Blog Posts on Dracula
Post One (originally posted at http://gothquest.wordpress.com/stoker/ on October 17, 2013):
The first few chapters of Stoker’s “Dracula” focus mainly on two
characters: Jonathan Harker (a solicitor) and Dracula (the count). In this short
amount of material, the reader’s perspective of the relationship between Harker
and Dracula changes drastically. It starts off as a friendly relationship; they
spend a lot of time together, and chat all night. But Harker realizes he is
being held hostage when he notices that Dracula is doing what Harker thought all
along the servants were doing; making Harker’s bed, laying the table, making
dinner, etc.
Why does Dracula pretend that there are servants in the castle? Why doesn’t
he just tell Harker that he is living alone?
To answer this question, we need to examine Dracula’s motives. What are his
motives? All we know is that he wants Harker to stay with him and he wants
Harker’s boss and loved ones to think he is alive and leaving the castle, even
going so far as to have him send letters stating when he is leaving the castle
and arriving at the train station, and when he is leaving the train station for
home.
Later on in the beginning chapters, Dracula steals Harker’s clothes and
pretends to be him as he makes a “dinner-run” to the village. He comes back with
a baby in a bag, and gives it to the three women that mysteriously appear in
front of Jonathan. Thinking Jonathan is asleep, he tells the women that they are
not allowed to touch Harker until he is “done with him.”
Which brings us back to the question: what are Dracula’s motives? I
personally think that Dracula is going to take on Harker’s identity and go back
to London to wreak vampire havoc. This would explain why he would steal
Jonathan’s clothes, and why he would kill him and make sure his loved ones knew.
This theory is solidified by the scene where Harker finds Dracula in a coffin,
obviously having just eaten, looking perfectly youthful and alive as opposed to
his old, haggard self that appeared before.
But why would he need to take on another man’s identity? Why wouldn’t he just
appear as Dracula? Possibly because once he’s finished with whatever it is he’s
planning on doing, he’ll go back to living alone (or rather, with three
mysterious vampire women) in his castle and the only people who will suspect him
are the local villagers.
But this still doesn’t answer the question of why Dracula would pretend to
have servants, even going so far as to make his bed and cook him dinner.
Dracula, in my opinion, is doing this to give Jonathan a false sense of
security. Which is obviously completely unnecessary, because Dracula has
complete control over everything that goes on in and around the castle (and even
possibly in the nearby village). But Dracula is obviously not a mindless killer,
he’s an evil with immense intelligence. So he could be studying Jonathan so as
to better impersonate him (or to better impersonate an Englishman), or he could
be, for lack of a better phrase, “playing with his food.”
Post Two (Originally posted at http://gothchat.wordpress.com/stoker-middle/ in response to a post in the same place):
I love the idea of shades of grey in Dracula. From my perspective, shades of
grey between life and death correspond with shades of grey between good and
evil. Although in the novel there is a definite good and a definite evil, many
characters blur the line. For example, Mina is a young woman who we as readers
entirely trust. She is pure, intelligent, and has a maternal instinct to take
care of everyone around her. But when the count attempts to change her, we don’t
know what to think. Is she a vampire? She is obviously rejecting the evil that
is trying to take her over.
As far as Van Helsing goes, however, I can’t say
that I agree. In my opinion, Van Helsing is one of the few characters the
characters as well as we as readers can trust. He does have a mysterious past of
which we know very little about, but that doesn’t make him untrustworthy. All we
know is that he’s Dutch, but has a German accent, he had a son who died but
we’re not sure how, and his wife went insane after their son’s death but he
refused to leave her saying “with my poor wife dead to me, but alive by Church’s
law, though no wits, all gone, even I, who am faithful husband to this
now-no-wife …” But it’s true, we have no idea how he knows what he does about
vampires.
The first few chapters of Stoker’s “Dracula” focus mainly on two
characters: Jonathan Harker (a solicitor) and Dracula (the count). In this short
amount of material, the reader’s perspective of the relationship between Harker
and Dracula changes drastically. It starts off as a friendly relationship; they
spend a lot of time together, and chat all night. But Harker realizes he is
being held hostage when he notices that Dracula is doing what Harker thought all
along the servants were doing; making Harker’s bed, laying the table, making
dinner, etc.
Why does Dracula pretend that there are servants in the castle? Why doesn’t
he just tell Harker that he is living alone?
To answer this question, we need to examine Dracula’s motives. What are his
motives? All we know is that he wants Harker to stay with him and he wants
Harker’s boss and loved ones to think he is alive and leaving the castle, even
going so far as to have him send letters stating when he is leaving the castle
and arriving at the train station, and when he is leaving the train station for
home.
Later on in the beginning chapters, Dracula steals Harker’s clothes and
pretends to be him as he makes a “dinner-run” to the village. He comes back with
a baby in a bag, and gives it to the three women that mysteriously appear in
front of Jonathan. Thinking Jonathan is asleep, he tells the women that they are
not allowed to touch Harker until he is “done with him.”
Which brings us back to the question: what are Dracula’s motives? I
personally think that Dracula is going to take on Harker’s identity and go back
to London to wreak vampire havoc. This would explain why he would steal
Jonathan’s clothes, and why he would kill him and make sure his loved ones knew.
This theory is solidified by the scene where Harker finds Dracula in a coffin,
obviously having just eaten, looking perfectly youthful and alive as opposed to
his old, haggard self that appeared before.
But why would he need to take on another man’s identity? Why wouldn’t he just
appear as Dracula? Possibly because once he’s finished with whatever it is he’s
planning on doing, he’ll go back to living alone (or rather, with three
mysterious vampire women) in his castle and the only people who will suspect him
are the local villagers.
But this still doesn’t answer the question of why Dracula would pretend to
have servants, even going so far as to make his bed and cook him dinner.
Dracula, in my opinion, is doing this to give Jonathan a false sense of
security. Which is obviously completely unnecessary, because Dracula has
complete control over everything that goes on in and around the castle (and even
possibly in the nearby village). But Dracula is obviously not a mindless killer,
he’s an evil with immense intelligence. So he could be studying Jonathan so as
to better impersonate him (or to better impersonate an Englishman), or he could
be, for lack of a better phrase, “playing with his food.”
Post Two (Originally posted at http://gothchat.wordpress.com/stoker-middle/ in response to a post in the same place):
I love the idea of shades of grey in Dracula. From my perspective, shades of
grey between life and death correspond with shades of grey between good and
evil. Although in the novel there is a definite good and a definite evil, many
characters blur the line. For example, Mina is a young woman who we as readers
entirely trust. She is pure, intelligent, and has a maternal instinct to take
care of everyone around her. But when the count attempts to change her, we don’t
know what to think. Is she a vampire? She is obviously rejecting the evil that
is trying to take her over.
As far as Van Helsing goes, however, I can’t say
that I agree. In my opinion, Van Helsing is one of the few characters the
characters as well as we as readers can trust. He does have a mysterious past of
which we know very little about, but that doesn’t make him untrustworthy. All we
know is that he’s Dutch, but has a German accent, he had a son who died but
we’re not sure how, and his wife went insane after their son’s death but he
refused to leave her saying “with my poor wife dead to me, but alive by Church’s
law, though no wits, all gone, even I, who am faithful husband to this
now-no-wife …” But it’s true, we have no idea how he knows what he does about
vampires.