt be as bad but if you look back at it he does intend to kill his prey, he just makes the connection alst longer and then he turns them into a vampire as well, i think that is the same as killing them instantly because the end result and end INTENTION was to kill the victim.
Post a Comment