Dark Creature Favortism?

[author_by_night]

I apologize to those on my flist who are not into Harry Potter, but this is a poll I want to make available to those not necessarily on my friends list.

I have noticed that Vampires do not seem to be shunned in potterverse, like Werewolves. They have special candy for them, and apparently can be famous singers and invited to Christmas Parties in school (wherein they are followed by girl students.)

So - my poll:

[Poll #857657]

Comments

[daniellafromage.livejournal.com]

Ha. I chose nearly all of them.

I don't think that JKR has really put much thought into it, so on one level the relative popularity of vampires doesn't need to make sense.

But to actually put a reason behind it...I suppose in the wizarding world vampires may be idolised in the same way are in this world. Plus, as you said, vampires (presumably) have more control over themselves than vampires.

The Ministry might not have such a problem with them because of their form. Vampires can pass for humans; there's no way a werewolf at that "time of the month" could.

Alternatively, there's the idea of a vampiric thrall, which I don't think is canon but I believe could be possible within Potterverse. Even if there are vampire-specific laws, they'd be tricky to enforce if a vampire could CONTROL YOUR MIND. D:

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

True about their forms, except I think it's been strongly implied in canon and such that Vampires are still distinct from humans.

Funny you mention vampires controlling people's minds; my friend is writing a fic about creatures who can control human's minds, and whom are hunted by Vampires. Unless I told you about it, and that ironic comment was on purpoose?

On the theory itself, beyond the irony - really interesting, although I think then Werewolves would be disliked even more. But if it's a fear thing... *shrugs*. Maybe it'd come to their advantage too at times - imagine Bellatrix's mind being controlled!

[daniellafromage.livejournal.com]

No - I just think it's fairly common vampire-power. Of the various vampire franchises over the years, Buffy is the only one I can think of that doesn't play up the idea of a vampiric thrall. I'd kind of like to read the fic when it's done, though!

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Ah, I didn't realize that. Interesting!

[(Anonymous)]

They only addressed the thrall issue twice on Buffy. Drusilla was shown holding Kendra in her thrall just before she killed her. (She held others in her thrall at various times, too.) And of course, when they had the Dracula episode he displayed this ability as well. It's canon from the Bram Stoker book.

[psychic-serpent.livejournal.com]

Sorry, that was me. Don't know how I got logged out.

[delleve.livejournal.com]

I think it's probably because vampires can control their thirst for blood more easily than werewolves. I mean, they could just drink cow's blood or something to feed their need for blood and then be totally fine around humans.

Also, if you think about pop culture (Buffy the Vampire Slayer, etc). vampires are sometimes portrayed as fairly good looking, so there's that as well. xD

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

True, although then, Werewolves have Wolfsbane... so I dunno.

Looks could very well be part of it, at least for teen girls.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I've no idea--I figure JKR just didn't think about it, but my guess is that Vampires are sexy and werewolves are savage, a common stereotype of the two. They may also be less contagious so that a vampire bite doesn't turn you into a vampire. It may be something you're born with instead of having to be a person who contracts a disease over which they have more control.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Hm, interesting about them being less contagious.

[a-t-rain.livejournal.com]

On looking at the latest Wizard of the Month, I'm starting to think Potterverse vampires may be a different magical race, like veela or goblins, rather than having a condition transmitted by biting. I don't see how else Lorcan d'Eath could be a "part vampire."

[clare-dragonfly.livejournal.com]

That's definitely the impression I've gotten. They seem to look different, though I don't have any canon evidence to back that up (books are at home). Kind of like hags, IMO--sort of evil but not uncontrollably so, sort of a different race but fairly human-looking.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Of course, that also applies to giants... but maybe the wizarding world is just selective. I also am beginning to think people are indeed born Vampires.

[clare-dragonfly.livejournal.com]

But giants are big enough and dumb enough that it's really hard to hide them from Muggles, which I don't think is the case with vampires.

[czeri.livejournal.com]

That's what I think as well. As such they're not contagious, therefore do not have to be as feared like werewolves. Also, a transformed werewolf is a savage beast. The vampires in Potter-verse seem to be perfectly reasonable beings.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Good point, although the Werewolf in HBP apparently did often look "thirsty." But that could just have been comic relief. ;)

[barbed-whispers.livejournal.com]

Hullo! Followed the link on d_s :)

I'm kind of a vampire enthusiast (okay, not really, but I have spent a ridiculous amount of time studying different vampire mythologies and reading the vampire encyclopedia, heh), so now you can have my two (or fourteen, hah, sorry) cents :D

When canon has both vampires and werewolves, vampires tend to be more popular/accepted than the 'wolves. (In my experience. I don't claim to have read every vampire/werewolf book out there...) I think it's because vampires look human at all times, they have really long lives (which helps them get better at PR and surviving), and getting bitten by a vampire is generally thought to be more glamorous than getting eaten by a 'wolf. I mean, look at Anita Blake. The vampires are very successful, rich, and well-liked by humans, but the lycanthropes all have to hide their true identities for fear of being shunned.

Of course, there is also usually a rivalry between the two. In most of the stories I've read, in a fight between a 'wolf and a vampire at about the same level of power, the 'wolf will almost always win when in animal form, but the vampire will almost always win otherwise. In several 'verses, werewolves are treated as second-class citizens or are scorned by all of the other preternatural beings, which I think goes back to their lack of control. They are animals in human skins, and they are generally treated as such. But they're also still technically humans, so they hate vampires (who aren't, even though they can pass).

