Everything Paranormal discussion

My bestie and I have been going back and forth about this issue. I say Fangs aren't cliche , their the one things that make a Vamp a Vamp. She on the other thinks they are, which annoys me because she only feels this way because of her Edward Love. What do you guys think?

Fangs are totally NOT cliche, I'm with you Jael, Fangs are what make a vamp a vamp!! Don't get me wrong I love Edward and all, but real vamps have to have fangs :)

Yes they do Susan. I am glad someone agrees.

Yep, vamps and fangs go together--always have, always will. And while I enjoyed the Twilight books, I still occasionally cringe at sparkly vamps and fangless ones as well. I mean, she could have left us the FANGS. . .

Fangs are sexy. We need fangs!

I agree Terri.

I don't think fangs are cliche, but not all blood-drinker myths involve fangs. If you go beyond the Dracula-esque vampires and the Black Death-era vampires and really look at vampire myths across the globe, some of these beings don't use fangs to consume blood. My co-author, Heather Poinsett Dunbar, is the real research expert on the subject. However, I recall that in some Western African myths, the tongues were used... sharp barbs at the tip of the tongue penetrated the victim's body and then siphoned blood through a tube in the tongue. I know there were other examples of mythological vampires without fangs, but I can't remember; maybe my co-author will read this post and add her own thoughts.

Cheers!

Christopher

I agree. Fangs make the vamp! Would be so weird to be a vamp and fangless... I think it's because we're all conditioned to think this way already... ever since we watched Dracula...

Carole
The Romance Reviews

The Romance Reviews (Carole) wrote: "I agree. Fangs make the vamp! Would be so weird to be a vamp and fangless... I think it's because we're all conditioned to think this way already... ever since we watched Dracula...

Carole
The ..."

Well, our blood-drinkers do have fangs, so far, though we will likely have some races of blood drinkers without fangs. We try to be sticklers to the mythology and folklore that we find. I agree, though, that vampires without fangs would take a lot to get used to...

Cheers!

Christopher Dunbar

okay okay...I shall comment, co-author. I admit. I like fangs. Fangs aren't always part of the vampire mythos. I'd even say that they aren't 'necessary' when someone could use sharp implements, etc.. However, a majority think 'fangs' when vampires are mentioned, and I for one would miss them. :)

I need to have the fangs. I did enjoy Twilight and Forever David but it took away from the story. Also, vamps should not be out in the day and eating cheese burgers. I am old school about the mythology.

LOL @ the out in the day eating cheeseburgers. Yeah I usually can enjoy a story about day walking vamps if the reason given is one I can believe, but yeah i like them to only be able to come out at night.

agreed. Vamps are creatures of the night - it's part of the allure. It makes them more mysterious and forbidden. Fangs are a must. The whole Twilight idea that their flat human-like teeth are just magically able to bite through easily somehow didn't make any sense to me.

Nor did it makes sense to me Melinda but my friend will justify and give reason for it to no end. LOL

Hey, human teeth are attached to a mouth with a totally nasty amount of bacteria in it. That's why in Emergency Rooms, human bites are treated a lot faster--and with a lot more antibiotics than a corresponding bite by an animal--well, unless the animal is suspected to have rabies, or its done a lot of collateral damange. But that I could really buy the Wolves of the Tribe's sharp teeth doing more damage than I could see the human like teeth of the vamps.

Maybe it's just me but perhaps some writers like the concept of animated dead and go with vamps since no one would find zombies sexy or interesting. So perhaps that is what the writer of Twilight was doing. Using the vamp element of being immortal and drinking blood but not the weakness to daylight and fangs. It's been done before. For me, I just don't enjoy it as a rule and it takes quite a bit away from the myth.

jD wrote: "Maybe it's just me but perhaps some writers like the concept of animated dead and go with vamps since no one would find zombies sexy or interesting. So perhaps that is what the writer of Twilight ..."

I am not one who believes all vampires have to be undead, or in some cases, immortal. If you base your vampires on actual vampire folklore from many cultures, each one is different so there are many ways one can portray a vampire. What is common, you might ask, is that they all consume the life essences of mortals, whether that essence is blood, energy, or something else. No other traits are 100% common for all other legends, at least not that I have seen so far. I think how vampires are portrayed today stem from Bram Stoker's vision and all of those who have come since.

Anyway, gotta run.

Cheers!

Christopher Dunbar

Good point Christopher. I forgot about Black Dagger Brotherhood and The Breed -- both have living beings (with fangs). I suppose it can be argued that the Stoker's myth has not inhibitied the creative ways writers define vampire. Again, for me, fangs fit within the definition of what makes them interesting. I am okay with them consuming energy or life essence but food...not so much. I can honestly say that many of my friends enjoyed Twilight because they were not fans of vampires and were more relaxed with the fangless version.

Hey, while we are talking "non" undead vamps, don't forget the Argeneaus. :o) Scientifically created vampires--from Atlantis. lol, I LOVE that in a couple of the books, they throw in that hoary old "Man From Atlantis" TV show. ( Man from Atlantis )

Yes, I read that one too. I love it. I call it "vamplite". Are we missing any more good living vamp series?

The daimons from Kenyon's Dark Hunter series are also living vamps. The vamps from Mead's Vampire Academy are too. That's all I'm remembering this late at night. :)

Aren't the Carpathians also "living vamps"? as opposed to the undead vamps that they turn into if they don't find their soul mates? Its been a LONG time since I read the series, so I'm a little vague on the whole sequence.

That's right, most of the Carpathians are born. I going to have to go with WTF on the Daimons. I thought they were some sort of soul sucking demonish immortals from mythology. Are they supposed to be vamps because they have fangs? My bad--I feel kinda dumb.

Yeah, the Daimons in Kenyon's series use their fangs to take souls in order to elongate their lives, so they're not really dead but just trying to live past the age of 27. They need to consume the souls to live longer lives {and if I'm remembering right - before they turn Daimon when they are Apollites, don't they drink blood?}. They also can't walk in sunlight.

So are they vamp? I mean does Keynon promote the series as a vamp series? I never got that impression.

She doesn't promote it as a vamp series. The Daimon's don't appear in ALL the books, just in some. And her description of them, in my opinion, was a little bit vague.

Basically, they were cursed by Apollo (who is ALSO their progenitor) for killing one of his lovers or another child or something. Because of the curse, none of them can live past 27--UNLESS they feed on the souls of humans. That's really when they become vampires, since until then they feed off each other (I think that's right, its been a while since I read them.)

It's been awhile for me too. that's why I am fuzzy. I was never a big fan of the series but I did love Acheron. That one was my favorites along with the hunter who was stuck in Alaska and ended up marrying a goddess.

Susan (Suz) wrote: "Fangs are totally NOT cliche, I'm with you Jael, Fangs are what make a vamp a vamp!! Don't get me wrong I love Edward and all, but real vamps have to have fangs :)"
I say "YES!" Totally!! Fangs Make The Vampire. Stephenie's Vampires are really actually Blood Drinkers not Blood Suckers ;)