Do the Dead Walk?

[Campbell, Anne-TMC-Rcvg]

No: HPFGUIDX 88911

{Pippin}
You know, I've been mulling over Kneasy's vampire challenge, 
and I'm not sure there are *any* undead in the Potterverse. 

{Anne}
Aw, Pip...don't give up. I Don't think Kneasy (or any of us really) is challenging the existence of undead Vampires in the HP world, simply WHO happens to be one. All any person in the Anti Vampire!Snape lobby wants is actual proof pointing directly to Snape--and not just indications--"batlike" attributes, flowing cloak, etc. Like in a court of law, what we're asking for is irrefutable evidence in which to convict Snape with. Thus far, such evidence has NOT been presented. Sure, you can alter the basic folklore, and you can include modern additions to it in order to point to vampiric "Seeming" traits on the part of old Severus...but no one has yet seen Snape display those traits. All we have are just hints--and ones that quite frankly CAN be applied to any number of alternate explanations as well as any variation of the Vampire, both in new and old incarnations...

{Pippin}
Point is, there are a lot of things in the Potterverse that can look 
like re-animated corpses, and several ways in which wizards 
might produce such an illusion, the better to befuddle hapless 
Muggles or even superstitious wizarding folk. 

Is there anything we know about vampires *from the canon* 
which suggests they are dead, apart from their appearance? 
We've been told in several places that Muggle ideas about 
fantastic creatures are wildly inaccurate. Could it be that one of 
these inaccurate notions is the whole idea of a re-animated corpse?

{Anne}
Possible, but as with the other observations made about Rowling's use of Myths, not likely. The universally accepted idea of the vampire is a walking, reanimated corpse, who feeds on the blood of the living (Which, if taken literally, even disqualifies the blood flavored lollis in Honeydukes as an indication of Vamp activity--the blood within is anything BUT fresh). The extraneous descriptives such as looks, the way they dress, even the presence of fangs (I don't think they had them in the original folklore--which brings up another argument against Snape as a Vamp--his teeth are obviously snaggly and irregular in the way they lay in his mouth according to Rowling--he would leave a readily identifiable mark behind when he went about feasting...) are variations on the original theme.
And although Rowling can and does put her own spin on these creatures she's used so far, it bears repeating that she harkens back to the original folk-loric creature in each case--with little influence by modern ideas--(Again, Kneasy points out the House elves--who are, undeniably, Brownies). Their looks, habits, 'rules' that they live by are all consistent with the original descriptives given to them by real villagers long ago that believed in them, and passed the stories on throughout time.
And also, Rowling HAS indicated there ARE vampires--although Quirrel's experiences could be discounted as a cover for what he was really doing in the Black Forest--Hagrid (who has never lied thus far in the series) stated that he had an altercation with one during his time spent trying to recruit the giants for Dumbly.
So, we're back to the beginning...who is the vampire, and who are the references pointing to? And who displays--noticeably and without question, and without 'altering' the *basic*, world wide accepted descriptions--the traits of the Vampire?

Anne
(Whose tempted to see if she can prove that Sirius will come back as a vampire....yes folks. I AM crazy.....)