Twilight: No Such Thing As Original Vampires?! (Twlght Vamp Bashing!)

For reason as to why this forum even exists, please see the note at the very end of the long rant.

I read recently on a forum that there was no "original" form of vampire and that vampires were all different.

While the latter is indeed true, that every author can shape the vampire in their novel to fit there specifications, I wish to point out that the first section is, indeed, not true.

Hear me?

NOT FUCKING TRUE!!!

And the reason why is so simple, so nerd-basic knowledge, that anybody with an IQ over that of broccoli and an interest in vampires should know this.

Because all mythological creatures are born from pure legend.

May I begin my testimony.

In 1897, Bram Stoker had created a worldwide phenomenon to sweep the nation; bringing to light the legends of vampires and their habits, weakneses and strengths. But that wasn't even the beginning of it.

Back in the 1400s, possibly even as early as the 1200s, villagers of small towns in Transylvania slept lightly at night in fear that vampires would descend upon them and feed. And while those legends may seem mediocre, may seem ridiculous, they are, in fact, true. People did indeed fear vampires back then.

And they were certainly not awing spectacles of shiny-ness and they didn't hiss like little girls when they were confronted by other vampires.

Vampires, according to Transylvanian legend, held themselves at the highest standards, had multiple wives, and made sure that if an enemy was near, it was either outsmarting them via traps or quick and beautiful dispatchment...

I'm sorry that you had to read this, but Twilight Vampires are far from their ancestors; in both respectworthiness and believability.

Based on comparisons, vampires from Transylvanian legend have an 89% higher chance of surviving in the wild, as opposed to Twilight vampires.

I may post the graph later.

THIS IS FAR FROM OVER!!


I am sorry, but I am sick to the teeth of people saying that the legend of vampires themselves started at Dracula and ended at the Twilight Saga (a waste of precious time).

Within CastleVania's saga, there lies many references to the Vampire. Quite obviously, CastleVania has taken inspiration from these creatures of the night and weaved it into their own brand of entertainment. You can simply play through the games in the series and understand completely...or so you may think! Without thoroughly understand the history and ways of the Vampire it is near impossible to grasp the logically-deprived story of CastleVania. Vampires being the most influential of the monsters in CastleVania, you should learn as much as possible of them as you do the main vampire hunter. Bare with me as I teach you a brief history of the blood suckers...

The word "Vampire", as you may think contrary, has been around since the Dark Ages, where it was given birth. Despite its modern definition, the word was used in a business-related contract in which the man calls an authority a "vampire". Where he got it from we know not, but it went into seclusion for a few centuries until the reports of vampirism finally began to pop up. Quite fitting with the brutal reports, the word "Vampire" was derived from a Slavic term pronounced in the same manner that meant, when translated, anything from "bat," "wolf," "flying, blood."

Along with the artistic movement and the "Enlightenment" period of earth, people soon began to seek knowledge and philosophic accumulation. During this time, people were experimenting for the first time, with forms of entertainment and arts. The theater was perhaps the most influential art to rise from those times. Towns people and even peasants would hold small performances acting out vampiric and witch/voodoo-related murders and practices. All of these things, along with the growing over knowledge of man with the invention of books and education for all led way to the public awareness of vampires.

Infatuated with tales told of vampires and mystical creatures, many thinkers put their mind to writing novels devoted solely to the vampire. A monk by the name Dom Augustin Calmet (1672-1757) wrote reports on differences between vampires in general and witches. Plays and acts also began to sprout up in the late 17th century and mid 18th century that showed the vampires portrayed in a wide array of manners from noble counts to haunting lesbians and succubus'.

I think I love you now. This research alone is amazing, not to mention how you're using it.

THUMBS UP!

((Delete this if necessary to continue))

((Fight the power, Admin-kun! Please, enlighten us with words of wisdom and truth!))

(I appreciate the gratitude; I was expecting to be flamed or trolled! Honestly, though, I'm sick of everyone saying Vampires just sprung out of the ground at Stoker. No, they did not!)

As I had left off in my evil rant of doom...

Vampirism is one of the most mysterious... er... mysteries of our time; from how long ago it originated, we can tell that the vampire is just as real in the psyche as it is physically impossible to manipulate.

To my surprise, as I continue this awkward and completely-personal vendetta against the Twilight vamps and their folly, I came across a startling fact; Christians, Greeks, and even Indians had thought of vampires long before Stephenie Meyer's time. (I don't care if I spelled the hag's name wrong.)

These religious groups all believed that drinking one's blood was considered passing on life; as in, taking in 'life-blood' was the equivalent of gaining more life.

Now, tell me you know that Romans were around ages ago, right? And God, time was based on God's only son's birth; AD began when Jesus Christ was born. Christians were born long before the 1200's. Indians... Their origins are mysterious, but are believed to be as old as the Romans' themselves! So, to further prove my theory that this legend is older than it is perceived... I am right!

