Ah, I've been waiting for this one to get published.
What, I didn't mention I had written another contribution elsewhere?
Surprise! Heh heh.
If you mosey on down to VampChix (VC), you'll notice my contribution, which was as requested by Michele Hauf.
In "Just a Quick One", I said I'd explain my "amateur vampirologist" tag at some future point. The blog entry I submitted does just that.
However, just as with my previous contribution elsewhere, some formatting errors seemed to have crept in. Except, in this case, it's also had a few other things snuck in, too.
Time to dissect.
Firstly, I am referred to in the intro as a "self-proclaimed Vampirologist." Ok, fair label. After all, I do refer to myself as one. But I thought the studying vampires bit was self-evident. Vampirology, after all, isn't exactly an established science. There's no real formal qualification to make you one. As Jay Stevenson notes in The Complete Idiot's Guide to Vampires (Indianapolis, IN: Alpha, 2002):
Nor did I originally include an Amazon link in, "When I got to high school, I found a copy of John Skipp and Craig Spektor's Fright Night novelisation (1985)". Didn't put one in this - "I later read Bram Stoker's Dracula (1897) [...]" - either.
More Amazon links magically turn up in the following paragraph:
Something went haywire on VC, in which this...
All said and done, it's one of my favourite blog entries. Hope you like it too!
What, I didn't mention I had written another contribution elsewhere?
Surprise! Heh heh.
If you mosey on down to VampChix (VC), you'll notice my contribution, which was as requested by Michele Hauf.
In "Just a Quick One", I said I'd explain my "amateur vampirologist" tag at some future point. The blog entry I submitted does just that.
However, just as with my previous contribution elsewhere, some formatting errors seemed to have crept in. Except, in this case, it's also had a few other things snuck in, too.
Time to dissect.
Firstly, I am referred to in the intro as a "self-proclaimed Vampirologist." Ok, fair label. After all, I do refer to myself as one. But I thought the studying vampires bit was self-evident. Vampirology, after all, isn't exactly an established science. There's no real formal qualification to make you one. As Jay Stevenson notes in The Complete Idiot's Guide to Vampires (Indianapolis, IN: Alpha, 2002):
Unlike demonology, which once enjoyed a certain degree of official support from the Church, vampirology has no major institutional underpinnings outside of fan clubs and research societies (28).Next up, the following portion of my blog entry for VC...
Soon after, I began devouring all I could on the subject. A few books that I particularly enjoyed at this time were Lynn Myring's Vampires, Werewolves & Demons (1979), Colin and Jacqui Hawkins' Shriek! A Compendium of Witches, Vampires and Spooks (1985) and I even attempted to wade my way through Paul Barber's Vampires, Burial, and Death: Folklore and Reality (1988), even if a lot of it went over my head....was interspersed with Amazon links I didn't originally supply.
Nor did I originally include an Amazon link in, "When I got to high school, I found a copy of John Skipp and Craig Spektor's Fright Night novelisation (1985)". Didn't put one in this - "I later read Bram Stoker's Dracula (1897) [...]" - either.
More Amazon links magically turn up in the following paragraph:
At this time, I was also buying and borrowing non-fiction vampire works. I got Manuela Dunn-Mascetti's Vampire: The Complete Guide to the World of the Undead (1994) for my thirteenth birthday. Later, it'd be accompanied by works like Matthew Bunson's Vampire: The Encyclopædia (1993) and J. Gordon Melton's The Vampire Book: Encyclopedia of the Undead (1994).The link for Tales from the Cryptkeeper, should have led you here, instead of a dead link.
Something went haywire on VC, in which this...
Now, I should state, that I didn't necessarily join it because I actually believed in Manchester's claims (or in vampires, in general), but it served its purpose. However, when it came to discussing certain matters on the Highgate Vampire case, I found my voice being somewhat restricted, so I founded my own forum to discuss it. This would later lead to a blog of the same name....was rendered as this:
Now, I should state, that I didn't necessarily join it because I actually believed in Manchester's claims (or in vampires, in general), but it served its purpose. However, when it came to discussing certain matters on the Highgate Vampire case , I found my voice being somewhat restricted, so I founded my own forum http://wampyrinhighgate.multiply.com/journal/item/31 to discuss it. This would later lead to a blog of the same name http://dawwih.blogspot.com/ .Something similar happened with another paragraph that went from this...
This, in turn, led me to a blog by Danish vampirologist, Niel K. Petersen. We both shared similar interests in vampire folklore and classic vampire studies. His blog was part of the reason I started my own, Diary of an Amateur Vampirologist....to this:
This, in turn, led me to a blog http://magiaposthuma.blogspot.com/ by Danish vampirologist, Niel K. Petersen. We both shared similar interests in vampire folklore and classic vampire studies. His blog was part of the reason http://doaav.blogspot.com/2008/07/just-quick-one.html I started my own, Diary of an Amateur Vampirologist .And lastly, I didn't originally include an Amazon link in Martin V. Riccardo's name.
All said and done, it's one of my favourite blog entries. Hope you like it too!
No comments:
Post a Comment