Jump to content

TVD Philosophy: I Was Ambushed; I Was Shot; Now I'm Vengeful


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.

132 replies to this topic

#121

Crim

Crim

    Fanatic

  • Interests:TV series (both live action and anime), movies (ditto), gaming, music, clinical psychology, religion.

Posted May 3, 2010 @ 3:15 AM

I cringed when Stefan almost quoted Being Human vamp mythology. Being Human vampires can live without drinking blood at all, but going off blood means being assaulted by memories of what you've done (sort of like Angelus becoming Angel) and the vampire main character once has a speech very, very much like Stefan's.

#122

Schumiac

Schumiac

    Couch Potato

Posted May 3, 2010 @ 7:43 AM

Shooting them or vervaining them up would also needed to be done if they were staked as well unless they ran into idiot newbie vamps like Logan. And afterward bodies would needed to be disposed of, burning them killed and disposed of the vampires all at once. Realistically speaking to stake anyone, let alone a vampire, would require someone to be pretty strong already. Most of the time this is glossed over.


What they did risked having the vampire wake up and attack them as it took time. Shooting a vampire enough vervain to immobilize it for a few minutes and shooting it with enough vervain to make sure it lasted till they got to the church and put it in chuch and set it one fire etc. are different things. That's why, they had to nuzzle them, have seperate iron cages for all of them which were carried with a horse cart each to the church, and had to have guards by every single vampire just in case. It took a lot of organization, lots of men, horses, iron cages, nuzzles etc. were needed (thus resources) and it took much time and energy. Staking them right after vervaining them would just take care of things right there and then. no risks involved for anyone. and yes, they'd have to take care of the bodies afterwards but carrying the shrunken body of a vampire is, I bet, less hard than carrying a still 'alive' on, and they wouldn't need guards or iron cages or anything, they could just pile them all up in some cart and take them to a burial site and/or to a burning site. (In all vampire shows 'staking' is not made to be that hard, so I'll assume it isn't.)

The Founders probably suspected there were vampires for awhile (even the fee/compel method leaves marks, after all. There weren't any blood banks to rob, and we can be pretty sure they weren't eating animals). But I think it was the daywalking bling that confused things at first. It was probably pretty inconceivable there could be vampires in the daylight. It was only the compass which proved that they were there.


Actually they didn't know about the daywalking bling and didn't seem to note it down, which is why the present-time council doesn't know about it. Actually, they have absolutely no idea that it is possible for vampires to be walking in the sun. Which is interesting, as they captured quite a number of vampires who were able to walk in the sun, wouldn't they ask how it was possible or make a note of it that it was 'possible' so the future generations shouldn't use "can walk in the sun" as a way to rule out a vampire candidate. Even if they somehow learned it wasa very special case due to Emily's rings, they'd still make a note of it...

If they were not killing people in large enough numbers to attract attention than why would the townspeople have realized they had vampires in town? Some were no doubt being careful and laying low, like Pearl, Katherine was not one of them and certainly not the only one out of over two dozen vampires. Pearl and Katherine never intended to stay there, they couldn't have anyway, Pearl wanted to leave actually because of the attention Katherine was bringing on them, there was nothing to indicate this had anything to do with reputation.


Katherine said she wanted to stay, and when Pearl came out of the tomb we found out she did see the town as her home. We also found out that vampires had property they owned in the town, which was confiscated. So they have settled in and making it their home. We don't know how the other vamps were acting, true, both the 'leaders' were Pearl and Katherine and they wanted to stay in town and have a low profile and any vamp that didn't obey that and caused trouble for them was probably warned and if things got worse, dealt with. (What the tomb vamps did when they got out is not really an indication they were killing people left and right as they have experienced Bitefest and have become revenge crazy. And even then, they initially listened to Pearl and kept a low profile and some like Newbie, although not living with Pearl, was still not revenge-seeking, and Pearl also mentioned some others simply leaving town). The only reason Pearl suggested they leave was because she was afraid too many people knew about them and would hunt them down, which is very similar to how she reacted in present time. (I don't think the vamps were mass-killing people, but the townspeople probably realized an increase in 'animal attacks', especially during night and some probably were a bit suspicious to them -like the guy in the carriage- and also realized the humans they found were drained of blood and their attempts to find the animal proved futile as no one saw a new beast around that might be doing this. If they have read/heard of vampires from before, they may have put 2 and 2 together and suspected it... And really it takes just one botched attempt by a (newbie) vampire to out them -as in if he/she is seen while preying etc., or someone they fed on and fed their blood to accidentally die, I guess... lol)

