Bitchin' Blog Posts
Fangs and Hair, Vamps and Weres, and What’s Next
by SB Sarah | by SB Sarah | November 25, 2009 | Wednesday at 11:17 am | 145 CommentsI was pondering my continued enjoyment of werewolf fiction, especially in the wake of the polarized reaction to my review of Bitten, and started to wonder why were-predators and vampires seem to be still the dominant paranormal motif in romance. There are other paranormal creatures - faeries, were-amphibians, were-birds, demons, ghosts, incubi and succubi, for example - within the paranormal romance shelves, but the predominant creature, both in continued fascination and in number of titles, seems to be the weres and the vamps.
Why is that? There’s a lot of questioning as to why the Twilight series sustains its audience (which grows weirder and weirder with every movie release, holy hell) and why vampires remain so alluring, and why these creatures pair so well with romance. I think that the allure of vampires is related to the allure of were-predators: each metaphorically details and resolves a deep-seated human fear or struggle.
With vampire romance, beneath (heh) the resolution of the attraction and courtship, there’s obviously death. Whether the vampirism is explained by a virus or the creature in question is actually dead, putting aside the “Ew, necrophilia” questions, vampire romance negotiates and conquers or destroys death.
I’ve talked about why paranormal romance is so popular and related that to the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US, and I think that same resolution of fear is, in part, what makes vampire romance so continually interesting to readers. I think (and many people disagree with me here) that paranormal romance became superbly popular in the US market following 9/11/01, for two main reasons. First, the evil is easily identified. Either he wants to exsanguinate you, or he gets really hairy in compliment to her lunar cycle, but the otherness and the potential intent to harm is pretty easy to spot. Contrast that with the kid and a backpack on the subway who might be a student or might be ready to blow himself and his neighbors to bits. The easily identifiable evil is a comforting contrast.
Then, there’s the resolution of that otherness. Either the Other is tamed by the Power of Lurrrrve™ and the protagonists united through conversion (she becomes a vamp, he becomes a were, etc) or the Other is destroyed because it’s the antagonist preventing the happy ending. And when a paranormal creature is destroyed in romance, it’s not just a duel with a handkerchief in the dew. The offending Other is chopped into pieces, set on fire, beheaded, and possibly sent to an entirely other dimension, depending on the world building and mythology at work. There is no ass kicking like paranormal villain ass kicking.
So when that taming and uniting or destroying happens within vampire romance, death is being vanquished at the same time. The unification with the heroine is symbolically a return to life. In Kresley Cole’s world, the vampires regain their heartbeats when they meet their mated other - a physical return to life. With Feehan’s Carpathians, they see in color after eons of monochromatic vision, and eventually indulge in requisite doggy style sexxoring. Nothing says back to life like backin’ that ass up, right?
With were-predators, I think, the issue being negotiated with the happy ending is anger. Combining animal instinct, predatory violence, and a code of rules and behavior that are both similar and separate from human society, were-predators can make for some amazing romance fiction. Instead of death, it’s rage and anger that are tamed and directed, or vanquished all together, and I think that for women particularly, that’s compelling. Were heroines come to terms with their violent side and have a proper and sanctioned outlet for all that unladylike rage and anger. Were heroes are isolated, even in a pack, and their rage must be tamed or redirected, or destroyed altogether, lest that anger and rage dominate the person. Emotional and psychological balance often factor into were romances, as well. Perhaps, even, it’s not so much anger as it is insanity that’s being negotiated in were romances.
When I was pondering this in 140-or-less on Twitter, Syzygy Magazine (NSFW) proposed that the vampires and the weres were recast archetypes which never go out of style, thereby extending their popularity as they reappear in other subgenres. The vampires are “the same brooding, wounded noblemen that dominate the period romance market, while the weres are “the tough, somewhat dangerous wilderness-connected archetype that usedto be rendered as cowboys.” I’m not sure I agree that the popularity can be explained simply by recurrence of archetype, and certainly there are broody weres up and down the joint, but that’s definitely a factor in their sustained popularity.
So what comes next? (heh.) What paranormal creature will rise (heh) to equal the vampire and the were in stature and publishing frequency? Are succubi and incubi the next big thing, or are their predatory sexual natures not that threatening? Ghosts are about death, but they’re also not entirely corporeal - something that troubled many a JR Ward fan. Zombies? Syzygy suggests that zombies represent the underclass; I think they represent decomp.
Are faeries the next big thing, or are they too complex to capture the romance reader imagination for repeated readings, since their mythology involves a very large and complicated society already? Maybe there isn’t a creature that captures, conveys and recasts a basic fear as much as vampires and weres do already.
What I’m most curious about is what creature could come next that would attract repeated readings of similar mythologies and characters as much as weres and vamps. Readers of were romance and vampire romance so often go after more of it, and seem to revel in re-experiencing the mythology and the courtship within it in books from a huge variety of authors. In fact, it’s that repeated reading of similar creatures that made me wonder if the attraction to the creature is tied to an underlying issue. Is there a similar issue that imbues a different paranormal creature? I’m not saying that we’re all neurotic morons who have our knickers tied into origami about death and anger. I do think, however, that the commonalities are revealing, and the enduring popularity of both vampires and weres indicates that more is being revisited than just a fangsome, hairy courtship.
Filed: General Bitching, Random Musings
Tagged: zombies, vampires, twilight, paranormal, kresley cole, cowboys, christine feehan,
Scrin said on 11.25.09 at 12:40 PM • [link]
I’d honestly put down the bias in the weres down to charisma. There are charismatic animals that people like. Wolves, big cats of various kinds…Maybe a few more.
As for the rest…Well, a little bit I’d lay at Harry Potter’s feet. After HP got going, fantasy got opened up to a more general audience and people found out it can be cool. Also, fantasy is fun to write, so if it’s selling, there’s people willing to write, creating a positive feedback loop. Since the romance genre is about the framework of the story and not the actual setting, it’s pretty reasonable to see a rise in the paranormal/fantasy romances.
And, then you get things like Twilight, were it takes the tired old fantasy/paranormal/horror formula and gets the sparkle going by dusting the story up with crack like it’s powdered sugar on a donut.
So, yeah, pretty much, fantasy writing (no matter if it’s set in some other world or in the streets of your own city) is getting mainstream and it’s got stuff the mainstream has yet encountered (I am quite proud that my Weird Shit Quotient is quite high, and therefore I can mess up the normos with stuff they haven’t heard of before.)
lilacsigil said on 11.25.09 at 01:13 PM • [link]
Robots! Well, androids. Or golems. Marge Piercy’s “Body of Glass” (also known as “He, She and It”) while not romance, as such, works with the golem legend in robot form, and ever since I read it, I have had a distinct lack of robot romance in my life.
ibm said on 11.25.09 at 01:55 PM • [link]
Great entry! The ass comment made me snort the water I was drinking all over my keyboard though :-)
I agree with the robot as the next frontier. Both Linnea Sinclair and Catherine Asaro have a line in relentless Cyborg manly sex bots…Of course there are Angels, a la Sharon Shinn? Also Julien May’s books, which are essentially romances, have well developed faery themes. I found this good list on Amazon, complete with mermaids http://www.amazon.com/Paranormal-Romance-Takes-wing-Shifters/lm/R176HTZGF7DE7I
Babs said on 11.25.09 at 02:11 PM • [link]
Oh God, please not faeries. As my daughter has just moved past the Disney Princess & Disney Fairy phase I just can’t do it…
I like the robot angle however…
SnowballOne said on 11.25.09 at 02:17 PM • [link]
Sarah,
I’m getting very uncomfortable with the contempt for Twilight I see on this site. I’m not a huge Twilight fan - I read the books but I won’t reread them, and I haven’t seen the movies - but I believe all fans deserve respect, even if you personally don’t agree with the value or values of the works they enjoy. Or their means of expressing their enthusiasm.
When you say the Twilight audience “grows weirder and weirder with every movie release, holy hell” - well, I see that as exactly the same fifteen-yard penalty you call when news outlets call romance readers frustrated housewives and romance novels bodice-rippers. It was unnecessary and truly a bit of a cheap shot. “Twilight” seems to have become a go-to punching bag around here - witness the Harlequin Presents titles content - just like romance is on other sites.
I suppose what I’m saying is - let’s practice what we preach. If we don’t want people casually denigrating what we love, let’s not do it to others. If we want to say, “I found Twilight poorly written. I disagreed with the gender roles and I found the relationship to be abusive,” fine, those are specific criticisms, which might be relevant to their context. But could we avoid gratuitous snark?
Edie said on 11.25.09 at 02:28 PM • [link]
Paranormal is fairly massive here in Australia too, most of the massive paranormal fans I know, also read normal fantasy (actually read the fantasy before the found romance as well as during) - so don’t know if that is the case with a proportion of US fans??
I also think for some, it is easier to suspend disbelief for a paranormal than it is for some other genres within romance. Or that could just be me.
We’ve already had ghosts.. early nineties is full of ghosts and time travel and even them combined. There are a lot of Demons already in e-pubs.. but futuristic seems to be making a bit of a comeback lately, so maybe it will be aliens?
Verification word mean65 - LOL
Jennifer Armintrout said on 11.25.09 at 03:19 PM • [link]
I don’t think it was necessarily 9/11 responsible for the rise in popularity of paranormal romance. Paranormal romance was growing pretty steadily in the early ‘90’s, too. It wasn’t as big as it is now, but it wasn’t difficult to find.
If anything, I think 9/11 accounted more for the rise in popularity of fiction with military heroes.
Jet said on 11.25.09 at 03:23 PM • [link]
Hey, nothing wrong with faeries especially the way Laurell K Hamilton writes them in the Merry Gentry series. Oh boy, hot stuff. Definitely not Disney.
Jen said on 11.25.09 at 03:35 PM • [link]
I think a lot of the links to - in particular- vampire fiction in general is that reaching for the unattainable and the temptation of a bad man who can’t be tamed. Every girl worth her salt would say she wants a bad boy for her own that she can tame with her mystical magic and vampire romance makes it a good outlet for that fantasy. They are the ULTIMATE bad boy that can never truly be redeemed.
And the same goes for werewolves, the raw aggression and animal violence is something we want to be able to tame until we can pet them like little pussy cats.
Of course, the only problem then is that once you tame them you don’t really want them anymore because they’re not the bad boys they used to be…these predators will never get like that because the dark side will always be a part of them, therefore giving them everlasting appeal.
And that, I think, answers the question of “what next?” There is no “what next?” Sure you’ll have your faeries and your robots but nothing will ever have the same deep-rooted appeal as the endlessly naughty Vampire and Werewolf.
kimsmith said on 11.25.09 at 03:58 PM • [link]
I predict angels. Don’t know if Anne Rice’s new book is good or even what it’s about (other than the holy host), and there’s Ward’s new series (which I haven’t read either), but Hush Hush was good (a new teen book). Part of the appeal of vampires is the “noble fallen” archetype, which one can play with quite a bit in angelic characters. There’s also the appeal of the strong, background type of a literal guardian angel.
I think angels are more challenging, though. Taking a religious icon that’s supposed to represent ultimate goodness and tarting it up, so to speak, as opposed to the vampirc bad boy appeal, which is already outside of the religious experience and, well, full of Bad Boyness—that just seems a little edgier to me, since people don’t really believe in vampires, but some believe in angels. Messing with the real versus the realm of the totally fantastic.
Deb said on 11.25.09 at 04:32 PM • [link]
Every “new” element in romance (whether time-travel, paranormal, werewolves, vampires, fairies, robots, what-have-you) is an attempt to up the conflict quotient and thereby make the resolution that much more intense and satisfying (in more ways than one). The key is always finding the right combination (and it does tend to be a zeitgeist thing) to enact the eternal dance of attraction-conflict/sexual tension-false resolution-more conflict/sexual tension-final resolution. Many of the “old” tropes that gave the romance its conflict and sexual tension (nobleman/commoner, yankee/rebel, patriot/tory, rancher/farmer, settler/Indian) have been played out, so “new” ones have been introduced. Eventually, they too will get old and something else will replace them. I remember about 15-20 years ago, every other romance involved time travel. You don’t see so many of those anymore. At some point, even vampires and werewolves will give way to some other exploration of what-makes-the-world-go-round.
As long as the stories are well-written with solid characters, I’m going to be reading romances regardless of how the love is manifested. I’m sure I’m not alone in that sentiment.
Debra Date said on 11.25.09 at 04:46 PM • [link]
Good article. Personally I think the popularity of the were/vamp trope is for a number of reasons, chief among these is the fact that almost everyone knows the basic vampire/were mythos (drinks blood/turns furry once a month). You would be hard pressed to find as large a group of people who know the basics of any other legendary creature (eg faeries). Angels would be perceived as taboo by many because of their religious connotations.
Paranormal romances also head straight to the grunting cavewoman part of my brain that appreciates protection with aggression (even if the heroine can take care of herself).
Wrap it all up in a big blanket of the Beauty/Beast trope and you’ve got the basics of a story that hits all my buttons.
I think that fantasy/sci-fi will continue to grow. Take a look at the most innovative and culturally significant movies and books of the last 20 years, most of them are sci-fi/fantasy. These genres allows for a re-telling of a familiar story in unexpected ways.
SB Sarah said on 11.25.09 at 04:59 PM • [link]
Fair enough. My apologies.
Alyssa F said on 11.25.09 at 05:12 PM • [link]
I think weres and vamps have appeal not only because of the danger, but because of an element I’ve seen in romances of every genre: let’s call it the “oh noes, I’m too kinky/rough/sexually demanding for this nice, sweet girl, she’ll never be able to handle me in bed, I must stay away!” trope. Basically, the hero’s animal/dark nature frees the heroine to be completely uninhibited with no fear of him thinking less of her for it, because she knows from the get-go that he is the same way, and that this makes her not only the woman he’s in love with, but his ultimate sexual fantasy as well- everything he’s ever wanted all rolled into one. (And isn’t that something we all want to discover that we are?)
