|
So we all know that vampires need blood to survive. Or most of them do. Or some of them do, depending on which way you look at it. But, do vampires have blood running through their…er, veins?
Bram Stoker, who is the one-stop-shop for many when it comes to all things related to vampires, didn’t think that vampires had blood in their bodies. He actually claimed that was the reason why vampires fed on blood, because they had none of their own. Stories such as the Twilightsaga furthered this thinking. In the saga, newborn vampires had blood in them, and this was why they were so strong. But eventually, their bodies used them up, and they would need to feed. But neither Twilight or even Bram Stoker can be thought to be the inventors of the vampire.
Many adaptations claim that vampires do in fact have blood. And even if they don’t have a way of specifically pointing it out, it’s there for us to see. Series like the Underworld have vampires being ripped apart, with blood flying all over the place. Others say that true vampire stories claim that the only way for a person to become a vampire is to drink the blood of one, therefore, vampires must have blood of their own. Okay, really? That’s actually something I’ve never heard before. And the ‘only way’? Whatever happened to good ol’ getting bitten?
Either way, there are arguments both for and against whether or not vampires actually have blood. Just like any vampire folklore, this one is wide open to interpretation. Do I think that vampires have blood? I think they probably do. But then again, if they needed it to feed couldn’t they just be their own donors? Maybe it doesn’t work like that? Once again, one answer brings about so many questions. I guess it depends on which story you’re reading at the time.
|
