Interview with a Vampire Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

RAMSEY CAMPBELL » Discussion » Interview with a Vampire « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tony (Tony)
Username: Tony

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 213.122.108.107
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 06:09 pm:   

I got this for £2 the other day, never really used to like it but thought another go might put me straight. A swift gander (yet to watch it properly) makes me think it's time to rejudge it - it looks absolutely stunning on 'old' dvd.
I remember so much excitement and indeed shock at the casting of Cruise, but if I remember right he stole the thing.
It's like Rice's star has waned, now, too, which makes the film feel something of a curio. I absolutely adored the book - read it when I discovered Ramsey, and thought it one of the best things I'd ever read at the time.
Anyone else any thoughts?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.96.253.77
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 07:17 pm:   

I've always liked the film - the sets, direction, and acting are all top notch.

Loved the book when I first read it (at a young age), but can't stand Rice's vampire stuff now.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 88.104.137.65
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 08:23 pm:   

I remember working in The Royal Exchange in Manchester, as an usher, and talking with the actors about if Cruise could play the part. I think he did very well.

Yes. Liked the book when I first read it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kate (Kathleen)
Username: Kathleen

Registered: 09-2009
Posted From: 86.137.108.144
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 08:32 pm:   

I absolutely loved the book when I first read it, despite not being a vampire fan (or a Rice fan). And like many, I couldn't imagine Tom Cruise in the role when I heard he was cast but was very pleased to be proven wrong. I agree completely with Zed - everything is top notch.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

John Forth (John)
Username: John

Registered: 05-2008
Posted From: 82.24.1.217
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 08:41 pm:   

Never read it. I tried one of Rice's other novels a few years ago (Telos?) and thought it was garbage. The film was great fun, though. Just the right side of ridiculous.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.110.163.176
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 09:12 pm:   

Stylish, agreeable hokum with some well-made historical scenes and a few powerful moments Ė 'Just the right side of ridiculous' is right.

At the time it was a postcript to the extended vampire fiction craze. Now, of course, it appears to be a prelude to the second extended vampire craze. Heavens above, if garlic can stop them surely any town with a Pizza Hut provides ample resources for their control. Enough already.

Having said that, 30 Days of Night is due an RCMB revival as well. It rules.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rosswarren (Rosswarren)
Username: Rosswarren

Registered: 11-2009
Posted From: 81.132.146.48
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 09:30 pm:   

I first read it while also listening to Carry on up the charts by the beutiful South and the songs really suited the book
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.26.213.180
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 09:48 pm:   

I thought it was shit.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.96.253.77
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 10:15 pm:   

Having said that, 30 Days of Night is due an RCMB revival as well. It rules.

Hear-hear - I love that film. I was defending it (again) only recently on Facebook.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Protodroid (Protodroid)
Username: Protodroid

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 109.79.91.98
Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 - 11:02 pm:   

I thought the film managed to make something inherently interesting, like vampires, boring, much like NASA did with space travel.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 85.222.86.21
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 10:08 am:   

I' have to disagree, Proto. I thought 30 Nights returned the vampire to his most primeval persona, shedding any semblance of humanity. I think it was unfairly knocked. The film oozes atmosphere.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 85.222.86.21
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 10:08 am:   

I'd
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 194.32.31.1
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 10:50 am:   

Found the book boring at the time, and couldn't understand all the hullabaloo about it, and I positively loathed the film. Anything that turns vampires into pretty romantic figures has always been anathema to me.

I grew up on 'Dracula', 'I Am Legend', 'Salem's Lot' & 'They Thirst' - now that is what I call proper scary vampire horror!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 11:21 am:   

Neil Jordan is one of those directors for me who has never put a foot wrong. I loved the film. Never read any of her books though - and the sequel was complete garbage apart from a rather good soundtrack...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 194.32.31.1
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 11:58 am:   

Neil Jordan has had more peaks and troughs in his career than any other modern director I can think of... I would always make a point of watching anything with his name on it but always with my fingers crossed.

