Return to forum list page
|micheledutcher||Eternal Life story||2011-10-11 12:39:08|
|micheledutcher||...in the movies, you see a vampire who is fighting desperately for his life, or wanting to have babies or whatever - but seldom do you see a vampire who is simply bored enough with life to want to go on to whatever is next. Interesting concept.
Even in the movie Bram Stokers Dracula - the vampire was desperately wanting to stay alive long enough to have his one true love reincarnated. Interesting.||2011-10-11 12:42:02|
|Banshee46||Yeah, I had this idea that after a while, you'd really begin to wonder what the damn *point* was. Like, you know nothing is *really* a threat to you. You don't want babies (or have accepted that it's not going to happen). Then what? We always imagine that if we had forever, we'd find ourselves some kind of purpose to keep us busy, but just watching some people in the life span they have *now* kind of suggests that that's not true. People *already* get bored with life. Now imagine you had three or four hundred years under your belt!||2011-10-20 10:31:06|
|Sidewinder4||Bram Stoker's original villain was not eternally alive but eternally dead; an "undead" creature of pure evil, referred to as "The Monster" and "The Demon," as well as "Count Dracula." Rather than drinking blood to live he drank blood so that others would die. Stoker's novel was not a regular narrative but rather it is a file about Dracula; including newspaper clips, diary and journal entries; even a recording on an Edison Dictaphone machine, "spoken by Van Helsing."
The book called "Bram Stoker's Dracula" is a novelization of a recent movie. The original is chilling. At one point the "good guys" and the girl partially under Dracula's control "hide in plain sight" behind a circle made from Blessed Christian Communion wafers and "The demon" attempts to entice them to "cross the line." There is a great deal of Christian symbolism in the book beyond holding up a crucifix. Originally Dracula was an uncreature whose bite caused damnation as well as death of the body. He tended to choose the shape of a wolf over the shape of a bat. Dracula had no redeeming qualities or desires from the pen of Stoker.
Sidewinder 4 ||2011-11-03 20:47:15|
|Anonymous||Living eternally as a negative is an interesting idea that is used as a plot in many stories, not just those about Dracula. In fact, it seems that whenever a being lives eternally in a story, that being is always miserable and lonely. The possibility of living eternally as rewarding and ultimately desirable does not enter into the equation. I wonder why that is. What if eternal beings lived full lives with loved ones and in a realm where possibility based in loving action were endless? Could they be incorporated into a story? Why not?
Book Marketing Manager: Cathedral of Dreams by Terry Persun and A Kingdom's Possession by Nicole Persun
|tgoyette||I've read some stories of post reality where the consciousness of people go on forever in a virtual reality. Because the norm is living forever it wasn't a big deal. Because it is virtual reality they can get a bit surreal.
|Anonymous||The way I figure it, any time you have a situation where someone lives forever while those around them do not, you have a situation where someone who lives forever will eventually grow bored. There's only so many new experiences you can have. There's only so many times you can love and lose and love again before you lose any interest in loving at all.
If you've ever raised rats, you might have a fair idea of what it might be like. Rats live about three years, and if you raise enough of them, eventually one rat blurs into another and you're just going through the motions. They stop being individual creatures, because you've just seen SO MANY in your life that your mind can't really parse the details of each individual one.
I figure, personally, if I lived eternally? I'd probably have about seven or eight hundred years of living it the hell up before things got boring. How many lovers could you possibly have? Hell,, how many times can you have a real, fulfilling relationship with another human being when you know that in a short (to you) period of time, they'll be too old to participate in many activities with you, and quite frankly, if you're already three or four hundred years old? They were never really your peer anyway. Even a fifty or sixty year old person is still like a child compared to you. This is to say nothing of the way culture and language change over time. Thinking realistically, could you have *honestly* fit in seventy years ago? A hundred? Even thirty or forty?
So that, I think, is why eternal life is a curse. It *starts* awesome, but eventually you're trapped in your own life, unable to really interact with humanity in any meaningful way.||2011-12-10 20:28:10|
|tgoyette||even more so if you raise fruit flies
|Banshee46||...THat made me laugh far, far harder than it really had any right. I just want you to know that :P||2011-12-28 18:08:23|