Eh? I picked up a vampire - Vol. 1 Ch. 1 - ch1
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Group Leader
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2019
- Messages
- 112
It died faster than I expected.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2018
- Messages
- 11
A Jiangshi isnt a vampire though?
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2020
- Messages
- 22
@poplartree Jiangshi (僵尸) IS a vampire. the longer term is xixue jiangshi (吸血僵尸, meaning blood-sucking vampire)
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2018
- Messages
- 3,593
@tylurr5:
Eh... I think I get the places where the OP might be coming from here?
First off, I think it's more complicated than that (or at least Wikipedia seems to say the "blood-sucking" bit is a more recent addition, to the extent that's trustworthy), and the original creature is to my understanding if anything at least as much like a zombie as a vampire, and indeed I feel like I've seen the "hopping zombie" more than the "hopping vampire" translation these days.
But furthermore, and more fundamentally, this creature jiangshi is as much a "vampire", as a Japanese kirin is the same as a "unicorn", or the korean dokkaebi a "goblin"—that is to say, there's superficial similarities that caused them to get conflated when translating, but the underlying legends and the creatures described are completely and fundamentally different, even at a glance.
That's really all I had to say, but rambling on a bit further:
Eh... I think I get the places where the OP might be coming from here?
First off, I think it's more complicated than that (or at least Wikipedia seems to say the "blood-sucking" bit is a more recent addition, to the extent that's trustworthy), and the original creature is to my understanding if anything at least as much like a zombie as a vampire, and indeed I feel like I've seen the "hopping zombie" more than the "hopping vampire" translation these days.
But furthermore, and more fundamentally, this creature jiangshi is as much a "vampire", as a Japanese kirin is the same as a "unicorn", or the korean dokkaebi a "goblin"—that is to say, there's superficial similarities that caused them to get conflated when translating, but the underlying legends and the creatures described are completely and fundamentally different, even at a glance.
That's really all I had to say, but rambling on a bit further:
Basically, translations of mythical creature names between highly differing mythologies are both common, and a mess. Some catch-alls like "demons" as "the bad scary things" translate half-decently well between some cultures, but the more specific ones like this usually are pretty awkward.
...But then, of course, after the translations sometimes people mix the legends together because, well, why not. So for example eastern and western dragons both cultures more or less recognize as "dragons" now, even if they're noticeably different. So one can't say firmly "this thing is this thing, and not that thing", and apply it in all cases, either.
It's all made up, without rules, after all.
...But then, of course, after the translations sometimes people mix the legends together because, well, why not. So for example eastern and western dragons both cultures more or less recognize as "dragons" now, even if they're noticeably different. So one can't say firmly "this thing is this thing, and not that thing", and apply it in all cases, either.
It's all made up, without rules, after all.
Similar threads
