Becoming A Vampire

[Tyler Austin "tiewashere"]

I haven't read any posts after the first post here but in Spike's case it was always said that he was different. This explains why he loved Buffy and had feelings for her before he had a soul. Drusilla even references the reasoning for turning him was that he had "golding fishes" around his head. Drusilla was attracted to the fact that Spike would be made into a different type of vampire. From my interpretation, this means that he is able to love and all that other fun stuff.

The Darla thing I got nothin'.

[midwesternwatcher]

Really? I need a little more evidence for that. First of all, Spike apparently wasn't the only vampire who claimed to be able to love. What about James, in Heartthrob, AtS 3.1, the one who had his heart cut out? And Drusilla also said, when she and Buffy were both tied up, that "we can love, if not wisely" do I remember right. Quoting from memory. She said "we," not "he" or even "I." I assume she meant vampires in general.

Even if Spike was different, Buffy didn't think so. Remember in ... "Dead Things" Buffy beats him senseless, she insists he can't feel anything real, just like any other vampire.

And if he is different, well, I have to ask -- why?

It seems to me we think Spike is different because, and only because, we know him better than any other vampire, even Angel.

[tkts]

Nov 9, 2010 15:32:36 GMT -5 midwesternwatcher said:

Remember I suggested an idea that Angel Faith also liked, that there might be no demon invasion at all, that a vampire is just the same human being as before, but in a transformed body and a new situation. The new vampire no longer has the needs for food, shelter and medical care that drive so much of human behavior. S/he may still need social support, but is now shut out of ordinary human society and must seek companions among other vampires, whose mores are different. I said before it was like defecting to an enemy in wartime. On second thought, I think it's more like joining a criminal gang. They still have a morality, but it's different. Only members of the gang (vampires in this gang) are recognized as moral agents. All others are legitimate prey.

But in this case, wouldn't you expect the transition to be more gradual?

We don't see any signs that vampires seek social support the same way they did as humans, then are shut out and start to change as a result. They try to kill right from the beginning, and socialization by other vampires to their new norm does not seem to be required.

[midwesternwatcher]

I suppose so. In some cases, the person might know that vampirism is coming and might prepare psychologically for it even before the change. I don't just mean cases where the person chooses to become a vampire, as with Billy Ford or Spike (if I read the scene correctly). Think about when Fray's brother ... Harth, I think that's his name, became a vampire. When he knew he couldn't escape, he proactively bit his vampire attacker.

Then we have to consider this new biological need, for blood.

Actually, if you want to make this case, your best evidence might be from "Tabula Rasa." Remember Spike loses his memory and forgets he is a vampire until Joan (Buffy) tells him. But the "game face" comes out as if by reflex.

The question you ask could be glossed over, but I admit I have little heart for it. If you're saying that the writers didn't intend what I describe, then you're undoubtedly right. If I'd been in the company of the writers early on, I might've suggested this way, and possibly I might've brought them into my way of thinking. But I wasn't, and I didn't.

My basic contention is that no theory is going to explain everything in the Buffyverse, because the nature of vampirism isn't something the writers ever thought out carefully. At least, vampires of the Bram Stoker-Count Dracula type won't do. They don't have enough personality.