But, now on to continue the rant that not only are vampires older than time itself, they are also more valuable than the Twilight vamps (if you can call them vampires) make them out to be. A quick example:

Back in Transylvania in the 1200s, villagers described vampires as 'unfeeling', 'evil', 'malevolent', 'completely disregarding all forms of life', and 'focused on their own personal gain through manipulation and intimidation of an opponent/prey'.

In 2009, teenage groups of squealing fangirls (known as 'R.A.H.R.' (pronounced r-AH-r) or Rabid Animals of the Human Race) describe vampires as 'sexy', 'loving', 'hot', 'cute', and 'protective', and only one of those are true, but in different perspective.

**The 'protagonist', Eliza of some sort, is the vampire Edgar's mate. In this he is protective, as he protects her against a few other vampires that come, hiss, then run off, only to come back, steal her, and make a few faces before ripping to shreds and burning in a pile of wood.

Sadly, if Edgar was really Eliza's mate, he would have changed her in .2 seconds. Not even.

Not only that!

Dracula is not protective of his wives, not even his newborn spawn! He is only protective of all that keeps him alive; the wives aren't a must, the children aren't a must, and the Chevelle parked out front is NOT a must.

Though it's awesome. ^.^

**Due to my dislike of Twilight, names above are deliberately messed up.

Vampires take mates; and let us keep this straight while we can: MATES. Only MATES. Not GIRLFRIENDS, WIVES, LOVERS, NONE OF THAT!! MATES. They are animalistic and fierce, and wished to be treated as such. Anyways, they take mates, which they call, very formally, 'brides'. These 'brides' of vampires are there for one and only one purpo-- ...Okay, maybe 2 purposes.

-To swoon over and worship their master. [Because if there is one affirmative thing I know about vampires, and even Twilight vampire-wannabes have this, it's that they're completely full of both themselves and shit. That's why the older (and NOT Twilight) ones are so cunning; they can tell lies like their hair is shiny. Twilight... No, they lost their cunningness a long time ago.. Around Chapter 1. Which they were not in. So HA!!]
-To breed.

And another, because it is very true too;

-To teach the children to feed.

Like bats themselves, they swarm. This passage proves that vampires may have been erected from the vampire bat and show some of the effects of the vampire bat's venom is not far off from that of Dracula himself:

Quote :

...a species known as the "vampire bat" has been studied... because of its strange eating habits. This bat sucks the blood of its victims by making a clean cut to the neck and main artery. It's saliva contains chemicals that gradually take consciousness from the creature it is eating.

Now tell me there is no resemblance. If you do, I'll kick you in the face.

Though the vampire bat is great proof vampires originated from an animal, there a few others that can compete with it, such as the leech. The leech is perhaps the most basic, representing the idea of a slimy, forboding creature taking human blood. Vampires were once portrayed as slimy, having pale, sickly, gooey skin and red eyes. I have a belief that this is where the vampire's hatred of sunlight came from; how easily leeches can dry up when placed in the sun with no water!

Many other legends can rival that of the vampire, such as the chupacabra of South America, or the furies of Greece. The chupacabra, a blood-sucking alien creature that feasts on animals, is a vampire-like myth that originated in the hills of South America, and still exists today. The myth of the fury, or a women that sucks the life from a sleeping victim, was created in Greek times to represent the wrath of the Gods. These creatures were released upon the earth to suck sould through the mouths of their victims, and send them to agony-filled torment in Hades, or Hell.

Therefore, it is also my belief that the vampire is a combination of many creatures, myths, and legends to create one uber-legend to strike fear into the hearts of men...

And not lust into the hearts of squealing teenage girls.

While none of the above may have anything to do with what I have originally argued about (the existance of a true beginning to vampires) it all ties in to one thing; while the vampires had a beginning and there was proof the beginning was older than we are, I have also proved that the Twilight vampires aren't just modernly shallow; they're a disgrace. Dracula and even a hunter of Dracula, Van Helsing, aka Gabriel, the Left Hand of God, would spit on you.

Now bow to Dracula, Edgar.

I may conclude this argument for now, but the war is not nearly as over as you assume it is.

*bows and leaves... for now*

((Oh so true. Bitches and bastards, he is right. Vampires are not kids who participate in human things such as school and they dont drive cars and dress like fancy little bitchin' rich kids. They dress in very ornate and delicately pieced to together clothes, live away from humanity, and kill them or make them vampires who are cruel and cold-hearted. You know what f*ckers?!!! Screw Twilight!!!! It's a piece of sh*t book/movie that deserves to be burned and forgotten!!!!!! Right on brother!!!))

((...Because I love you sooo much... Please marry me, Admin-sama.))

禁断の愛 wrote:

(I appreciate the gratitude; I was expecting to be flamed or trolled! Honestly, though, I'm sick of everyone saying Vampires just sprung out of the ground at Stoker. No, they did not!)

((Why would we? This "rant" kicks ass.))

((Thanks tons! ^.^

I can't seem to crop up more research at the mo', though I think I'm about done with the rant.))