[ SECRET POST #4176 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4176 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 40 secrets from Secret Submission Post #598.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I agree that the height of vampires was their implied sexuality - the sexual freedom against the backdrop of an oppressive society. And the darkly delightful, even frightening, implications of vampires and sexuality.

But I don't think vampires can be written that way anymore, because society has moved beyond "implied sexuality". Stocker writing Dracula with implied sexuality (even bisexuality) represents a real societal literary barrier. We don't have that barrier today, neither within the limits of what is appropriate/inappropriate to be explicit about in society or in high literature. It would just be a bit baffling and underwhelming at this point to read about vampires with only implied sexuality.

Not that vampires need explicit erotica to be successful. But I also don't think toning it down would recreate the same morbid fascination as it had in the 19th or earlier 20th century.