What’s coming next? Well, there seems to be a growing trend towards genetically engineered superhumans. I’ve also seen a growing number of demons. If Harry Potter has inspired the paranormal industry, then why oh why has the urban magician antihero (as seen in the writings of Jim Butcher, Simon R Green, etc) never really taken hold in romances?
I WANT THAT. I would eat up those books like damn.
Maybe I should submit a book recommend thing to see if there’s anything like that out there. Yes, I think I will.
RStewie said on 11.25.09 at 05:26 PM • [link]
I agree with those above; evidently, the next new thing is Biblical: Angels, demons, fallen angels. Brooks’ Guardian series has been on this for a while, and Singh’s new Archangel series is taking the mythology in a different and interesting direction. Shinn I don’t read as Romance so much as Fantasy, but there’s no denying that she’s been down this road before, too.
With the rise of steampunk, I think the robots might have a chance…someone would really have to do it right, though, for me. When I think robots I think Terminator and/or Iron Man (I know, he’s not really a robot, it’s a suit)...but that’s not really sexxxy to me. (RDJ IS Teh Sexxy, tho.)
What I really love about Cole’s IAD series, though, is that there are SO MANY different mythologies included. I love that she just takes all of them and throws them together. I’m waiting for her to throw an angel in there…I saw it mentioned at one point, I think.
brandi said on 11.25.09 at 05:44 PM • [link]
I think it would be impossible to determine what the next frontier is for the paranormal genre, because the success of Twilight can be mainly attributed to the fact that Meyers made it accessible to an audience that is not the typical paranormal romance reader.
And I think your theories about vampires representing eternal life, and werewolves representing the rage inside of us is very thought provoking.
I think the reason vampires and werewolves are so appealing is because vampires represent everlasting love while werewolves represent unbidden desire.
I was just having a discussion with another writer about the main reason that Twilight’s werewolf vs vampire works so well is because they represent Bella’s growing sexuality.
When Bella meets Edward he longed for her, had a hunger for her and eventually fell in love with her. It is a proper and sweeping romance. A love that will last forever.
Jacob comes along when Bella is older, and he represents not love but sex. He has this fantastic body, he radiates heat, he walks about with this natural sexual charisma.
Bella is 18 years old, and as a girl gets older, her longings for someone to love her endlessly are not always as strong as her natural hormonal desires.
This is why the party lines are so split between the two. What type of man are you looking for, one that will love you and treat you like a fragile little china doll for all of eternity, or one that will easily rip off his clothes and as Trent Reznor says “F*ck you like an animal.”
Debra Date said on 11.25.09 at 05:47 PM • [link]
Brandi, that last sentence is made of Pure WIN! I couldn’t agree more.
Theresa Meyers said on 11.25.09 at 05:49 PM • [link]
I think vampires and weres have yet another appeal beyond the bad boy, rough side, taming the beast thing.
You brought up death, I rather think that popularity of vampires has to do more with the universal search for immortality in one form or another. It touches a common thread in all of humanity, which makes it more popular. Just look at all the religions in the world all explaining life of one form or another after death to see the appeal.
With weres its another human basic, the freedom to release ones primal self within society. We expect weres to dominate, take what they want, be passionate and territorial. All things that if you did it at work would get you popped in the back of the head with a pink slip faster than you could crack open a book cover.
If we take these two themes further then other characters with that same immortal bent or ability to safely showcase the primal nature of humanity are going to grow in popularity as well.
On the immortal side, that would be things like angels (lets not forget Lucifer was the highest angel of them all so they do go bad on occasion), demons (which includes succubi and incubbi), fairies (the dark kind a la Melissa Marr) and ancient gods/goddesses.
On the animal side it would include shapshifters of other types not just the canine or feline varities.
I’m not buying into the whole robot thing only because, seriously, what if it was programmed to just say it loved you? Would that really be the same thing?
Ha! Spaminator is were34. Scary. It’s like it reads minds.
Barb Ferrer said on 11.25.09 at 05:51 PM • [link]
I think if you want to know what’s going to be big next in terms of paranormal romance, it’s good to skim the YA shelves. That said, I as was already said above, angels for sure and perhaps ghosts. Fairies/fae, and I think more sophisticated retellings of fairy tales are going to gain steam again. (Two that are making splashes right now are Ash and Fairest.)
Theresa Meyers said on 11.25.09 at 05:55 PM • [link]
Brandi. Thank you. Now scared.
Preteen daughter after seeing New Moon on Fri: “Mom, I don’t get why all the girls in my class like Edward. I mean he’s kind of like flour. But Jacob, Jacob is like chocolate chip cookies. Ok, more like just the chocolate.”
O.M.G. I’m screwed, aren’t I?
Melisse Aires said on 11.25.09 at 06:05 PM • [link]
I think an underlying issue with vampire popularity is that they are powerful, alpha—but they are also vulnerable. There’s sunlight, vampire hunters, wooden stakes, vampire hunters, more evil vampires…and just night to night living that keeps them in a restless undead lifestyle. The love of a good woman brings changes beyond true love, it brings a way out of a dark life.
teshara said on 11.25.09 at 06:08 PM • [link]
I want to see genies :D
RebeccaA said on 11.25.09 at 06:12 PM • [link]
I was rereading Patricia Briggs the other day and thought of it as a bit like paranormal romantic suspense. In contemporary romantic suspense there has to be a reason not to go to the police. But when you add monsters, weres or vampires, then of course the human police can’t help, and the hero gets to kick butt, instead of just picking up the phone to call the local cops.
JamiSings said on 11.25.09 at 06:14 PM • [link]
See, now I disagree with many of the reasons people might like vampires or werewolves. But only because that’s not why I like vampires. (Not a big fan of werecreatures.)
For me it’s partly because in my freshman year of high school a lot of people died. My maternal grandmother, several friends of the family, and a friend whom was hit and killed by a car - she was 14. This left a big impression on me that made the immortality of vampires very appealing.
The other is the fact I seem to encounter a lot of wimpy men in the real world. Men who stand by, refusing to tell a woman they like her, waiting for her to make the first move. Then when she goes off with some guy who was brave enough to say “I think you’re attractive and I’d like to get to know you better” stand there and whine “Women only want a**holes!” Not realizing it’s not a matter of women liking jerks, it’s a matter of the woman liking a man with a backbone.
These same guys tell me it’s my lack of confidence, not my weight, that keeps me dateless. Yet can’t accept that their own lack of confidence also keeps them dateless. They equate being a wimp with being “a nice guy.” Plus their fear of rejection keeps them afraid. If they’d just man up and say “I like you” they’d have more dates.
Vampires don’t lack confidence. Even the most tortured one goes for the girl if he’s attracted to her.
Now as for The Next Big Thing -
Fairies have been done. Like Moning’s The Immortal Highlander. And they do have their appeal. There’s also a lot of YA novels where fairies figure in. Though usually the heroine herself is half-fairy and doesn’t know it. So they have their place.
Angels - well, they present a good source of conflict, actually. One would have to tread carefully. Plus angels, even the ones with male names, are actually suppose to be genderless. (Though some authors have suggested angels gain a gender should they “fall.”)
However, like I said - good source of conflict. Like if an angel fell in love with an atheist. Now that same atheist would have to accept the existence of God. That their life was not the random events of evolution but a life of meaning with a higher purpose and what they did here on earth, even the tiniest thing, would have ramifications both here on earth after their death and in the next world. Or if the angel fell for someone who’s belief system is fundamentalist - be it Christian, Islam, etc. The angel revealing to them that ALL religious beliefs have value in the eyes of God, that the Wiccian down the street has just as much of a chance of getting into Heaven as the minister of the church. That Hell was really only for people like Hitler, John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, and someday Casey Anthony. That being a homosexual isn’t a one-way ticket to eternal damnation. That the Jews are still the Chosen People.
It would set someone who’s beliefs are so black and white spinning and make for excellent conflict. Perhaps though, way too heavy for a romance novel.
For me - I kind of want to see aliens. (Though my idea could easily be done with angels or fairies too. BTW - I cannot write to save my life, so if this hasn’t been done and someone who does write wants to “steal” this, go for it. Just promise you’ll base a character off me. I’ll be happy to provide you with all the details. One of my long time fantasies has been to be the inspiration behind a romance novel heroine.)
I want aliens whom are perfect according to our society’s standards. Each could be a super model. They’re all around 6 feet tall. All the men have roman noses and strong chins. The women are all hourglass shaped and their hips are never bigger then their breasts and their noses are dainty. Though they very in height slightly and coloration of skin/hair/eyes not one is more or less beautiful then the other. They’re also extremely intelligent with IQs of 200+.
And when they come to earth - they chase after the imperfect. Fat women with sagging breasts, flat chested women, bald men, short men, fat men, too-thin men, bone thin women, women whom have to wax their upper lip once a week. Men or women whom have been disfigured in accidents or in the war. Etc etc. Just anything our society labels as “ugly” and makes people feel worthless.
Because perfection is boring.
It’s the physical imperfections, the wrinkles, the freckles, the acne that makes humans interesting to them. And when these same people reject them, thinking that no one this beautiful could want them and this is some cruel joke on the aliens’ parts, the aliens then have to spend time with the humans, getting to know them, and falling in love with their personalities. Their little quirks. Seeing beyond the bald heads and hairy upper lips, down to the person underneath. Falling in love with everything - good and bad. From their secret giving to charities to their bad tempers.
That’s what I want to be The Next Big Thing. Perfect beings whom fall for the imperfect.
But that’s just me and I’m weird.
Kathleen said on 11.25.09 at 06:17 PM • [link]
I believe that since vampires and were’s are actually considered “damned” and “abominations” in mythology ,but we relate to them because they are or used to be human, that the popularity comes from having this “condition” be overcome by love and fated love.
Laurel said on 11.25.09 at 06:19 PM • [link]
I’m predicting angels with a significant break from religious tomes. The ingredients are there: fallen, free will, forbidden love. Think City of Angels for a younger audience.
Vampires will never go away. They make Byronic heros in a ready made package. They are dangerous and predatory and the heroine (or hero, if anyone will write that book) has to completely trust the vampire’s love or inherent goodness to master the instinct to kill. Chicks will always dig the Byronic archetype. Plus, no matter how liberated we get, evolution is at play here. Men are (usually) physically superior in terms of strength and speed and most women are attracted to that. Vampires, the way they are typically written, exagerate these qualities. Same is true for Weres.
I think you’re right on the money with the Were appeal. It’s like the early 70s rape fantasies; it lets us indulge in something we would like without the guilt. Women in 1971 did not actually want to be sexually assaulted. What they wanted was forceful, visceral, and gratifying sex to someone they weren’t necessarily married to, without the social stigma. If she really wanted it but the man didn’t give her the option of saying no then she hadn’t done anything wrong. Twisted and sick, but hey, it clearly worked for a lot of readers.
Weres do this for exploring violent and basic impulses. They are part animal, more connected to instinct and less limited by their cerebral cortices. Plus, they can go either way. Changing partners just for sex can be okay or destined to be together works, too. Wolves mate for life and have intense family bonds.
And Sarah, I think you’re right about the post-9/11 era. Fantasy always has a spike after a cultural injury. Look at what the Vietnam war did for The Lord of The Rings.
Lindleepw said on 11.25.09 at 06:21 PM • [link]
Wow. I just had a conversation with my friend a couple a days ago about why I’m not a Twilight fan, and we talked about some of the points that were brought up in this article. One of the main reasons I’m not a fan is that I’m really not that into vampires. I think a big draw of vampires is the whole eternal life thing. And that’s where I have a problem. I believe in heaven and that somday I’ll go there. So even though I have a healthy amount of fear regarding death, I’m okay with the thought of dying (after a long, happy life, of course. LOL). However, the idea of eternity has always wigged me out. I remember as a kid thinking of going to heaven and living for FOREVER and it just really freaking me out. I think the idea of eternity is really hard to relate to. The concept of eternity still bothers me sometimes, so vampires…don’t really interest me. Does anyone else have problems with eternity or am I just weird and alone in my issues?
Also, I agree that angels are making a comeback. But not the Touched by an Angel type. There seem to be quite a few bad-ass angels out there that can’t be controlled. Kinda angels being bad boys, which can be very interesting.
Laurel said on 11.25.09 at 06:38 PM • [link]
LOL, lindleepw! Me, too, but for much more prosaic reasons. They are always supposed to be physical perfection, right? But the standards of beauty change. 2000 years ago people had bigger jaws and I think more teeth. But the 2000 year old vampire is supposed to be ethereally beautiful?
Charlaine Harris has the only major vampire contribution in current circulation that addresses this in any way. Older vampires don’t have perfect teeth- no fluoride, no braces=crooked and missing teeth. If they had bad skin before they were turned they still have scars. They might be short depending on heritage and nutritional status.
Polly said on 11.25.09 at 06:43 PM • [link]
Sarah,
I think you’re right about some of the appeal of vamps and were, but for me, the attraction of the were story in not just about anger/primitive impulse control or lack thereof, but also about the difficulties of having two identities that do not necessarily mesh with each other, but do not exclude each other either. Maybe it’s because I myself am from a minority group with a strong cultural identity, but I’ve always seen were stories as exploring, essentially, identity politics (it’s like the weirdest immigrant experience ever, where some difference from the dominant culture will always exist). Yeah, the anger and power aspects are totally there too, but it’s the belonging/not-belonging aspects that get me the most. I’ve always thought that’s part of the appeal of were stories to everyone, not just me, but now I’m wondering. Anyone there with me?
rcw said on 11.25.09 at 06:45 PM • [link]
I don’t get it. Romance and vampires just don’t go together; it’s sort of like mixing ice cream and vinegar, isn’t it? As for angels, in Paradise Lost, Raphael explains to Adam that sex between angels is as far above sex between humans as angels are. Under those circumstances, it would probably be difficult for a romance author to describe!
