Vampires

[koinonia02]

No: HPFGUIDX 76934

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> In the  Potterverse are vampires considered to be human?
<snip> 
> It makes a difference to the theory of Snape being one. According 
to 
> MBAWTFT, only humans are allowed wands.
> 
> Suppositions based on accepted lore are not particularly helpful, 
JKR  
> tends to put her own twist on folk legends.
> 
> Can anybody find a canon reference?



"K":
Perhaps this is what you are looking for:

GoF/Ch 9 No non-human creature is permitted to carry or use a 
wand.~~~~

That doesn't mean that a non-human 'will not' carry a wand. It just 
means they are not suppose to do so. This could be one of the many 
reasons Snape does not go around stating what he is. Plus it doesn't 
appear that the wizarding world is that crazy over vampires. For 
instance:

In GoF/Ch 10 Percy, "Last week she (Rita) was saying we're wasting 
our time quibbling about cauldron thickness, when we should be 
stamping out vampires! As if it wasn't specifically stated in 
paragraph twelve of the Guidelines for the Treatment of Non-Wizard 
Part-Human ---

GoF/125-126 Young wizards are trying to impress veelas by 
saying, "but I'm a vampire hunter. I've killed about nine so far____'.

OoP/302 (Scholastic version)Umbridge hates part-humans including 
werewolves and merpeople. Sirius, "Apparently she loathes part-
humans. "So what are Umbridge's lessons like? Sirius interrupted. "Is 
she training you all to kill half-breeds? 

Further defintion of how a vampire is classified:

FB/x-xiii There are beasts and there are beings. Problems arose as to 
who would be classified as beings and who would be beasts. A 'being' 
is a creature worthy of legal rights and would have a voice in the 
governance of the magical world. Finally the magical community found 
an acceptable definition. 'Beings' are any creature that has 
sufficient intelligence to understand the laws of the magical 
community and to bear part of the responsibility in shaping those 
laws (FB xii). However, the centaurs have refused 'being' status and 
requested to remain 'beasts'. The centaurs objected to some of the 
creatures with whom they were asked to share 'being' status, such as 
hags and 'vampires' (FB footnote xiii). So vampires are classified 
as 'beings'. 

     
 
"severusbook4" Message 76909  

So far JKR's touch on vampires has been very light and unsupportive 
of Snape being one or even half one (visions of Blade dance in my 
mind). 

"K":
Oh I disagree <G>. There are plenty of references to vampires in all 
the books. There are references to vampires and Snape in the books. 
Sure, JKR hasn't put a big "V" on his forehead but I wouldn't expect 
her to do so. I keep hearing how all the vampire references are a red 
herring. Why would JKR bother to do that? Is it her intent to just 
turn around and laugh at the end of book seven if we find out Snape 
isn't a vampire? Why even bother to tease? Unless Snape is something 
other than a vampire/dhampire and she is drawing our attention away 
from what that is. However, it is always vampires that we hear about.

severusbook4:
 Since JKR seems to do her homework when dealing with 
mythical creatures and beasts, we can only hope that she will stay 
semi true to vampires. And if she does then Snape is not a vampire 
in any stretch af the term.


"K":
How is Snape not a vampire? What if he is hiding what he is? That's 
not totally out of the question.

severusbook4:
 Snape prefers the dark clothing and the 
dark arts (can anyone say image conscious?), and IMHO I believe he 
is Gothic in nature, the brooding, depressed, unhappy person he is 
portraid to be in the books.  

"K"
Now I can go along with the idea that JKR just loves that Gothic 
look. I have no problem with that but I might also ask why Snape 
loves dark clothing and is so interested in the dark arts. Could his 
interest in the dark arts not be because he is a dark creature? 

One can make a vampire whatever they so desire. JKR does not have to 
follow Anne Rice or any other author. Sure, she should probably stay 
true to what we know about vampires. But there's a problem in that 
line of thinking also. One could spend all day reseaching vampire 
folklore and come up with many different types of vampires. For 
instance, some of the folklore says vampires have always been able to 
walk in the sunlight and it hasn't been till more recent times that 
others have decided they could not withstand sunlight. I can find 
gaunt or plump vampires, those with fangs and those without, those 
who eat and those who don't, those who can have children and those 
who can't, those who have long fingernails and those who don't, those 
who sleep in coffins and those who don't. 

If JKR doesn't want Snape to have fangs or nails and gives Snape the 
ability to wander in sunlight why can't she do that? She would be 
staying true to some versions of vampire folklore. At the same time I 
would not be surprised to see Snape one day showing off his beautiful 
set of fangs. 

What will be interesting to see is if Umbridge and the Ministry does 
go ahead and checks the background of Snape as Umbridge stated they 
would be doing.

Until we hear from JKR that Snape isn't a vampire, I'll stick with 
that theory!

"K"

v-v
(best I could do for fangs)