Hi all,
Probably like some of you reading this blog today, I saw last week’s episode of ‘Moonlight’ and, as a longtime writer of vampire fiction, found one part particularly resonant. At the end, when Beth and Mick are on the roof eating (well, she is) after he has turned back into a vampire, Mick tells Beth that things will be more complicated now (read: their relationship) because he’s once again a vampire. And her response is a good one. She tells him that it’s himself, not the vampire thing standing between them. Watching the episode, I had to agree with her. Mick's vampirism has nothing to do with preventing him to get closer to Beth. It's just an excuse that Mick can conveniently 'hide' behind when Beth demands intimacy. Perhaps, Mick is afraid of getting hurt. Perhaps, Mick is unsure of whether he could be the lover that Beth needs. In any case, the thing that is keeping him from being lovers with Beth is not his lack of mortality. Far from it. It has more to do with who Mick was as a mortal and who he still is inside. Beneath the fangs, so to speak:)
And that got me to thinking.
I write vampires (and about their condition) without putting a morality judgment on them, that is, I don’t see being a vampire, a bad or a good thing. My vampire characters don’t kill to feed. If they did, I might have to amend that latter statement. But anyway, I want to write about vampires and have their vampirism as just being another facet of their character. In other words, I am more interested in how they deal with life, death, love, etc. than just how they feel about being immortal. True, their problems may stem from their immortal condition (have vampire hunters chasing them) but many things that they experience, humans experience it as well (love, loss, what makes every day worthwhile). And more interestingly, how are these shared issues (my vampires are parents as well, Mina has biological child by deceased husband, Jonathan Harker) are dealt with in different (or even in similar ways) by the immortals.
And furthermore, how the vampires' mortal feelings will affect their judgment. Does the age of the vampire matter in how they deal with issues they've dealt with once long ago as humans? I think this depends on the individual vampire. Whatever the age though, even old, old vampires still have a memory or hold onto a piece of what they were like before they changed. Well, that's how I write my vampire characters, at least:)
I’ve discussed the idea of immortality with many of my online buddies. And, as I’ve said to a few, once one crosses over into immortality, they now are harder to kill but becoming a vampire doesn’t solve all their problems. It just creates a new set of problems that must be dealt with (and through writing, explored). And that’s what I find so interesting. Not the problems that center around vampirism (most of my vampires are ‘happy’ being vampires). But, rather, exploring through my writing how they now, as immortals, have to deal with some of the same (love, death, loss, parenting) and different (chased by vampire hunters) as humans do. What is also interesting to consider as a writer is how does one’s immortality affect decisions/situations that they’ve dealt with before as a mortal and now, have to deal with again as an immortal. For example, Vlad the Impaler (Dracula), as a mortal had a wife (two wives, according to some history texts) and children. For this writer, it will be exciting to have him deal with these issues he’s formerly dealt with as a mortal. Because now, as of the second book, he has both a partner, Mina and an ’adopted’ child, Quincey.
Some people say “you can’t go home again”, meaning, once you’ve lost something, it’s gone forever and you can’t get it back, whether it be a feeling, a person or a situation. Other people say that yes, it is possible. Still others feel that yes, you can try to recreate a situation, feeling, emotion, etc. and sometimes, you can even get it back, better than before. What is the truth? I dunno. Answering that question and those like it is why I write. In any case, it is something to consider as I continue writing my Dracula-Phantom series.
Take care all,
Chris
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Vampires, souls and sentiency: Or why zombies are so blanking scary.
Hi all,
I may be dating myself (I’m almost 40 these days) but if you ever get some time, watch some episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation, and the next series, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (the Dax character who has the brain of a man and the body of a woman is just such an incredibly rich, complex character) . I forget which episode and year (someone reading this blog may remember and if so, I thank you for it) but anyway, there was a wonderful episode about determining whether the android Data was sentient. It was a beautifully crafted episode from a writer’s point of view because it showed how an robot could be ‘human’ in everything but flesh and blood. Though Star Trek never took sides with religious issues, the fact that Data was declared sentient brought up the idea that he could also have a soul (an interesting idea from the religious angle of things).
Anyway, as a writer of vampire fiction, I’ve always been more interested in writing about sentient vampires. Not necessarily moral vampires since being sentient has nothing to do with morality. But vampires who remain essentially ‘themselves’ after they change, yeah, those are the type of vampires I enjoy writing about.
I just saw “30 Days of Night” and enjoyed it but most of the vampire characters (with the exception of the lead vampire character) only seemed partially sentient, if at all. And the human male character who was changing slowly into a vampire character after being bit was afraid of changing and of losing himself. And yeah, I can definitely understand the horror of this idea.
As a person, it is a scary thing to lose one’s sense of self. I never experienced it firsthand but rather, second hand, with my father who had a stroke. For two years, my mother and I were his primary caregivers and though he knew who we were until he passed away, there were times in the hospitals where he was not himself nor did he know who I was. It was a very scary thing to witness and it was extremely heartbreaking to try to speak to him at these times (when he did not know who I was).
