The Unsorted BBS Collection/thegreatunsorted.tar/thegreatunsorted/texts/txtfiles_misc/vamp06.faq

Text File | 1995-03-26 | 14KB | 244 lines

The Vampire and Holy Symbols


== Holy Symbols in Modern Vampire Fiction ==

In _The_Dracula_Tape_ by Fred Saberhagen, Count Dracula explains that
he is not frightened by religious symbols, but that he has such
respect for Christianity (being a Catholic himself, as I recall) that
he objects to the profaning of sacred symbols by their use against
him.  He is physically unharmed.

In _Those_Who_Hunt_The_Night_ by Barbara Hambly, the vampires are
unaffected by religious symbols; one even wears a crucifix.  The
vampires are allergic to silver and certain types of wood.  The shape
of the item is meaningless.

In _Vampire_Junction_ by S.P. Somtow, Valentine the vampire has
outgrown any fear of silver or religious symbols, but younger vampires
believe that such items can hurt them, so they are intimidated by
them.  Valentine lets his servants use crucifixes to control the other
vampires, and doesn't tell his fledglings there is no power in such
symbols.

Jack Fleming, in P.N. Elrod's series, 'The Vampire Files,' states that
he was a pretty good guy before he died, and he is still a pretty good
guy as a vampire.  He is not afraid of religious symbols, but
occasionally pretends to be intimidated so as to get his adversary to
drop his/her guard.

Anne Rice's Louis (_Interview_With_The_Vampire_) even goes into a
Catholic church in Paris, enters a confessional and ends up killing
the priest.  He expects to be struck by lightening or something, but
is unharmed even though he is in 'a House of God' and touches the
crucifix.

I think that the five examples cited show that modern authors are
definitely moving away from religious symbolism to control/avoid
vampires.  I attribute this to a growing awareness in our society of
the variety of religious experiences available around the world, and
the recognition that there are many people (including vampires) to
whom Christian religious symbols are meaningless.  It could also
reflect a spreading disinterest in religion and a rejection of
religion's control over the individual.

Davis Farnsworth

== Holy Symbols in Folklore and Pre-Twentieth Century Vampire Fiction ==

     As can be seen from Davis' survey above, the trend in modern
Vampire fiction is away from the efficacy of Holy symbols as wards
against the undead.  The situation was far different in 19th century
and earlier fiction.  Generally those stories are closer to the
vampire tradition of Europe, a tradition that evolved in an intensely
religious world.  Further, the holy symbols associated with the
vampire are generally those of the Catholic and Greek Orthodox
Churches, reflecting the region of Europe in which the vampire myth
matured.  The vampire myth reached its current form in central and
southeastern Europe, an area dominated by the Catholic and Orthodox
Churches and the struggle between those two faiths.  Two of the major
supposed causes of vampirism were excommunication or burial in a
region dominated by a sect conflicting with one's own.

     Stoker's Dracula is repelled by the crucifix or any other symbol
of the Church.  Bits of Holy Wafer or a sprinkling of Holy Water is
efficacious in repelling the vampire or in purifying a location so
that the undead can no longer enter.  Van Helsing uses this method to
cleanse the coffins of the undead so that they can no longer rest
within.  LeFanu's Carmilla is repelled by the reading of religious
verses and at one point faints during a religious reading.  Other 19th
century and some 20th century fiction show the vampire similarly
susceptible to the manifestations of Christianity.

     As with many other aspects of the myth, the folklore literature
is mixed on this issue.  The diversity most likely reflects the
varying evolution and epidemiology of vampirism across the different
regions of Europe.  It is really only in the 19th century, with the
development and dissemination of fictional vampire literature in
western Europe that the vampire myth became homogenized and assumed a
more uniform and consistent nature.  In some European stories, the
vampire cannot even enter the shadow of a church.  In other areas the
vampire is relatively immune to the emblems of the Church.  Generally
though, across most of Europe the vampire, since he was an agent of
Satan, was held to be subject to the dominion of the symbols of
Christ.  The Cross, Holy Water and other symbols of the Church were
almost universally held to be powerful weapons against vampires,
werewolves, witches and other spawn of Satan.

                                 Dragon

== A Brief Synopsis of List Discussion of the Holy Symbol Issue ==

     List discussion concerning this topic has ranged across the
entire spectrum of possible positions.  As with most vampire topics,
the exact position of the writer is very dependent on the writer's
view of the nature of vampirism.  However, few of the list members
seem to support the traditional outlook on holy symbols.

     Many list members felt that the traditional interpretation of
vampires and holy symbols, i.e., that the vampire is repelled because
the holy object is an actual expression of the power of Christ and his
Church over the minions of Satan, was unacceptable.  They felt that
this interpretation implied the superiority of the Christian religion
over all other faiths in a manner that invalidated other religions.
If the symbols of Christ held an innate power over the servants of
Darkness then Christianity must be the One True Religion.  Many people
find this outlook unacceptably chauvinistic and demeaning to the
followers of other faiths.

     For those list members who accepted the idea that holy symbols
had any power at all over vampires, the consensus seemed to be that
the power of the symbol derived from the faith of the wielder (or more
rarely, from the belief of the vampire) rather than any intrinsic
power of the symbol itself.  In other words, if a person, confronted
by a hungry and hostile vampire, presents any symbol which they truly
believe to represent the power of Light and Goodness, their very
belief will manifest itself in a force sufficient to drive away the
undead.  Other list members were willing to accept that the symbol
might have some innate power (however, this power would be equally
available to followers of other faiths) but the wielder must have a
true belief in his symbol for that power to be manifested.  There is
some support for this position in modern fiction.  A common scene in
many vampire movies is that of the would-be vampire killer who has
little or no religious belief presenting his cross only to have it
sneeringly taken away by the unaffected vampire.