Pearl mentioned Katherine carrying on with the Salvatore brothers was making people talk - I take that talk to be about how Katherine is a 'light' woman, not how she is a vampire so I'd say it is about reputation. The Pearl & Katherine counted on their 'respectable lady' status to blend in & infiltrate the top ranks of the town as that gave them a better idea of what the founders' was up to.

ETA: We also know from Stefan that vampires had a tendency to 'punish' those whose actions put the rest of them in danger, which to me means as a general rule all vampires know to keep a low profile and try to abide by that rule (especially when in a coven) and do not go on killing sprees in towns that just screams "vampires all around us" to the townsfolk...

Edited by Schumiac, May 3, 2010 @ 11:30 AM.


#123

Lizardbeth J

Lizardbeth J

    Couch Potato

Posted May 3, 2010 @ 11:24 AM

Actually they didn't know about the daywalking bling and didn't seem to note it down, which is why the present-time council doesn't know about it. Actually, they have absolutely no idea that it is possible for vampires to be walking in the sun. Which is interesting, as they captured quite a number of vampires who were able to walk in the sun, wouldn't they ask how it was possible or make a note of it that it was 'possible' so the future generations shouldn't use "can walk in the sun" as a way to rule out a vampire candidate. Even if they somehow learned it wasa very special case due to Emily's rings, they'd still make a note of it...


I don't doubt that they never figured out the the bling existed, but the compass pointed at Pearl and Katherine, among others, who Gilbert and Papa Salvatore would know had been in the daylight. They HAD to know. I'm just saying it took them so long to figure it out because they expected the vampires to not be able to be in the daylight and were probably looking for people who didn't go out in the sun first.

Since Gilbert trusted the compass more than he trusted the fact that Pearl was in the daylight, I'm guessing they just wrote off the 'creature of the night' thing as untrue folklore and assumed ALL vampires can walk in the sunlight.

But yeah, it would've been smart of them to note that down someplace.

#124

Schumiac

Schumiac

    Couch Potato

Posted May 4, 2010 @ 5:52 AM

As has been brought up by others in different discussions, I do wonder if the circumstances of one's turning into a vampire (what happens just prior to it, how they complete their transformation and what happens right after it) have a lasting impact on the rest of their 'unlife'.

Before Stefan was killed, he was feeling guilty for getting Katherine caught and betraying his brother's trust and trying to make amends for that. His transformation was completed when he accidentally fatally wounded his father and drank from him, and then he went ahead and forced his brother to turn into a vampire against his wishes, as he really enjoyed being a vampire, thought it was great and wanted to share it with his brother and be with him for all eternity, but his brother rejected him the moment he became a vampire, letting him know he hated him for it (Stefan was definately under the impression Damon's real hatred is due to the turning, IMO).That all means, in a very short amount of time, he saw the two people who used to love him the most and were his family (and thus his closest), hate him for who he has become/the things he has done. There is much guilt and self-doubt there, which may be affecting how he views himself and his actions even now...

