Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Doctor Doom <JCH8169@*****.TAMU.EDU>
Subject: Vampires...
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 06:25:29 CET
>>>>>[ ArkAngel asked earlier if anyone had seen the near the turn of the
century film, _Dracula_, and commented on how inaccurate it was... I have
indeed seen it. Not long ago, I embarked on a extensive research project
regarding HMHVV infected beings, especially _Sanguisuga europa_, which involved
reviewing information from the most diverse sources, and that movie was one of
them. Personally, I feel the film was very well done, and I do not feel the
inaccuracies detracted from its quality.
I am not certain which inaccuracies you had grievance with, ArkAngel,
but that will not dissaude me from guessing:
The movie was correct in that Vampires can go out in the day, although
it is not true they suffer no ill effects, or, for that matter, that they
experience something so benign as having their powers limited, as depicted in
the film. My studies have concluded that vampires exposed to sunlight have
intense allergic reactions, and yes, it does burn, but they are NOT destroyed
outright by it. So, it is true that they can be killed by the sun, but not
Further, MANY vampires do exhibit an 'allergy' to Holy Symbols, but this
is, in my opinion, largely psychologically-based. My research has revealed
that there are vampires that suffer no debilitating effects from Holy objects,
but there seems to be a bizarre exception in the case of coming into physical
contact with items that have been blessed, including Holy Water. Apparently,
(and this is based upon conjecture) these is something vaguely magical about
the act of blessing something. (The last phenomena has not, I feel, been
adequately researched, and thus should be subject to review.)
Anther quality of the vampiric powers I found false was the trans-
formation that Dracula experienced when he drained Lucy of her blood the first
time (by which I mean that werwolf-like creature). Dracula's comment upon
being confronted by Mina lead me to believe that it was being treated as one
of the natural states of the vampire (this conclusion may be false, I admit).
It is, of course, possible that a vampire could take that form, but it would
be via a spell, and I do not see a vampire willingly transforming himself into
something so alien to human nature. A wolf, yes, a bat, yes, but a cross
between man and beast, I find that most improbable.
Another possible inaccuracy implied by the person who posed the question
earlier is the chopping off of the head, as per tradition, to ensure the death
of a vampire. This prevents the HMHVV creature's natural regenerative
processes from coming into play, and thus ensures that they shall not be coming
back, so to speak.
The last aspect of the film I shall comment on is that the film also
implies that Vlad Tepes of Wallachia was the first Vampire, a fact which is
not supported by the evidence I have compiled to date. Doubtless, Prince Vlad
was a truly bloodthirsty man, and legend has it he was Sanguisuga Europa, but
the FIRST? Depending on what and who you read, most unlikely. ]<<<<<
-- Darkwatch <23:25:32/11-29-53>


These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.