His genre films vary wildly imo:

'The Company Of Wolves' (1984) - one of the Holy Trinity of "best ever" werewolf movies made in the early 80s - you know the other two. For me they represent the cinematic pinnacle of that entire sub-genre and anytime someone tries to defend CGI effects over make-up and animatronics I point them here. The film itself is a visionary distillation of Freudian dream logic on screen using the imagery of fairy-tales to magnificent effect.

'High Spirits' (1988) - rubbish supernatural comedy that is best forgotten by all concerned.

'Interview With The Vampire' (1994) - pompous and overblown romantic tosh that no self-respecting vampire would want to be associated with.

'In Dreams' (1999) - decent but overly familiar supernatural thriller that entertains but fails to stick in the mind. So not great but not bad...

'Ondine' (2009) - haven't seen it but liked the sound of it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.166.117.210
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 12:28 pm:   

You forgot his best work: Angel, Mona Lisa, We're No Angels, The Crying Game, The Butcher Boy...

All excellent films.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 194.32.31.1
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 12:33 pm:   

They are indeed, Zed, but I was only singling out his genre films.

You forgot 'Michael Collins', another great movie, though overshadowed now by the much superior 'The Wind That Shakes The Barley'.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 12:34 pm:   

"one of the Holy Trinity of "best ever" werewolf movies made in the early 80s - you know the other two."

Silver Bullet and My Mom's a Werewolf?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 12:39 pm:   

Is High Spirits the Peter O'Toole comedy? Didn't realise that was Neil Jordan...

The Butcher Boy is definitely a genre film - one of the best psychological horrors of the 90's - also a brilliant brilliant book by Paddy McCabe.

I'm not sure if I've seen In Dreams. I stand by my statement though. I've not seen a neil Jordan film that I haven't liked if not loved (that includes the overblown romantic tosh, as you put it, that is IWAV).
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.166.117.210
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 12:42 pm:   

I'm with you, Weber - Jordan's a very fine director. I was obsessed with Mona Lisa when it forst came out. It's astonishing. The Butcher Boy is a minor masterpiece.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mark West (Mark_west)
Username: Mark_west

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.39.177.173
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 12:49 pm:   

I wasnít overly impressed with the film, as I recall (I seem to remember that Brad Pitt was too whiny for me), though I loved the novel. The Lestat series tapered off considerably though and I donít remember getting through the third book - I havenít read another Rice since.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Protodroid (Protodroid)
Username: Protodroid

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 147.252.230.148
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 01:37 pm:   

Sorry Frank, I was talking about Interview, not 30 Days...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tony (Tony)
Username: Tony

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 213.122.108.107
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 01:43 pm:   

Ugh! It counted for 30 Days, tho, IMHOtep.
Proto - I think the vampires were meant to be dull. It came across in the books. They were how they were partly (mostly) because of the boredom. Hard to convey dramatically, I suppose.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tony (Tony)
Username: Tony

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 213.122.108.107
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 01:44 pm:   

Pitt thought the part whiny, too. He hated it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan (Jonathan)
Username: Jonathan

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.143.178.131
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 01:46 pm:   

Liked the book at the time I read it (I was around 17), but I threw the sequel across the room, it was so fricking whiny.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

John Forth (John)
Username: John

Registered: 05-2008
Posted From: 217.20.16.180
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 03:02 pm:   

Silver Bullet and My Mom's a Werewolf?

Pfft. Teen Wolf 1 and 2, surely!

Haven't gotten around to 30 Days of Night due to my aversion to anything involving Josh Hartnett (I'm also no great lover of Steve Niles' comic work). Worth a look you'd say?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 03:13 pm:   

Howling 5 and 6 even...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 194.32.31.1
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 03:30 pm:   

'The Butcher Boy' is a strong contender for his masterpiece (though I'd still pick 'The Crying Game') but I don't consider it a horror film.

