You were 16 when you read Stoker’s Dracula and you were bloody afraid to leave the windows open at night. Count Dracula, with all his gothic associations, made quite an impression on your mind and threatened to be as scary as human imagination would let him be.
But hey, not all vampires are one-dimensional sinister bloodsuckers. You simply cannot ignore the vegetarian, metrosexual creatures of the night who are about as threatening as Justin Bieber and can walk in broad daylight. Gentlemen, meet the erudite Twilight vampire.
In spite of their chemical differences, vampires of all ages have one common feature — they are positively Freudian by nature. Right from Fanu’s Carmilla to Anne Rice’s Interview with the Vampire (with the possible exception of I Am Legend), repressed human desires are consistently represented through the children of the dark. For good or for worse, the semblance stops here. Dracula, with all his vice, is sublime from a certain perspective. Modern vampires seem like a metaphor for corrupt individuals who screw less fortunate people to survive. They are one hundred percent genuine suckers.
Dracula was written more than 115 years back. Jonathan Harker’s world had a different set of values and morals than that of us. But do we like the new vampire more than the traditional one? Are we uncomfortable with the heavy dose of morbid atmosphere and eternal damnation that Bram Stoker presents us?
Who do you want to see outside your window? The Transylvanian Christopher Lee or the de-fanged but charming Robert Pattinson?