And that’s why I think zombies, non-sentient/semi-sentient vampires are so scary and disturbing. Because on a primal level, one sees the characters and unconsciously is reminded of the diseases (such as dementia, Alzheimer’s) that can affect a human person’s sentiency. For all the Star Trek fans out there, that’s also probably why the Borg were so darn upsetting (as was Picard‘s morphing into Locutus). The Borg were like zombies in a way since one lost their sense of self (We are the Borg, you will be assimilated) when they were captured. 7 of 9 (and a Star Trek episode about the capture of a Borg child) brought sentiency back to the Borg characters and though they never lost their scariness, some did become humanized and we, as television viewers began to want to understand them as a race rather than just to be blanking afraid of them. In other words, when we could see the Borg as individuals (again, only the characters that I previously mentioned), we felt a ‘connection’ to them and felt that they could almost be understood. Well, some of them anyway. The others, yeah, you just need to escape from fast. Very fast.
That brings me back to vampires and sentiency. It is a scary thought to think of becoming immortal means losing one’s sentiency or sense of self. Even if one does not lose it completely (some vampires in the movie “30 Days of Night” seemed semi-sentient), being in a twilight state can seem even scarier to some. And I’m with that group. If becoming a vampire means giving up one’s sense of self, then, nope, I’d not sign on the dotted line. However, as I’ve said before, being a sentient vampire has nothing to do with how ‘moral’ a vampire character is or isn’t. Vampires can have a sense of self. And they can also be some mean SOB’s. But somehow, even seeing a cruel, evil vampire, while scary, is, in my opinion, less scary than seeing non-sentient beings. And they are interesting characters to write as well. Which is always a good thing:)
Take care all,
Chris
I may be dating myself (I’m almost 40 these days) but if you ever get some time, watch some episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation, and the next series, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (the Dax character who has the brain of a man and the body of a woman is just such an incredibly rich, complex character) . I forget which episode and year (someone reading this blog may remember and if so, I thank you for it) but anyway, there was a wonderful episode about determining whether the android Data was sentient. It was a beautifully crafted episode from a writer’s point of view because it showed how an robot could be ‘human’ in everything but flesh and blood. Though Star Trek never took sides with religious issues, the fact that Data was declared sentient brought up the idea that he could also have a soul (an interesting idea from the religious angle of things).
Anyway, as a writer of vampire fiction, I’ve always been more interested in writing about sentient vampires. Not necessarily moral vampires since being sentient has nothing to do with morality. But vampires who remain essentially ‘themselves’ after they change, yeah, those are the type of vampires I enjoy writing about.
I just saw “30 Days of Night” and enjoyed it but most of the vampire characters (with the exception of the lead vampire character) only seemed partially sentient, if at all. And the human male character who was changing slowly into a vampire character after being bit was afraid of changing and of losing himself. And yeah, I can definitely understand the horror of this idea.
As a person, it is a scary thing to lose one’s sense of self. I never experienced it firsthand but rather, second hand, with my father who had a stroke. For two years, my mother and I were his primary caregivers and though he knew who we were until he passed away, there were times in the hospitals where he was not himself nor did he know who I was. It was a very scary thing to witness and it was extremely heartbreaking to try to speak to him at these times (when he did not know who I was).
And that’s why I think zombies, non-sentient/semi-sentient vampires are so scary and disturbing. Because on a primal level, one sees the characters and unconsciously is reminded of the diseases (such as dementia, Alzheimer’s) that can affect a human person’s sentiency. For all the Star Trek fans out there, that’s also probably why the Borg were so darn upsetting (as was Picard‘s morphing into Locutus). The Borg were like zombies in a way since one lost their sense of self (We are the Borg, you will be assimilated) when they were captured. 7 of 9 (and a Star Trek episode about the capture of a Borg child) brought sentiency back to the Borg characters and though they never lost their scariness, some did become humanized and we, as television viewers began to want to understand them as a race rather than just to be blanking afraid of them. In other words, when we could see the Borg as individuals (again, only the characters that I previously mentioned), we felt a ‘connection’ to them and felt that they could almost be understood. Well, some of them anyway. The others, yeah, you just need to escape from fast. Very fast.
That brings me back to vampires and sentiency. It is a scary thought to think of becoming immortal means losing one’s sentiency or sense of self. Even if one does not lose it completely (some vampires in the movie “30 Days of Night” seemed semi-sentient), being in a twilight state can seem even scarier to some. And I’m with that group. If becoming a vampire means giving up one’s sense of self, then, nope, I’d not sign on the dotted line. However, as I’ve said before, being a sentient vampire has nothing to do with how ‘moral’ a vampire character is or isn’t. Vampires can have a sense of self. And they can also be some mean SOB’s. But somehow, even seeing a cruel, evil vampire, while scary, is, in my opinion, less scary than seeing non-sentient beings. And they are interesting characters to write as well. Which is always a good thing:)
Take care all,
Chris
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Vampires and Religion: Apples and Oranges?
