Vampire fangs

When an image of a vampire is conjured, it most frequently boasts pale skin, long fingernails, and fangs. From that point onward, accounts differ. Sometimes the fangs are in the upper teeth, other times they are only in the lower teeth. Occasionally, the fangs retract so that the vampire can pass as human. Fangs can be large or discreet, "or even the special pricklike needle hidden under the tongue that Suzy McKee Charnas has her vampire in The Vampire Tapestry," regardless, "the convention that arose in" vampire-related "literature was the possession of fangs" (Ramsland 36).

The reason for the development of vampire fangs in literature is twofold. First, it solves the problem of how the vampire extracts the blood from the victim. "To get the blood, the vampire needs a way to pierce through skin and veins or arteries. While it could as easily have been a sharpened fingernail or a weapon," fangs were chosen because they are identified as predatory. The second reason that fangs developed in literature is that such a dental abnormality identifies the individual as a vampire and associates "the vampire with predatory creatures like snakes, rats, and wolves" (36). "Predators were identifiable by their fangs, and victims by two little holes in their neck" (Auerbach 52).

Fiction is not consistent on the existence or type of fangs. Some fictitious vampires have no fangs at all. In Hollywood Gothic, "Dracula has no fangs, long nails, blazing eyes, or other vampire accoutrements" (90). Yet, sometimes fangs are so well developed and integrated into the story that they seem to be inherent to the vampire.

Folkloric accounts of vampires and fangs are nearly as muddled as fictive stories. In Malaysia, "the Hindus told of a vampire called the langsuir. Any woman giving birth who died upon discovering that her child was stillborn was thought to become one of those creatures. The langsuir was not described as having fangs like other vampires, rather it supposedly had a hole in the back of its neck that it used to suck blood" (Konstantions 24). However, in The Vampire in Legend, Lore and Literature, "Professor Devendra P. Varma describes paintings and carvings found in the Indus Valley. The pieces of art, which date back about five thousand years, depict hideous creatures with green faces and fangs. Those beings are believed to be the first vampire gods" (Konstantinos 22).

A vampire's possession of fangs is among the oldest traditions. The widespread notion of fangs may result from the examination of dead bodies by people fearing vampires. If a body was exhumed and examined for vampirism, the investigator may discover that the teeth appeared larger or longer than they had in life. This is due to the recession of the gums after death. As the gum tissue decomposes, it shrinks away from the teeth and exposes more of the tooth. The teeth of a deceased individual may appear to have grown after death.

Is the notion of vampire fangs a development only fiction? It appears that it is not. Few individuals can refute evidence from five thousand of years ago. Clearly, the idea of fangs is entrenched in the legends and imagery of vampires. But does a vampire always have fangs? A predator in fiction is easier to spot than one who chooses to hide in plain sight.

Phir milenge,
Ana

Sources:
Auerbach, Nina. Our Vampires, Ourselves.
Konstantinos. Vampires: The Occult Truth.
Ramsland, Katherine M. The Science of Vampires.

Crosses & Crucifixes

Crosses and crucifixes are so entrenched in vampire legend, that we have a hard time imagining a story without them. In Bram Stoker's Dracula, the crucifix has the power to dissolve a vampire's anger:

When the Count saw my face, his eyes blazed with a sort of demoniac fury, and he suddenly made a grab at my throat. I drew away and his hand touched the string of beads which held the crucifix. It made an instant change in him, for the fury passed so quickly that I could hardly believe that it was ever there.

"And against the vampire there is no more potent a device than the crucifix -- representing the cross that bore the crucified body of Christ" according to Constantine Gregory & Craig Glenday in Vampire Watcher's Handbook. This "Handbook" goes on to declare:

Alone, the cross is invaluable as an anti-vampiric; not only is it the most ancient and universal of all symbols, but, unlike other religious imagery, it can be quickly improvised with anything from stakes and swords to sticks and fingers. It can even be drawn in the air or across the chest to provide the vampire hunter with instant divine protection.

The major fallacy with this argument is that the crucifix is not the most ancient of symbols. Truly, tales of vampires and blood drinkers resonate from times long before the invention of the crucifix or its association with the Christ. What of these archaic vampires? Are ancients felled by the crucifix--it's unlikely.

There are two disparate arguments regarding the crucifix. The first is that its power is determined by the faith of the bearer, and the other is that the power comes from God and has effect over any vampire whose former life was contained within the Christian society. The question that arises is: Will other symbols have similar effect? Will a Durga effigy in the hands of a Hindu smite a vampire? And what about vampires that were never of the Christian faith--will the crucifix affect them?

Is there any innate power of the crucifix or is it merely a lucky charm to ease the fears of the bearer?

Do svidanja,
Ana