                                 Dragon

                     EDITOR'S    NOTE : The following material was contributed by Amos Haggard.


Vampires are creatures of myth and imagination, and as such, probably
closer to the ideal than the real, for most of us at least.  When
fiction deals with myth, or with folklore, wish-fulfillment tends to
be stronger than realism. So we have the Western gunman in his role as
the hero's best friend riding for the sunset to leave the hero free to
marry the heroine; because it is nice to imagine that someone would do
that.  The word 'marry', by the way, was used advisedly. And because
he is imaginary, we can make him do what we like, and there is no need
to remember that Wyatt Earp was probably a dispassionate killer.  The
same human desire to create a moral light in the darkness - a light
preferably held in the strong hands of the hero - led to the idea that
symbols of good could keep the vampire away.  But as literary taste
moves away from moral example and happy endings, so the idea of evil
being defeated by good becomes less credible.  The vampire disregards
the cross, and the human carrying it doesn't quite believe in it
either.  Notions of what is good and what is evil become more
uncertain.  Maybe a pentangle would be a safer bet... or an AK 47.

The point of all this is that I would agree with the idea that a
power-symbol is effective against a vampire only if you believe in it.
However, this is very difficult to explain, unless you concede that
your belief, or your imagination, is responsible for the vampire's
power as well as the symbol's. It would be my view that the sane human
mind finds it almost impossible to imagine complete and irresistible
evil.  In the imagination, there will always be some way to combat the
dark.  When the general mood is as pessimistic as it is at present,
and people see their symbols losing power, there is always a last
resort.  You can welcome the vampire's advance, in the hope that his
attack will release you, instead of ending your life. You can grow to
despise your weakness and idolize those who take advantage of it.  You
can allow your fascination with the killer to become stronger than
your identification with his victim.  You can enjoy cool sex with your
vampire lover and finish by becoming vampire yourself.

                            Amos Haggard

                      EDITOR'S  NOTE : The following was contributed by Enigma Nocturnus.


Greetings, denizens of the night!

     On the holy symbol issue, I am vexed with a variation on the
problem that faces philosophers working in the branch of Ethics: how
to deal with the multiplicity of religions. One can take either of two
approaches to the matter. First, one religion could be the 'true
religion' and all the rest are fallacious. Second, one could take a
relativist approach and claim that all religions are equally valid.
Actually, I take a variation on the second view, since I am a strange
breed of agnostic (I am currently calling myself a transcendentally
agnostic manichean). I acknowledge the existence of a multiplicity of
Gods/Goddesses, however, I do not worship any of these beings. I see a
situation in which the Gods/Goddesses act under the auspices of
something greater (which is _not_ worshipped) and essentially
indefinable (at least by mortals). This came about because of my
attempts to account for humans becoming Gods/Goddesses, and the
reverse. Anyhow, enough of my particular views.  Suffice it to say,
that I will attempt to establish a set of theories involving holy
symbols that either 1) satisfy a multi-religion context or 2) dispense
with religion all together.

     Imprimis, the protection offered by the holy symbol comes from an
innate quality of the object (sanctity) and/or an innate quality of
the wielder (faith). If religion is used, then the answer is simple.
Blessing of a holy symbol (or empowering, if you prefer), endows it
with a certain power. This power, by itself, would not be sufficient,
as we see many examples where an individual who has no faith has his
holy symbol batted away by the attacking vampire. Faith is a necessary
component: it would appear to act as the catalyst by which this power
can act in terms of defense.

     There is an alternate argument: that an agency of the deity, or
the deity himself, comes to the defense of the would-be victim. These
arguments tend to get around the problem of the vampire and the victim
being of different religions, which results if the repellent nature of
the symbol is purely because of the vampire's fear of sacrilege...

     Secundus, let us turn to a hypothesis where a purely psychic
phenomena occurs. In some ways, it shares some kinship with the
posting I made some weeks previously concerning vampire's
inability/aversion towards crossing thresholds. What might be
happening under the aegis of religion could well be an unconscious
psychic defense. I read the process as follows: Mortal presents holy
symbol, and the fear of the vampire reacts with this defensive action
by an automatic surge of will through the holy symbol. The vampire,
who is already very sensitive to such phenomena, recoils from the pain
at the flood of force, tinged with fear.

     Now, this view has some interesting corollaries. First, to a
trained mind, the holy symbol can be dispensed with, as he or she is
able to manage his or her personal defenses/shields to act in a much
more efficient manner.  Second, vampires would probably be barred by
such magical phenomena as magic circles and wards. I would argue that
the vampire would not be helpless in such cases, and could launch an
attack on said defenses (and an older vampire could likely make a more
effective attack, being both more proficient in the arts and/or more
sensitive to the interactions going on).

     In any case, the two major mechanisms I described are not
mutually exclusive. In fact, they mesh without too much fuss. By
length, I think it is fairly indicative of which I prefer, however
(having extensively studied psychic, magical, and other metaphysical
phenomena in the attempt to understand my world). Hopefully, the above
hasn't been too torturous to read, as I was hoping to condense as much
of my thoughts as possible. In any case, since this is my third post,
I'll shut up until tomorrow, or whenever I decide to post next...

                            Yours through the night,
                            Enigma Nocturnus
                            ([e-mail])

Malek's Law:
'Any simple idea will be worded in the most complex way.'