Before Damon was killed, he was all about Katherine and had the sibling rivalry going with Stefan, and his relationship to him got strained & he was really angry at Stefan when he caused Katherine's capture & also had anger towards vampire hunters of the town -I think his father being one of the leading figures also helped fuel this hatred. As they were trying to save Katherine, he (and his brother) were killed by the said vampire hunters, who then set fire to the church to kill the love of his life (or so he thought). Then his brother came and forced him to become a vampire. After which (I assume) he learned from Emily that she has been lying to him and Katherine was indeed saved from the fire as the spell worked but had to wait a long time to undo the spell. So the feelings he was feeling when he was turned were "obsession with Katherine", anger at Stefan (and hatred/anger at Founder's council), and probably 'everyone betrays me/ you can't trust anyone'. And those seem to be the main things that drive Damon and his actions even today...

We know Harper was a soldier left to die who was saved by Pearl by being turned into a vampire, and it seems it has led to him being extremely loyal to Pearl, not leaving her side.

Anna, who was most probably not Pearl's biological daughter but some girl she adopted (maybe even as a baby) at some point and raised as her own, seemed to be stuck in playing Pearl's "teenage daughter" all her life, too. Yes, on the one hand, it makes sense for her to want to save her mother whom she loved from the tomb, but on the other hand she is an at least 145 years old vampire herself, and not only does it look like she devoted all that time to saving mother, she also went back into that "daughter" role the moment Pearl was out of the tomb. She had one "rebellious moment" where she was all ;I'll date jeremy if I want to and will turn him too' but that also came out more teenager-like than anything else.

It's hard to say much on Scum Fell & Vicky as they were baby vamps still. And Pearl, whose 'history' we don't know...

#125

Bishop92

Bishop92

    Fanatic

Posted May 4, 2010 @ 1:14 PM

The difference is that Stefan's father just wanted to get rid of him, not to cleanse him, while the townsfolk were trying to "save" the immortal souls of their neighbours using every resource available to the best of their knowledge Guiseppe only wanted to save himself the shame and neither one of his sons could die soon enough for him.

I cringed when Stefan almost quoted Being Human vamp mythology. Being Human vampires can live without drinking blood at all, but going off blood means being assaulted by memories of what you've done (sort of like Angelus becoming Angel) and the vampire main character once has a speech very, very much like Stefan's.

I knew that sounded familiar for something!

#126

fengshoe

fengshoe

    Couch Potato

Posted May 7, 2010 @ 11:37 PM

From the episode thread:

To expand on the Caroline/Damon rape issue, I guess I see it this way: let's say you meet a really hot guy and you're really attracted to him. Then, while you're about to sleep with him (or right after you do sleep with him) you find out something about him that totally repulses you. Example, maybe he's married and a serial cheater, I don't know (obviously isn't the same as being a homicidal vampire who feeds on you, but, work with me here?). So you decide to leave and never see him again--but he compels you to "feel ok" with this. Basically changing your view so you think a man cheating on his wife is a totally acceptable thing and can be disregarded, so you continue sleeping with him. In this case I wouldn't call it rape because the actual act of sex is completely consensual, probably just a "brainwash" type thing as mentioned before.

Again, what Damon did is absolutely horrible but not nearly as abhorrent as rape (which IMO is probably one of the worst crimes that can be committed).


That would still be rape though, if you leave and choose not to continue a relationship with a person for a specific reason, in this case he's married, and that person removes your ability to say no for that reason, then you are not truly consenting to sex. Caroline in theory willingly slept with Damon but that's only because she did not have the ability to make a fully conscious decision to have sex with him, because he took away that ability by making her okay with what he did. At its core, this isn't much different than if he had roofied her. Would Caroline honestly have slept with him willingly after he fed from her and she tried to fight him off the next morning? I really don't think so, and with that in mind she was made to willingly want to have sex with her attacker.

Edited by fengshoe, May 7, 2010 @ 11:39 PM.


#127

FromReality

FromReality

    Couch Potato

Posted May 8, 2010 @ 1:15 AM

The first time Caroline slept with Damon, she was in full capacity, I believe. The scene where Damon feeds off her for the first time, came off to me as post first time having sex for them, but maybe I read it wrong. The sex and entire relationship afterwards was under compulsion. Which yes, is an issue I have, but I don't want to misrepresent it as Damon full on compelling her into sleeping with him from the get go.

