Plugging my theory (was Re: A BIAS in the Pensieve: A Batty

[nkafkafi]

> Neri:
> > As I wrote later in that post, I tend to think that the vampire
> thing
>  is strictly in the metaphorical level.<
> 
> Pippin:
> But that is so unlike everything else in her world. Hagrid didn't 
> turn out to be a metaphorical giant. It seems that all the other 
> major species have or have had representatives on campus, 
> (assuming Flitwick is part goblin as the movies imply) so 
> shouldn't there be a vampire?
> 

Neri again:

I think JKR uses mythological and folklore materials in two main ways.
When the creatures or artifacts are mere plot devices, JKR describes
them in the conventional way, or frequently as a parody. Typical
examples: giants, dragons, fairies, trolls, centaurs, brooms, wands.

In contrast, sometimes creatures and artifacts become central not only
to the plot, but also as a theme. This is when they acquire strong
metaphorical meaning, and this is when JKR gives them her unique
personal interpretation (although the original mythological and
literary influences can still be easily identified). Typical examples:
house elves, dementors, the mirror of Erised, Harry's scar, Lily's
ancient magic, the Unforgivables, the patronus.

For me, Potterverse vampires sound very much like the first group.
Voldy's immortality, the Dark Mark and Death Eaters sound very much
like the second.

Neri