Are Vampires Dead?

Welcome to our debate forum where we will have hot topics for you to discuss weekly. Just as a reminder we will only leave topics open for the week and then start a new one.
Settled in Forks
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:36 pm

Post by Eclisse » Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:59 pm

I think, in terms of food, that blood is like...a drug or alcohol. Not in the sense that it's addictive (though it is to some vampires). It makes sense that the process in which Meyer's vampires process blood would be through the lining in the stomach. Just like alcoholic beverages in the human stomach, the alcoholic part is absorbed through the lining in the stomach, and the remnants after the absorption remain.

With blood, there is nothing to remain when a vampire sucks it through into the blood stream. This absorption would make sense, because vampires do not use the restroom. It would also explain how it becomes useful to them (because their heart does not beat, they need to replenish blood in a different way).

In technical terms, I do not think vampries can be considered 'biologically' dead. Medical science declares people 'dead' when their brains stop emitting electrical signals to the rest of the body. Just because a person's heart stops beating or their lungs quit breathing does not mean they are not living (respirators, life support, etc).

And, clearly, Edward has not stopped thinking, or loving.

Settled in Forks
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:02 pm
Location: anywhere with a Twilight book available!!!

Post by edward's#1fangrrl » Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:13 pm

I think that vampires are not dead, exactly. If you approach them as a separate species, that changes things altogether. So their life cycle works a bit differently. So what? They're not dead. If you aproach them as human, they're dead as humans, but not as vampires. It's kind of a vicious cycle, if you catch my drift.

On Edward possibly resenting Carlisle: I think not. Remember, he was dying of the Spanish Influenza. He had nothing to lose, since his parents were already dead. Rosalie is being petty, because without Carlisle, she'd be dead. In the ground rotting dead. Plus, she got Emmett!

Jump Starting Bella's Truck
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:09 am
Location: Waiting for the next rainstorm ... in Austin, TX

Post by mandustries » Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:35 pm

December wrote:Ok. I really want to press all of you a little bit here. What about ghosts, angels, demons, spirits, shades, zombies, etc.? They all think and move and don't die a natural death (though they also CAN be destroyed).... Are these things alive also? Or is there some point in thinking that ghosts are dead? If so, what makes the Cullens different? To return to Bella's choice again, imagine for a moment that Edward were a ghost rather than a vampire. If Bella were to die -- in the ordinary way -- to be with him, knowing that she would still exist as a ghost, would we feel that she was still going to be alive? That this wasn't dying? I agree that becoming a vampire seems different, but why?
I think part of the main reason that vampires seem different than ghosts, angels, zombies, etc., is that they are eerily similar to humans. We cannot immediately tell them apart by sight. (A warning: I'm going to generalize here, mixing different parts of different myths.)

Zombies are diseased. They stumble around, lusting after brains. They are broken and rotting. They used to be humans, but their humanity is gone.

Ghosts are non-corporeal. They can't touch us, we can't touch them. They are unchanging, set in their ways. There's usually one reason they're hanging around, and this is their reason for existing the way they do. The whole "unfinished business" idea.

Angels are higher beings. Sometimes they are portrayed as non-corporeal as well, only taking on human form as to not blind us with the extraordinary sight of them in their true glory. They were never human, either, but something more. Same with demons, however, they are often seen as monstrous and grotesque—obviously inhuman.

Vampires, on the other hand, look human. They walk normally, they talk, they can coexist with humans without (most of) us noticing. They lead lives, they hold jobs, they have neighbors. (At least, the Cullens do.) Vampires in other tales are a little more conspicuous, with their fangs (Dracula, et al), their wrinkly heads (Buffy) and burning in the sun, while Meyer's vampires can move throughout normal life without being bothered (If they avoid the sun and doing things like stopping vans from squashing people, of course). They differ from other supernatural beings in that they have a cloak of humanity. Personally, I think they're closer to being human than any of those other things.

edward's#1fangrrl said something I think is really appropriate. Vampires, although they were human, are now a different species. They're alien. Who's to say that every living thing in this universe eats, sleeps and breathes just like humans do?

Three long posts on the same page? Sorry guys!
[size=75][color=white]Banner made by me![/color]
[color=black]I'll never hear thunder the same way again.
Proud Cullenist—Member of [/color][color=yellow]Alice House[/size][/color]

Jump Starting Bella's Truck
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:17 pm
Location: In Different Worlds

Post by Eclipse_Fan_58 » Thu Jun 19, 2008 4:18 pm

i don't really know. But for me it's just . . . I guess they are a different species. But with their skin turning cold and as hard as rock, their heart stops beating and their blood is replaced with that venom. Then there's the fact that they don't need to breathe. So that's sort of a fact that they died. Plus, they don't "die" that easily. They need to be burned and ripped apart, too. So if you shoot them they won't have a bullet hole where there should be.
I don't like that their dead. So I'm just going to say that they are in the middle of death and life. It's better to say it that way then 'they are dead humans, who are now vampires.'
It's really Stephenie's so let her decide.
*Taking place when Rosalie is telling her story*
She looked at me with confused eyes.
I was only half paying attention.
I was thinking about Edward and Tanya and all those females.

