I recently read a review of Anne Rice’s new book, “The Road to Cana.” But more importantly I found out that she is not going to publish another vampire story which she initially said she was willing to write.
I have to admit that I am indeed saddened. Of course I respect the consecration of her work to Christ. And I commend her on striving to follow God’s will. I just wish that it included a Catholic vampire story. (But not my will…)
She wants to use her writing as a tool for Evangelism. Well, there is no other genre of literature better equipped for Evangelism than the vampire story. It has only been recently that vampires have suffered from the modern preoccupation of calling what is evil, good and what is good, evil. And do not mistake something which is intrinsically evil as something intrinsically other. Vampires are us, what we become (monsters) when we turn our backs to God and give ourselves over to unbridled passions, our lusts and selfishness, our nihilism. In this way vampire stories are at their core Catholic. Built into the conventions of the genre is Catholic theology; light/darkness, blood/life, life/sacrifice, undeath/damnation, soul/immortality, instinct/vice, sin/slavery, the sacramentals (holy water, crucifixes, rosaries, etc…).
Since vampires represent human nature how is redemption possible? Within the conventions of the genre it is not. Once you are a vampire you are always a vampire, there is no cure, no redemption. But this can lead to fairly one dimensional characters (pure evil, however witty). [This is why Milton gave Satan the best lines.] And why Mrs. Rice let Lestat suffer guilt. Others have tried in different ways to overcome this problem. Take the characters of Angel and Spike. But both characters suffer from what amounts to emasculation or an identity crisis. They are vampires but either can’t be a vampire (Spike’s chip) or do not want to be (Angel’s soul), except when convenient.
When one reads Rice’s Vampire Chronicles you can’t help but ask yourself, would I risk eternal damnation for immortality and vampiric gifts? It is scary to think that I might actually care so much about this “sterile promontory.” The distinction between good and evil should always be clear.
So, it is obvious that in writing a Catholic vampire story one would include a story of redemption. But is a “saved” vampire still a vampire? Aren’t we as baptized Christians made into a new creation? The cruse has been removed and we have been glorified. So the key here is to make the post-vampire character even more powerful and glorious than the conventional vampire but sans the need to kill and all other evil. We are sustained by the once for all sacrifice of Jesus and His flesh and blood. He is Life. We are no longer slaves to sin and our fleshly impulses. We are through Him (and His life, death, resurrection) brought into the life of the Trinity in Heaven.
I think the story of the “Catholic” vampire is viable. It is after all our story. And I think it would be even better if the redemption of the character were to coincide with the Parousia, the final defeat of evil, a new creation of humanity, earth and heaven….
Mrs. Rice pray on it.
Hi Jeff,
I made my way over here from your brother’s blog (Gregory). Being a big fan of Benedict XVI, I drop by once in a while to hear a Catholic voice.
I’ve read only one of Rice’s vampire stories (Menoch The Devil), but I really enjoyed it. I found it interesting that even before her conversion, Rice’s writing reflected an intense spiritual searching.
I have to admit I was a little disappointed when I found out that she only intends to write “Christian” stories.
At some point I’ll actually have to try to read her new books…
Jeffrey:
I think you may enjoy Astro City: Confession, a superhero comic book written by Kurt Busiek, which is the best “Catholic Vampire” story I’ve encountered.
The vampire myth is one that ultimately presumes that sacramental Christianity is indeed true; a Vampire is a parody of Christ, promising immortality by the drinking of blood.
Bro, my friend Joe gives you a mention at #3.
On the saving of vampires, I’ve been thinking…
since vampires are a ‘cypher’ for depraved humanity, a vampire’s redemption should be in terms of some parallel reality too. You know, like Narnia is saved by Aslan, not by the actual Jesus.
Or if not strictly ‘allegory,’ then something “sub-creation”-ish in the Tolkien sense. Either way, mixing fictional sinners (vampires) in with real soteriology is awkward. Bottom line: for the story, I think we need to imagine what a fictional “vamp-Christ” would be like.
Brother,
I am more interested in the “Tolkien school” rather than the allegories of Lewis (which i think are too limiting and are by definition one dimensional).
Isn’t “sub-creation” the raison d’etre of literature? Didn’t Tolkien mix fictional characters with real soteriology? Now I think you mean Jesus’ literal return in a story. Whether Jesus’ actual return would work rather than a more metaphoric Parousia is indeed questionable. However, I was just throwing out the idea for the benefit of Anne Rice (I sent her an email), since she seems to be more interested in literal Christian stories… the relevance of which is a debate Christians have been having about Christian Art since the beginning….
If you were questioning the salvation of “vampires” as awkward because you are Reformed (interpreting the vampire as the un-elect) that is another matter…
I don’t think Tolkien mixed fictional characters with real (our) soteriology, no. He didn’t mix his characters into our world at all. Eru may somehow be Yahweh (or perhaps represent Him in a less “sub” way), but the Middle Earth Eru created was not recorded in Genesis… if you get my point here.
Anyway, continuing to think about your point… I think even more interesting than a Vampire straight-to-consummation redemption, would be a salvation more like ours in terms a semi-eschatological (“now-but-not yet”) age. So, it would involve saved Vampires who do not immediately attain to full glorification (but with that glorification in view).
No, the salvation of Vampires is not awkward. Rather, the literal Jesus as vampire-savior (or savior of vampires) is awkward… just as awkward as Jesus (or the Pope, for that matter) showing up in Middle Earth! You see what I mean.
Really, I like the idea of vampires as the collective damned, both elect and unelect. The elect get saved from their damnation… which is the point, right?
Brother, Tolkien did indeed use our real soteriology in a metaphorical way. If you are using “real” as the literal, Jesus of Nazareth, Son of God, being born, suffering, dying, and resurrecting for Frodo and for all the sins of middle earth, of course he didn’t. But, yet again middle earth is earth. It is not a one to one parallel (that’s what makes Tolkien such a good writer); the story is more complex. So who is the Christ figure in LOTR? Well, there are many, Frodo, Gandalf, Aragorn, even Sam…. Anyway, I think we agree that mixing a more metaphoric Salvation story with a literal or even allegorical one does not work.
I think there is a place in Lewis’ or Tolkien’s writing where its revealed that Middle Earth is set in the Antediluvian world, that is, Earth before the Flood. I think it was in Lewis’ writing.
I’ve tended to think of vampires as fallen angels.
But thinking of them as the Lost is also useful.
Tolkienn was a scholar interested in Anglo-Saxon culture and literature, and they referred to the world as Middle Earth (middangeard), so that’s where the name comes from. That gave me the impression that Tolkienn’s stories were set in an earth of the dim past—that shadowy part of the past that gave us Beowulf, and the first bits of the King Arthur legend, though maybe even earlier than that.