thought of FK during a philosophy/theology lecture

A Great Courses professor I enjoy mentions in a certain lecture that one of the things he wants us to keep in mind about the ancient world, especially classical Greece and Rome, is that they defined humanity in contrast to beasts, while we post-modern types define humanity in contrast to machines. That is, he says, the classical world generally thought of the essence of humanity as the rationality and reflection that enable and uplift self-control, as animals cannot, while today often presumes the essence of humanity is the emotion and instinct that enable and uplift self-expression, as robots cannot.

Re-listening to this lecture recently, I thought about that difference in FK terms.

Nick, of course, is very concerned with the definition and understanding of humanity. To a large extent, his perspective has come to be the ancient one, that humanity is the opposite of the beast -- and in his case, the vampire is the beast. His Christian cultural heritage understands this as grace rather than rationality, but it's a similar contrast. What is human is other than the beast.

Lacroix, on the other hand, argues to give in to instinct and inclination. His position seems to be the post-modern one defining the correct way of being as individual satisfaction and expression of desire and perspective. What is best is other than the machine.

Alternatively, the first-season structure would put Nick and his quest for humanity in the middle, as the seeker, with Natalie and Janette on either side, suggesting the not-a-beast and not-a-machine perspectives, respectively, yet in a less-binary way that opens the possibility that Nick's understanding of humanity -- and of what it represents in FK -- could, maybe should, ultimately partake of both.

Anyway. Just thinking. :-)