|
|
Post by Paradox on Sept 19, 2009 21:12:17 GMT -5
Thought I'd link you an excellent article from Fred Clark over at the Slacktivist. Vampires & Crosses. I know many of you will like it. |
|
|
|
Post by Magnizeal on Sept 19, 2009 23:09:19 GMT -5
My first thought was that he knows nothing about D/s, where the sub has the power -by- submitting. And then that turned into wanting to write a D/s vampire story with a willing harem of donors. Then I turned my brain off and played some games. >.>
Anyway, it was interesting, but... well, wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by renaissanceblonde on Sept 19, 2009 23:20:10 GMT -5
Interesting...
Wow. Just wow. He worships a zombie God whose followers share his blood, and he calls out vampires?
|
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on Sept 19, 2009 23:45:30 GMT -5
My first thought was that he knows nothing about D/s, where the sub has the power -by- submitting. And then that turned into wanting to write a D/s vampire story with a willing harem of donors. Then I turned my brain off and played some games. >.> Anyway, it was interesting, but... well, wrong. I really don't think he was going for the sexual angle here. I'm pretty sure he was talking about people who exploit others for their own ends. Sex wasn't mentioned at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Magnizeal on Sept 20, 2009 2:04:07 GMT -5
My first thought was that he knows nothing about D/s, where the sub has the power -by- submitting. And then that turned into wanting to write a D/s vampire story with a willing harem of donors. Then I turned my brain off and played some games. >.> Anyway, it was interesting, but... well, wrong. I really don't think he was going for the sexual angle here. I'm pretty sure he was talking about people who exploit others for their own ends. Sex wasn't mentioned at all. Oh, I know he wasn't going for the sex angle at all. I've just been doing a lot with D/s stories that have it as lifestyle, so 24/7, which is... how to put this. Not primarily sexual. My point was just the exchange of power, the way the one who 'gives up' is actually the one with the power, and the one who Dominates is actually the one following. Purely talking about the power lines, and contrasting that to how he's saying vampires are incapable of understanding that because they are the 'Doms'. He just doesn't use that terminology. Does that clear it up? |
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Sept 20, 2009 2:17:19 GMT -5
My first thought was that he knows nothing about D/s, where the sub has the power -by- submitting. And then that turned into wanting to write a D/s vampire story with a willing harem of donors. Then I turned my brain off and played some games. >.> Anyway, it was interesting, but... well, wrong. I really don't think he was going for the sexual angle here. I'm pretty sure he was talking about people who exploit others for their own ends. Sex wasn't mentioned at all. But those who exploit those for their own ends are not turned off by selflessness, at most, they shrug and take anyways. For those who take, somebody who always submits is their wet dream. Sticking with Magni's relationship example, the idea in the link is disproven because there are abusive relationships. An abuser doesn't hesitate because his/her partner gives, the abuser takes more. The article seems to be saying that somebody who is being taken advantage of (not just sexually, but it includes sexually) should just submit and the abuser will be confused and stop. This doesn't work. |
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on Sept 20, 2009 9:02:22 GMT -5
I really don't think he was going for the sexual angle here. I'm pretty sure he was talking about people who exploit others for their own ends. Sex wasn't mentioned at all. Oh, I know he wasn't going for the sex angle at all. I've just been doing a lot with D/s stories that have it as lifestyle, so 24/7, which is... how to put this. Not primarily sexual. My point was just the exchange of power, the way the one who 'gives up' is actually the one with the power, and the one who Dominates is actually the one following. Purely talking about the power lines, and contrasting that to how he's saying vampires are incapable of understanding that because they are the 'Doms'. He just doesn't use that terminology. Does that clear it up? In a way your point and his are the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on Sept 20, 2009 9:06:14 GMT -5
I really don't think he was going for the sexual angle here. I'm pretty sure he was talking about people who exploit others for their own ends. Sex wasn't mentioned at all. But those who exploit those for their own ends are not turned off by selflessness, at most, they shrug and take anyways. For those who take, somebody who always submits is their wet dream. Sticking with Magni's relationship example, the idea in the link is disproven because there are abusive relationships. An abuser doesn't hesitate because his/her partner gives, the abuser takes more. The article seems to be saying that somebody who is being taken advantage of (not just sexually, but it includes sexually) should just submit and the abuser will be confused and stop. This doesn't work. I think the relevant passage is this one. The goal is not to submit to evil, but to confound it. The vampire believes that it is better to prey on other people than to give to them. It's philosophical and shit. It's Christian ethics, ok? It's complicated. I just thought it was a wonderful metaphor. |
|
|
|
Post by Magnizeal on Sept 20, 2009 13:33:23 GMT -5
The goal is not to submit to evil, but to confound it. The vampire believes that it is better to prey on other people than to give to them. It's philosophical and shit.
It's Christian ethics, ok? It's complicated. I just thought it was a wonderful metaphor.[/quote]
But that's what he's saying. 'Vampires' are not confounded by the crosses. People who prey on others are not confounded when others give up the pursuit of power. They do not think "Hey, maybe the other person has the right idea." They think "Sucker!" and continue to go about their life of preying.
|
|
|
|
Post by shiftyeyes on Sept 22, 2009 23:13:59 GMT -5
I had always just assumed that in any setting in which vampires are repelled by crosses that isn't explicitly Christian, the logic was that vampire had always had issues w/ that shape and the cross caught on as symbol for the church b/c of the added vampire fighting bonus it provided.
|
|
|
|
Post by John E on Sept 25, 2009 1:14:34 GMT -5
I think the bottom line is that the type of vampire stories that most modern vampire stories are based on were first popularized in Christian Europe, at a time when the religion and the church had a lot of influence. Vampires being scared/harmed by crosses was likely just the people telling the tale patting themselves on the back that their religion of choice is so teh ossum that it beats scary evil things.
Anything deeper than that is retcon.
|
|
|
|
Post by shiftyeyes on Sept 25, 2009 18:16:48 GMT -5
Yes, it's retcon. But it's retconning the history of the church, which they've demonstrated a complete willingness to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by calee022 on Sept 26, 2009 16:18:45 GMT -5
Read "I Am Legend" (DON'T watch the movie).
|
|
|
|
Post by peanutfan on Sept 27, 2009 13:58:50 GMT -5
I actually think the vampiric fear of the cross predates Christianity.
Hear me out on this. Many religions around the world have used crosses as symbols of the sun. These symbols include both equilateral crosses and crosses of the type now known as cruciform. Europe was once home to many of these religions.
By the same token, many vampire-like creatures in European lore were weakened or driven into torpor by sunlight, though the complete destruction part of it didn't enter the picture until the 1922 movie "Nosferatu".
Hence, brandishing a symbol of the sun at a creature that was weakened by sunlight...I think you all can work out the rest on your own.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on Sept 27, 2009 19:43:25 GMT -5
I actually think the vampiric fear of the cross predates Christianity. Hear me out on this. Many religions around the world have used crosses as symbols of the sun. These symbols include both equilateral crosses and crosses of the type now known as cruciform. Europe was once home to many of these religions. By the same token, many vampire-like creatures in European lore were weakened or driven into torpor by sunlight, though the complete destruction part of it didn't enter the picture until the 1922 movie "Nosferatu". Hence, brandishing a symbol of the sun at a creature that was weakened by sunlight...I think you all can work out the rest on your own. Vampires optical nerves are hooked up in such a way that they go into grand mal seizures when observing intersecting parallel lines. While not a disadvantage in nature, it led to their extinction once humans discovered euclidean architecture. |
|
