Showing posts with label Vampires. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vampires. Show all posts

Wednesday, 1 March 2023

Vampire-hunters and vampire-hunting kits

Shortly before going on leave last year, I was approached by Charmaine Manuel, who was writing an article on the “10 strangest artefacts in Australian museums”—which was published in The Guardian on 31 March 2022 (available here—without The Guardian’s annoying pop-up, 9 trackers and 30+ advertisements**).



Charmaine was interested in my thoughts on a Victoria Police Museum’s “Vampire Slaying Kit, Early 19th Century” that was seized in Pascoe Vale in 2004, as a part of a drug raid.

(No explanation is offered on the Museum’s online catalogue for why the above kit was kept by the Police. Possibly, it was a “proceeds of crime”—rather than a “possession of a deadly weapon”—forfeiture, since the pistol is unlikely to be functional. Even if the pistol were functional, the crucifix isn’t really a “deadly weapon”—unless you are a vampire—the same goes for the Holy Water, and if a wooden stake is considered a “deadly weapon,” every gardener in Melbourne is in trouble.

Since the rest of the “Vampire Slaying Kit” contents isn’t “deadly”—and yet these items were not returned—I am guessing forfeiture of the whole thing. But, who knows, they may have kept the Kit to help in their fight against the legion of the undead. More likely, someone at Victoria Police kept the kit simply because they liked it, wanted it, and they could—which is pretty much how Governments work in general.)

Anyway, the Victoria Police kit clearly isn’t “Early 19th Century”—as claimed in their Museum catalogue (admittedly, “last updated 5 years ago”). As I explained to Charmaine, there are a lot of these faux-antique kits available online, ranging from the “Prop Plastic” “Vampire Hunting Kit” (here, for $40) to those “made with antique and vintage parts” (as here, for over $1000).



These, better, antique / vintage “Vampire Slaying Kits” commonly contain a handful of more-or-less genuine antique items, but even the most expensive of these have—for obvious reasons—plastic or dummy guns (as here).

(In the past, the more expensive ones sold in America were likely to contain real weapons, though not—it seems—anymore, on eBay at least). This one (here and image below) was one of the few I could find that appear to have real weapons.



The best of these kits are beautiful and wildly expensive artistic creations, assembled almost-exclusively from genuinely antique boxes, maps, journals, rosaries, crystal vials for holy water etc.

In her article, Charmaine gave an example of a kit sold by Sotheby’s in 2011 (here, with an estimate of 20–30,000 USD), but Sotheby’s sold another in 2021 (here, with an estimate of USD3000–5000; pic below).



In the catalogue entry for the above, Sotherby’s state that “While some vampirists claim such kits were common in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, they were more likely assembled following the publication of Bram Stoker’s novel Dracula in 1897 and marketed to travelers visiting eastern Europe.” While it is not impossible that some sort of tourist-ware was produced for the limited number of Dracula-enthusiasts visiting eastern Europe, I am yet to see any kit with a proven history that is anywhere near as long as suggested here.

To my knowledge, nothing like these kits existed prior to their appearance in films, but I am not 100% sure when that first happened—even though I have watched 279 vampire films, fifty of them more than once, and made notes on many of them, but this was not something I was looking for.

What I can say is that, although many of the early 1970s films, for instance, have a vampire-expert (I am thinking of the iconic Peter Cushing / Van Helsing figure), who helps track down and kill vampires, or has a hero who has to acquire the necessary items to do it, this type of theatrical, Tim Burton-esque, sciency-gimmicky-“Vampire Slaying Kit” seems to be at least a decade later still.

I personally associate this type of “Vampire Slaying Kit” with Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992) and, although not a vampire film, there is also a great example of this same sort of sciency-gimmicky monster-hunter kit in Sleepy Hollow (1999).



I will keep an eye open for this type of kit as I re-watch vampire films. Hopefully, in future, I will be able to identify when they came into vogue. For the present, I’d guess it was the 1980s—when many cultural crimes were committed. Certainly, a lot later than Dracula (1898) and definitely not “Early” in the nineteenth century.

As for the dating of the Victoria Police Museum’s “Vampire Slaying Kit”—and as I said to Charmaine “If it’s 19th century, I’ll eat my head”!

**In the time it has taken to write this post, my (free) AdBlocker had blocked 75 advertisements on this page of The Guardian’s website.

Saturday, 21 September 2019

The Devil in Love revisited

In the first of three updates to my Halloween 2011 post on Cazotte’s The Devil in Love (here), I mentioned that I had discovered there were a number of American editions of this novel. In that post, I provided details of four original editions (representing four different translations: 1791, 1793, 1798, 1810), and three modern editions (1925, 1991 and 1993).

The three American editions I discovered in 2012 were those of 1810 (New York), 1828 and 1830 (Boston). Not having access to any of these online, I suggested at that time, that “it seems most likely that they are all reprints of no.2—the 1793 edition.”



Since writing the above, I have acquired a copy of The Devil in Love that was printed in Boston in 1828.



