Jeremy Magnan
Department of English & Creative
Writing
Allegories of Vampire Cinema is a theoretical
film essay involving the
issue of spectator relations to vampire films
before, during, and after
viewings. The piece closely examines which
character the spectators are
truly meant to connect with. This is an
interesting and important issue to
raise as it offers a new analysis that had not
previously been explored,
aligning the spectators not with the
protagonists of these stories, but with
the vampire itself. In my research, I gathered
dozens of books, magazine
articles, and journal entries to delve deeply
into the horror genre and
vampire subgenre. I also screened over three
dozen vampire films, though
only a handful are cited directly. The essay was
pieced together from the
beginning of January through March when, upon
completion, I presented
my findings at the 2008 PCA/ACA National
Conference in San Francisco.
Implications that are brought to light upon the
revelation that the spectator
is being aligned with vampires include the
notion that the vampire film
may not be an isolated case. With further study,
theories and analyses may
bring about spectator relations and alignments
with not only a myriad of
other antagonistic horror icons, but antagonists
throughout the entire scope
of film.
Many authors have sought to lend insight into
the metaphorical relationship between the
vampire, their victims, and even their
spectators. On the spectators of horror films in
general, Joseph Biggs and Dennis Petrie offer
that “...one goes to the horror film in order to
have a nightmare... a dream whose undercurrent
of anxiety both presents and masks the
desire to fulfill and be punished for certain
conventionally unacceptable impulses (Biggs &
Petrie, 2008, p. 484).” It is their position that
the spectators of horror view these films due
to a subconscious desire to see their
“unacceptable impulses” played out by the monster (in
our discussion, vampires) and to be punished for
the surrogate actions that the monster
plays out in our stead. In regards to the
vampire, Jorg Waltje sees our clear alignment with
the vampire as soon as we sit down in the
theater. He explains:
“The vampire only comes out in the dark and
spends the
rest of the time in his coffin. The spectators
voluntarily sit
in a coffin (the darkened cinema), watching a
screen on
which not only light but also (within and
between every
frame) darkness is projected (Waltje, 2000, p.
29).”
While I agree that this is a startlingly clear example
of our relationship to the vampire,
this vampire-spectator relationship can be
further clarified through a common
iconographical object in most of these films in
a way that has not as yet been established.
Lacan’s famous mirror stage is one of his
pillars of seeking out the moment when the
identity of a child in relation to itself begins
to develop. “The child... can already recognize
as such his own image in a mirror. This
recognition is indicated in the illuminative mimicry
of the Aha- Erlebnis... This event can
take place... from the age of six months... up to the
age of eighteen months (Lacan, 2004, p.
441-442).” Aha, you may say, but the vampire
casts no reflection, does it not? Stoker
himself, Dracula’s keeper, has been the catalyst for
your exclamation: “This time there could be no
error, for the man was close to me, and I
could see him over my shoulder. But there was no
reflection of him in the mirror (Stoker,
2003, p. 30-31)!” So what would Dracula’s answer
to Lacan’s mirror stage be in fact?
Fiona Peters states:
“Vampires have no need for an unconscious- nor
can they
be seen in mirrors because they do not need to
rely on the
process of identifications that Lacan describes;
in other
words they have not become formed as human
subjects,
and in the case of those who become vampires
after being
human... they have evaded the symbolic order... (Peters,
2006, p. 180)”
In Peters’ argument, humans who become vampires
have separated and transcended
themselves from the symbolism that is the
vampire to become one of them. Interesting...
My question for Peters would be What if
someone was a vampire and didn’t know it? Must
they still graduate from the fully-fledged
human’s mirror stage? I believe they do. But who
ever heard of someone not knowing that they are
in fact a vampire? Perhaps my line of
questions has no value... I believe Slavoj Žižek
had it right when he said, “It is therefore
clear why vampires are invisible to the mirror:
because they have read Lacan and,
consequently, know how to behave... (Žižek,
19992, p. 126)”