Jana Oliver said on 11.25.09 at 06:54 PM • [link]
“I agree with those above; evidently, the next new thing is Biblical: Angels, demons, fallen angels.”
I’m hearing the same from my editor and other sources. Both demons and the Fallen have considerable baggage (emotional and otherwise) and that can play well in a storyline. De-coupling them from religion might be tricky, however. I prefer to leave some of the religious elements in place because it adds more depth to their internal conflict, but then I’m a rabid fan of GOOD OMENS (Pratchett and Gaiman).
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 07:08 PM • [link]
@ibm:
@Theresa Meyers:
There is real potential for cyborgs to be very popular in the near future, but the character type will have to mirror the evolution of the vampire/were from disgusting monster to uber-lover. The idea of a cybernetic character won’t take off until we can’t distinguish them from humans. Like vampires and weres, once (wo)man/machine characters, like the Replicators in the Stargate series for instance, can masquerade as humans the threat is more dangerous. Right now we have obviously cyborg characters like Sinclair’s Branden Kel-Paten and Asaro’s Ander (The Phoenix Code)—the former taps into the scarred Phantom of the Opera-type hero and the latter doesn’t appeal in a Romantic sense because, like Star Trek’s Data, the character is child-like. Kel-Paten is one of my favorite heroes because his body modifications have a real impact on his emotional and psychological life. Like the Phantom, he’s torn up inside figuratively and literally and that’s compelling. Combining that inner conflict with a machine indistinguishable from humans could be very compelling.
The basic ideas behind vampires and werewolves are the resolution of primal needs like sex and violence. I know Spock isn’t a cyborg, but I think he’s a cyborg prototype and his conflict with these issues is at the heart of his popularity. Like vampires and weres, a cybernetic character could have a huge amount of strength, intelligence, and a lack of consequences for their actions. Vampires at least have to strike a balance with humanity since they need humans for sustenance, but a cybernetic character has no such dilemma (unless you approach the idea as The Matrix did and use humans as a power source—not very romantic).
So, there’s opportunity for a compelling conflict on multiple levels that would resonate with mainstream Romance readers once cybernetic technology becomes more commonplace—and that will happen eventually. Right now we’re creating cybernetic limbs and connecting humans directly to computers, so it’s just a matter of time before we’re talking about these issues over our kitchen tables. Once that happens, I think we’ll see cybernetic characters more often in Romance. Science Fiction examines how these technologies will and should shape our world, but Romance can examine how these ideas could shape our relationships and individual autonomy. To have a more universal appeal, the cybernetic character has to move beyond the “battery-operated boyfriend/femme-bot” idea for such a character to be considered sexy, dangerous, and worthy of love.
Miri said on 11.25.09 at 07:16 PM • [link]
I’m putting my vote in for Angels. You’ve seen the trailer for Legion with shirtless, winged, in a rain storm Paul Bettany right? The movie looks sucky but I’ll see it just for the hot Angel eye candy.
Shiela Stewart said on 11.25.09 at 07:18 PM • [link]
I’m currently writing about an angel and a demon having a child that Satan desperately wants control of so I’m all for Angels being the next great read. Yes, you have the taboo religious aspect. Angels are supposed to be good, but….but….even the good have their moments.
Anyone watch Supernatural? Castiel is one hot angel and i would love to see him have his own series. :)
As for vampires. Yeah, it’s the bad boy thing, the live forever, not get sick, powers and so forth that is intriguing. I don’t know that the sucking of blood is that popular but everything else about the vampire is and that is what draws the reader in. Plus, it gives them a chance to push the stress and worry of real life aside and live for the moment in a vampires skin as they read the story. We all need an escape, and vampires seem to be it these days. Personally, I’m glad. :)
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 07:26 PM • [link]
@Sheila Stewart:
Sure is, but don’t forget Dean and his liaison with fallen angel Anna.
Wendy said on 11.25.09 at 07:27 PM • [link]
I always want the Gargoyles from the 90s Disney cartoon of the same name to be something not created by one guy, and thus off-limits creatively.
That whole Elisa-Goliath beauty and the beast thing was lovely.
You’ve got life-span issues and forced nocturnal lifestyle and species issues and culture issues and….gliding. *le sigh* Yes, I used to write myself into the show when I was 15.
As a writer, you could tap into a number of the things that appeal to readers who like werewolves and readers who like vampires. Yep. Too bad they’re off limits.
Debra Date said on 11.25.09 at 07:29 PM • [link]
Wendy, is it sad that I tried to get someone to transfer my Gargoyles VHS tape to DVD the other day ?
I’m still a big fan of that series…
Kristina said on 11.25.09 at 07:31 PM • [link]
I have always thought that the paranormal male and the subsequent (sp?) taming/rescuing of him was the romance worlds back door acknowledgement of co-dependency. “I know this guy will be THE ONE if I can just change him a little”
Now I read paranormal romances and genre almsot exclusivly for the last several years and my theory has always made me avoid like the plague the wimpy emo heros. The ones that are just so TORTURED by the monster they are. I read ONE Susan Sizemore that the hero was way too “Woe is me, I’m going to walk into the sun” that I have NEVER read another of her books. I like my co-dependant hero saving but he has to be at least tough enough to survive the cure.
Shiela Stewart said on 11.25.09 at 07:32 PM • [link]
@dangrgirl
Oh I haven’t forgotten. I love Anna and I thought it was perfect that she and Dean got together. See, Angels might very well be the next great thing. :)
“Sure is, but don’t forget Dean and his liaison with fallen angel Anna.”
Shiela Stewart said on 11.25.09 at 07:35 PM • [link]
You and me both, Debra. I loved watching the Gargoyles series. Still do. :)
Kristina said on 11.25.09 at 07:35 PM • [link]
One more thing, in reading comments. I totally agree with Lilac and Igm. Robots or more specifically Cyborgs or Bio-engineeerd super humans. Anyone read the Ellora’s Cave books? Alot of them are futuristic with engineered humanoids and/or aliens.
Love me some intergalactic romances. :0) Angela Knights Warlord series is a gem, Trigon Rituals is the title of a fav of mine by Pillow I think. Definitly Aliens as the next leg of the WTF romance hereos.
Scrin said on 11.25.09 at 07:36 PM • [link]
I would like to say I’d agree with you, but the fans (some of them, at least) are creepy. I’ve seen reports that some of them scratch their necks open before coming into the presence of Robert Pattinson and say, “We did this for you, Edward!”
Furthermore, Pattinson isn’t enjoying that sort of attention, and is trying to just do the job and not encourage them. Any of the fans could look up his views on the matter and maybe, y’know, respect his wishes here? But as it stood when the Twilight movie came out, security asked him specifically not to make eye contact with the crowd, for fear of causing a frenzy.
Hate to say it, but if the frenzy and excitement goes further, Pattinson gets a decent chance of getting his very own, “If I can’t have him, no one can” psychostalker.
JamiSings said on 11.25.09 at 07:37 PM • [link]
Nothing wrong with liking Gargoyles. Though I was more into Owen/Puck because he was voiced by Brent Spiner and I used to have a HUGE crush on him. (You should hear the guy sing!)
Scrin said on 11.25.09 at 07:39 PM • [link]
Oh, yeah.
I think the next thing is Fantasy Kitchen Sink—where all (or most) of the creatures you’ve heard about, are real. Why limit yourself to just one critter type and their trauma. Show your versatility and raise your name!
Amelia said on 11.25.09 at 07:50 PM • [link]
Besides vampires and weres I’m also a big fan of highlanders, make them immortal or throw in some time traveling and I’m hooked. The mention of Fae/Fairy reminded me of the Fae Adam Black from Karen Marie Moning Highlander Series. There is nothing Disney fairy like with him.
http://www.karenmoning.com/novels/immortal_highlander/index.html
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 07:52 PM • [link]
@Wendy:
What? Huh? I certainly hope not because I’m working on one right now. Sure, Disney owns the copyright on the specific characters and stories in that show, but there’s no reason we can’t write a story about gargoyles in general. I think it’s a hugely compelling idea.
Michelle (mlg) said on 11.25.09 at 08:15 PM • [link]
I don’t see it as the next thing, but I wanted to point out a wonderful book with a Goblin hero. Clare Dunkle’s The Hollow Kingdom is a well done YA fantasy/romance where the heroine is being chased by the Goblin King. If you like Beauty and the Beast type stories you will enjoy this one. I enjoyed it especially since the heroine is a very intelligent and nearly outsmarts the King.
Mafuane said on 11.25.09 at 08:37 PM • [link]
Vampires and Werewolves will never die out because they inhabit that part of the sort of dark gothic cliche, you can’t think of a dark misty romanian village without imagining a werewolf or vampire in the background. They have also been part of our imagination and culture for years, featuring in our folktales and legends and so ingrained are they that writers will instantly pick them without a second thought. They unlike other beings have been at the forefront of Gothic Literature for years, think back to books like Carmilla (http://www.answers.com/topic/carmilla), they belong to literature and in literature they will stay. Creatures like succubuses and such, don’t have this sort of background and therefore require more imagination on part of the writer and are less easy to write.
Since my own books deals with angelic like beings i’ve done alot of research on the matter and found that the most common angel “hero” as it were is Gabriel, in the romance novels i’ve read. For some reason he is the most attractive to writers (not Michael or Raphael or any of the others) and this had made me wonder why.
On my blog I went into detail about how Angelic Art more of less depicted Michael and Gabriel in equal amounts, so it can’t be that these writers are drawn in by these pictures of the “beautiful angelic man” when writing about Gabriel, so I assume that he inhabits some sort of nativity cliche, being the angel most associated with christmas, he’s the most well known and well, y’know “write what you know”.
Also as said before, angels are deeply rooted in religion, however the idea of a “man with wings” is not so much, in fact that idea was inspired by art if you look up angel in the bible, you’ll get this sort of description: “arms like bronze, face like lightning” these beings are no where near the way they are depicted in classical art, so really I’m not sure how far these writers can get away with it.
One very good story I read about angels was a chinese manwha (comic book) named Angel Myth, where the angels are as said in the above posts “genderless” and “emotionless” this causes problems for the main character’s guardian angel. Angels it says are not cast out of heaven for falling in love with humans, but that their suffering comes from the fact that their comrades begin to look on them with suspicion and draw away from them because they come to inhabit the “other”, something that they have nothing in common with and which they look down upon. Therefore they choose to abandon heaven out of the fact that they no longer belong there.
Ghosts will never be big in romance, when you think of ghost you think of thing in a white sheet, you think of ghost stories, there’s nothing vaguely romantic about a groaning figure tied in chains (or is there ;D) I doubt this will ever be popular, but heck, prove me wrong!
Fairies as well remind us of tiny winged girly things, that’s why they aren’t so intresting. You don’t instantly equate handsome hero with fairies do you, it makes him sound so girly. Also you have to delve into a lot of celtic mythology which as said before is very difficult to understand unless you’ve had this in your background. I read a book called “Morrigan” I think it was by Nora Roberts once and I thought she got it all wrong with her characterisations.
I really think it comes down to cliches, when you think of werewolves and vampires you think of dark/sexy/gothic, when you think of fairies and ghosts you think of sparkly women in miniskirts and white sheets. Angels can be done but they are wraught with difficulty.
However what I do think no one has touched upon is the goldmine of dark spiritual beings that exist in English Folktales, such tales as “the Elf-Knight”, “Tam-Lin”, “Reynadine”, “The Outlandish Knight”, “The wife of Ushers well”-> this one deals with ghosts, and “Long Lankin”.
Laura Vivanco said on 11.25.09 at 08:49 PM • [link]
Monica Jackson had a genie hero in Love’s Potion.
SB Sarah said on 11.25.09 at 08:58 PM • [link]
I agree - I tend to shy away from angel/demon/fallen mythologies because of how unsure I am about the involvement of religious themes and dogma in the plot.
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 08:58 PM • [link]
I said:
Holy chao, I forgot to mention Blade Runner’s Replicants, which could really be subtitled Robots In Love (depending on your opinion of Decker’s true nature).
Sonneillon said on 11.25.09 at 09:07 PM • [link]
One of the reasons I doubt Faeries will really take off in paranormal romance is that the Fae are truly alien, as opposed to vampires and werewolves who were once human and presumably remember what that was like. The Fae have never been human, they will never be human, and human logic is as foreign to them as a goldfish’s logic is to us. Anyone who actually bothers to research the legends of the Fae will find they’re strange creatures with stranger taboos. Having them fall in any kind of meaningful love with a human is a truly herculean feat. I’m sure a good author could accomplish it (there’s a story by P.L. Nunn I haven’t managed to get my hands on yet but it looks promising) but ultimately the Fae are so Other that humankind has very little in common with them.
Anyway, my two cents.
JamiSings said on 11.25.09 at 09:36 PM • [link]
Oh, correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t the Carpathians also aliens whom happen to also be able to breed with humans? But only virgins? Or was that a different series?
In regards to ghosts. I’ve actually read a couple of good ones. In one the ghost actually helps bring two lovers together and at one point him and his dead beloved possessing their bodies to be able to make love. The other a ghost was wooing a woman whom finds out in the end she’s been dead for awhile of a brain tumor. But by that time she loves her ghost hunk.
Fairies may never have the popularity of vampires, but they’ve been around awhile.