#128

LolaRuns

LolaRuns

    Stalker

Posted May 8, 2010 @ 1:25 AM

It doesn't matter whether the first time was consensual. That doesn't preclude all further times from being rape. That's why there are laws for rape within marriage.

(for the record I have no firm opinion on where sex with the aid of compulsion is on the rape scale, but if somebody has sex with somebody twice or 10 times for that matter and the first time is consensual and the other it's rape that person is still a rapist. If I meet you on the street and 9 times out of ten I shook your hand and only one time I punched you in the face instead, I'm still the person who punched you in the face regardless of all the times where I normally shook your hand)

#129

FromReality

FromReality

    Couch Potato

Posted May 8, 2010 @ 2:08 AM

Oh, I completely agree LolaRuns. I hope it didn't come across like I didn't. I was simply responding to the idea that Damon compelled her initially into sleeping with him, as I feel there are two separate arguments that get mixed together. I definitely (and I have other posts somewhere that reference it) believe that Damon mind-raped her post first sex, and thus every thing afterwards was not consensual and out of her control. As I stated, the sex and entire relationship afterwards was under compulsion and thus a violation of her rights. All I was saying was that the first initial time, it actually was hot girl meets hot guy, hooking up commence.

#130

fengshoe

fengshoe

    Couch Potato

Posted May 8, 2010 @ 2:30 AM

To be clear I don't think Damon in any way was compelling Caroline up until that point where they started to have sex that first night. Nor, as I stated in the episode thread, do I think he at any point sat her down and made her specifically sleep with him. I think all the compulsion done was about making her okay/forgetting what he was and what he was asking her to do, which of course still stripped her of her ability to say no. But she took him home of her own free will, and based on what we learned it would seem one can't be compelled to invite a vampire in. So by that very logic she wasn't being compelled by that point. I do question what happened after he fed from her because they were just starting to get hot and heavy but no actual sexing had happened, but there seemed to be an implication the next morning sex still happened. But perhaps I'm misreading that scene and he didn't start to compel her until the next morning and he just fed and they both passed out/fell asleep.

Edited by fengshoe, May 8, 2010 @ 2:32 AM.


#131

LolaRuns

LolaRuns

    Stalker

Posted May 8, 2010 @ 2:35 AM

I guess I just don't really understand what that has to do with anything. It just seems like a neutral/empty fact to me. So Damon is hot on first glance. It's not like that is news when we constantly have characters commenting on it (like Bree, Matt's mom, Tyler's mom), nor is he the only guy Caroline found shallowly hot (hello Stefan). Nor does being hot or being found hot make Damon any more or less guilty. To me it's just an empty fact that has no impact whatsoever on morality, so I don't see why it's even being discussed. (I'm not saying it shouldn't be discussed, but I guess I don't understand the connection here)

I don't see it having an impact unless one wants to discuss the (imo relatively minor compared to murder/violence) morality of whether it makes Caroline a slut/easy for going with an older guys she thinks is hot or what it makes Damon that he was hooking up with a high school student and having sex with her despite not liking her.

Of course Damon compelling people in sexual situation isn't just an isolated incident. Aka the college students he picked up when he was grieving for Katherine. IMO they were clearly under the influence for him to be able to publicly bite her (and sorry despite all the stereotypes of evil slutty college girls, what are the chances that you could just pick three up, get them to dance around together in their underwear for you and allow you to drink their blood, I think one must have an exceptionally low opinion of women to think that that is realistic/just normal, what are the chances that all three have such low self esteem, not even one of them gets even a sliver of "eep, what would my parents think" and what are the chances that even if such girl exist Damon would just magically find exactly those three) and when he talked about ereasing their memories of it that just screamed parallelism to how a rapist using knock out drugs would act. IMO I can't see any way to interpret this as Damon having exceptionally sleazy and skeezy sexual ways when it comes to sex with humans. Even IS echoes that when he says that he sees Damon as the guy who on a date would get bored with his date (after having been around for so many centuries) and just prefer to mind-zap aka forcing his will on her.