As you can see above, this edition has a charming frontispiece of “Biondetta Playing On The Harp”; and as you can see below, the Boston text matches—as I suspected it would—no.2 in my previous post, the 1793 edition. This edition starts “At five and twenty I was a Captain of the Guards in the service of the King of Naples, and lived in gay society …”



The two Boston editions are somewhat similar in size and length, suggesting one may be a reprint of the other. It is likely that Peaslee's the Boston edition is itself a reprint of Van Winkle's New York edition, but this is something I will only be able to establish in the unlikely event that I end up with a copy to compare my Boston edition to.



Below is my updated list of editions of The Devil in Love. Since 2011, three of the early editions have been added to Google Books, so I have added links to these. I have also passed on my copy of Biondetta, or the Enamoured Spirit, which illustrates my previous post, to Monash University, and have updated the holdings accordingly.

* * * * *

[1] Alvarez, Or, Irresistible Seduction; A Spanish Tale (London: W. Richardson, 1791). ¶ On Google Books (here). ESTC: t226198 (recording 2 copies); “When I was five-and-twenty years old, I was a captain in the the King of Naples’ guards: we lived very sociably among ourselves …”

[2] The Devil in Love, Translated from the French (London: Hookham and Carpenter, 1793). ¶ ESTC: t71529 (4 copies); on ECCO; “At five and twenty I was a Captain of the Guards in the service of the King of Naples, and lived in gay society …”

[3] The Enamoured Spirit (London: Lee and Hurst, Bell, Millar and J. Wright, 1798). ¶ On Google Books (here). ESTC: t210676 (2 copies); “At the age of five-and-twenty I was Captain in the Guards of His Majesty the King of Naples, and kept constant company with my brother officers”

[4] Biondetta, or the Enamoured Spirit (London: J. Miller, 1810). ¶ On Google Books (here). I have located nine copies: L [1458.d.16] and O [Fic. 27524 e.164]; CaSRU [PQ 1961 C5 A6413 1810]; CtY [Hfd29 151N], DLC [PZ3.C3197 B FT MEADE], MH-H [*EC8 L5875 Y810c], PSt [PQ1961.C5A65 1810], ViU [PZ2.C39 B 1810]; VMoU [840.5 C386 A6/B]; “At the age of five and twenty I was a captain in the guards of the King of Naples.”

[4A] The Devil in Love (New York: C. S. Van Winkle, 1810). pp: 178: i–viii 9-178; 17cm ¶ One copy: NNYSL [Ham C3865 D3].

[4B] The Devil in Love (Boston: J. P. Peaslee, 1828). ¶ pp. 102: i–vi 7–102; illus.; 12cm. ¶ One copy: AuPC-PS [lacking i–ii?]; also recorded here as having being in the “Library of the Hasty-Pudding Club in Harvard” in 1841. “At the age of five and twenty I was a captain in the guards of the King of Naples.”

[4C] The Devil in Love (Boston: N. H. Whitaker, 1830). pp. 110; illus.; 12cm ¶ Three copies: DeU [PQ1961 .C5 A6413 1830], MH-H [GEN 40516.6.2*], InU-Li [PQ1961.C5 D513 1830].

[5] The Devil in Love (London: Heinemann; Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1925). Limited edition (UK: 75 copies; US: 365 copies) ¶ Reprints translation no. 2; available online on Europeana, courtesy of the Bodleian Library (direct link to PDF here)

[6] The Devil in Love, translated by Judith Landry (Dedalus, 1991; 2nd ed. 2011). ¶ “At the age of twenty-five I was a captain of the king's Guards at Naples; we kept our own company much of the time …”

[7] The Devil in Love. Followed by Jacques Cazotte: His Life, Trial, Prophecies, and Revelations by Gerard de Nerval, translated by Stephen Sartarelli (Marsilio, 1993). ¶ “At the age of twenty-five I was a Captain of the Guards in the service of the King of Naples. We lived much of our time …”

Wednesday, 24 February 2010

Dracula (1979) as Paranormal Romance

In September 2008 I helped organise, and participated in, a two-day symposium at Monash University under the title Vampires, Vamps and Va Va Voom: A Critical Engagement with Paranormal Romance.


The symposium was great fun and great experience for those involved. (And NB, two presenters who were sessional or fixed-term staff now have ongoing positions and four or five(?) honours students have since won scholarships to extend their studies.) Information about the symposium, and podcasts of the papers, are available online (here).

My paper examines the main romance elements of John Badham's Dracula (1979), comparing them to typical elements in Paranormal Romance fiction, to assess whether the film succeeds a romance narrative or a horror story with a romantic sub-plot.

Anyway, the first version of the file they posted of my paper was corrupt and impossible to understand. Last week it was re-posted and is now available here. I had to listen to part of the file again to see if it was okay and doing so has encouraged me to write up the paper for publication. So, if you have any thoughts, any suggestions or criticisms, please do let me know. I can be contacted on