It's a highly disturbing and darkly funny psychological character drama in Stevie world.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan (Jonathan)
Username: Jonathan

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.143.178.131
Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 03:31 pm:   

Loved 30 Days of Night. Really good film.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Bestwick (Simon_b)
Username: Simon_b

Registered: 10-2008
Posted From: 86.24.209.217
Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 08:57 am:   

Interview with the Vampire- loved the film, especially Cruise's line at the end: 'Still whining, Louis? Have you heard enough yet? I've been listening to that for centuries.'

I've read very little Rice, and have a big problem with anything that romanticises vampires. A vampire is essentially a rapist and a killer. Using hypnosis to seduce your victims is basically on the same level as dosing them with Rohypnol. Hearing them whine about how difficult it is being a vampire and trying to claim the status of a persecuted minority... um, basically, fuck off.

Not seen 30 Days yet, though I've heard it's ace.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.110.200.116
Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 09:24 am:   

Well, in theory we're talking about fictional entities. A vampire is not a person with inhumane behaviour patterns. It's an undead creature that preys on humans as a hawk preys on sparrows or a snake on mice. It knows no other possibility. Both sympathy and moral condemnation are irrelevant.

However, the fact that the van Helsing types talk about vampires as 'evil' shows that the myth is ambiguous: when we talk about vampires we are really talking about the people for whom vampires are a metaphor. And at that level, your comment is perfectly fair.

The 'supernatural romance' sub-genre appears to identify vampires as Goths: languid, pale romantics with a death fetish. However, that's a metonym rather than a metaphor, and is driven more by marketing than by creative imagination. Brite doesn't endorse it, for example.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stu (Stu)
Username: Stu

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 86.16.1.76
Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 09:30 am:   

On a lighter note. http://www.the-isb.com/?p=703
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Bestwick (Simon_b)
Username: Simon_b

Registered: 10-2008
Posted From: 86.24.209.217
Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 09:49 am:   

Joel- But vampires were human once, and in many versions of the myth as well as a lot of the fiction, retain some vestige of the original personality. Certainly, the mythology of vampirism is divided on whether the body is brought back to life by a demon or the original soul of the deceased. The former indicates an entity mimicking the original personality. The latter implies a choice has been made by the dead person. It's a blurred line. Vampires can be portrayed as non-human predators, yes, but there's also the (past) connection with humanity and the ambiguity as to how much of what you see is human and how much... other. Of course, a non-supernatural explanation (a la 'I Am Legend') means we can deal with the personality-change aspect a lot more easily.

An ex of mine used to talk about how she wanted to be a vampire (gah.) To me, that's actually a fascist mentality on top of the rest- 'I am superior, I have more right than you to exist...'
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Bestwick (Simon_b)
Username: Simon_b

Registered: 10-2008
Posted From: 86.24.209.217
Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 09:52 am:   

Stu-
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stu (Stu)
Username: Stu

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 86.16.1.76
Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 10:08 am:   

>>An ex of mine used to talk about how she wanted to be a vampire (gah.) To me, that's actually a fascist mentality on top of the rest- 'I am superior, I have more right than you to exist...'

You're sure she didn't just mean that she wanted to rip your throat out with her teeth?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Matthew Fryer (Matthew_fryer)
Username: Matthew_fryer

Registered: 08-2009
Posted From: 90.195.182.189
Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 10:09 am:   

I enjoyed the book at the time, but now Louis does my head in with the whining. The best scenes are when Lestat is having a go at him, like this one...

"You whining coward of a vampire who prowls the night killing alley cats and rats and staring for hours at candles as if they were people and standing in the rain like a zombie until your clothes are drenched and you smell like old wardrobe trunks in attics and have the look of a baffled idiot at the zoo."

Brilliant. People should talk to moody vampires like that more often.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stu (Stu)
Username: Stu

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 86.16.1.76
Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 10:13 am:   

I get annoyed when I see lifestyle books about How To Become a Vampire.

