GARLIC-LOVING VAMPIRES:
THE RESHAPING OF VAMPIRE LORE IN MODERN FICTION
by Catherine Karp
"In all the darkest pages of the malign supernatural there is no more terrible tradition than that of the Vampire, a pariah even among demons. Foul are his ravages; gruesome and seemingly barbaric are the ancient methods by which folk must rid themselves of this hideous pest."
--Montague Summers, VAMPIRE: HIS KITH AND KIN (1928)
Oh, Mr. Summers, what would you possibly think of today's vampire fiction? How did a "pariah even among demons" transform into the sexually alluring cover models staring out from many a paranormal romance novel? And why do many modern authors prefer to stray away from vampire legends of old, rejecting even ancient vampire deterrents such as garlic?
Well, for starters, it's nearly impossible to write a tale using solely vampire lore.
Beginning with the earliest examples of vampire literature--Heinrich August Ossenfelder's "Der Vampir" (1748), John William Polidori's "The Vampyre" (1819),
Joseph Sheridan Le Fanu's CARMILLA (1872)--authors rejected and reshaped folklore to lend a romantic aura to bloodsuckers.
If writers adhered to the characteristics of vampires in legend, these tales would be filled with bloated, hideous peasant corpses eating through their shrouds and crawling out of their graves to attack their families. Diverse legends of supernatural, blood-drinking creatures can be traced from every continent (except for Antarctica--as far as I've read), but most of these monsters are repulsive and motivated by bloodlust or revenge. Instead of reading about smoldering eyes, we'd be confronted with glowing red irises, long fingernails, and pointed tongues--depending on the country of the folklore's origin. The characters' breath would be foul, and their entire body would reek of death. At best, we'd find an alluring demonic woman, but she'd be merciless and vengeful and would likely vampirize children, like Lilith of Jewish demonology and the civatateo witches of Mexican lore. No one would seriously see these creatures as potential romantic partners. There would be no vampire love stories.
So, unless a writer is creating an outright horror story populated by corpses running amok, the myths must be altered.
In the granddaddy of all vampire novels, DRACULA, Bram Stoker described his count as being "rather cruel looking, with peculiarly sharp white teeth" that "protruded over the lips" (DRACULA, 1897). While hardly the handsome aristocrat portrayed in movies, Bram Stoker's literary version of Dracula wavered halfway between the fiendish, rancid-smelling creatures of lore and the modern-day hunks of TWILIGHT.
Dracula is a creature with fearsome physical attributes, but he's also an aristocrat able to mingle with polite society, a trait shared with vampires of early-nineteenth-century literature. No eastern European folklore vampire could have accomplished such a feat with the composed air of an intellect. The revenants of legend primarily existed to kill, not to socialize and skillfully maneuver their way into their victims' lives.
Most importantly, Stoker heaped a bounty of new traits upon his count that has altered vampire mythology ever since DRACULA's publication. For example, a vampire's lack of reflections and shadows, as well as the use of the term "undead" as a synonym for vampires, are credited to Stoker.
Dracula retained some of the demonic, heathen features of old-world revenants, as evidenced by his avoidance of holy symbols, but this aristocratic, wall-scaling, mist-producing fellow blazed the path for future changes.
Once the twentieth-century rolled around, writers could choose from a smorgasbord of vampire characteristics deriving from traditions, Stoker, and, suddenly, even cinema. The classic 1922 silent film NOSFERATU introduced death by sunlight to the mythology of the undead--a technique used by the next major heavyweight in vampire literature, Anne Rice.
The publication of Rice's INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE in 1976 gave writers even more to think about when choosing traits for their own vampires. The undead could now be
extraordinarily beautiful, guilty, sensitive, soul searching, and confused. Traditional deterrents such as garlic, crosses, and wooden stakes don't bother her characters. Moreover, she created a character who wants to talk about his life as a vampire--to explore and analyze what it means to exist in such a condition. The book became the second-highest bestselling vampire novel behind DRACULA. If Rice hadn't parted from vampire folklore so dramatically, would her series have become so popular and influential? Doubtfully. When it comes to choosing bestsellers in the genre, modern readers typically pick novels that have less and less to do with the original features of bloodsuckers. It seems we prefer to see vampires as more advanced versions of ourselves--tragic, beautiful souls (yes, vampires even have souls these days) who can transcend traditional ways of dying.
Case in point: TWILIGHT.
Author Stephenie Meyer's vampires are a far, far cry from the repulsive, bloated corpses of centuries gone by. Not only are her vampires immune to garlic (her vampire hero, Edward, goes on a date in an Italian restaurant, no less), but they're impossibly gorgeous, they wander around in the daytime hours, and they actually sparkle in the sunlight. In an interview on TwilightLexicon.com, Meyer explained, "Almost all of the superstitions about vampire limitations are entirely false in my world. Vampires don't really have any limits, other than the self-imposed guideline to keep their existence a secret. No unconscious periods, no problem with sunlight, crosses, garlic, holy water, wooden stakes, etc… These are all myths--deliberately placed in earlier centuries to mislead impressionable humans and make them feel safe." Has Meyer's rejection of folklore harmed her success? Hardly. The Twilight Saga continues to stay at the top of the NEW YORK TIMES and USA TODAY bestseller lists.
The embellishment and rejection of folklore will more than likely continue as long as authors sit down to spin vampire tales. Writers are presented with enough vampire legends from around the world to fill entire encyclopedias, and it's fascinating to see which particular traits he or she will choose. There are a variety of questions authors must answer when creating their fictional creatures: Can he be awake during daylight? Can he eat food in addition to blood? Does she shapeshift? Are her fangs noticeable? Does he feed solely off humans? Despite the dearth of vampire fiction being published, the possibility of inventing unique stories still exists due to the sheer number of vampire variations. There are a seemingly endless number of ways to approach the subject and a multitude of genres to use (horror, romance, chick lit, comedy, etc.). Whether vampires are consuming synthetic blood (Charlaine Harris's Southern Vampire series), attending private schools (P.C. and Kristin Cast's House of Night series), borrowing blood from sleep research subjects (Suzy McKee Charnas's THE VAMPIRE TAPESTRY), or needing to be invited into a home like their legendary predecessors (John Ajvide Lindqvist's LET THE RIGHT ONE IN), they continue to fascinate us with their lure of danger and immortality. Just don't necessarily count on garlic to protect you anymore.
