FK General Discussion: What is Vampirism?
Sep. 28th, 2024 10:45 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
switchbladeeyesIn the Forever Knight universe, what exactly is vampirism? Is it biological? A state of mind? A state of spiritual downfall? Moral downfall? Some mix of these things? Something else?
It seems any hopes Nick could have of curing vampirism necessitate answering this question. Because how can you cure it if you don't know what it is?
Biology: As I recall, in "The Fix", Natalie references something unique about Nick's cells or his DNA or something that she sees as a tell-tale sign of his vampirism. And if that can be corrected, Nick won't be a vampire. The drug in "The Fix" worked at first, but did not work long-term. Is it because they just had not found the right biological cure, or is biology not the "source" of vampirism, but rather just a symptom of it? Natalie's approach in seasons 1 and 2 assumes that a cure will address Nick's biology.
State of Mind: I think this is such an interesting avenue that the show got into in season 3. There is definitely some kind of mind-body connection involved, but how it works is unclear. In "Hearts of Darkness," a traumatized young woman developed a split personality, totally unaware that one of her personalities was a vampire. As a practical matter, the personalities that don't know about the vampire, aren't vampires. We see her do things like eat food. We see the same thing with Nick in "Night in Question" when severe head trauma gave him amnesia. He didn't know he's a vampire so he didn't behave like one. It didn't stick in either event, however.
And then there's Janette. What's up with that? Did she want to be human enough (so she could be with WhatsHisFace and the kid) that she turned human? Was she well and truly human? Was it a state of mind?
State of Spiritual Downfall: That vampires are repelled by religious/spiritual objects is a long-standing aspect of the vampire legend. In the novel Dracula, as I read it, vampirism was unquestionably due to being in a state of spiritual downfall. Mina Harker, who was horribly wronged by Count Dracula, was also the only one to have some sympathy for him. I was struck that for her, tracking him down and killing him was not just because he was doing horrible things, but because if she and her allies could kill him, they could free his soul. Maybe this spiritual downfall angle is the same in FK.
Certainly, Nick sees himself in a state of spiritual downfall, but that seems to be because he sees himself through the lens of the religion that shaped him in his human life. Other vampires don't necessarily share this view. Who's right?
An interesting thing in FK is that vampires do not have to believe in a religion for that religion's objects to repel them. What's up with that? It is challenging to chalk up to "state of mind" when there's still an effect regardless of whether you believe in the religion.
State of Moral Downfall: Are vampires inherently morally "bad" or "evil"? Nick sees vampirism that way. We've seen him express it more than once. Which is interesting because he still chooses to associate on friendly terms with some other vampires. If he thinks they are evil, why is he associating with them?
Vampires certainly have impulses to perform evil deeds. I mean, they get off on murdering people. Yikes. But does the impulse alone make them "evil"? I'm sure we all agree that Nick has done some horrible, evil things (body count likely in the tens of thousands, at minimum!), but is the Nick that we know in the modern era an evil person?
Interestingly, the modern era gives vampires a practical way to avoid their murderous impulses. They don't have to murder humans to drink human blood. Though some of them still do. (I'm looking at you, LaCroix.) If you have a choice to do an evil thing or not do it, and you choose not to, doesn't that suggest you aren't inherently evil?
So what is vampirism? Thoughts? Theories? Any of the above resonate with you?
It seems any hopes Nick could have of curing vampirism necessitate answering this question. Because how can you cure it if you don't know what it is?
Biology: As I recall, in "The Fix", Natalie references something unique about Nick's cells or his DNA or something that she sees as a tell-tale sign of his vampirism. And if that can be corrected, Nick won't be a vampire. The drug in "The Fix" worked at first, but did not work long-term. Is it because they just had not found the right biological cure, or is biology not the "source" of vampirism, but rather just a symptom of it? Natalie's approach in seasons 1 and 2 assumes that a cure will address Nick's biology.