Step 1: Have someone bite open your neck and drain all the blood from your body.

Step 2: There is no step 2 'cos now you're dead you stupid idiot!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Bestwick (Simon_b)
Username: Simon_b

Registered: 10-2008
Posted From: 86.24.209.217
Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 10:36 am:   

>>You're sure she didn't just mean that she wanted to rip your throat out with her teeth?

Come to think of it, that would explain a lot.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 82.17.254.215
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 10:47 am:   

I always read the vampire myth as demonic possession of the soul after the body had physically died. This possession ties the person's soul to their corporal form which can only be stopped from decomposing by drinking the blood of the living, who then, in their turn, becomes vessels for the possessing entity as well. The vampire has to be willingly allowed in by the victim, usually through seduction, and it is this choice that gives the demon power over their soul, until despatched from the corpse by any of the tried and true methods - stake & decapitation, etc...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 82.17.254.215
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 11:02 am:   

I believe it must have started as a simple religious allegory warning against the danger of putting material things of the earth over the higher spiritual plane of existence. The body over the soul. Fire and brimstone preaching and the gullibility of the populace would have done the rest, creating a powerful myth that looks set to run and run...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Bestwick (Simon_b)
Username: Simon_b

Registered: 10-2008
Posted From: 86.24.209.217
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 11:33 am:   

The whole 'willingly allowed' thing is a bit of a blurred line, though, Stevie- with vampires' 'seduction' is usually shown as being a form of hypnosis, then as I said above it's more akin to spiking the victim's drink with Rohypnol. And that's not seduction, it's rape...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 82.17.254.215
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 02:00 pm:   

Yeah, Simon, I believe that line became blurred after the fact due to different literary adaptations broadening out the myth.

Turning the vampire into an even scarier predatory archetype.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.37.199.45
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 02:04 pm:   

Stevie, you might appreciate this remasrk from French historian Michel Foucault:

We have had sexuality since the eighteenth century and sex since the nineteenth. What we had before that was no doubt the flesh.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.166.117.210
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 02:05 pm:   

The earliest versions of the vampire myth - begun in eastern Europe, I think - didn't even feature blood-drinking, "seduction", or stakes through hearts. Those initial creatures were more like ghouls: they dug themselves out of the grave and ate carrion, and they attacked anyone they saw passing by. I recall the method of despatching these things was to drive an iron spike through the mouth, thus nailing them into their coffins. Decapitation, too.

Disease and premature burial seem to be the roots of the vampire myth. Everything else - the need for blood, the garlic, the crucifix, etc - seems to have been invented by the later fictions.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Protodroid (Protodroid)
Username: Protodroid

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 147.252.230.148
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 02:06 pm:   

One Eurpoean legend said you should scatter seeds around the vampire's coffin. He would feel compelled to count them all and by the time he did, the Sun would be coming up.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.166.117.210
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 02:09 pm:   

Yes - I've heard that one. I always liked that.

I imagine a grubby creature hurrying to count the seeds, and when the sun comes up over the horizon he says "Oh, bugger. Not again!" and trudges wearily back into his grave.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 85.222.86.21
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 02:19 pm:   

I find it interesting that of the central to East European countries I've experience of, superstition, ghosts, myths of vampires and such, are considered strictly the domain of the British and the Irish, and of course, Hollywood. They find out interest in horror, and related subjects, to be rather strange. It's one of the things I miss about Britain, the paranormal Britain, whether you believe in such things or not. I mean everybody knows somebody who claims to have had a paranormal experience. Obviously not with vampires, but I guess you get my drift.

Perhaps these countries have had enough of real life horror to want to take much interest in it as cultural trait.

Poland for example has made very few horror films, and try as I might, I have yet to meet one Polish person who knows anybody who claims to have had a paranormal experience.