I’m still pulling for my aliens that I mentioned above. LOL If only some lovely writer would “steal” the idea!
Cyranetta said on 11.25.09 at 09:37 PM • [link]
This really is the most fascinating discussion and demonstrates once again why SMTB is a preferred hangout.
As to future areas of heroic development in the supernatural area, the one thing that I don’t recall seeing much expressed (but admitted I can’t keep up with the whole field) is heroes who are not themselves magic, but who USE magic—romantically (and erotically!) inventive grownup Harry Potters. The tricky part would be to avoid using magic that operates on the heroine’s agency (unless that were part of the villain’s modus operandi).
As to the Carnival of Weres, I suspect there are some comedicly-inclined writers who could do a lot with unlikely weres: e.g. the standard alpha hero who morphs inconveniently into a were-sloth or a were-ferret or a were-bear in the middle of hibernation. I also suspect that were-creatures too connected with the traditionally creepy (were-spiders? were-chameleons?) would require almost unimaginable skill to get the average reader to go along romantically on that journey.
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 09:39 PM • [link]
@JamiSings:
I don’t know about the Carpathians, but Lara Adrian’s vampires have their origins on another planet.
RE: Fairies—it’s not Romance, but one of these days I’ll get around to reading the Keeping It Real series by Justina Robson. It’s elves from another dimension AND a cyborg named Lila.
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 09:40 PM • [link]
@Cyranetta:
Easy peasy: Make it the heroine who is the magical character. C’mon, we all know Hermione should have her own stories.
Theresa Meyers said on 11.25.09 at 09:42 PM • [link]
Cherry Adair’s Night and Edge trilogies have heroes that remind me of what Harry Potter would be like if he grew up, became anti-terrorist operative and decided to use his powers to protect Muggle kind. I can definiately see the appeal of wizarding types as paranormal romance characters but I don’t know if they’re really on the same level as vampires or weres.
K. Z. Snow said on 11.25.09 at 09:44 PM • [link]
Mishmash here.
More writers need to start making up their own creatures or venturing into other mythologies.
Vampires will never die because (not to put too fine a point on it) they’re effing HOT. Writers have proved, too, how creatively their characteristics can be manipulated.
I’ve never understood the werecreature thing. Skates too close to bestiality for me. Robots? Uh, no thanks. I have a lot of trouble seeing them in a sensual or romantic light.
It seems the reworking of traditional fairy tales has become popular.
(Yikes. A composition teacher would so hate this post.)
JamiSings said on 11.25.09 at 09:53 PM • [link]
But then don’t you run the risk of being tempted to have her control him? I don’t know about the rest of you, but as the only girl out of four kids and the youngest there’s many times I wished I could control men - even now at 33 I’d still like to do it if only to get my lazy-butt brother to help me haul heavy stuff out of the car!
The gender doesn’t matter. Either way the temptation is there. Unless you put in a device that says whatever gives them their supernatural abilities, be it God or any of the minor gods and goddess that if they ever use their powers to take away another’s free will - unless it was for the greater good like getting a pedophile to turn themselves in - their powers and maybe even their life would be forfit. Much like how in Eion Colfer’s children series about pre-teen criminal mastermind Artemis Fowl, if the fairies, dwarves, sprites, etc enter a human dwelling without permission they lose all their magic.
diremommy said on 11.25.09 at 09:59 PM • [link]
I agree with the ones who say angels and demons will be the next big thing. Richelle Mead already has a wonderful series about a succubus who falls in love with a human, hangs out with (remarkably normal) vampires, demons, angels, fallen angels, and nephillim, and is trying to find the balance between her succubus side having to feed off sex and corrupt moral humans, and loving a human at the same time. It is actually one of my very favorite series right now. I like that she has angels and demons, but doesn’t go overboard (or really into at all) on the religious overtones.
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 10:01 PM • [link]
@JamiSings:
Yes, absolutely, but I’d welcome a heroine conflicted over whether or not to control the hero. We’ve seen many other Romance novels where the hero tries to control the heroine in all sorts of ways, not just paranormal. I certainly, in the end, would want and expect the heroine to turn away from that, but I think it would be a refreshing internal conflict for a heroine. That’s me though, someone who is also a bit tired of the “vampire boyfriend” idea and would like to see it flipped around to more paranormal heroines paired up with human heroes.
JamiSings said on 11.25.09 at 10:04 PM • [link]
I’ve seen a few vampire heroines paired up with human males. Usually as part of a series. Like the daughter of the vampire male in the previous book. Oh, and there was this one series years ago that mostly dealt with the same male vampire, but there was a female vampire whom he grew up with as a human child who took up with a human male (who’s description is a lot like that of singer/actor Michael Crawford - found out the author is a fan of Michael actually) and turns him semi against his will.
Jarant said on 11.25.09 at 10:06 PM • [link]
@ DebraDate
I totally agree. Vampires and were’s are popular because, whatever characters an author creates, they are riffs on an familiar and appealing theme: dangerous, undead, attractive, amazing secks. Someone perusing the romance section for the first time could see “vampire” on the cover of a book and KNOW, more or less, what they are getting. Now why vampires have lasted so long as literary figures, THAT gets into the whole “saving-the-bad-boy, escaping-death, alpha-male” analysis.
My personal theory as to why Twilight is so popular is that it’s the first exposure to romance (as a genre) that many readers have had. I think there are a lot of readers who would never dream of touching anything in the Romance section because of the stigma. But Twilight wasn’t marketed as a Romance, it was a YA novel. So if someone bought Twilight, they weren’t buying a Romance, they were buying the “new Harry Potter.” And then they got drawn into the story because, even if it’s not the BEST example of a romance, it has all of the POWERFUL elements of romance that hook and maintain readers. This certainly describes my and my friends’ experiences. The washingtonpost.com actually had an interesting article about this last week: grown-up, feminist, adult women who fell hard for Twilight even though “they knew they shouldn’t.” The subtitle is actually: “Good, smart, literary women [try] to resist the romantic vampire phenomenom [and fail.]” You could actually substitute “Twilight” with “Romance Novels” and come to the same conclusion.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/18/AR2009111804145.html
@brandi
I agree with you about Jacob representing a progression for Bella, but I come at it from the other direction. I don’t think Jacob represents sex at all - in fact, I think there is something almost asexual about Bella’s relationship with him. (I’m referring to his character in the books, Taylor Lautner’s representation is another discussion altogether.) Yes, he’s physically and sexually maturing, and Bella acknowledges this, yet she never feels the sexual urges for Jacob that she does for Edward. She’s ALWAYS got sex on the brain when she’s with Edward, with Jacob, she has to have the “He’s a great friend and he loves me, isn’t that enough?” talk with herself. When she ultimately rejects Jacob romantically, it’s because she makes the (adult) decision to not settle for “good enough” in her romantic relationships. She pursues what she really wants, rather than what is easily available.
Shiela Stewart said on 11.25.09 at 10:07 PM • [link]
Oooh, I must check this out!
I really think angels and demons will be the next big thing. People are always questioning and wondering about religion. Plus I think there are so many possibilities for a series. JMO
I agree with the ones who say angels and demons will be the next big thing.
Richelle Mead already has a wonderful series about a succubus who falls in love with a human, hangs out with (remarkably normal) vampires, demons, angels, fallen angels, and nephillim, and is trying to find the balance between her succubus side having to feed off sex and corrupt moral humans, and loving a human at the same time. It is actually one of my very favorite series right now. I like that she has angels and demons, but doesn’t go overboard (or really into at all) on the religious overtones.
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 10:15 PM • [link]
@JamiSings:
Yes, there have been a few and I’m always looking for suggestions on others. However, as a reader, I’d love to find paranormal heroines who do not owe their paranormal existence to a man, whether its her literal father or a vampire sire. Also, I’d like see a paranormal romance heroine be the lead character, something I seem to usually only find in urban fantasy. I basically want to flip the power structure and see what happens. Sure, I like the “vampire boyfriend” type stories where the paranormal character is the hero and his paranormal aspects ramp up his “otherness,” but we’ve been examining that structure in Romances for a long time. I’m in the mood to invert it and see what happens.
Awesome. Sounds like she was a side story, though and not the main attraction. We’ve taken the monster side of men and made them sexy heroes—I’d like to see that done with women and turn them into alluring heroines deemed worthy of love too.
Jane Lovering said on 11.25.09 at 10:28 PM • [link]
I wonder if the whole vampire/were-creature thing isn’t a little to do with the food chain. We, as humans, are so used to being ‘top of the block’ that every so often we long for something to come and ‘be the boss of us’. Something that seems to be tame but at the same time could kill and eat us any time it liked.
Maybe, sometimes, we just get tired of being top dogs and have the urge to sublimate ourselves to something else.
JamiSings said on 11.25.09 at 10:44 PM • [link]
She was, but semi a main character in her own right. It was mostly about the male vampire (who wrote musicals, BTW) trying to return to humanity. I wish I could remember the tiles for you or the author. All I can remember is the male vampire’s obsession with Gene Kelly.
As for the other - like I said earlier. I’m weird. I like it when it’s a male vampire. I think it’s all tied up psychologically with the fact that being the youngest of four and only girl, I’ve had to be “tough.” People often see me and I have been forced many times into the role of “leader.” I hate leading people. And I’m not kidding about wimpy men around me too. I hate dishrags, male or female. When it comes to men I want a guy with a backbone. So male vampires fill that role.
Actually I could go off into a whole long thing about my psychological issues and why I like certain types of romance novel characters. But then I’d have to go entirely off topic and go into things like my medical problems, my weight, and most things people say is “TMI.” (Though they are part of the reasons why I really want to be insperation behind a romance novel heroine. After all, how many overweight 33 year olds whom still live with their parents and enjoy Star Trek, comic books, and music ranging from big band to disco do you see in romance novels?) Seriously though, anyone whom doesn’t mind a big rambling thing, writer or not, is welcome to contact me. I’m an open book. I always hope explaining my problems will help someone else.
But it comes down to I AM A WEIRD WOMAN. LOL And pretty darn proud of it. Though I tend to tick off everyone.
On a side note, probably one reason I prefer the vampire male is because I have always been attracted to older men. At three my first crush was Mr. Spock! And no, I’m not looking for a “sugar daddy” nor do I have “daddy issues.” I have a wonderful father. It’s just mainly I get along with older men better, I find them more mentally stimulating, and I find slight crows feet and slight greying at the temples really HOT! Just like some women like pecs and others butts, I find grey hair sexy. So vampires tending to live forever are often older then the women they chase. Which appeals to me in the May-December romance department.
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 10:51 PM • [link]
@JamiSings:
Sounds interesting. I will definitely look for it.
I have no problem with male vampires, I’d just like to see some balance.
I can see what a male vampire would fulfill that, but let me clarify that I think a human hero with a paranormal heroine is perfectly capable of having a backbone, just not a supernatural one.
jarant said on 11.25.09 at 10:55 PM • [link]
I don’t think we should treat “vampire” as a monolithic category. The zombie-ghouls from early ghost stories were different from Stoker’s gentleman Dracula who was different from the Cullens. In fact, I think there have been significant shifts in recent history: think about how what the vampires were in Buffy the Movie vs. Buffy the TV show (I don’t remember the movie clearly, but I BELIEVE vampires were solely bad guys, whereas in the television show, they were bad guys AND boyfriends.) There are a few unifying elements (blood and dead-ness) but the image of “vampire” has changed really radically, and it’s changed because our (cultural) needs/desires have changed. For early incarnations, truly monstrous forms resonated with people for whatever reason. Whereas current versions seem to emphasize sex and relationships, because that is what resonates with current audiences. Perhaps the reason vampires have lasted so long as literary figures is their malleable nature: they easily alter, or update, to match the needs of an altering readership.
Sarah Rees Brennans said on 11.25.09 at 11:03 PM • [link]
I totally agree, it’s a hairtrigger word. I was scared-stiff careful to have the demons in my book based on the demons of Sumerian myth rather than Christianity, and yet was excoriated in a Booklist article for my trendy blasphemy…
On subject, I don’t think I could picture dating an angel - Alan Rickman in DOGMA shoving down his pants and being smooth down there keeps recurring to me. But I would like to see more genies, and a spread out to a plethora of other mythologies - I just read Guardian of the Dead by Karen Healey and liked its take on Maori myth and the fairyish patupaiarehe. Plus, ghosts and magicians!
Shiela Stewart said on 11.25.09 at 11:07 PM • [link]
Oh and don’t forget Angel. He had his own series and he was a good vampire fighting to protect the helples. He was the ultimate in bad boys when he was first turned but when he was cursed with a soul, he went good. He was so yummy as both the good and the evil.
Buffy the Movie vs. Buffy the TV show (I don’t remember the movie clearly, but I BELIEVE vampires were solely bad guys, whereas in the television show, they were bad guys AND boyfriends.)
JamiSings said on 11.25.09 at 11:09 PM • [link]
Oh I’m sure. I just haven’t seen it yet. I probably will eventually.
Other information on that series - I read it in high school and I graduated in ‘95, so that should give you an idea of the publication dates. There was either four or five in the series. I don’t remember much other then what I told you. Oh, yeah, the female vampire I mentioned - she was the first woman he ever had sex with. In fact, he was going to be a priest before she seduced him. I can’t remember if which one of them became a vampire first, but I’m pretty sure one turned the other.
I’m trying so hard to stay on topic but can’t. LOL
dangrgirl said on 11.25.09 at 11:09 PM • [link]
@jarant:
This is the evolution of the vampire as disgusting demon monster who looks like a Nosferatu to vampire boyfriend and dark lover. I think the change began with John Polidori’s The Vampyre with the main character Lord Ruthven he based on Lord Byron. Polidori was Byron’s personal physician: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Polidori#Biography
Which leads us to Mary Shelley, who many see as the writing the first Science Fiction novel, Frankenstein. Ironically, Frankenstein is a golem character (didn’t someone earlier mention golems?), but he was created by science. The story came about because of a paranormal writing challenge.