To me all the "well she would have had sex with ihm anyway" doesn't work at all. Because even if she wouldn't have after being mind-zapped she wouldn't have been able to act on it. And nobody gets to just fast forward to what they want. Think of a prostitute, she is willing to have sex with you, but she wants you to pay. You overpower her to skip the paying part and go right to the sex part, it's still rape even though she was theoretically willing to have sex with you under certain circumstances (which you weren't willing to provide).

And yes, before we skip it, Damon is not the only one. Isobel also did it when she got those humans and brain-zapped them into putting on a sex show for her. There's sexual assaulting and sexual exploitation (if we presume Damon only got the college girls to dance for him and let him feed) going all around.

To me feeding alone is more like assault (and the equivalent of compelling somebody to let you feed would be, I don't know, using chlorofom on somebody to steal their wallet, you can argue that the person is better off than they would be if you had beaten them to a pulp and left them permanently injured, but it's still assault of some sort), but if Damon gets them to undress and dance around and gropes them that is sexual assault. (btw, blood!Stefan was also in that range with the fondling and sexualized langauge he used before biting the beauty pageant girl)

I'm not trying to put up a moral finger. This is a tv show. Bad/violent things happen. Almost everybody has done at least some things which are morally questionable. Stefan has killed his share of people, especially if we go with the equation that vampires = people because they too have thoughts and feelings. By the same logic, Elena too has assaulted her share of vampires, Alaric too has killed his share. I wouldn't go as far as saying that it's kinda like a war zone situation where people do things to survive, but well, it's a tv show and the tv show sets up a particular universe. So characters have done bad things and yes, Damon's bad things happen to include sexual assault (but again he isn't the only one).

Edited by LolaRuns, May 8, 2010 @ 2:47 AM.


#132

fengshoe

fengshoe

    Couch Potato

Posted May 8, 2010 @ 2:56 AM

I guess I just don't really understand what that has to do with anything. It just seems like a neutral/empty fact to me. So Damon is hot on first glance. It's not like that is news when we constantly have characters commenting on it (like Bree, Matt's mom, Tyler's mom), nor is he the only guy Caroline found shallowly hot (hello Stefan). Nor does being hot or being found hot make Damon any more or less guilty. To me it's just an empty fact that has no impact whatsoever on morality, so I don't see why it's even being discussed.


You mean discussing how Caroline was going to initially sleep with him without compulsion playing a factor? Because I do agree it has no real impact on the discussion in the long run. I was simply stating for the record at that point it was consensual and at this point, it stopped being consensual and what I thought the compulsion consisted of. Because some have made the argument that he didn't flat out tell her to sleep with him using compulsion so it isn't quite rape. Once it stopped being consensual, when Damon started to compel her, then it doesn't matter if that first time was. It is all the times afterward that count.

The vampires seem to have a very blasť attitude when it comes to sex and compulsion. I agree that what Damon did to the college girls and Isobel to the two she picked up was sexual assault. I think what Katherine did to Stefan, and Damon to Caroline was rape. And if Damon slept with any of those girls. I have to question if the show is really acknowledging the amount of sexual assault/exploitation that is going on, especially since they have shown so much of it. It seems the writers want to handwave it just a bit, I mean yes it is stated these humans are being used as puppets which is wrong, but they seemed to gloss over what exactly these humans are doing/is being done to them while being used.

Edited by fengshoe, May 8, 2010 @ 3:00 AM.


#133

LolaRuns

LolaRuns

    Stalker

Posted May 8, 2010 @ 2:59 AM

That blase attitude was really on the forefront again with Isobel stating that the cowboy she compelled was originally gay (again: no particular judgement on my side, but it seemed to be an odd detail to put in, maybe to stress Isobel's evilness/blasť attitude about humans).