I don't know if this makes sense, but it's kind of depressing for me.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Huw (Huw)
Username: Huw

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 220.138.162.5
Posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 02:49 pm:   

Frank, you should move to Taiwan - practically everyone here believes in ghosts, spirits and demons!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Protodroid (Protodroid)
Username: Protodroid

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 109.79.63.159
Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2011 - 02:41 am:   

I dunno, Ireland's had a grim history, so I'm not sure if it's real life horror that's the cause. I thought that Eastern Europeans were superstitious - one refused to disturb a gull's nest on the roof of a building I lived in because he said it was bad luck to harm a sea bird. Perhaps he was lying? Brilliant idea for skiving. "Yeah, that door is supposed to look like that. Right angles are bad luck."
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 194.32.31.1
Posted on Monday, March 21, 2011 - 01:03 pm:   

Stevie, you might appreciate this remark from French historian Michel Foucault:

We have had sexuality since the eighteenth century and sex since the nineteenth. What we had before that was no doubt the flesh.


I think Chaucer might have had something to say about that, Joel...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.110.218.127
Posted on Monday, March 21, 2011 - 02:34 pm:   

Stevie, Foucault obviously doesn't mean that there was no fornication! But you won't find Chaucer's characters (or even Shakespeare's) employing the concept of 'sex'. Part of the reason why the Victorians were so repressive was that they had codified the idea of 'sex' as something that could and should be invisible, something whose mention was 'obscene', something that was not part of decent life because it was animal and dirty. Chaucer would have found that attitude quite incomprehensible. He would have said that fornication was 'wrong' if it involved betrayal or mistreatment, but he would not have said it was in itself shameful, because in his time it was merely fornication, it wasn't 'sex'. Does that make the distinction clearer?

It's worth considering that we still have problems when we take 'sex' outide the context of human life and feeling. When a heterosexual couple walk along hand in hand, or kiss in the street, nobody accuses them of shouting from the rooftops that they're having sex together. But when two men, or two women, behave as a couple in public they're often accused of being offensively blatant about their 'sex life'. The implication is that certain types of people make love and are lovers, but others merely have sex.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 194.32.31.1
Posted on Monday, March 21, 2011 - 03:15 pm:   

I'm with you completely, Joel.

Sex is sex and great fun it is too.
Love is love and to know it is to know true happiness in this existence.

Going right back to the Ancient Greeks it is obvious that the human race has always been aware of the distinction between sex (or fornication - one of my Top 10 words) and love, irrespective of "sexuality".

It is our misfortune to live within a period of history that deems public expression of homosexual love as somehow "not right". It is my view that love can never be wrong - unlike fornication lol.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.31.133.89
Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 07:33 am:   

It's the same with wanking. How I lament the days in which it could be performed on street corners. Sigh.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stevie Walsh (Stephenw)
Username: Stephenw

Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 194.32.31.1
Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 10:26 am:   

Ever read 'The Unlimited Dream Company', Gary? I think you'd get a lot out of it!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stu (Stu)
Username: Stu

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 86.24.25.4
Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 11:20 am:   

>>It's the same with wanking. How I lament the days in which it could be performed on street corners. Sigh.

You mean we're not allowed to do that? Thanks for the warning.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Bestwick (Simon_b)
Username: Simon_b

Registered: 10-2008
Posted From: 86.24.209.217
Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 12:12 pm:   

Stu, I think it's still OK in Essex. Actually, it might be mandatory.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 09-2010
Posted From: 86.165.39.12
Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 12:16 pm:   

Hey, I'm a seasoned inhabitant of deepest Essex and I'd advise against it - even here!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Protodroid (Protodroid)
Username: Protodroid

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 109.79.168.153
Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 07:47 pm:   

It's all just a mechanism to move a few cubic centimetres of fluid from one body into another. Surely we can find a way to do this that doesn't involve giant Valantines cards and mini-breaks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 92.232.199.129
Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 09:24 pm:   

Proto, you're clearly and old romantic at heart (not!)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 92.232.199.129
Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 09:24 pm:   

"an" not "and" - I'm a silly billy

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration