Kill It With Homeopathy!
Jun. 23rd, 2010 11:58 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I love urban fantasy. It's my genre of choice, and I've been a fan of it since well before it was trendy. It has its flaws, all genres do, but for the most part I can handwave past them to appreciate the story and the world and the characters.
There's one plot hole, though, that I'm running into more and more often, that I just can't get past. It's one of the only things nearly guaranteed to get me to shout, shake my fist in the air, and put the book in Time Out for being bad. And given that more and more of my friends are taking up writing in general and urban fantasy in particular, I need to put out a plea to them, and to all authors, to please never ever ever use this idea.
Killing vampires with bullets made of anticoagulant is Just. Plain. Stupid.
The logic starts with 'well, vampires have blood in them.' Yep. You know what else has blood in them? People. Also chickens, and iguanas, and cattle, and bunny rabbits, and werewolves, and anything else in the vertebrate category. We don't shoot them with anticoagulants.
I've seen settings where the logic chain follows to '...and blood has COAGULANT! And coagulant plus anticoagulant - it's like matter and antimatter! They'll explode on contact! Boom, vampire bits everywhere!'
If this were true, my job would be a lot more interesting, given that I need to store blood in tubes with anticoagulant every time I test a dog for heartworm. All anticoagulant does is keep blood from clotting.
Other authors just stick with the basic logic, figuring that should be enough. Vampires are full of blood; if you shoot them with anticoagulant all that blood will leak out, right?
There's just one problem with that. They *drink* blood. So the worst you could do would be shoot them in the stomach and have their lunch leak out, leaving them hungry. Even if you shot them in the femoral artery, they're dead. Their hearts don't pump, and the blood in their veins doesn't circulate. They can't bleed to death, even if the blood doesn't clot. Everything above the wound may pour out, but everything below will just sit there - and again, why would bleeding damage a dead thing?
This just leaves the explanation of sympathetic magic. Vampires are all about blood, and coagulant is all about... um.... blood. And I'd even accept that, if the authors presented it that way. But it's always couched in terms of science, where it boils down to complete and utter malarky. It's about as logical and scientific as saying, 'Oh no, an attack cow! Cows are full of milk! Quick, shoot it with lactaid! Lactaid breaks down milk proteins!'
'Oh no, a zombie! Zombies eat brains! Shoot it with prozac!'
'Oh, no - attack vegetarians! Shoot them with Beano!'
Please, authors. Just use wood-tipped bullets and call it magic. You're writing fantasy, it's okay to do that. That's why it's called fantasy.
There's one plot hole, though, that I'm running into more and more often, that I just can't get past. It's one of the only things nearly guaranteed to get me to shout, shake my fist in the air, and put the book in Time Out for being bad. And given that more and more of my friends are taking up writing in general and urban fantasy in particular, I need to put out a plea to them, and to all authors, to please never ever ever use this idea.
Killing vampires with bullets made of anticoagulant is Just. Plain. Stupid.
The logic starts with 'well, vampires have blood in them.' Yep. You know what else has blood in them? People. Also chickens, and iguanas, and cattle, and bunny rabbits, and werewolves, and anything else in the vertebrate category. We don't shoot them with anticoagulants.
I've seen settings where the logic chain follows to '...and blood has COAGULANT! And coagulant plus anticoagulant - it's like matter and antimatter! They'll explode on contact! Boom, vampire bits everywhere!'
If this were true, my job would be a lot more interesting, given that I need to store blood in tubes with anticoagulant every time I test a dog for heartworm. All anticoagulant does is keep blood from clotting.
Other authors just stick with the basic logic, figuring that should be enough. Vampires are full of blood; if you shoot them with anticoagulant all that blood will leak out, right?
There's just one problem with that. They *drink* blood. So the worst you could do would be shoot them in the stomach and have their lunch leak out, leaving them hungry. Even if you shot them in the femoral artery, they're dead. Their hearts don't pump, and the blood in their veins doesn't circulate. They can't bleed to death, even if the blood doesn't clot. Everything above the wound may pour out, but everything below will just sit there - and again, why would bleeding damage a dead thing?
This just leaves the explanation of sympathetic magic. Vampires are all about blood, and coagulant is all about... um.... blood. And I'd even accept that, if the authors presented it that way. But it's always couched in terms of science, where it boils down to complete and utter malarky. It's about as logical and scientific as saying, 'Oh no, an attack cow! Cows are full of milk! Quick, shoot it with lactaid! Lactaid breaks down milk proteins!'
'Oh no, a zombie! Zombies eat brains! Shoot it with prozac!'
'Oh, no - attack vegetarians! Shoot them with Beano!'
Please, authors. Just use wood-tipped bullets and call it magic. You're writing fantasy, it's okay to do that. That's why it's called fantasy.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:40 pm (UTC)I just rolled my eyes, said 'Whatevvz' and turned the brain off for the rest of the movie
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 05:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:09 pm (UTC)http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2010/04/20/new-age-terrorists-develop-homeopathic-bomb/
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:32 pm (UTC)If they wanted to make a bomb, they should take something incredibly stable, then dilute it a 1000 or more fold in water. Now that would be dangerous.
