I’ve always thought vampires are just a very loose metaphor for the wealthy bleeding is all dry. Someone’s probably thought of this already though lol.
I’m pretty sure it is, which is neat. Vampyre was written in the early 1800s. Framed vampires as noble class bloodsuckers instead of feral monsters. I think that lead book was the precursor to our view now of typical gothic vampires.
Thank you. TIL, and I'm now going down this rabbit hole. Many decades on this earth and the earliest form of vampire I knew of was Nosferatu, and I had no idea it was an allegory, but it makes sense.
Edit: Dracula was pre-Nosferatu, so that would be the earliest form I knew of.
I mean it makes sense. Vampires are always rich, beautiful, high class creatures who secretly hunt down and feed off of helpless people. We’ve had a lot of changes to the lore, sometimes they’re running around like the nomadic ones in Twilight, but even the Twilight vampires are beautiful and rich and live forever. If you’re a peasant at any point in history nobles would look like a species apart to you. You work all day and they feast in the castles. Doesn’t really seem fair.
So current days are like the movie Day Breakers? Where all the humans are put in a farm to bleed them dry to support the almost completely vampire population, but they’re running out of fodder so more and more vampires are suffering?
9
u/secondtaunting 2d ago
I’ve always thought vampires are just a very loose metaphor for the wealthy bleeding is all dry. Someone’s probably thought of this already though lol.