Settled in Forks
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 5:21 pm

Post by Paris_Falls » Thu Jun 19, 2008 4:44 pm

I think that Stephenie Meyer gave us an indication of aging, actually, when I think back on it. The Volturi, because of their age, actually look different from younger vampires. Their skin is papery almost, translucent. I would consider this transformation of their bodies as aging. The aging process being an indication of life.

To reiterate: the vampires are living, merely in a different way. They are sentient beings who still need food for sustenance and there seems to be an indication of the aging process. Most importantly, they can be killed, and therefore aren't truly immortal.
To be immortal is commonplace; except for man, all creatures are immortal, for they are ignorant of death; what is divine, terrible, incomprehensible, is to know that one is immortal.

`Jorge Luis Borges

Wandering Through Town
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 8:19 pm
Location: sleepover at edwards

are vampires dead?

Post by joy » Thu Jun 19, 2008 5:52 pm

Where to start? I believe vampires are physically dead ( no beating heart). By medical standards they would be classified as dead. However, I believe that the vampires still retain their souls and after they are killed as vampires they will proceed on to the afterlife. If as a vampire they learn to control and behave themselves and try to live within the ethical boundaries I believe heaven can still be an option for them; Edward type vampire yes, James not so much. Remember Edward and other vampires do not choose to change into vampires . But Bella is choosing to change but i think God would know her heart and i wouldn't consider it suicide. I do believe they are alive in a sense and still have their souls. Look at all the stories of people seeing a bright light, the heart has stopped but their soul is still around. Then they come back to their body. I think Edward's soul is intact. But you know this is just totally my point of view. I have no masters or phd on the subject but its just a guess and i would love Edward to have a soul he deserves heaven..

Settled in Forks
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:34 pm
Location: United States

Post by unforgivenminute » Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:51 pm

I think we are beyond modern medical explanations of life and death. I hardly think that just because the vampires would be considered medically dead by our standards can dictate whether or not they have life.

I don't personally think we can classify vampires as dead. Once a person has undergone the change, they have clearly transformed from human to something else. I don't think that this constitutes death. They still can think, and learn, they have emotions. They have physical presence. They need to feed. And, despite what Edward believes, I think they retain their soul. All these things together indicate life. We can't judge vampires on the basis of our physical world because they are not part of our physical world.

Earth To Bella
Settled in Forks
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 9:16 pm
Location: Forks ;]

Post by Earth To Bella » Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:07 pm

Vampires are not dead in my opinion.

They can learn new things. They have emotions. They just don't have to breathe, don't have heartbeats, etc. etc. Technically, medically speaking, vampires are not part of the living. But if you think broader about it, they are just as alive as we are. Just not in the same way.

If Edward was able to open himself up & change in spite of one person, how is that being dead? If you're dead, you have no life. You cannot live throughout the next day.
Vampires are aaaaaalive! :)

Team Edward *ash*
Buying a Better Raincoat
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 5:23 pm
Location: waiting in the meadow....maybe Edward will show up :)

Post by Team Edward *ash* » Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 am

Paris_Falls wrote:I think that Stephenie Meyer gave us an indication of aging, actually, when I think back on it. The Volturi, because of their age, actually look different from younger vampires. Their skin is papery almost, translucent. I would consider this transformation of their bodies as aging. The aging process being an indication of life.

To reiterate: the vampires are living, merely in a different way. They are sentient beings who still need food for sustenance and there seems to be an indication of the aging process. Most importantly, they can be killed, and therefore aren't truly immortal.
I really like this! i am a non-vamp-dead believer! They are alive to me, and this helps! But props to your way of thinking...... AMAZING!!! :D
In the meantime, Bella was with Eric. Later, she met up with Edward and made him quack like a duck. About a month later, they're all on the Maury show, and Bella is Eric's baby's mama. They had twins Amii and Eastmann. When Bella told Renee, it turned out she was pregnant too...with triplets...Olga, Hamburger Phone and Ieshia...Hamburger Phone is a whatsit.

Wandering Through Town
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:57 am

Are Vampires Dead?

Post by dsolo » Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:02 am

I was rereading Twilight again, and as I read Ch 14, I realized that Edward had answered the question that is the topic of this forum when he was explaining his "gift" to Bella.

"Carlisle has a theory....he believes that we all bring something of our strongest human traits with us into the next LIFE, where they are intensified."

Bella's next question is - "What did he bring into the next LIFE, and the others?"

From there, the discussion turns to why vampires exist - evolution? creation?

This discussion convinces me that SM does not consider her vampires as dead humans, but living vampires. They refer to their change as the next life, not death. So, I guess it is a werewolf prejudice.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest