As you may remember
from my last entry, I’ve recently fallen in love with Richelle Mead’s young
adult series Vampire Academy. Last
time, I talked about how great Mead’s writing was technically, and,
essentially, justified my love for the series. This time, I’ll move on to
compare Mead’s series with my beloved Buffy
the Vampire Slayer. To some extent, I really couldn’t help drawing these
comparisons while reading the series. After all, Joss’s mythos is my most
familiar frame of reference for the vampire legend. It also helped that there
were a lot of things to compare, all
of them favorable (and, in a few cases, I think Mead outperforms Master Whedon
– blasphemy, I know!). As we go forward, dear readers, I’ll be comparing the
mythologies of the two universes, some main character parallels that I couldn’t
resist, and female role models.
Mythology
With fantasy, it is incredibly
important for an author to define their “universe”. By definition, the
traditional rules of what is and isn’t real don’t apply to fantasy, so the
burden of setting up rules falls upon the author. Modern vampire fiction,
especially, tends to want to break away from the “rules” of traditional
vampiric legend. Buffy does that by
introducing the Slayer mythos, allowing vampires to enter holy ground, and, of
course, the idea of vampires with souls. The idea of the Slayer is fascinating
enough – one girl in all the world destined to protect mankind from evil. While
Buffy is, at its heart, a
vampire-based mythos, Joss Whedon is able to keep it (mostly) fresh across
seven seasons by introducing his audience to witchcraft, demons, and a host of
other supernatural friends and foes for Buffy and the Scoobies.
I
think one of my favorite things that Mead does with Vampire Academy is to take elements of this more modern vampire
mythology and make it her own. I love the idea of the Moroi – the “good
vampires”. They drink blood, but use willing human “feeders” so as not to kill
their victims. Moroi are born, not made, opening up some interesting ideas
about human evolution (but since this is the lit blog, I’ll leave you to ponder
that one on your own). Buffy has its
share of “good vampires”, but I would hardly put Angel and late-run Spike in
the same category with the Moroi.
And the Strigoi – man, they’re
scary. They share an awful lot in common with Joss’s vampires – soulless
creatures of darkness that kill without remorse or second thought. Mead’s
Strigoi are made (or, as the Strigoi would see it, awakened), either by force
or by choice. A Moroi may willingly cut themselves off from their elemental
magic and lose their soul by killing someone – another Moroi, human, or dhampir
– during feeding. Alternatively – and probably more commonly – a Strigoi may
turn their victim by a mutual drinking of blood. Add in super strength,
inability to be in direct sunlight, and an aversion to silver, and you’ve got a
pretty standard vampire.
But then you have the dhampirs, that
race of half-human, half-vampires that are bred to protect the Moroi and
trained to kill Strigoi. There’s not really a good parallel in traditional vampire
myth, but I couldn’t help but think of them kind of like Slayers, at least in
purpose. Obviously, there’s more than one of them, but killing vampires is a dhampir’s
destiny the same as it was Buffy’s. And that ingrained sense to protect the
physically weaker Moroi that dhampirs have – that feels a lot like a Slayer’s
duty to protect the world from the forces of darkness.
Rose vs. Buffy
Both Buffy and Vampire Academy
are, at the core, coming of age tales for their respective protagonists. Rose
and Buffy each grow so much over the course of their series, and their growth
is one of the forces driving their stories and keeping audiences intrigued.
Additionally, Rose and Buffy are very similar characters, with their respective
creators drawing on a lot of the same archetypes to create these wonderful,
feminine protagonists. For one thing, Buffy and Rose both start their journeys
in a very similar place – one of rebellion. When “Welcome to the Hellmouth”
starts, Buffy is, essentially, on the run from her true identity. After
everything that happened at Hemery High in LA, she doesn’t want to be a Slayer
anymore, and is looking for a fresh start in Sunnydale. The last thing she
wants is to be in the middle of anymore supernatural nonsense. Of course, that
doesn’t last long, and Giles manages to get Buffy to embrace her destiny as the
Slayer.
While
Rose wasn’t rebelling from her destiny as Buffy was, Vampire Academy does begin with Rose and Lissa “on the lam”, trying
to make a go of it in the world outside of St. Vladimir’s. After they’re
brought back, everyone – school administration included – assumes that Rose and
Lissa left the Academy for fun, and that Rose was being incredibly
irresponsible by leaving Lissa with inadequate protection in the outside world.
Additionally, Rose has no problem breaking school rules (and, later, actual
laws – such as breaking an inmate out of a maximum security prison), just as
Buffy knows when rules are made to be broken. Both characters use that
rebellious streak to their advantage, though, rather than letting it drag them
down.
A
sense of duty is also incredibly important to both Buffy and Rose. Over the
course of the first couple of seasons, Buffy struggles a lot with her identity
as a Slayer. For example, in “Prophecy Girl”, Buffy even tries to quit being
the Slayer after finding out about the prophecy that claimed she would face the
Master and die. After these early struggles, she comes to grips with her
destiny, and continues to try to balance her duty with having a somewhat normal
life. Whereas season 1 Buffy was so afraid of death that she wanted to run
away, season 5 Buffy is willing to sacrifice herself without a moment’s
hesitation to save the world.
Rose,
on the other hand, doesn’t struggle nearly as much with her sense of duty as
Buffy does early in the series. Rose has grown up knowing what she was made
for, so to speak. As a dhampir, she doesn’t have the luxury of a normal life –
protecting Moroi is her life. Had Buffy grown up having the Slayer mythos that
instilled in her, I think she would have turned out much the same (kind of like
Kendra, in a way) as Rose. There’s a huge difference between growing up with
the expectations Rose had and being thrust into all of it at 15 the way Buffy
was. That doesn’t mean that Rose isn’t searching for some normalcy in her life,
though. She knows she is meant to be a Guardian, Lissa’s guardian, but she
still wants so badly to have a sense of normalcy in her relationship with
Dimitri, a balance it appears she finds at the end of Last Sacrifice.
What
hits me the hardest about both characters, though, is how far they are willing
to go to give others the protection they need. Part of it is their sense of
duty, to be sure, but a huge part of the sacrifices both Rose and Buffy are
willing to make come from a place of love. Granted, Buffy kills Angel at the
end of “Becoming, Part 2” primarily to save the world, but she has a defining
moment when Angelus kills Jenny (“Passion”). It’s not until that episode that
Buffy realizes the real consequences of allowing Angelus to live. It’s not just
about how Buffy feels anymore – her friends are in serious danger as long as
Angelus is targeting them to get to Buffy. Rose goes through something similar
with Dimitri (which I’ll discuss at length below), but her resolve isn’t so
much to protect her friends, but to give Dimitri the peace she knows he’d want.
Nevertheless, both Buffy and Rose must sacrifice their “true loves” for the
greater good.
Finally,
Buffy and Rose share a similar sense of humor, and both are able to make jokes
and trade quips even in the direst situations. There’s something a little more
rough around the edges about Rose, though, that reminds me a lot of Faith,
without the murderous tendencies and severe mental instability, of course. Rose
is almost like a perfect combination of the best parts of Buffy and Faith’s
personalities. There aren’t nearly as many pop culture references the
protagonist’s vocabulary in Vampire
Academy as there are in Buffy,
but I think that’s owing to differing mediums. A television show, in a lot of
ways, becomes dated much more quickly than a novel. Even if a show is devoid of
pop culture references, the costuming alone will date the show. Books, on the
other hand, are much easier to make timeless, so it makes sense that Mead
doesn’t want to pigeonhole herself by making a ton of pop culture references.
Dimitri vs. Angel
Before I get too far with this comparison, I
do want to point out that I am hopelessly in love with Dimitri Belikov. I’ve
been known to develop unhealthy attachments to fictional characters, but there
have only been three (before Dimitri) that really stole my heart – Harry Potter’s Sirius Black, The Dark Tower’s Roland Deschain, and Stargate’s Daniel Jackson. And just when
I thought there was no room in my heart for another fictional crush, I met
Dimitri. Honestly, it’s like Mead took all the best qualities of Sirius (loyalty
and bravery), Roland (sense of purpose and fairness), and Daniel (honor and
passion) and rolled them all up into one amazing character. Dimitri is perfect,
and I love him.
One of the strongest correlations I
noticed while reading the Vampire Academy
series is how similar Dimitri’s character arc is to Angel’s. Both characters
are focused on doing what is right, though their motivation differs. For Angel,
helping Buffy is an attempt to atone for his past sins. He did so many horrible
things as Angelus, and after being cursed with his soul, he feels the weight of
each of those awful deeds. Angel is a walking contradiction – a vampire with a
soul – but his good deeds are not wholly by choice. I think that’s really
important to Angel’s story. Yes, he had the choice to clean up his act and join
forces with the Slayer, but he didn’t do it because it was the “right” thing to
do. Instead, Angel becomes good because he’s forced to have a conscious and
seeing Buffy for the first time sparks something within him. Eventually,
though, Angel does find that sense of “right”, and fights for the side of good,
even becoming a Champion for the light on Angel.
For
Dimitri, on the other hand, every single one of his actions is out of a sense
of duty and a desire to do the right thing. Any course of action that might not
be wholly “right” is agonizing for him, as evidenced by his hesitancy to admit
his feelings for Rose and, later, by his desire not to take Rose away from
Adrian. After Dimitri is saved from his Strigoi state by Lissa, he becomes much
more obsessed with doing the right thing. For someone so principled, so
disciplined, and so honorable, having committed all those terrible acts takes a
tremendous toll on him. I think that’s what makes Dimitri such an interesting
character for me, especially compared to Angel. Dimitri is good because that’s
who he is; Angel is good because of circumstances he’s thrown into. That makes
a huge difference, even though both characters act with honorable intentions.
