Thursday, April 14, 2011

Making a Monster

The vampires in Burden Kansas are a bit different. But then again, most vampires are a bit different, because 1. you can’t include the entire vampire mythos in one creature and 2. the monster should suit the story. I discuss some of the factors that go into creating a vampire in a guest post over at Katie Salidas’ blog.  I think it’s a very interesting topic, and I’d love to get a discussion going in the comments. What traits do you think are essential for a vampire?

In other news, I should be receiving the proofs for the paper version of Burden Kansas tomorrow! I’m very excited. I’ve had stories printed in several books and a journal. And really, I’m an e-book devotee now. I strongly prefer reading text on my Kindle. But I’m as giggly and giddy as a tufted titmouse at the prospect of holding the first paper book that’s all mine! Hopefully they’ll be error-free and the book will be available for sale next week.

In more important news, did you know that TV’s Frank from MST3K is active on Twitter?!?! Well, he is: @FrankConniff


I think I’m suffering from vitamin D deficiency. I’m planning to sit outside and read for awhile today. But I’m looking out the window, and it just looks terrifying out there. So we’ll see.

4 comments:

  1. I am definitely more of a fan of feral type vampires, but I'm good as long as they meet the following criteria:

    1. Some kind of sunlight weakness. They don't have to instantly burst into flames, but Dracula throwing his cloak over you in the daylight seems a lot more like an awkward vampire cosplay convention than horror. A restriction to the night makes a vampire more intimidating and frightful

    2. Vampires need to consume blood. I like vampires who puke after eating human food, but I can appreciate a vampire who drinks a glass of wine every now and again. It doesn't have to be achieved through two perfect puncture holes, but there must be blood. Evisceration is always good in my book

    3. The ability to regenerate. This trait also necessitates that vampires be killed through particular methods. A vampire who scrapes his knee shouldn't need a bandaid, he should suck it up and continue playing night-soccer, or whatever it is vampires do in their free time.

    4. I have a hard time imagining a vampire with a small dong. I don't require a specific mechanism for vamp-dong enlargement, but it needs to happen somehow post-turning. This its necessary for both romance style vampires and nasty eat-you vampires. Its hard to be intimidated by a vampire who is embarrassed in the locker room, and I feel that hundreds of years of uncomfortable looks from partners would really wear on a vampire.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm torn on the dong issue. In a lot of vampire fiction since Anne Rice, they're described as being carved from marble. That sounds impressive for the nether region, right? But then I started thinking, because both Rice and Meyers have described their vampires as seeming like living marble statues. I think back to the marble statues at the Smithsonian. I think of Michaelangelo's David. If they're literally just like marble statues, they've got some shortcomings that could explain a bad temper.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Vampires are blood suckers, literally or metaphorically, and so the relationship with their victims is key - a lot of the time they don't kill (straight away) but return to feed again and again. And the victim is *changed* by this psychologically in some way. To me, it's this dynamic that distinguish vampires from other monsters.

    And I think it is this relationship between vampire and victim that has lead to the descent into Twilight style schlock, but the trend has always been there since Dracula.

    ReplyDelete