Fictional vs. Classical Vampires

     Sounds like a “B” movie title doesn't it? It lends itself to the perception that there are vast differences between the two. The reality though is that much like a lot of realities that are revealed on a daily basis involving a wide variety of topics often do not match the perception. For generations since the release of the 1922 silent film “Nosferatu” which was supposed to be based on an adaptation of Bram stokers “Dracula”, classical vampires have been defined by their alleged and often times brutal ways in which they obtained the blood for which they needed to exist. As I said though the perception often does not match the reality. When looking at the purported vampires of the past attention must be paid to the fact that every culture has had their version of vampires. This reveals that there are often huge discrepancies between the perceived classic and those in which they are based off of are at times huge. For the sake of this, I'll use two of the more notable figures of vampire lore, Vlad Tepes and Elizabeth Bathory.

     Vlad Tepes is portrayed as a vicious and blood thirsty ruler who inflicted pain and death on those who crossed his path. He is portrayed as one who renounced god and Christian beliefs, thus leading to rising upon his death as a vampire as punishment. The reality though is there are no accounts of Vlad ever having inflicted any of the atrocities that are accredited to him on the people he ruled over. What is noted however is that when he did die, he died a devout Christian.

     The lady Bathory however is a different matter entirely. There are recorded accounts of the atrocities she stood accused of. Her actions reflect more of what is associated with the classical vampire. Upon her trial it was reveal that the number of victims she herself admitted to but showed no remorse for is around 600. It is also noted that she reveled in torture, and kept practitioners of darker arts by her side and was even taught about these arts. There are those who believe she was the real inspiration for Brom Stoker's vampire. The times however did not view women, even those of nobility not equal to men therefore her atrocities were attributed to a more believable figure in a ruler who in truth is really only guilty of impaling those who he perceived as traitors and invading armies.

     The “Fictional” vampire however is a Hollywood / romance novel driven entity. It gives us vampires that we have come to a first name basis with. Names such as Lestat, Nick, Angel, Spike, Mick, and even “bleh” Edward. Although these fictional vamps still are portrayed as blood drinkers. Their methods of getting it is portrayed as noble, romantic, and less messy. Fictional vampires are often defined in a black and white, good or bad personality. Since Lestat first graced the imagination and pages of Anne Rice, vampires have been given personality. These personalities more times than not are reflections of the society in which we live. They are polar opposite of what is believed about classical vampires. They truly are figments or adaptations of the imaginations of their creators.

     The differences between the “fictional” vampire and that of the “classical” vampire are apparent. One is seen as a devil incarnate, the other the mysterious stranger in the shadows who saves the night.