Picture, if you will, the Lady Igraine kneeling naked before a stone hearth. She dabs her forehead with a fragrant mixture of herbs and oils, whispers the arcane words and stares into the flames. The image of Uther Pendragon appears, hunched over a leather war map. Suddenly, his head snaps up, eyes fixed in a thousand-yard stare as he sees the disembodied vision of his Lady. Igraine has risked her life to send her soul out of her body and across the vast expanse of distance and time to warn her love of Gorlois' impending ambush.

Now picture this:

Lady Igraine kneeling before the stone hearth, typing furiously on her iPhone.
Igraine: Uther, GTFO!!!
Uther: New phone, who dis?
Igraine: (.)(.)
Uther: Send nudes.
Igraine: Srsly?
Uther: ...
Igraine: Just GTFO. Gorlois is coming to kick your ass.
Uther: LOLZ. K, thx
Igraine: smdh

In “Excalibur”, Lady Igraine risks forbidden magic to save her lover. Today that’s called Skype. Basically the same thing, right?!?

I'm writing a series of books that gives a medical (albeit fictional) explanation for a disease that has given rise to the myth of vampires (and eventually, zombies, ghouls and who knows what else). My question is, does a logical, scientific answer to an age-old legend kill the romanticism of it? That mysticism that is so alluring to readers? In my mind, it makes the idea more plausible, and therefore more attainable, if transforming into a slavering bacon monster is your thing (cause it sure is mine). But is the vampire’s bite more alluring than, say, the mosquito’s, if it accomplishes the same thing (eternal bacon monster status)?

I have to admit, Merlin’s crones gathered around a cauldron and spying on his enemies has more appeal than the lot of them stalking Instagram and Facebook to gather info.