Hi all,
As you might know from reading my Dracula-Phantom series, I am interested in the intersection of immortal beings and theology. I just wanted to discuss two thoughts with respect to this.
First: Til death do us part? Or is a marriage dissolved once a human becomes a vampire?
Several months ago, there were a couple of good discussions that I read on several “Moonlight” blogs about this idea, in other words, is Mick still considered married in the eyes of God even though he became a vampire? I’ve heard both for and against and just wanted to add my opinion on the matter. I write vampires as being sentient beings and not changing their personality as they enter immortality. Though having lived a long life, the vampire’s personality may change and shift, though these changes I show as ones that are affected by what happens after they become a vampire (their responses to conflicts in their long life). Therefore, since I ‘see’ immortals as still possessing their own ‘souls’ so to speak, that is, intrinsically being the same person before and directly after the change (though their long life, not their vampirism may ultimately affect their personality), I also would think that they would consider themselves spiritually ‘bound’ to their respective partners (definition of marriage in Christianity) even after their ‘death’. So yeah, I feel that the human now vampire doesn’t get ‘out of’ his/her marital obligations by just becoming immortal. In my opinion the ‘til death do you part’ refers more to the true death, not to immortality, which is just way to be alive
The other topic about vampires and religion that I‘ve always thought about is the idea of “Do all vampires go to heaven?” in other words, could an immortal being be “OK” in the eyes of their creator even though they’re a vampire? I’ve always been a person who thought that doing good works and helping out one’s fellow human being would count the most about where one would be ‘good enough’ for heaven. Therefore, I’d say “yeah, I think a vampire could go to heaven?” Would it be ‘tougher’ for him/her to ‘get in’? Probably. But then, if you read the Bible, Jesus says that it’s tough for rich people as well. So then, a vampire just has to work a bit harder.
If you’ve watched the great vampire television series that aired in the mid-90s (and is now on DVDs) called “Forever Knight” they aired an episode where Nick Knight (vampire cop) ‘died’ for a few minutes and met an angel. The angel told him that he could not get into heaven unless he became human again. It was a wonderful, thought provoking episode (as were most of the episodes of the show) but ultimately, I find that I have to disagree with their philosophy.
So, those are just some of my views on vampires, religion and immortality. As I’ve said, I’m always interested in these types of issues so expect to see more in my future blog posts.
Take care all,
Chris
As you might know from reading my Dracula-Phantom series, I am interested in the intersection of immortal beings and theology. I just wanted to discuss two thoughts with respect to this.
First: Til death do us part? Or is a marriage dissolved once a human becomes a vampire?
Several months ago, there were a couple of good discussions that I read on several “Moonlight” blogs about this idea, in other words, is Mick still considered married in the eyes of God even though he became a vampire? I’ve heard both for and against and just wanted to add my opinion on the matter. I write vampires as being sentient beings and not changing their personality as they enter immortality. Though having lived a long life, the vampire’s personality may change and shift, though these changes I show as ones that are affected by what happens after they become a vampire (their responses to conflicts in their long life). Therefore, since I ‘see’ immortals as still possessing their own ‘souls’ so to speak, that is, intrinsically being the same person before and directly after the change (though their long life, not their vampirism may ultimately affect their personality), I also would think that they would consider themselves spiritually ‘bound’ to their respective partners (definition of marriage in Christianity) even after their ‘death’. So yeah, I feel that the human now vampire doesn’t get ‘out of’ his/her marital obligations by just becoming immortal. In my opinion the ‘til death do you part’ refers more to the true death, not to immortality, which is just way to be alive
The other topic about vampires and religion that I‘ve always thought about is the idea of “Do all vampires go to heaven?” in other words, could an immortal being be “OK” in the eyes of their creator even though they’re a vampire? I’ve always been a person who thought that doing good works and helping out one’s fellow human being would count the most about where one would be ‘good enough’ for heaven. Therefore, I’d say “yeah, I think a vampire could go to heaven?” Would it be ‘tougher’ for him/her to ‘get in’? Probably. But then, if you read the Bible, Jesus says that it’s tough for rich people as well. So then, a vampire just has to work a bit harder.
If you’ve watched the great vampire television series that aired in the mid-90s (and is now on DVDs) called “Forever Knight” they aired an episode where Nick Knight (vampire cop) ‘died’ for a few minutes and met an angel. The angel told him that he could not get into heaven unless he became human again. It was a wonderful, thought provoking episode (as were most of the episodes of the show) but ultimately, I find that I have to disagree with their philosophy.
So, those are just some of my views on vampires, religion and immortality. As I’ve said, I’m always interested in these types of issues so expect to see more in my future blog posts.
Take care all,
Chris
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