Michele Hauf said on 11.25.09 at 11:36 PM • [link]
Depending on the writer, both vamps and weres may or may not offer the promise of immortality.
This is how I simplify the allure of both:
Vamps offer the ultimate surrender fantasy. Will she surrender to his bite? To his overwhelming power?
Weres offer the fantasy of safety. They are fierce protectors of their own (meaning the heroine) and (is some novels) mate for life. As well the ‘taming of the beast’ fantasy plays in, too.
anonylyser said on 11.25.09 at 11:52 PM • [link]
This is a really interesting discussion. I don’t pretend to understand what people see in Twilight since it turns me right off, but clearly there is something in it that resonates with a fairly significant population. Though I think I’m a little odd in that I don’t really like vampire/human romances—possibly because I don’t like the alpha male type. The Edward Cullen version of romantic hero is too controlling for my liking.
Interestingly enough, the one vampire/human relationship I have really loved was Hoyt/Jessica in True Blood.
While reading this thread I was reminded of the book Tam Lin by Pamela Dean which deals with fairies (of a type) and while the ‘hero’ isn’t a fairy, there is some interesting exploration of those relationships. One of the most interesting things is that for a good part of the book you don’t even know that some of the characters aren’t human or fully human. Man, I love that book—must go dig it out and read it again.
Alpha Lyra said on 11.25.09 at 11:52 PM • [link]
I’m glad this topic is being discussed, because I’m one of those women for whom vampire and werewolf romance do NOT work. And I don’t know why!
I do love romance novels (fave authors: Elizabeth Hoyt, Suzanne Brockmann, Linnea Sinclair, Louisa Edwards, Sherry Thomas, Jennifer Crusie). I also love fantasy novels. It seems to me that paranormal romance, the melding of those two, would be the perfect genre for me. So how come every time I read a vampire or werewolf romance, I hate it? There are a few exceptions. I loved “Sunshine” by Robin McKinley. I keep trying vampire novels, because they make up such a huge part of the market now and I read a LOT, but 19 times out of 20, I don’t like them. I really should just give up on them.
So the answer I’m hoping to find in this thread is, why DON’T I like them? Why do they work for so many women, but not for me?
Karen H said on 11.25.09 at 11:58 PM • [link]
I have always liked vampires, even before I picked up my first romance novel. In fact, vampires have always been my favorite fantasy, even before I got into Anne Rice’s vampire series. I don’t like to go to bed until the last minute and I don’t like to get up in the morning. I’d love to be able to live forever without aging or getting sick and I’d just as soon drink a meal as be bothered with all the deciding what you want, buying the ingredients, preparing, eating, cleaning up, digesting, etc. And the superhuman strength is also a very appealing. So vampires will always do it for me.
As far as a vampire heroine, Lynsay Sands has several in her vampire series, including at least one whose hero is a human male (the daughter who faints at the site of blood and whose name I cannot quite remember—Lianna, maybe?)
I also like werewolves because they’re sexy and wolves are very noble. Besides Karen Marie Moning, the fairies in Marylyle Rogers’ books are very sexual so I’m totally okay with fairies as heroes. And aren’t some of Kresley Cole’s folks also fairies?
JamiSings said on 11.26.09 at 12:26 AM • [link]
It might always be a mystery for you. I mean, I love the music of Barry Manilow and Neil Diamond, but despite what Amazon.com seems to think, I canNOT stand Barbara Streisand, Josh Gorban, or Michael Bub-howeveryouspellit, and I wouldn’t listen to any of the American Idol contestants/winners if you paid me. Heck, put a gun to my head and I’d choose death over listening to them. Yet Amazon.com keeps recommending them based on my love of Barry and Neil.
Can I explain why I don’t like them? Nope. No more then I can explain why I enjoy the Rolling Stones and The Monkees but just can’t get into The Beatles. And you’d think the fact that the Beatles were big fans of Buddy Holly and I’m a big fan of Buddy Holly they would appeal to me. They don’t. Except the song Penny Lane.
I like Star Trek (all except Voyager) and Stargate SG-1 (but only with Richard Dean Anderson) but don’t like Star Wars or Doctor Who. I love The Dresden Files but can’t even get past the blurbs for anything by Kim Harrison. I love shows like Law & Order but can’t watch CSI.
I like vampires but can’t read Twilight.
See, it’s just one of those weird things that makes us human. Just go with it, don’t sweat it. Don’t try to explain it. If people try to make you explain it just say, “I can’t. Now if you can’t change the subject, kindly bugger off.” There’s more important things in life to worry about. Like does William Shatner really wear a toupee? *winks*
jarant said on 11.26.09 at 12:34 AM • [link]
@Alpha Lyra
I have the same challenge - the “paranormal” aspect of romances frequently seem forced. It’s as though the author gets so distracted by incorporating the “Other” elements into the story, that character and believability suffer. eg so much description of rippling muscles and gleaming teeth and really really bad dialogue. At least, that’s been my experience so far.
Have you read any of Patricia Briggs’ work? Her novels are frequently in the Sci-Fi/fantasy section, but they tend to have a lot of Romance elements (especially her Omega series.)
Jesi said on 11.26.09 at 12:58 AM • [link]
I prefer weres over vampires because of the dualistic nature. It seems as if the character is constantly battling inner turmoil. I think it’s something most people can understand. I know I do. I have the outward appearance that I always hear about when people first meet me (bitchy, too honest and blunt, sarcastic, maternal, often bubbly) but rarely do people actually take note of what else I’m made of (soft, insecure, tired of being in charge, etc). It sounds simple, but figuring out which one is winning out takes a lot of time and energy. Especially since the inner is far more negative and quiet than the outer.
Vamps are more simplistic for me: either eat or don’t eat humans, have sex, get hitched (or variant thereof) and live eternally. Both are very predatory, arrogant, and proprietary but vamps just don’t keep my interest. That said, I do love Frost’s Night Huntress series and a few others. I still prefer the weres with the too hairy body and more…primal fear. (You see a big hairy dog looking at you like dinner, you run. Mama didn’t raise no fool. Whereas a vampire is just a screwed up once human.)
For my part, I like oddball paranormal choices. Merpeople, for instance, or Djinn. Faeries I love, but I don’t know many writers that seem to separate them other than the Seelie and Unseelie Courts that start to sound a lot of the same. I like seeing the groups interact against each other, and not necessarily traditional choices (weres versus vamps). Say witches and merpeople or Djinn and weres. Something offbeat.
Just please don’t make a vampire sparkle in the sun and I’m good.
Angelia Sparrow said on 11.26.09 at 01:02 AM • [link]
Zombies.
I’ve already encountered four pieces of zombie erotica (two of them anthologies) and have included zombies in a steampunk love story of my own.
They’re hot on the horror front right now. I can see the crossover coming (and have sharpened my halberd accordingly).
Vampires have peaked. There will always be a market for them (some of us even liked them back in the 70s) but the popularity is declining I think.
Weres have a couple more years left. Esp the non-wolf shifters. Skinwalkers, maybe, and other things like that.
Zombies. Ghosts. Faeries. Angels/Demons. Those are my calls the next big ones, probably in that order. Don’t look for Redcap, Wendigo or Popobawa romances to get big soon.
Me? I’m writing steampunk. And Flower Fairies. (not together)
mulberry said on 11.26.09 at 01:33 AM • [link]
Ooohhh robots!
Tanith Lee’s Silver Metal Lover- soooooo sweet…
SnowballOne said on 11.26.09 at 01:36 AM • [link]
AlphaLyra - I don’t much care for them, either. I think it’s because to me, all the permutations they have to go through to transfer them from villain to hero (“They don’t drink blood!” “They only drink each others’ blood!” “He’s not dead, it’s a virus!”) reach eyerolling extremes, and frankly have become cliche. I also don’t like the immortality aspect of vampires, because you just know the heroine is going to become immortal too, even if they try to build a giant conflict around whether or not she will. The idea that it can’t be a happy ending unless everybody lives forever is kind of disturbing.
That being said, I’ve really enjoyed Sookie Stackhouse.
Also, at Sarah: thank you for a classy response to my concerns about jokes about Twilight.
Jennifer said on 11.26.09 at 01:40 AM • [link]
I love JamiSings’s post. That is all.
JamiSings said on 11.26.09 at 01:50 AM • [link]
Which one? LOL I’m sure you mean the one before this one, of course, but I couldn’t help myself.
Becca said on 11.26.09 at 03:39 AM • [link]
I’m another one for whom vamps and weres don’t work. and if the next Big Thing is angels and demons, I’ll probably go back to reading straight mysteries (and Nora) until it passes. I’m finding it harder and harder to find non-Regency non-Paranormal romances anymore.
Gwynnyd said on 11.26.09 at 03:46 AM • [link]
Mercedes Lackey and Roberta Gellis have four fae/faery novels set in Elizabethan England with strong romantic elements.
This Scepter’d Isle (The Doubled Edge, Book 1)
Ill Met by Moonlight (The Doubled Edge, Book 2)
By Slanderous Tongues (The Doubled Edge, Book 3)
And Less Than Kind (The Doubled Edge, Book 4)
The love of a fae for Elizabeth is very well done. The fae in these are very alien and they have their own set of logic to follow - but they still can intersect with humans. The authors work a whole ‘nother set of motivations around the actual events of the 16th century and do it in a quite believable way.
Suze said on 11.26.09 at 03:50 AM • [link]
For the love of all that is good and right, NOT ZOMBIES! Blech! Eww! Yick! Rotting bits falling off… No. Just, no.
Actually, a friend and I were having this conversation a couple of years ago, and our conclusion was demons would be the next sexxxy not-quite-human hero.
And sure enough. I can’t get enough of Carolyn Jewel’s demons. Hear that Carolyn? I can’t get ENOUGH! I’ll buy any that you write. Want MOAR!
I learned about Carolyn from the Crimson City series, which had some nummy demons. There are no religious connotations (that I could see, anyway). Just hot, dangerous goodness.
Also, gods from non-Abrahamic pantheons. Much of the hotness. I still have a big crush on Thor, as depicted by Marvel, from when I was addicted to comics a couple of decades ago. Mmmmmm. Gods.
JamiSings said on 11.26.09 at 04:07 AM • [link]
That’s the movie zombies. Now if it was VooDoo zombies that would be a whole other matter. They’re not suppose to be dead. Just people from whom all free will has been taken. Maybe a whole new twist to it - they can only be free if they find love?
I’ve never been a fan of the rotting eating human flesh zombie. (Too close to ghouls anyway. Though ghouls eat dead people, not living.) Prefer VooDoo zombies.
Maybe I’m too much into paranormal stuff. I went through a vampire obsession after my friend died. I know more about vampires then people should and as a result also know a bit about zombies, werecreatures (besides wolves -foxes, tigers, bears, and hares - oh my! Okay, to be fair werehares are actually suppose to be witches), witches, the fae, ghouls, etc.
Just call me Jami: Queen Of Useless Supernatural Trivia!
Violet Ingram said on 11.26.09 at 04:53 AM • [link]
The popularity of vampires & werewolves has risen and fallen over the years. I think that may always be the case. Just like wizards, witches, zombies, and ghosts.
The hero in my current YA wip has trouble with his parents. His mother is a witch from a different coven than his girlfriend and his dad, Satan, wants him to kill his girlfriend and her entire family.
Here’s hoping book buyers want more witches and Satan.
Edie said on 11.26.09 at 06:21 AM • [link]
Has anyone mentioned something that often comes up in discussions with relation to were heroes..
A lot of people mention the family dynamic, someone mentioned that they are loners - while they may be a bit, as we all are - they are generally surrounded by a massive pack/family whom he will die for and they will do the same in return..
And the dreaded fated mate.
Beatriz Williams said on 11.26.09 at 07:21 AM • [link]
Fascinating discussion here—many of the points raised could be the basis for someone’s PhD dissertation, let alone the Next Great Romance Meme.
As someone who took a long break from romance (from the early ‘90s to the mid-noughties), I think part of the extraordinary growth of fangs-and-fur can be traced to the migration of the historical romance from meaty globe-trotting adventure to lighter (and leaner) Regency romp. Bad boys were no longer all that bad; heroines were no longer in danger of being tied to the bedposts by pirates and highwaymen, just brooded to death by Darcy clones. (Look, my husband broods for an hour and I want out.) Someone needed to get the adrenaline rush going again, so creatures portrayed as monsters by previous generations were rehabilitated as anti-heroes to fill the narrative gap.
Fifteen years after college, I’m still not quite sure why I majored in anthropology, but it does give me a deep appreciation for our endless inventiveness in scratching our human itches. Women are driven to tame the tiger, to civilize the uncivilizable; by bringing to heel the dangerous Other we gain both group status for ourselves and cool new genes to help our offspring crush the competition. It’s win-win!
JamiSings said on 11.26.09 at 08:06 AM • [link]
Beatriz’s post makes me want to ask - Why the heck are bad boys so popular anyway? Yes, I keep saying I want a guy with backbone. But by that I mean a guy who’s not afraid to say he likes me, not afraid to hold my hand in public, whom opens the door for me, and doesn’t always give in to me but says “No” to me on occasion. A guy who’s confident without being an over bearing buttmunch.
But a bad boy, not so much.
Okay, granted when I was younger I would’ve gone for Lacroix rather then Nick Knight. Now, not so much. Not that Lacroix didn’t have his good points - like his hatred of blood money, he almost seemed in many ways a moral vampire, but still bad. But bad boys rarely are tamed. And the ones who are seem to me not so bad to begin with.
