Due to my incommunicado phases, things that happen just do so and I sometimes don't notice them to happen. What I am describig now is already a past event, but it has sparked some thoughts that want to be spoken just now, so bear with me.
Those who remember me from the very "past" past also know that I have provoked some debates due to my controversional ideas about how vampires come into being. I have pursued some then-current theories on a purely intellecutal level, but I have also always stated that someone caused my condition, and that I can pin it down to a name, date and course of action. This idea was extremely unpopular, since the general consens is that vampires are not "created", they awaken. Reasons for this are simple: most vampires cannot nail their self-realisation down to another person who caused their physical reaction to blood, the side-effects, the changes in their perception, body, mental state. We agreed to disagree, and eventually, I started to consider that there might be an effect that I labeled as "triggered awakening", meaning that we are still talking about the process of awakening as described, but some involved person took actions that enforced it. It would have happened anyway, just maybe significantly later. This, however, never gave me an explanation why some things in my human past never fit into the awakened vampires" scheme, like an early fascination about blood, the more radical changes in my appearance which exceed those during most described awakenings, first signs during adolescence or simply the fact that someone did something to me and only few months passed until something else happened - while he was neither present nor involved.
So, enough of that. Years ago, long after Diane, the US scene and during a phase where I was absolutely not involved into anything, I met my now best friend and first new family member. She told me that her "awakening" was triggered as well. And she could give me a name, place, date... oh well, coincidence, right?
Maybe. But a few months later, I found a donor for a while, who had no inclinations to blood-drinking whatsoever. A nice, young guy, trained in medical stuff, intellectual, slightly cynic, scientifically curious, but definetely no blood-drinker, not the kind of awakening-type. However, after a while, he started to describe some effects that sounded startingly familiar. I promised to be around, in case he needed help, but he did not like that whole mentor thing (long story which had to do with other folks, not even vamps, for that matter), and things changed in my life to the worse as well around that time. We lost contact eventually for approximately a year, and when I reconnected to the local scene, I talked to him again. We are still on good terms, no bad feelings involved, even though I was and still am extremely sorry for not having been able to help when I should have. Now guess what? He is a vampire. Sanguinarian, like me.
Guys, I don't believe in coincidences. At least I don't believe in coincidences being pack animals. One such story beside mine, okay. But another one, and then directly connected to my own life? Well... no.
So what does this mean, actually? I am not sure. But if there are psi-vamps and sang-vamps, and they have a lot of differences, why would it be so unreasonable to think that not even all sang-vamps are the same? Over here, the idea of one person causing another to become a vampire is not exactely popular either, but the disagreements about what defines vampirism are of a different nature. It seems to be an accepted thought that bloodthirst has something to do with an energetic imbalance, but without all the violent disagreements between psis and sangs. Our disagreements seem to be of a more, don't know... "moral" nature? But I will come back to that later (yes, the issue from my last post continutes...) Also, the general idea of different vamp-types existing is daily business. Same for diverging theories about our heritage.
Fact is, I was always a little scared of being somewhat "contagious". I refuse to donate to hospitals for that reason, even though my blood-type is fairly rare. I know that one of my earlier donors started to behave strange after a while, asking me questions that in my view aimed at wanting the confirmation that he is turning into a vampire, but his arguments were so silly that I convinced him that he was, basically, just full of false ideas about the subject. I still believe I was right in his case, but what if not? What if there is a kind of vamps that causes others to become vamps as well? There are numerous kinds of conditions out there which can both be inherited but also developed by other factors, so why not this one?
For the moment, I can only name a few common factors.
- we all donated to some blooddrinker for several times or in a somewhat extreme setting before things changed
- most of us drink more than commonly accepted as, well, acceptable (I definetely fall into the more extreme category)
- we all have developed problems with sun and light within months after the incidents, more or less
- we all seem to be no typical awakening candidates
- we all showed no warning signs during adolescence that are common during awakening
The technical aspects of how the blood was taken seem to be of no relevance, they were all different. Also, none of us took blood of that vampire involved seemingly (in my case I am not sure, though). The determining common factor seems to be the total amount of blood / energy lost in the process, either by intensity of the contact or the continuity of donations.
I am not yet worried about my donors in general - it did not happen to everyone. But if I will continue to notice such tendencies in long-term relationships, how am I supposed to react on this? No long-termers anymore? That would be difficult to accomplish. Donors don't grow on trees. The community is small.
For the moment, this will remain an intellectual problem for me. None of us who are in contact at the moment "plan" to spread our condition for the sake of finding out. (Come on, that would be pretty feakish, wouldn't it??) But if I detect other cases and similarities, be sure to find them here.