And then, of course, there’s the
part where both Angel and Dimitri turn into bloodthirsty, soulless monsters. When
Angel loses his soul, it’s rough, and you can’t help but feel for Buffy. Sex ed
can cover so many consequences of teenage sexual activity, but your boyfriend
turning into a monster isn’t one of them. My problem, though, with Angelus, is
that I like him too much. I like regular Angel okay, don’t get me wrong, but
there’s something about Angelus that’s so much cooler (especially when he
interacts with Spike – that’s the best). I suppose that’s the root of my issue
with Angel as a character – he’s just not that interesting. Yes, Buffy loves
him and losing him (first when he turns into a vampire, then when she kills
him, and yet again when he leaves Sunnydale) is rough on her, but he doesn’t
make her a better person or a better Slayer. So, as much as I cried along with
Buffy each time she loses Angel, my tears weren’t for Angel – I cried because
Buffy was hurting.
But
in Dimitri, Mead created a character that I care about even more than the
protagonist. I love (and identify strongly with) Rose, but Dimitri gets to me
in a way that Angel never, ever could. I’ve got to admit, when Dimitri was
turned Strigoi, I pretty much fell apart. It tore at me for days, days I tell
you. I could not stop thinking about how freaking unfair everything was.
Dimitri and Rose were this close to
their happily ever after, and everything was taken from them in the blink of an
eye. Rose says it herself – she and Dimitri complement each other perfectly.
Dimitri makes Rose a better person and a better Guardian, and she does the same
for him. That they strengthen each other makes their relationship that much
better – that much more real – than Buffy and Angel’s, and I think it’s that bond
that got me to connect so much more deeply with their storyline than I ever did
with Buffy and Angel. So, here is one instance where, for me at least, Mead
outperforms Whedon.
I
think I’ve drawn all of the major comparisons between Dimitri and Angel, so
I’ll end this section with one final thought. As I finished Shadow Kiss, where Dimitri is turned
Strigoi, distraught as I was, I kept thinking “but Angel got better.” And,
every time I thought that over the course of the next couple of books, I had to
remind myself that Joss Whedon’s work is not the basis for all modern vampire
mythos. Just because Willow was able to restore Angel’s curse didn’t mean that Rose
would find some way to fix Dimitri. I think my lingering doubts were equal
parts Whedon Effect and my refusal to believe that Dimitri was really gone.
And, apparently, sometimes Whedon-induced hope isn’t all that ill founded after
all – everything can work out all
right in the end.
Female Role Models
Ultimately, both Mead and Whedon present protagonists
that are exceptionally strong female role models. Both Rose and Buffy have a
lot of integrity, a deep sense of honor, and they hold themselves to higher
standards than those around them. When they fall below those standards – like
Buffy running away from the Master or Rose breaking Adrian’s heart – they feel
bad about it. It goes back to what I said in the last blog entry about asking
“did I do the right thing?” These kinds of questions make Rose and Buffy better
characters, and guilt only serves to make them stronger.
What stands out most strongly to me,
though, is that neither Rose nor Buffy see themselves as a victim of
circumstance. It’s far too easy for people in difficult situations to sit back
and ask “why is this happening to me?” The problem with the victim mentality is
two-fold. First, it encourages inaction. If all of these bad things are just
“happening” to you, why should you bother to better your situation or find a
way to fight back. Additionally, seeing yourself as the victim is very egocentric,
like the universe has nothing better to do than rain on your parade. And, to be
sure, a lot of bad things happen to both Rose and Buffy. But, each time
something turns their world upside down, they do something about it. Rose can’t
sit idly by after Dimitri is turned Strigoi or after she’s accused of murdering
Tatiana – she has to do something to make it better, to make it right. Buffy
doesn’t let the Master, Angelus, or Glory end the world – even when it feels
like a personal attack against her or her family – she stands up and fights.
And
that’s what makes Rose and Buffy such excellent role models. When everything is
crashing down around them, they don’t give up, even if they want to. They both
lose (and then regain) their boyfriends, but they don’t sit down in the middle
of the forest and have a good cry about it (a la Bella Swan). It would have
been so easy for both Buffy and Rose to run away from their problems, but they
don’t. Even when Buffy does run away, at the end of season 2, she comes back
ready to pick up the pieces and do her duty (just like Rose returning to take
her guardian exam after hunting down Dimitri). It’s not about the bad things
that happen to you – it’s about how you react to awful circumstances that show
what kind of person you are.
Ok,
I think I’m done. Really, this time.
Mischief Managed,
Slim Pearl
Silver-Feather
Currently Reading:
Nothing! I’m on a self-imposed hiatus until I can get caught up with this blog!
Books
Read in 2012: 19
No comments:
Post a Comment