State of Mind: I think this is such an interesting avenue that the show got into in season 3. There is definitely some kind of mind-body connection involved, but how it works is unclear. In "Hearts of Darkness," a traumatized young woman developed a split personality, totally unaware that one of her personalities was a vampire. As a practical matter, the personalities that don't know about the vampire, aren't vampires. We see her do things like eat food. We see the same thing with Nick in "Night in Question" when severe head trauma gave him amnesia. He didn't know he's a vampire so he didn't behave like one. It didn't stick in either event, however.
And then there's Janette. What's up with that? Did she want to be human enough (so she could be with WhatsHisFace and the kid) that she turned human? Was she well and truly human? Was it a state of mind?
State of Spiritual Downfall: That vampires are repelled by religious/spiritual objects is a long-standing aspect of the vampire legend. In the novel Dracula, as I read it, vampirism was unquestionably due to being in a state of spiritual downfall. Mina Harker, who was horribly wronged by Count Dracula, was also the only one to have some sympathy for him. I was struck that for her, tracking him down and killing him was not just because he was doing horrible things, but because if she and her allies could kill him, they could free his soul. Maybe this spiritual downfall angle is the same in FK.
Certainly, Nick sees himself in a state of spiritual downfall, but that seems to be because he sees himself through the lens of the religion that shaped him in his human life. Other vampires don't necessarily share this view. Who's right?
An interesting thing in FK is that vampires do not have to believe in a religion for that religion's objects to repel them. What's up with that? It is challenging to chalk up to "state of mind" when there's still an effect regardless of whether you believe in the religion.
State of Moral Downfall: Are vampires inherently morally "bad" or "evil"? Nick sees vampirism that way. We've seen him express it more than once. Which is interesting because he still chooses to associate on friendly terms with some other vampires. If he thinks they are evil, why is he associating with them?
Vampires certainly have impulses to perform evil deeds. I mean, they get off on murdering people. Yikes. But does the impulse alone make them "evil"? I'm sure we all agree that Nick has done some horrible, evil things (body count likely in the tens of thousands, at minimum!), but is the Nick that we know in the modern era an evil person?
Interestingly, the modern era gives vampires a practical way to avoid their murderous impulses. They don't have to murder humans to drink human blood. Though some of them still do. (I'm looking at you, LaCroix.) If you have a choice to do an evil thing or not do it, and you choose not to, doesn't that suggest you aren't inherently evil?
So what is vampirism? Thoughts? Theories? Any of the above resonate with you?
no subject
Date: 2024-09-29 09:42 pm (UTC)Did Monica know about Jacqueline? I want to say she did, but I haven't seen it in awhile. That is how true dissociative personality disorder works--one personality might know about the others, while another is completely innocent of all the other personalities. Which makes me wonder if 'she' could only go out in the daylight as innocent Ellen, or could Monica go out as well, even knowing that Jacqueline can't? Interesting stuff.
I do have yet another fic rec for you. This one is quite short, I find it to be very powerful and at least touches on some of the topics you are considering.
https://users.lmi.net/akr/fk/fiction/byothers/nemoubli.txt
no subject
Date: 2024-09-29 10:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-10-01 01:45 pm (UTC)At the very end, even though Nick experiences great distress as he is conscious of all his memories (that he could only have if he'd known he'd been a vampire) slip away from him, is the ultimate place this will lead such a bad outcome? When you think about it, in a moment, he's not going to be conscious of what has happened. He's going to stand up and go home and look forward to seeing Natalie at dawn, unbothered by what he has lost because he won't remember that he lost anything at all.
Thanks again!
no subject
Date: 2024-10-04 04:49 am (UTC)It is a good one!
It wasn't clear to me whether LaCroix had erased Nick's memory, or if it was due to some natural process of him regaining his humanity. The fact that the memories were fading as opposed to just disappearing made me wonder. Clearly he had just made Natalie forget entirely.
But I think that would also meet the definition of Nick not feeling 'whole' even though he wasn't conscious of his past. I do wonder if Nick were given a choice of humanity, but with the known caveat that he would lose all his memories, including those of his mortal family, would he agree? Maybe, but I'm not certain.