For the Love of Vampires

A compare and contrast essay...

With all the drama caused by screaming fans and tabloid scandals, one might think that the current fascination with vampires is a modern fad, but this is hardly the case. The concept of immortal evil sucking the blood of the innocent to survive has both fascinated and horrified readers of literary fiction for years. That said, the image of the modern vampire is rather different than that portrayed by Bramm Stoker. In fact, it is quite possible that the monster, Dracula, would be extremely offended by any comparison between himself and the heartthrob, Edward Cullen, and it would be hard to blame him. This modern vampire is a weak and paltry character next to the monster of classic fiction. Instead of a figure of selfish manipulation, evil power and perverse sensuality, the sparkling Cullen shows restrained self-denial, kind concern and almost antiquated morality.

While the creature hunted by Doctor Van Helsing felt no compunction in using his victims to accomplish his own ends, only to feed upon them as soon as they were no longer necessary to him, our more modern vampire is concerned with protecting the humans he lives among and feeds only on animal blood. Who can forget the eerie image of the ship of death cast up on the English shore, its final crew member lashed to the helm, the ship’s log the only thing left to tell of one after another missing or found dead, with no explanation for the terrified men, who did not realize they carried a monster in their hold ? No amount of dramatic music or stunning visual effects can provoke the shivers that such a scene naturally engenders when one is confronted with a youth willing to live on the vampire equivalent of tofu rather than harm even his enemies.

Furthermore, this malevolent being from distant lands tainted those victims he did not kill outright. He was pleased to make them as evil as himself, while today’s vampire so abhors his own existence that he refuses over and over again to grant his form of immortality to the girl he loves, despite her repeated requests . Mara’s cry of “Unclean, unclean!” when the communion wafer burned the skin on her brow communicated a despair that no amount of arguing on the part of a young lover can ever convey.

Again, on the one hand, we find the vampire’s strength used to enforce perverse desires, while on the other, we find an uprightness approaching prudery. One does not need to be well-versed in Freud to read the erotic implications of Lucy’s forced sucking of Dracula’s blood after being drained herself. Nor does the image of her former love piercing her writhing body with a wooden stake fail to arouse, even while it disgusts. This is not merely sex; it is a sick and twisted mockery of the thing, intended to revolt even while it fascinates. Compared to this, it is hard to see Cullen, who will not spend a night with his darling before they are lawfully wed, as a monster at all, never mind one that deserves to bear the title Vampire.

Where once the word Vampire stood for the age old story of good versus evil, with every possible sentiment of fear and horror that could go with it, today it has become nothing more than a banal twist on the lighter, less inspiring story of boy meets girl, where a sparkly exterior seems to be the lone stab at originality. And while modern readers may be excited to the point of fainting as they await the arrival of each new installment of their favorite romance, they will never know the thrill of setting Dracula aside for the night and having to cross the room to turn out the light.

I found this in some old schoolwork of mine and it gave me a giggle, I thought some of you other Prosers might be amused as well.