Vampirism is so back !!

Riyo Ismail

“Vampire” by Takato Yamamoto, 2006

Now with the new adaptation of “Nosferatu” released and my personal favourite show of all time “Interview with the vampire” being renewed for yet another season, I just want to celebrate the fact that VAMPIRISM IS SO BACK! If vampire media has no fans, it will be because I have died and gone to Jannah, and so allow me a moment to speak on a piece of art that is very dear to me, “Vampire” by Takato Yamamoto. Ngl I kinda forgot about this one until I asked oomf to send me vampire art and they mentioned Yamamoto lmfao, oh well <3 Sorry to younger me who literally had this hidden away on some Pinterest board once upon a time. I guess I forgot my roots (being a bit superficially into gothic art).

Takato Yamamoto is a contemporary artist whose art style is inspired by the Ukiyo-e art movement from the Tokugawa era between the 1600 and 1800s. You’ve probably seen the painting “The Great Wave off Kanagawa”, you know the one everyone’s Tumblr feed drowned in back in ca. 2013 yeah? To this day we still can’t escape it, because tell me why I still see it on random fake asf ads on printed sweatshirts on every corner on the internet... anyways yeah that’s from that same period. Regardless, Yamamoto largely influenced by the more traditional Ukiyo-e art style, mixed with gothic symbolism created this beautiful, haunting piece that evokes a sense of morbid curiosity (to me at least).

This artwork features two figures in an intimate embrace surrounded by lush pillows. One holdingthe other gently after having engaged in a vampiric act (allegedly). Blood spilling from their mouth as well as from the neck of the one being held. There is a softness in the thin brushstrokes, a vulnerability in the nudity and the intimate pose of the two. A vulnerability and softness to which we can juxtapose against both the brutal nature of vampirism, as well as the shameless, unapologetic striking eyes of the one who has just fed on their lover. Through this comparison I interpret a larger narrative around co-existence and entanglement of seemingly opposing forces, virtues and sins. I’ll get back to this later as well.

This piece to me is about lust and tenderness, the eroticism of hunger and bodily desire. To indulge but also to nurture and be nurtured. The “victim” does not look so much a victim rather than a lover perfectly at peace in the arms of their partner in this moment. For all I know they could be strangers. This might just be a one-night stand with someone who ended up being a freak, resulting in an early twink death, quite literally this time. Regardless from what I can sense in this scene, there is no grief in this moment, no rage, disgust or sense of betrayal or terror. Some might say this might actually be due to the blood loss and being near to death or whatever. In the end it really doesn’t matter, there’s peace in death, no?

The fact that Yamamoto depicts the lover (I have decided to interpret them as this yes) to be holding the other still even after having drained the blood. Tells me that in this moment there’s care and tranquillity yet. And perhaps a sense of protectiveness, or possessiveness, because why is the one whose gaze is turned towards us, staring us down... I promise we don’t want that… These challenging eyes are what first awoke an interest for me in this painting. Their glaring light colouring eerie, and unflinching. The eyes read as if they’re asking us wtf we’re looking at and to mind our business. Which would be fair ngl, because why am I here… Idk shit about art. I digress, to me this vampire seems to simultaneously be daring us to keep looking as well as to look away. And personally, I can’t seem to look away without looking back just yet. Another point that exemplifies the way revulsion can be hypnotising in its ugliness. Similar to how beauty and horror may go hand in hand, and as disgust and pleasure do not always exist in opposition to each other but can co-exist to the point where it’s hard to discern where one ends and the other begins. This line of reasoning brings us back to the larger narrative of the entanglement of contrasting concepts.

This piece too feeds in its own way on ideas of love and desire as well as greed. In holy matrimony one takes another as theirs, in sickness and in health, but what if we are the sickness? Furthermore, what does it even mean then to take and to love, are the two synonymous? Would a vampiric act between lovers then be to take another into ourselves, in a way that lends itself to the immoral and unnatural? Perhaps, but in a way that’s too pretty to condemn. Or maybe it’s just me who will forgive ugliness if it’s got a pretty face… Well, me and Yamamoto, I fear pretty privilege might be real asf around here. Matter of fact, in my opinion we need more freak artists like Yamamoto. But be tasteful with it, as Yamamoto is here, depicting the violence of taking in a tender, almost ethereal way. Because what is actually ugly about giving freely, or indulging freely, in a moment of passion and care? To be used for nourishment, to give in, and feed others with all that you have. Giving life, the only thing one truly possesses. What does it mean to perverse what we can agree is a moral act: giving, being charitable, and caring? Perhaps it is only sinful because sometimes our own lives are not considered ours to give. Life being a gift of God and to give away what God has given is surely wicked right? I’m gonna be honest, I don’t really care what’s moral or not when it comes to art like this… but on the other note then, is taking always selfish? When it is nature (for a vampire, stay with me here), taking when it is given, if it gives you life, even if it shortens theirs? When a vampire drains their lover, they are once again doomed to solitude and grief. To follow greed and hunger, and one’s natural inclination towards it might then lead one into the abyss, as greed begets greed. But is a life of repression a life at all and what is love if not at times pleasurable selfishness?

Let me backtrack for a second, I was lying earlier as there is a sense of grief in this, but not from the one we would expect, not from the dying but from the vampire. The under eyes are slightly reddish as if the vampire had cried before or during the act. Grief and greed might also be intertwined then as I imagine the anguish in failing to resist a need so deep it destroys another and nourishes oneself. For me what fascinates me is not really the destruction but the choice. Same as with all vampire media, for me the potential commentary on freedom and repression of one’s nature is where my interest lies. For vampires, choosing to not drink would be to deny themselves. Something is always taken from them regardless of their choice, but they do have a choice. A vampire choosing to not drink blood is just as interesting to me as one who does freely and the one who does begrudgingly while asking for forgiveness for their own existence.

I could go on forever, so I’ll stop myself here. These are always thoughts that stay with me when I consume art with similar themes of vampirism, cannibalism and desire. I think we might be drawn to them because it allows for artistic exploration of what we allow ourselves to want despite morality and ugliness. I don’t know what Yamamoto would think of these questions, nevertheless I end this text by asking for a proper gothic wave in mainstream art, film and literature! plsplspls<333

Was this entire text just excuse for me to yap about the beauty and horror of vampirism? Absolutely, thank you, and you are welcome.