Oh well, I guess I’m kind of getting off topic, but I really don’t get the bad boy thing.
Steph said on 11.26.09 at 09:09 AM • [link]
One question: Is a vampire baby considered a stillborn?
anonymous said on 11.26.09 at 09:16 AM • [link]
I don’t understand the appeal of the bad boy either. That’s possibly why vampires in particular have never appealed to me. I have no desire to save the unsave-able; I’d always much rather go out and read about (and fantasise over) the misunderstood good guy with the heart of gold. I will always root for the ‘best friend who loves her’ over the ‘domineering jerk who excites the pants off her’ because sure as eggs that best friend (at least in-book) is pretty amazing sexually too and is actually decent to the girl.
For some reason the paranormal romances I’ve read almost always contain domineering jerks who win the girl and so I’m pretty over the genre. Maybe I need to find a ‘decent guy’ type of creature to read about.
JamiSings said on 11.26.09 at 09:18 AM • [link]
OOOH! Useless Trivia Time! *cracks knuckles*
Traditionally according to myth only male vampires can help in the conception of a baby, and only with a human woman. This hybrid is called a Dhampire. Known at birth by their see-through skin and the fact they have “no bones” at birth. (Guess they get them later.) They’re natural born vampire killers. They have all the strengths, none of the weaknesses. They can sense the resting places of vampires and are the most effective killers of vampires.
So - technically alive since they’re half mortal. Not a stillborn.
Now of course fictional vampires by various authors have different rules. Like the ones whom say “true vampires are born, not made.”
But for the actual mythology - dhampires are born, and only through male-vampire/human-female sexual unions. (Usually the vampire is newly made and the husband of the woman in question. Returning to their wedding bed at night to feed on her and have sex until she’s either dead and a vampire too, or pregnant.)
Jocelyn Z. said on 11.26.09 at 10:11 AM • [link]
I think that the popularity of Vampire fiction goes hand in hand with the rise of AIDS awareness. Of course, vampires have been around for quite a while, but Anne Rice’s popularity really took off at around the same time AIDS became known. It’s only become more and more embedded as girls grow up who received sex ed in high school, and that one-to-one blood-to-sex connection was made in their brains. Being with a vampire is like the ultimate in unsafe sex (to the point that I’ve seen a lot of authors explain the hero doesn’t get diseases), plus extra penetration imagery. I’m not saying unsafe sex is hot (god, no) but the attraction of experience in a young-looking body and the sex/blood link goes far.
Shifters, I leave to others to explain. I don’t really get it, it works for me sometimes and doesn’t sometimes.
Marigold Windswept said on 11.26.09 at 10:37 AM • [link]
Hey JamiSings, I love your idea about perfect/non-perfect. I am writing something at the moment which has that theme: the perfectoids aren’t exactly aliens, just future humans that have gone too far along the “If you don’t fit this template, get surgery/take some chemicals/fix it” route. They find imperfection impossible to deal with at first and have to learn the beauty of the complicated imperfect human world…
Anyway I’m as yet unpublished and it’s only about half way there. i’ll let you know!
dangrgirl said on 11.26.09 at 05:39 PM • [link]
@JamiSings:
I don’t particularly like the jerkwad hero either, but his arc is proportionally related to the depth of the cathartic grovel at the end of the story. I understand that this jerk => grovel => redemption arc is very popular for many readers, but it doesn’t really work for me. IMO, alpha heroes are all about confidence, but this often gets mangled into just an annoying domineering guy when insecurities are directed outward—often at the heroine. I find it more compelling when insecurities are directed inward.
beggar1015 said on 11.26.09 at 07:09 PM • [link]
I just think it’s a literary fad, a cycle of sorts. People get tired of reading the same old same old (too many cowboys, Navy SEALS, playboy sheiks) so when something new (although old) comes along, people jump on it. I’m reminded of a time when Sci-Fi entered the romance genre. Even Johanna Lindsey wrote a couple of books set on other planets and spaceships. It was something different.
This vampire obsession will eventually pass although I’m not going to hazard a guess as to what will replace it. Maybe a Tarzan-type jungle nature boy will make a sudden resurgence. While that’s not new, it’s new to a generation not used to Tarzan. There, I just lied and hazarded a guess when I said I wouldn’t.
Sonya Bateman said on 11.26.09 at 08:40 PM • [link]
@teshara:
You made my day. I have a UF debut coming out in the spring, with genies. :D
Beatriz Williams said on 11.26.09 at 08:42 PM • [link]
Absolutely! It’s easy to forget just what ‘alpha’ means: he’s the leader, the one whose intrinsic qualities encourage others to follow him. True alphas aren’t jerks at all; jerks are just the wannabe alphas who don’t know any other way to lead. Look at sports teams. You can identify the captain pretty quickly, and he’s not the wanker hogging all the playing time.
That being said, the burdens of leadership are immense, creating plenty of conflict—plenty of opportunity for failure and sacrifice and redemption—to drive a story forward. Bring on the ‘good guy’ heroes, I say! At this point, I’d be far more interested in angels than vampires.
JamiSings said on 11.26.09 at 09:07 PM • [link]
Let me know, Mari. I happen to work in a public library and our librarian, whom doesn’t read fiction, is always teasing me about how he “depends on me” to tell him what to buy. (Though right now of course we don’t have much of a budget.) I plan on acting like I’m taking him seriously. In fact, I’ve been asking around for a list of romance novels to give him! Preferably listed between “sweet romance” and “hot erotic romance.”
Anyway, if I have to I’ll just buy your book myself and donate it! I’ve done that before.
Suze said on 11.26.09 at 10:05 PM • [link]
That is the most awesome thing I’ve read today.
You know, when I was a ‘tween, I DEVOURED Edgar Rice Burroughs. Holy cow, I’d love a Tarzan resurgence. There was one in the 80’s? Greystoke, The Legend of Tarzan, introducing Christopher Lambert. Mmmmmm. Delish. It’s so hard to keep it from going totally campy and cheezy, though.
Beatriz Williams said on 11.26.09 at 11:25 PM • [link]
Ooh, the noble savage! I love it. You’re right, though—it would have to be done by a deft hand to avoid high camp. Paging Ms. Kinsale…?
Heather Massey said on 11.27.09 at 03:48 AM • [link]
Me too. One aspect I really enjoyed about Linnea Sinclair’s cyborg hero Branden Kel-Paten (GAMES OF COMMAND) was that he was a good guy hero *and* he was all about the angst as well. Heck yeah, bring on more cyborgs. Best of both worlds.
Other good guy heroes in science fiction romance include Soren from Jess Granger’s BEYOND THE RAIN, Thor from Katherine Allred’s CLOSE ENCOUNTERS, and Rork from Karin Shah’s STARJACKED.
Plus, I’m dying for some steampunk romance and the heroes & heroines that go with them: Automatons, cowboys, airship captains, inventors, you name it.
That said, I’d also love to see heroines get more fun roles, and those who are just as compelling as the heroes. Especially more anti-heroines, like Catherine Asaro’s android heroine Alpha from her book, er, ALPHA. I am in love with that character. She can kick my ass anytime.
Steph said on 11.27.09 at 05:09 AM • [link]
JamiSings: I had no idea, though that makes sense. Thanks!
Lindsay said on 11.27.09 at 11:49 PM • [link]
You might want to check out the Dresden Doll’s song (and video) Coin-Operated Boy.
analysis42 - I haven’t got my thoughts in order to do any analysis.
Jana Oliver said on 11.28.09 at 03:38 AM • [link]
I really liked how you portrayed your demons. I’m basing my stories on Christian, Jewish and Muslim scriptures regarding the Fallen and Lucifer whilst carefully avoiding the “S” name since that comes pre-loaded with meaning for some folks. Depending on which religious texts you study, The Adversary has different roles. I’ll take heat no matter what I do, so I’m just going where the story takes me and wear flame-proof clothing.
Mia Cherish said on 11.28.09 at 10:12 AM • [link]
What a nifty article.
I write paranormal romances. I’ve been fascinated with vampire mythology since my teens. I think the vampire and the wereanimal’s popularity in romance isn’t new at all; we’re simply witnessing the most recent incarnation of it.
I recall reading Frank Langella’s forward in a fancy illustrated copy of Stoker’s “Dracula.” Langella admitted he embraced the title role (on Broadway and later in film) as a romantic figure back in the 1970’s. It worked, boy did it work.
The ancient Greek myth of Hades bearing Persephone away into the Underworld has overtones of vampirism in it. Persephone’s taste of forbidden fruit contaminates her. Even the fairy tales “Snow White and the Seven Dwarves” and “Sleeping Beauty” contain vampiric elements.”
Vampires and werewolves and comparable otherworldly beings offer enormous versatility in characterisation. A vampire can be a hero and still do unspeakable things that, if a “normal” human did them, a reader might lose empathy or at least doubt their sanity. They make fabulous villains, fabulous guardians, and fabulous lovers (unless you’re dealing with Rice-esque impotence.)
I don’t think the vampire fad will ever go away. The trend’s been trendy since ancient Egypt. I think it’s possible we’ll see vampires evolve with human imagination and social cicrcumstances. We’ve already seen that through the late seventies to the present, where the vampire lost his traditional repugnance for holy symbols and gained fatal photosensitivity.
saltwaterknitter said on 11.28.09 at 12:13 PM • [link]
I found Twilight poorly written. I disagreed with the gender roles and I found the relationship to be abusive.
Kelc said on 11.28.09 at 06:29 PM • [link]
I love, love, love vamps…weres are a close second only since I started reading paranormals and that was a few years ago. Always had the hots for vamps. Really - I’m certain I could’ve redeemed David (Keifer Sutherland in the Lost Boys), seriously.
I started writing a vampire love story back in 1996, if I’d only known maybe I would’ve completed it. Alas, hindsight and all that. But I still have a vampire story to tell.
Why do I love vamps? Holy cow, I never dissected that. But given my above comment, I believe it’s because if any guy ever needed redeeming or saving or the loving of a good woman, it’s gotta be a vamp, right? And I’m a good woman.
I admit it, when I read a book half my brain is imagining I’m standing in for the heroine (I’m never her), or the hunky secondary character wants me and only me. Think JR Ward’s newest - Covet. Marie-Therese/Gretchen can have Vin, I want Jim. Damn he’s hawt.
Redemption of the bad-boy who is not really bad but misunderstood and terribly guilt-ridden over his drink of choice. How can a good girl (like me) ever really understand and come to love and accept him? It’s just how I roll.
Weres - wolves, panthers, leopards. Nalini Singh has cornered this market, as far as I’m concerned. Her changellings - rowr! Wait, Kresley Cole writes an awesome Lykae - her manipulation of mythology is pure genius. I await their books with bated breath.
Nalini’s new angle series - yikes! It’s great too. Raphael, yum. Her vamps in this series - can’t wait to see where that goes.
Am I tired of vamps - well, I’ve read a lot of shit that makes me roll my eyes, but that happens regardless. And almost every story has redeeming qualities, so I just keep reading more.
What hot in the future? Angels and demons are the future and the future is now. Hmm….I think demons as unrelated to any religion are on the rise, steep rise. Larissa Ione’s Demonica Series - fabu! Except that little BDSM-as-a-cure blip in book 2 - still scratching my head at that one. She still rocks and is on my auto-buy list, under Sydney Croft, too. (Dev and Oz. These two made me cry - I haven’t cried at a book in forevah. But they’re neither vamps nor weres…sorry, I digress).
So that’s it - I love the alpha heroes, but too much asshole-like behaviour pisses me off, so there’d better be an awesome grovel at some point.
I can save you, dammit, just find me. SWF (actually I’m married but let’s role-play) looking for a Sebastian Wroth, or Acheron, or Zsadist (not any of the other BDB, tho) type, tall, gorgeous and angst-ridden, but is good to my mom, and me, of course.
Hmmm…...
Lady T said on 11.28.09 at 08:03 PM • [link]
Lots of great food for thought here-I do agree that since 9/11,fantasy has been more openly embraced by mainstream audiences and given a little more respect. I’m a vampire fan all the way(and yes,I love Buffy & True Blood & Twilight and even The Vampire Diaries,which has turned out to be a better show than I expected)but do appreciate the rise of werewolves over the past several years.
I remember one of the first werewolf novels I read before it became a popular paranormal fiction theme;The Wolf’s Hour by Robert McCammon,which had it’s leading man use his shapeshifter abilities to spy on the Nazis during WWII. It introduced to me the concept of a were being able to change at any time and not have to wait for a full moon,plus despite the rather cheesy sounding story line,the plot and characters were well developed and compelling.
Werewolf/shapeshifter stories seem to have become more of a female enpowerment tale on page rather than the big or the small screen so far-not only Kelley Armstrong’s Bitten but Carrie Vaughn’s Kitty Norville novels and the Mercy series by Patricia Briggs as well. While I’m loving the strong vampire resurgence of late,it would be nice if one of these fierce female were sagas were snapped up by a smart producer to bring to life either for cable TV or a major Hollywood film.
As to the next big thing,aliens do have a good shot at it,with Stephanie Meyer’s The Host featuring a love triangle between an alien parasite,the woman possessed by it and the man they both care for(sounds weird and strange,but it works).
Also,some sword and sorcery stories(that are not Tolkien) may find a stronger foothold in these turbulent times;I’ve become a fan of the syndicated series Legend of the Seeker(based on Terry Goodkind’s Sword of Truth books)and the show is in it’s second season right now,with a solid fanbase growing around it. While there is some humor in the show,it’s not trying to be campy like Hercules or Xena were back in the day. Keep an eye on LOTS,because I think it’s really leading towards something bigger on the horizon.