Those who remember me from the very "past" past also know that I have provoked some debates due to my controversional ideas about how vampires come into being. I have pursued some then-current theories on a purely intellecutal level, but I have also always stated that someone caused my condition, and that I can pin it down to a name, date and course of action. This idea was extremely unpopular, since the general consens is that vampires are not "created", they awaken. Reasons for this are simple: most vampires cannot nail their self-realisation down to another person who caused their physical reaction to blood, the side-effects, the changes in their perception, body, mental state. We agreed to disagree, and eventually, I started to consider that there might be an effect that I labeled as "triggered awakening", meaning that we are still talking about the process of awakening as described, but some involved person took actions that enforced it. It would have happened anyway, just maybe significantly later. This, however, never gave me an explanation why some things in my human past never fit into the awakened vampires" scheme, like an early fascination about blood, the more radical changes in my appearance which exceed those during most described awakenings, first signs during adolescence or simply the fact that someone did something to me and only few months passed until something else happened - while he was neither present nor involved.
So, enough of that. Years ago, long after Diane, the US scene and during a phase where I was absolutely not involved into anything, I met my now best friend and first new family member. She told me that her "awakening" was triggered as well. And she could give me a name, place, date... oh well, coincidence, right?
Maybe. But a few months later, I found a donor for a while, who had no inclinations to blood-drinking whatsoever. A nice, young guy, trained in medical stuff, intellectual, slightly cynic, scientifically curious, but definetely no blood-drinker, not the kind of awakening-type. However, after a while, he started to describe some effects that sounded startingly familiar. I promised to be around, in case he needed help, but he did not like that whole mentor thing (long story which had to do with other folks, not even vamps, for that matter), and things changed in my life to the worse as well around that time. We lost contact eventually for approximately a year, and when I reconnected to the local scene, I talked to him again. We are still on good terms, no bad feelings involved, even though I was and still am extremely sorry for not having been able to help when I should have. Now guess what? He is a vampire. Sanguinarian, like me.
Guys, I don't believe in coincidences. At least I don't believe in coincidences being pack animals. One such story beside mine, okay. But another one, and then directly connected to my own life? Well... no.
So what does this mean, actually? I am not sure. But if there are psi-vamps and sang-vamps, and they have a lot of differences, why would it be so unreasonable to think that not even all sang-vamps are the same? Over here, the idea of one person causing another to become a vampire is not exactely popular either, but the disagreements about what defines vampirism are of a different nature. It seems to be an accepted thought that bloodthirst has something to do with an energetic imbalance, but without all the violent disagreements between psis and sangs. Our disagreements seem to be of a more, don't know... "moral" nature? But I will come back to that later (yes, the issue from my last post continutes...) Also, the general idea of different vamp-types existing is daily business. Same for diverging theories about our heritage.
Fact is, I was always a little scared of being somewhat "contagious". I refuse to donate to hospitals for that reason, even though my blood-type is fairly rare. I know that one of my earlier donors started to behave strange after a while, asking me questions that in my view aimed at wanting the confirmation that he is turning into a vampire, but his arguments were so silly that I convinced him that he was, basically, just full of false ideas about the subject. I still believe I was right in his case, but what if not? What if there is a kind of vamps that causes others to become vamps as well? There are numerous kinds of conditions out there which can both be inherited but also developed by other factors, so why not this one?
For the moment, I can only name a few common factors.
- we all donated to some blooddrinker for several times or in a somewhat extreme setting before things changed
- most of us drink more than commonly accepted as, well, acceptable (I definetely fall into the more extreme category)
- we all have developed problems with sun and light within months after the incidents, more or less
- we all seem to be no typical awakening candidates
- we all showed no warning signs during adolescence that are common during awakening
The technical aspects of how the blood was taken seem to be of no relevance, they were all different. Also, none of us took blood of that vampire involved seemingly (in my case I am not sure, though). The determining common factor seems to be the total amount of blood / energy lost in the process, either by intensity of the contact or the continuity of donations.
I am not yet worried about my donors in general - it did not happen to everyone. But if I will continue to notice such tendencies in long-term relationships, how am I supposed to react on this? No long-termers anymore? That would be difficult to accomplish. Donors don't grow on trees. The community is small.
For the moment, this will remain an intellectual problem for me. None of us who are in contact at the moment "plan" to spread our condition for the sake of finding out. (Come on, that would be pretty feakish, wouldn't it??) But if I detect other cases and similarities, be sure to find them here.