Also, sort of in response to a_t_rain's comment about whether vampires are a race or if it's passed by biting- it may be both. In some mythologies, vampires can have children. In some, there are two types of vampires- the kind that can grow older and have kids, and the kind that can't. I tend to assume that JKR has only the vaguest notion of which kind she's writing, so I just use the broadest definitions and then bend them to fit my mood *g*

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Interesting... I can see people's logic going that way, I suppose.

I think JKR knows what she's writing, but I think we tend to put so much forthought into stuff... JKR mainly cares about the main characters, if that makes sense. Not that I blame her, it would just be nice to have an explanation.

[purple-ladybug1.livejournal.com]

I put they have more control, they are different than we think, I don't really know, and other.

In a sort of combo of all those, I've read a short series of universe with vampires, witches, and other dark creatures. Some vampires held parties where humans willingly went to have their blood sucked. It was like a drug. Other vampires wanted to be peaceful, so they joined an organization that welcomed all creatures, even "natural enemies," but it also provided blood for vampires, so they could survive without victimizing anyone.

So, I'm thinking that they can control their thirst more than werewolves can control themselves, they can go to blood banks?, and there are more people willing to be bitten by a vampire than a werewolf.

Just some thoughts. Interesting idea. I hope JKR fills us in.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Interesting thoughts!

[unlikely2.livejournal.com]

I think Slughorn is a kind of vampire in that he takrs 'value' from those around him for his own benefit. For example, what sort of kickback did he get for choosing that dodgy textbook? Who is he likely to recommend for a post at Saint Mungo's? The better student or the one with an Aunt on the Wizengamot? How do you feel about the better connected but less effective healer treating your child? (What if s/he's out on the magical equivalent of the golf course?) For some reason that kind of predation is often more acceptable than someone thieving in order to eat.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Good point about Slughorn - he does seem more about people who he admires, doesn't he? Although I can't imagine him endangering his students. I think, flaws and all, he does care about them.

*Shrugs* Does that make me weird? ;)

[unlikely2.livejournal.com]

'll admit bias because I suspect that he'll be one of those who are 'not what they seem' in book 7. I'm not entirely sure that his 'I taught him' in HBP with regard to Snape wasn't a boast. We'll find out next year. ;)
That aside, maybe Slughorn doesn't think he's doing harm. He could believe he's a force for good, identifying the 'stars' and 'helping friends' but I suppose it depends on how you'd feel about someone with inferior qualifications getting a job you wanted because of who they know. (As you might have guessed, I've a particularly nasty bunny biting my leg). Perhaps we should agree to disagree?
Good question though.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Oh, I do think "getting people jobs" is unfair. I think Slughorn cares about his students, but a little too much at times. It's unfair to the other people.

[tree_and_leaf]

I agree with you, actually. I like Slughorn, for all his obvious faults, and he's a very recognisable type of British (university) professor. All the older universities are full of people like that, who love making connections between people. This disadvantage is that they often play favourites, but on the upside they are often good at seeing beyond someone's academic qualifications to their other strengths.

I think the use of the textbook has more to do with the belief of certain types of teacher that the book they've used all their career is the best one available - I had a maths teacher at school who insisted on using a book which my mother had learned from. And I ended up with an excellent grades, so *shrugs*.

[arianablack.livejournal.com]

Not to be repetitive, but I think it really does come down to the issues of control and conformity. Vampires have so many more ways of blending into human society than werewolves. While werewolves may look perfectly human a majority of the time, there's always that one time of the month where its impossible for them to hide what they are. Even should no one they know be around them at those times, it seems inevitable that their regular disappearances will be noticed. Look at Lupin and the Marauders. Heck, even Hermione figured it out, and she really only saw him during class, not every single day like the Marauders. Vampires, on the other hand, can usually pass for humans up until the moment they decide to sink their fangs into you. Werewolves have no choice in whether they transform or not, while vampires can not only choose when and who they bite, they can also make the decision not to attack a person at all, but rather an animal. Werewolves seem to prey solely on humans (though I'd love to see something like a were-hamster).

I also think vampires can be a bit more rational than werewolves could ever be in their animal form. Granted, wolfsbane is available, but as Lupin said, its a fairly recent development, and it doesn't sound as though its available to everybody. Lupin had to depend on Snape for his supply.

It may also be partly to do with the respective transformations themselves. By all accounts, the werewolf transformation is a grotesque experience, whereas with vampires, its usually just their teeth getting longer. And I think "barbed_whispers" made a good point about werewolves being animals. It sounds as though, without wolfsbane, werewolves on the full moon are really little more than animals.

Of course, with people like Fenrir Greyback running around preying on children, who can really blame the Wizarding community for favoring vampires over werewolves? Between Greyback and Bela Lugosi's Dracula, I know who I'd rather be around.

[hinotori.livejournal.com]

That's a really interesting question. I never thought much about it myself, but now that you brought it up... hm.

I think JKR's take on lycanthropy is interesting anyway -- she treats it like a dangerous, incurable disease that can be highly contagious and/or fatal if precautions aren't taken. The whole set-up of werewolves being discriminated against (i.e. people not wanting to hire werewolves for fear of their "condition" etc)-- it kind of reminds me of the way Andrew Beckett in "Philadelphia" was treated when people in his company found out that he had AIDS.

I don't even know whether JKR ever came clear about "her" idea of the infection with vampirism -- her portray of Slughorn's friend in book 6 was kind of disappointing to me also. (Okay, so I read too much Anne Rice when I was younger... anyway.) I think it's just one of her quirks. But interesting nevertheless! :D :D

werewolves .vs. vampires

[(Anonymous)]

I'm sorry. No offence to vampires, but werewolves rule! Werewolves are so cool. Anyone that thinks otherwise, no offence, but your dumb.

(Never dis a werewolf)