Jesi said on 11.28.09 at 08:13 PM • [link]
I should mention that I’ve shifters and weres before I knew what they were. My imaginary friend was a shape-shifting chicken. No lie. I was two when Fee appeared. I think it’s a natural progression for me to like the stories as an adult.
Irene Chandler said on 11.28.09 at 09:33 PM • [link]
I’m going to go against the consensus here and say that I think gods are going to be in sometime soon. Not God, mind you, but Greek or Norse-style gods—incredibly powerful and entirely fallible, with enormously messed-up family backgrounds.
Why? Because I think part of the lure of paranormal romance is that superhumans of any kind are sexy as all get-out. Vampires, werewolves, in some ways it doesn’t matter, so long as the hero is too powerful and too charismatic and his struggle is all about limiting himself before someone gets hurt. Gods are ready-made for that kind of story.
Irene
Mia Cherish said on 11.28.09 at 09:58 PM • [link]
Your opinion intrigues me, Irene. In the latest vampire stories, I’ve been toying with mythological beings connected to various gods. Amazons, for instance, are the half-mortal daughters of Ares. While Ares doesn’t have a role in my work (at least, not at present) I depicted Ares as a good if somewhat absentee father. The Amazons have special dogs bred by Ares to be their companions and protectors, for instance.
I worked in bits like that to present a world where the vampire main characters weren’t “ultra alpha top-of-the-food-chain.” Use of additional paranormal and/or mythological beings helps “level the playing field” and allows the vampire to become a bit more human.
JamiSings said on 11.29.09 at 01:33 AM • [link]
Okay, for all that I “just don’t get the appeal of bad boys” this statement does make me want to confess that I’ve got a “thing” for Thorn from Bad Moon Rising by Sherrilyn Kenyon.
Thorn is kind of a minor character in it, but he is appealing. I mean, the son of Lucifer/Satan, but battles his father’s demons, seems totally evil in many ways, lives in Hell, but tries to keep demons confined and not allow them on earth? He seems like a bad boy but is really a good boy and just needs a good woman who can help him hold it together. Sort of like how Trudy kept Adrian from going totally OCD in Monk, enough for him to have a great career in law enforcement, up until her murder.
That kind of bad boy appeals to me. The kind who isn’t bad but seems like it.
That being said, IRL I’d never go for a guy like Thorn. He’s too scary in the long run. Nice to fantasize about. Not so much to actually start a relationship with.
Anyway, I’ve got my Hang Ups and Issues (there’s reasons those are capital letters) that prevent me from being in a relationship to begin with. But it doesn’t stop me from day dreaming. After all, a fictional character can’t reject me for being too fat or listening to Tom Jones.
Irene Chandler said on 11.30.09 at 12:08 AM • [link]
And you’re not the only one. Sherrilyn Kenyon’s vampires are connected with the Greek and Atlantean gods. I’ve sort of stopped following the series, but I think her later books feature fewer vamps and more assorted other beings. I also remember a book—can’t bring the author to mind, unfortunately—where the protagonists were wrapped up in some sort of contest run by the goddess of paradoxes and other impossibilities. I was confused by coming in mid-series, but I thought that universe included vampires, weres, phantoms of some sort, demons, and . . . valkyries, I think? A total smorgasbord, in other words. All in all, I think you’re at the head of a trend. :)
Well, it also helps to answer the question, “Why don’t vampires rule the world if they’re all that?”
Obligatory disclaimer: I should point out that my opinion isn’t totally unbiased. I have a book out with Liquid Silver which features gods. It’s straight-out, no-extra-adjectives fantasy, not urban fantasy, but I think it covers some of the same themes. So, y’know, I’d really like it if gods got big all of a sudden, and that might skew my perception.
I still think I’m right about power and its problems being a huge theme in urban fantasy, though. There’s a reason wererabbits have never taken off.
Irene
JamiSings said on 11.30.09 at 02:22 AM • [link]
Werecreatures, Greek dream gods/goddesses, but Ash and/or a Dark Hunter usually appears in every book even as a cameo. And since her vampires are really Daimons they’re not really vampires in the traditional sense.
Who says they don’t? Best way to rule is behind the scenes. Let someone else take the blame for your goof ups. Imagine a world where every country is secretly led by vampires and the humans “in charge” are just puppets not even aware they’re under control of a superior being. That all our wars are really just vampires’ being all territorial.
You mean besides the fact that in traditional mythology wererabbits/werehares are in reality witches whom take on the forms of rabbits/hares in order to drink human breast milk? Apparently in the olden days it wasn’t unusual for a human woman who’s nursing a baby to give her extra breast milk to small farm animals by suckling them. So witches would take on the forms of young rabbits/hares, go into the homes of nursing women, and wait to be suckled.
Yet more useless trivia I know. Kind of like how I know if your first finger is longer then your middle finger that mean’s your a witch because that’s your potion stiring finger.
Jesi said on 11.30.09 at 02:40 AM • [link]
I don’t think the genre could handle another Bunnicula or wereoffspring, though. *waves teeny Bunnicula flag*
Suze said on 11.30.09 at 04:36 AM • [link]
No, no, it’s not vampires it’s reptilian aliens. Nice attempt to distract us from the awful truth, though. What are you, an agent of the Illuminati?
HUMANS, GET OFF YOUR KNEES!
Conspiracy theories are so much fun!
JamiSings said on 11.30.09 at 05:08 AM • [link]
The Illuninati are SO 1884! I’m part of the Discoinati. Because I love the nightlife, I’ve got to boogie.
Geez - and I wonder why I’m single.
Mia Cherish said on 11.30.09 at 06:21 AM • [link]
An Aussie friend of mine goes on and on about Kenyon; I need to pick up at least one of her books and see if she works for me. : )
I do think these kinds of trends are inevitable. That said, for now at least, vampires are my “main love” in genre fiction. At least the really pretty ones are.
JamiSings said on 11.30.09 at 10:48 PM • [link]
Start with Fantasy Lover. That’s the one that got me hooked. Grace acts almost exactly the way I would - except I would’ve locked Julian out of my room and bathroom and cried every time he touched me.
I wonder if anyone here would be interested in reading my “rules for dating a vampire”....
lunarocket said on 12.02.09 at 05:05 PM • [link]
And this last bit is what confuses me about vampires. Vampires are DEAD. There is NO heartbeat. Therefore there is NO blood pumping through the extremities. Therefore, no matter how hot he is there ain’t gonna be hot secks! ;-)
This would go a loooong way to explain the broodiness in my humble opinion!
JamiSings said on 12.02.09 at 05:17 PM • [link]
Ah - but vampires are supernatural. The natural rules don’t apply to them. In fact, there’s many myths about vampires whom feed on the psychic energy of sex. Yes, that would seem like incubuses/sucubuses, but they are demons. These vampires were once human.
Then of course there’s vampires whom feed on psychic energy given off by nightmares. These ones are usually females. If they taste the blood of the man who they’re tormenting they’ll “fall in love” with him and keep giving him nightmares every night until he dies.
lunarocket said on 12.02.09 at 06:48 PM • [link]
Ah - but vampires are supernatural. The natural rules don’t apply to them.
I don’t know….. supernatural is all fine and dandy but I think they get way too many perks to still be dead. The only perk they don’t seem to get is enjoying food and wine. Personally, I can’t imagine giving up chocolate and sex no matter how great being a vampire is. I like things a little more realistic even in vampires. Never got the “sunlight frying them thing” either. Just doesn’t make sense.
JamiSings said on 12.02.09 at 07:36 PM • [link]
Not all vampires are allergic to sunlight. There’s actually one legend about a farmer whom returned from the dead as a vampire - and came home during the day to help on the farm so his family wouldn’t go broke or starve. Then returned to his grave at night to sleep.
Now, before I run off to work, here is -
Jami’s Rules For Dating A Vampire
1: Vampires are highly allergic to UV rays. So dates at the beach or gift certificates to tanning parlors are out. Also don’t expect trips to the Virgin Islands or Bermuda. Disneyland/Disneyworld/EuroDisney are also out.
2: Not all vampires have fangs. Russian vampires, for instance, have long, sharp, pointed tongues. Be sure of your vampire’s dental make up before you french kiss him or her.
3: If you’re a woman, avoid dating your vampire if you are menstrating.
4: Do not handle anything that might cut you while on your date with a vampire. Be certain to clean wounds throughly and bandage them well before going out on a date.
5: Do not eat a lot of garlic heavy foods while dating your vampire.
6: Like werewolves, vampires are sensitive to silver. Stick to gold jewelry.
7: A vampire can control you if he or she drives a gold spike through your shadow. If you enjoy free will, look out for gold spikes.
8: Vampires can be killed with thorns from wild rose bushes or with cold iron spikes. Be careful when wandering through wild flowers or in iron factories.
9: If you and your vampire break up one way to repel him or her is by spreading cow poop that has been found in a thorn bush on your window sills and door jams. This is also good for door to door salesmen, Jehovah Witnesses, and your nosy neighbor. Buying your own cow and planting a lot of thorn bushes will help you keep up a fresh supply.
10: Vampires are repelled by religious symbols you have faith in. Try to leave off the Star Of David, crucifix, or pentagram while on your date. Unless you don’t allow blood drinking on the first date.
11: Vampires are total alphas. Be prepared to say “Yes master” or “yes mistress” a lot.
12: Vampires don’t care to be tied up, but they don’t mind you being tied up. Especially on their dining room table.
13: Vampire females can’t have babies. However vampire males can impregnate human females. (Yeah, Undeath is not pro-feminism.) So ladies, unless you wish to give birth to a natural born vampire hunter – a dhampire – you better practice safe sex/birth control.
14: Vampires have OCD. If grain like oats, wheat, corn, rice, etc fall at their feet they have to stop and count every grain. They also will untie all knots they see. Buy a lot of dress shoes, slip ons, or shoes with velcro, and keep your vampire out of the kitchen.
15: Don’t cheat on your vampire with a werewolf and vise versa.
And also -
Jami’s Useless Vampire Trivia
Ways to become a vampire:
1: Be the 7th son of a 7th son.
2: Die as any one of the following – suicide, murder victim, witch, or werecreature – and you will return as a vampire.
3: Be a murderer.
4: Die unbaptized. (Obviously if you’re any denomination of Christianity that will apply. Jewish, not so much.)
5: Satan brings you back as one because too many people cried at your funeral.
6: Be a redhead. (Seriously, many countries believed redheads, especially redheaded women, came back as vampires after they died.)
Ways to kill a vampire -
1: Iron spike through skull.
2: Silver knife or bullet blessed by a holy man. (Silver, not just for werecreatures anymore.)
3: Thorn poked through the tongue pinning it to the roof of the mouth. Vampire will starve to death.
4: A branch of wild rose on their grave. Traps vampire in grave. Vampire starves.
5: Remove and burn the heart. Cut off the head and bury it under the vampire’s feet.
If bitten to prevent coming back as a vampire, kill the vampire, then mix their blood with dirt from the vampire’s grave and eat it.
And of course there’s different foods for vampires too. Of course we all know what incubuses and succubuses all feed on. Then there’s myrnas whom give men nightmares and feed off their fear – myrnas are only women, never men, and if they taste the blood of the man they’re feeding on they’ll return to him over and over until he dies. Any man whom suspects he’s the victim of a myrna has to sleep with a silver dagger clutched in his hands pointing upwards. (So on his back and he can’t roll over.) The myrna (I might be spelling that wrong, BTW, but I know it’s like that and it also happens to be an actual woman’s name as well) will throw herself upon her victim, the silver dagger piercing her and killing her.
A dhampire can be identified at birth by the fact they have see-through skin and soft bones. Basically they’re a human shaped jellyfish their first year of life. (Since all myths are based in reality I wonder if there has ever been any see-through babies.)
To find a vampire’s grave send a pure white horse with a virgin upon it’s back through a cementary. Any grave the horse stumbles on, won’t walk on, or freaks out around contains a vampire. Oddly in most of the mythology they not only stress a virgin, but a boy virgin age 8 or younger. I don’t know why boys and not girls. Unless girl virgins were harder to come by back then or something. And considering they stressed 8 years old or younger – well, it just makes my stomach queasy to think about what prompted that part of the myth.
I tell you, if there’s ever a vampire apocalypse I’m covered.
A zombie one – well, I’m sc**wed.
XandraG said on 12.02.09 at 07:46 PM • [link]
I’ve read or skimmed every post here—good stuff!
I think the universal appeal for Vampires and Weres has really taken off since 9/11’s influence not just because of the direct effect of such a cultural blow, but of the immense load of by-blows surrounding it. All of a sudden, in the collective consciousness, War has become something other than lines of men facing off on a field, or fields of tanks and soldiers. War lost its “front lines” far away from everyday life and the front lines were driven home to become—especially to American audiences, who haven’t seen domestic conflict on home soil in at least two generations—our places of work and play. Our homes. Now War is fought not between soldiers who’ve signed up for combat duty, but by agents of terror and chaos who *look just like us* - without uniforms to distinguish them, without combat zones to separate them from civilian places. And without political entities with structures to be negotiated with. Other countries aren’t our enemies anymore, now it’s the twitchy looking dude with the backpack on the subway. And speaking plainly, all the military technology in the world couldn’t stop an assault of hate from people whose bases were in caves. That’s damn scary.
So what we turn to in our fictions is the concept of a Greater Justice. It comes from the secret super-power of something that is human, but super-human. It comes with the obligatory “That’s not a knife, THIS is a knife” I-have-a-secret-weapon scene against the bad guys. And it comes with a secret society with more power than the clay-footed powers our everyday organizations have shown. How many readers can’t get enough of the weres because they show pack society where everyone’s place is secure, and the laws of ascension are pretty clear, and the idea is that if someone’s in trouble, not only the big dude with the hairy back, but his whole family of big dudes with hairy backs, are going to come galloping in to rend flesh and save the day.
