posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 04:20 PM
May I just point out something someone mentioned earlier? (To those ranting that it's "all fiction, nothing else!").
Well done. We get your point.
However, even if all those books you read, which are, yes, fiction, it all roots back to either Dracula, the novel, or maybe another book which I've
not found. Bram Stoker based his book on Vlad. And, even if Vlad didn't drink the blood, he still had a thirst for it, in such a way.
It just so happens that novelists have romanticised the notion of Vampires and given them extra abilities and morphed the character somewhat, that
doesn't mean that Vlad isn't now a Vampire, as that is what he was considered, was it not? (I've probably just made something up there, but I'm
sure that's what I read about all those years ago when Vlad struck a chord in my heart and I wanted to read more about the twisted man, If I'm
wrong, feel free to metaphorically shoot me!)
So, theoretically, Vampires are fiction based on fact, therefore, does the basis of this Vampire fiction become fact itself?
(I think I'm rambling again. I'd be surprised if anyone understood any of that - felt like I was speaking in riddles, haha!)
....I'll quit talking lol!