If homeopathy, like, worked or anything.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 05:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:09 pm (UTC)You are wonderful.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:13 pm (UTC)That could actually be kinda cool.
Even better would be a wood-tipped tracer round. That way you could shoot a flaming bullet that both stakes them *and* burns them with phosphorous. That should take care of even the most stubborn vampires.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:18 pm (UTC)I would have assumed that vampire saliva contains anticoagulants for much the same reason mosquito and tick salivas do.
(in my mental urban fantasy picture, the vampires make mixed drinks, like 1 shot gin, 1 shot Type O, 10mg heparin, served over ice in a tall glass with club soda).
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:29 pm (UTC)Oh, wait, sorry, this is not a chance for me to whip out my amazingly geeky, far too complete for anyone, including me, knowledge of vampire lore. Sorry. It's just so damned seldom I get a chance to show it off!
Anyway, back to your post -- shooting vampires with anticoagulent might, at *best*, give you a semi squishy, sloshy vampire, and really, who wants that?
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 06:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 06:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 02:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:49 pm (UTC)There are so many *good* clever ideas; that's part of what bugs me about the idiotic ones.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 05:10 pm (UTC)Ask me about the "hoodoo sniper rifle" sometime...
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 05:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 07:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:46 pm (UTC)Shotgun shells filled with toothpicks work as well.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 06:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 04:50 pm (UTC)Ok, that made me giggle... :-)
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 05:06 pm (UTC)"Because it's maaaaaaaagic," is a 100% reasonable explanation for things that happen in a work of fantasy and/or horror fiction. Vampires don't have a fatal allergy to ultraviolet radiation; rather, the monstrous vitality in their unnatural corpse-bodies is destroyed by the holy power of the sun. A tanning bed should do exactly nothing to a vampire. Likewise, a silver bullet doesn't kill a werewolf because of some chemical reaction. It kills said werewolf because it's magic.
But, then, I'm also in the "Hannibal Lecter as protagonist" camp, in terms of my preference when it comes to monstrous characters in stories, and I'd love to see a work of vampire fiction written from that perspective... which, of course, probably means that I'll have to write it, myself.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 02:29 am (UTC)& girlie glitter all over perfectly good vampire stories,
but, as with many things mainstream, I seem to be out
of step with general tastes...
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 05:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 05:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 06:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 08:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 05:44 pm (UTC)Although, I do get annoyed by this "only catholic stuff kills vampires." What if the Vampire isn't particularly Catholic? I would take serious delight in a Jewish vampire getting beaten by a loaf of challah.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 06:40 pm (UTC)Likewise, an ardent, truly faithful Chinese Communist would find a copy of Mao's Little Red Book just as effective as a blessed cross to a Catholic. And Pagans... well, since they tend to be nature worshippers, and the whole reason vampires are evil is that they are unnatural, Pagans should be able to kick blood-sucker ass with some *high-test* authority. One mid-level Druid with a call lightning spell could wipe out a whole NEST!
Pretty much, it boils down to my favorite line from a vampire movie EVER... "You have to have FAITH for that to work on me, Mr. Vincent".
no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 02:33 am (UTC)I've been to at least 80 of them, and trust me,
no one "blesses" the shank bone - and it's usually
way to small to do any damage to anyone.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 02:57 am (UTC)2. My understanding (admittedly imperfect) was that the ritual itself made the meal blessed. Then again, I have a very Pagan/Taoist view of what makes a thing holy.
3. Oh, man... I'm really sorry my attempt at humor failed so utterly. I certainly did not mean to upset anyone.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 04:06 am (UTC)But the person who failed the most is me - everyone was making jokes & I got all serious.
Back to your regularly scheduled fun - forget the pedantic curmudgeon in the corner!
no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 01:05 pm (UTC)And I am sure that the seders we did were different... we did have a Rabbi and his family come to them every year, and he was the one who helped our pastor get it "right", but I would not be surprised if it was not what Jewish kids grew up with. It was, after all, an Episcopal church in the Hudson River Valley in NY. This is part of why I've been using the "we're kind of stupid that way" Hobbes icon.
Have I met you at one of ladysprite's dos? If not, I need to. I'd like to talk with you further -- and if I have, my apologies... I have a memory like a steel... sieve.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 01:44 pm (UTC)Possibly not even the same time Zone... :-Q
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 10:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 02:31 am (UTC)Now a mezuzah - that would work just like a cross.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-25 04:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-27 04:28 am (UTC)In fact, in the first few centuries AD, the church tried to ban crosses on graves for that very reason -- the preferred symbol was the fish.
I could further speculate that there's a spell that infuses pagan solar cross-power into water, tricked out with bells and whistles to disguise it as a Catholic ritual.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 05:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 06:21 pm (UTC)This is a mark of genius.
PJW
no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 07:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 12:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 03:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-23 09:56 pm (UTC)If you shot a vampire full of coagulant, they might starve, or start crunching...
There is at least one case on record of someone who was on an antidepressant trial, overdosed, was close to death, then they discovered he was in the placebo side of the trial - at which point he recovered.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 12:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 01:06 pm (UTC)Ok. You win. :)
(I think my brain needs to take a shower now...)
no subject
Date: 2010-06-24 05:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-03 05:06 am (UTC)It got worse from there.