As for what’s next—fae do have a certain appeal, but like other posters have mentioned, the fae have been established as capricious and alien in their thinking, and not all noble in their dealings with humanity. Which sheds a certain appeal when one thinks of the banking industry’s same capricious malice.
Aliens don’t have the entirely same appeal because as much as we like the idea of advanced beings coming to our rescue, we’d still feel like pets on the inside. Note the popularity of space environments where humans are dominant.
Zombies—PS - to the yinzers, take a gander at http://www.monroevillezombies.com/
Zombies don’t so much represent rotting flesh and tasty brains, but the sameness of corporate america. How different are the shambling undead than the shambling inhabitants of America’s cube farms? I’ve done my time in the corporate world, and indeed, we used to joke about how much more lively the cemetery was on any given day.
Elemental said on 12.02.09 at 08:23 PM • [link]
Jami, great summing up there. It would be funny to see a wisecracking vampire slayer try the stake-through-the-heart method, and then have it do nothing because she forgot the iron spike, bag of rice, or the bushel of roses.
Something I’d like to see is for Asian mythology to be mined a bit. You have all kinds of interesting human-like creatures such as the kitsune, nagas / naginis or asparas, who in the original stories had no problem mingling with and marrying humans—some myths even had dragons assuming human form and fathering children.
JamiSings said on 12.03.09 at 12:50 AM • [link]
Funny you should mention it, Elemental - the rice part of the vampire’s OCD actually comes from China. There their vampires are suppose to have long nails and are covered in moss. I noticed that the grain myth is actually the most prevalent of the vampire repelling/stopping myths. The grain just happens to change depending on the country. In Asian countries it’s rice, in European it’s wheat. I assume in America it’s corn. Seems like every country has a variation of the “must collect all spilled grain” myth.
Of course according to the X-Files it’s sunflower seeds. LOL
Mia Cherish said on 12.03.09 at 04:21 AM • [link]
I love Eastern Indian mythology and there are more than a few stories that make for excellent “vampirization.”
Every so often I feel an itch to vampirize the faerie tale of Snow White. Several elements in the story point to vampires IMHO.
Beatriz Williams said on 12.03.09 at 04:49 AM • [link]
Thank goodness I’m not the only one to ponder the Turgidity Paradox! And alas, JamiSings, though I love all the info you’ve posted, my inner scientist just can’t be satisfied with the *it’s magic* explanation. Is there a reasonably plausible pseudo-scientific hypothesis out there? Because it kind of bugs me. Just what the heck is, um, holding things up?
And then there’s the Live Sperm Enigma… or are the little guys undead too?
JamiSings said on 12.03.09 at 08:46 AM • [link]
Ah but there is no scientifically explaining the supernatural.
That’s part of the fun. Just taking magic on faith. Somethings aren’t meant to be explained. Take, for instance, this - even as a young girl back when their true natures were hidden, I just could not stand Tom Cruise and Mel Gibson. Could I put a finger on why? No. There was just something about them that put my teeth on edge.
Cut to years later when Cruise becomes a couch jumping cultist freak and Mel, son of a Holocaust denier, turns out to be an antisemitic sack of adulterous crap.
I don’t think one could ever really scientifically explain how I “knew” deep down that there was something off about them. But somehow I did. I just accept it’s something I can’t explain. Like with the vampires.
It does make me wonder what will happen in the future with Leo DiCaprio and George Clooney because I can’t stand them either. Nor Brad Pitt or Mathew McConaughey. Just something about them sets my teeth on edge.
To be fair though, in most Christian societies they saw vampires as beings of Satan. Remember what I said about Satan making you a vampire if a lot of people cried at your funeral - if he saw that he’d raise you from the grave as a vampire. In fact there were people whom were paid to laugh at funerals to fool Satan into thinking there were people glad the person in the coffin was dead.
And let’s not forget the classic Christian guilt about sex. Real quick family thing for me - while my maternal great-grandparents were in reality, Jewish, they hid the fact due to persecution and pretended to be Catholic. So my mom was raised Catholic. Including all the guilt about sex. When I was old enough to start thinking about and having sex, mom informed me one day, “Only men and wh**es have orgasms. Good girls never enjoy sex.” (One of my lovely Hang Ups I often hint to, but not the only one. LOL)
Sex = evil. Satan controls/makes vampires. Therefore the vampires can have sex because Satan likes humans to sin by having sex.
Why do male vampires have children with human women and not the other way around? Same reason women in Greece and Rome would have children with Zeus. In reality these women were sleeping around. They got pregnant outside the bounds of their marriage/after being widowed for a year. To avoid being called a fornicator, they blamed their pregnancy on a vampire.
Oh, another bit of trivia - if you have poltergeist activity, a vampire is present. Yep, that’s one of the myths, vampires and poltergeists are suppose to go hand in hand.
dangrgirl said on 12.03.09 at 06:10 PM • [link]
@JamiSings:
Lara Adrian’s vampires originated on another planet. The original aliens, called the Breed, crash-landed on Earth, but could not sustain themselves on anything but the protein from blood. Also, they could only procreate with human women who had a specific genetic trait, called Breedmates, and could only sire sons. Each Breedmate also has some sort of paranormal talent and the mixed breed son inherits that talent from his mother.
It’s light science because Adrian doesn’t go into much more detail than that. I wish she would, actually, because I think it’s a neat twist on the vampire myth and also because I’m a science nerd. I’d also like to know more about the origins of the Breedmates because their ability to procreate with the aliens/vampires means that they share some genetic components and therefore aren’t fully human either.
If it isn’t clear already, I think a scientific origin for vampirism is interesting. Didn’t the TV show Forever Knight have some sort of scientific explanation for vampirism? I seem to remember the doctor character trying to “cure” the vampire.
Irene Chandler said on 12.03.09 at 08:58 PM • [link]
(Quoting from two different posts: apologies.)
Depends on what you mean by “see-through.” You can’t see all the way through someone with albinism, but it might be a lot easier to make out the veins. (I have never gone up to an albino person and said, “Excuse me, can I take a close look at your skin?” so I’m not totally sure of this.) That might count as see-through skin to some people, and it sometimes comes with other frailties—generally vision problems, IIRC, but myths are also about exaggerating things, and heaven knows that jellylike bones are more fascinating and gross than being dramatically nearsighted.
Okay, now I’m wanting to write a story about an albino con man in the middle ages who hires out as a vampire hunter based largely on the fact that he looks weird to the local yokels—and then stumbles onto real vampires.
IIRC, there were different views on that even within the show. Natalie (the doctor) was convinced that vampirism could be scientifically explained somehow, and she was definitely searching for a cure. Nick (the vampire) wanted a cure badly enough to go along with almost anything that didn’t involve killing folks, but he seemed to think that his problems were metaphysical, not biological. There was a certain amount of support for both viewpoints. Natalie managed to suppress the vampirism on occasion—never without side-effects, which is why they didn’t stick with those treatments—but the one recovered vampire in the entire series seemed to have been cured by true love.
Also, Nick wasn’t capable of sex, although I can’t remember if it was because of blood pressure issues or because he was extremely likely to rip his lover’s throat out. I used to know way too much about that series, but it’s been a long time.
Irene
JamiSings said on 12.03.09 at 09:04 PM • [link]
Oh there’s always some show trying to do that. Moonlight tried too. Even succeeded but Mick went back to being a vampire to save Beth, again. (Amazing how those shows are usually the vampire trying to save the human and rarely the other way around.)
I don’t want a scientific explanation for vampires. I like the supernatural and things you can’t explain. Maybe it’s because I’m a believer, or because it just makes life more interesting.
I would hate for someone to be able to scientifically explain ancient gods and goddesses. I’d much rather then me misguided or even fallen angels whom wanted to be worshiped the way God is and therefore pretended to be gods and goddesses then have them be aliens. Same thing with vampires. I’d just rather have the supernatural.
dangrgirl said on 12.03.09 at 09:08 PM • [link]
@JamiSings:
Whatever works for you, but I find the scientific explanation just as interesting as a supernatural one. I don’t favor one over the other. I enjoyed the Stargate TV series mostly because the Goa’uld represented themselves as gods all over the planet for thousands of years. We all read for different reasons.
JamiSings said on 12.03.09 at 09:12 PM • [link]
If I remember correctly Nick only ever had sex with Janette because sex with a human was too dangerous. Janette became human while drinking the blood of the man she was truly in love with while they were having sex.
And you could be right. Obviously all myths are based in some form of reality. Werecreatures can be explained one of two ways. There’s the mental disease of lycanthropy where people really believe they can turn into animals. I believe there was even one case where a man on trial for murder insisted that they cut off his skin so they could “see the wolf’s fur growing underneath.” Then there’s the Beserkers and other warriors who’d put on animal pelts before battle.
Vampirism can be explained with Porphyria.
For a publicly edited page, there’s actually a good resource over at Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampirism - covering vampire-like creatures in African and Asian folklore as well.
BTW - The albino con man turned vampire hunter, I hope you do write it. It sounds like an awesome idea.
Jamie said on 12.05.09 at 09:21 AM • [link]
This thread has been really encouraging to me, actually. I’ve been wanting to start a paranormal romance for a while, but I’ve been waffling on whether anyone would want to read it. Why? Because the hero and the heroine are both humans living in a paranormal world. The heroine is the tough, scarred (physically and psychologically) snappy vampire hunter, the hero is a mild-mannered (but hot, of course!) parabiologist trying to save her from her self-destructive nature and inner demons. This is set in a modern world where magic, vampires, etc., are known and accepted; the girl hunts vampires illegally because they killed her family, while the guy studies how they work- the heroine believes they are all irredeemable monsters, while the hero thinks that, like humans, some are good and some are bad. It’s (I hope) pretty different from anything that’s out there, and I thought that might be a bad thing, that it’s so different no one would want to read it, but I see the variance of tastes on here, and it gives me hope yet that my story might sell. And a couple of people mentioned using other mythologies; I try to incorporate Hindi, African, and Asian mythos into my stories as much or more than European. Transylvanian vamps are overdone; give me kappas and kitsune any day. They are a lot more interesting and a lot less trite!
Violet Ingram said on 12.05.09 at 09:31 AM • [link]
Jamie,
Your book sounds great. I know I’d read it. Keep us posted.
JamiSings said on 12.05.09 at 09:43 AM • [link]
Jamie - I want to read it now! *impatient dance*
And yes, traditional vampires are overdone.
I have to say, vampires who were Christian in their human lives is also overdone. One of the best short vampire stories I read was in a book written for kids. It was about a young Jewish boy who gets turned into a vampire. Consuming blood is a big time no-no, part of making sure meat is kosher is draining out all blood. So of course he’s a bit conflicted. Anyway, after being driven out of his own village, a Rabbi in another comes up with a solution and the vampire becomes a protector. It was like the story of the Golem but with a vampire instead.
I mean, there’s SO many other religions out there. I’d love to see vampires from other belief systems. Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Pagan, Wiccan, etc - heck, imagine an atheist being turned into a vampire and being forced, after looking for a scientific explanation - to be forced to accept a completely supernatural one - maybe even meeting some angels and/or demons - the conflicted feelings there!
Then there’s also other mixes - a vegetarian gets turned and has to choose between human or animal blood, a pacifist who can’t reconcile their thirst with their desire to be completely non-violent.
Imagine, if you will, a total wallflower. A woman who spent her entire life under overbearing parents, bouncing from one emotionally abusive relationship to another, believing herself to be completely weak - gets turned into a vampire and her sire keeps telling her to stop being such a dishrag and grow a backbone.
Jamie said on 12.06.09 at 08:12 AM • [link]
Glad to know that you guys like the sound of my book- I’m only about 15 pages in, but I’ll keep writing as fast as I can. I agree- there are lots of other belief systems, they need to be represented too. It’s a subtrope of the annoying thing where, on TV if someone is a Christian, they’re Catholic. Which, in Italy or Poland, would be fine; but the majority of Christians in the U.S. are some form of Protestant (Baptist, Methodist, whatever), and Catholics are more of a minority amongst U.S. Christians. It takes so little time to do research on those kind of things, so I find it really annoying when authors and tv writers don’t bother to do it right. The time that annoyed me the most was in an episode of Stargate SG-1 when the characters said that there wasn’t a zoo in Colorado Springs, when there is, in fact, a very large and very nice zoo- the Cheyenne Mountain zoo, as a matter of fact. As a native Coloradoan, I was headdesking for about three days over that one.
JamiSings said on 12.06.09 at 08:57 AM • [link]
Oh I know what you mean! Law & Order: Criminal Intent did a BIG boo-boo by not researching. The episode where the guy keeps donating stuff and even killed a woman who got his kidney because she chose to get married and design jewelry rather then be a social worker. He arranges to donate a lung to a boy with cystic fibrosis.
I may not be an expert but my best friend had CF. (She passed away in 2005.) And I know you CAN’T transplant just ONE lung! You have to do BOTH lungs or the unhealthy lung can actually infect the healthy lung. You have to wait for someone who’s legally brain dead.
I’m sure had they bothered to ask a doctor they could’ve just as easily said the kid had lung cancer from his parents’ smoking instead. That episode always ticks me off because they obviously didn’t research CF at all.
Liza said on 12.15.09 at 11:10 AM • [link]
I recently wrote a post about why exactly women love vampires. It comes down to power and anarchy. http://www.vanillasoup.com/attraction/why-women-like-vampires/
Care to comment?
Comments are now closed for this post.
Subscribe to These Comments