How the Vampire Genre Has Changed...

     The literary and media vampire genre in general has undergone a vast shift in the more than 100 years since Irish novelist Bram Stoker published “Dracula”. If there were tectonic plates between Stoker’s “Dracula” and Meyers ‘Twilight” series, that shift would probably register as an 8.5 on the Richter scale.

In the beginning, literary vampires were a metaphor for unbridled sexuality and a refusal to stick with the strict morality of the time in which it was published. Dracula’s victims were depicted as highly sexual creatures who wanted nothing more than to fuck and drink blood, although not necessarily in that order. They apparently thought nothing of feeding from innocent little babies. Bad little girls came to an equally bad end by stake and or decapitation, while good little girls who may have been wavering on that amorphous line between good and bad could only be saved by “God”.

German filmmaker Friedrich Wilhelm “F. W.” Murnau and his “Nosferatu” introduced the idea that the vampire (depicted in this silent film as a hideously formed, pale white creature with long bony fingers, a bald head, and bulging eyes) could be destroyed by the light of the sun, reaffirming the idea that vampires were creatures of shadow and darkness, that could not tolerate the light of truth or some such nonsense.

While literally millions of people have probably seen the classic Bela Lugosi horror film “Dracula”, many do not realize that it was originally a stage play that also starred Lugosi. Audiences were frightened by what they saw depicted on the stage and on the screen. Perhaps that fear was not so much of fear of the vampire, but a fear of the permission that Dracula gave to not being a good little girl. This Dracula was a slightly more sympathetic vampire, who said the famous line “Ah, to sleep. Perchance to dream.” This vampire experienced regret at no longer being allowed the simple pleasures of sleeping and dreaming. Ultimately, however, Lugosi’s Dracula came to a bad end, and was destroyed by Van Helsing and his merry band of vampire killers.

Decades of vampire movies thereafter continued to present their leading monsters in a negative light. Given the power of hypnosis, these vampires were all about domination and power over mortal men and women (but especially the women). While women in the audience (and maybe even some men) might still swoon at the idea of being bitten and drunk down by one of these vampires, these creatures were not truly depicted as being the leading men. They were the leading monsters, with the still human men working to defeat them and save whatever damsel in distress needed saving. There was usually at least one human girl turned a vampire in the mix. These fledgling vampires would never start as an innocent girl, but would always have some negative aspect to their human personality that made it “okay” for them to be turned into a vampire. These young women never came to a good end.

The ABC soap opera “Dark Shadows” was failing quite successfully until it was decided that supernatural elements should be added to the show. Thus, the character of Barnabas Collins was introduced. Over time, it was revealed that Barnabas, played by Canadian actor Jonathan Frid, had been cursed by an angry witch called Angelique to join the ranks of the Undead as revenge for his spurning of her way back in the 1700s. The show went from highlighting the trials and tribulations of the Collins family to highlighting the trials, tribulations, and attempts of Barnabas Collins to regain his lost humanity while wooing the reincarnation of his lost lady love Josette Dupree, the still very human Maggie Evans. The soap opera even managed to spawn to a large screen movies that, while they showcased the actors from the soap opera, bore very little resemblance to the television program beyond Barnabas and a whole lot of vampires.

The soap opera lasted perhaps another two or three years after the introduction of the vampire Barnabas Collins, and vampires pretty much went back to being the bad guy.

Then, the Frank Langella version of “Dracula” came to the stage. In it, Dracula was presented as an even more sympathetic character than he had been before. Yes, this Dracula was still evil, but it was difficult not to root for the success of this Dracula and his lady love. When he ultimately came to his end, it was much less violent than it might have been. As with the original Lugosi stage production of “Dracula”, Langella also brought his Dracula to the silver screen and to a much larger audience. While Lugosi had been a rather creepy looking Dracula, Langella made for an unabashedly handsome Vlad Dracul. Female audiences were so riveted by Langella’s good looks that no one appears to have said anything about his lack of an Eastern European accent.

If you are of a certain age, it is disingenuous to pretend that you have not at least heard of “Love at First Bite” which starred the dashing and eternally tanned George Hamilton as the dashing and eternally pale Count Dracula. This Dracula, with a wholly sympathetic character, is kicked out of his ancestral castle in order to make room for the Russian women’s Olympic team. His subsequent homelessness leads him to travel to the United States of America where he sees and falls instantly in love with an American model who appears to have the intelligence of bellybutton lint. The comic hilarity that ensued included pokes at common vampire movie standards such as vampires being afraid of crosses, barely making it to their coffins in time, their inability to partake of human “shit” and more. We even have Renfield stopping for a bite of lunch. For a change, the girl is not looking to be saved, much to the dismay of her human leading man.

This appears to be the point where the genre makes its most drastic shift. While there are still movies depicting evil vampires, there begin to be tales of vampire romances.

“Bram Stoker’s Dracula”, which starred British actor Gary Oldman in the title role, took the audience far into the back story of the fictional character of Vlad Dracul. It depicted how Dracula lost his beloved to suicide when she thought him killed in battle; then a Christian burial was denied her because of her having committed suicide; and how his shrieked denunciation of the Christian God led to his transformation at the hand of the divine into the creature of darkness known as Dracula. And when he discovers that his lady love appears to have been reincarnated as the lovely Mina Murray, he travels to Great Britain where he moves into Carfax Abbey to begin his quest to win her love.

This Dracula brings us back to the depiction of the vampire as being a daywalker, something that the author of the novel, Bram Stoker, had indicated the vampire was capable of doing. While Dracula was not as strong during the day as he was at night, the sun did not otherwise damage him.

It is interesting to note, that during the course of their curious courtship, Mina does indeed remember things from her previous existence. This appears to legitimize her growing love for the vampire, and she does not appear to be as frightened by Dracula’s true nature as her cinematic predecessors would have been. Her human fiancé Jonathan Harker is depicted as being rather plain and boring, while the character of Van Helsing is depicted as being a fairly hysterical (not the funny kind) know-it-all. In the end, it is very easy to root for the success of the vampire and his lady love, and to cry at the tragic end of their story.

Vampire romances have flooded the literary world like out-of-towners descending upon Comic Con. When looking for paranormal fiction, it is far easier to find a vampire – human love story than a simple vampire – 'kicking ass' story. I have never been much of one for paranormal romance. At this point I think it has been done to death.

How can you justify a vampire hundreds of years old who hates what they are? You would think that if someone hated being a vampire so very much, he would have found a way to end himself long ago . Why does it take romance to kick them out of that deep blue eternal funk? Why is there this need to be “saved”?

I write my vampires as being content with what they are. They do have limitations, so they are not all powerful. They must drink from a living human body, so bottles and bags just are not going to happen. Dead bodies equal dead blood. This means that your average vampire in my mythos cannot live easily in a large city. The humans are going to notice when people go missing or are found dead with almost no blade remaining in their cold corpses.

My vampires bite and drink and kill, and make no apologies for doing so. They are not necessarily going to go out of their way to protect the human race. My vampires are not saints. They are sinners like all the rest of us. Which is to say that they are people just like you and me. They have their likes and loves and hatreds, like everyone else.

If you are looking for romance or salvation then you need to look somewhere else than in the books that compose the Sumaire Web. You will not find either of those in here. If you are looking for biting and blood and violence and death, come on in...

We have been waiting for you.