Why are there so many Draculas

I have heard and see stories and movies either related or about Dracula, but I haven’t until this class actually read the novel Dracula. From what I have heard and see from both experiences prior to the novel, the legend of Dracula has been around for a while and is continuously being retold and changed like many other well know stories throughout history. Whether it is Romeo and Julie, Pride and Prejudice, Sherlock Homes, and many others that still peeks the reader’s and audience’s interest and imagination. These stories have certainly peeked my interest and imagination. My favorites have been Sherlock Homes and so far, Dracula as well.

Dracula was indeed a spooky for the first four chapters and continues to do so. Then again, what is there anything about Dracula that isn’t spooky. Despite the different versions of Dracula, some common themes and characteristics remain purity much the same. His desire and need for human blood, his scary appears from his sharp teeth and tall, shadowy, undead like figure. And of course, his and other vampire’s weaknesses, from sunlight, crosses, etc. There are differences in the look and appearances whether it is seeing him on a video screen or imaging him as you read. In the 1931 Dracula and in the 1948 Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein 1948, he is in the time-period of the 1930’s and 1940’s and dressed in the typical with black and white suite rather than just the black cape.

My favorite versions of Dracula are from the movies Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein 1948, mostly because I grew up watch the comedies of Abbott and Costello films. But for the more actions packed ones are Van Helsing 2004 and Dracula Untold. Both did a good job of maintaining the well-known characteristics and look of Dracula, but also did well in changing some things about him, but for the most part, the story he is involved in. In most stories, Dracula is portrait as the villain and Van Helsing is the hunter that fights against him, as well as, in the novel in our reading. I liked how in Dracula untold, it puts him on a more human part of him and a good side to him as well. Regardless on how the story of Dracula, which is mostly based on fiction, changes from version to version. It continues to interest the spooky and horror of the audience’s imagination.  

Oh vampires...

Ok so I am a huge Halloween fan and some people think i'm crazy to like Halloween more than Christmas, but I was a little excited when I saw we would read Dracula. I was a little worried at the same time because I had never read Dracula before, so I didn't know what to expect in terms of how it was written. I must say I was a bit surprised at just how much i've been enjoying it so far. I think what I enjoyed the most about the first chapter was when Harker was in the hotel and the innkeeper's wife put the crucifix around him. I laughed at this part because I could totally see my mom or grandma doing that. 

However, the details in these first few chapters that described the count made me picture exactly what he looked like at that moment. I have to admit that as I was reading, I couldn't help but compare the reading to Twilight and Hotel Transylvania. For one the scene where Harker is outside of the castle made me think of Hotel Transylvania and how nonchalant the guy was about seeing Dracula, which definitely wasn't the case in the book. I guess I really am apart of the vampire fandom deep down inside.

Old Age Dracula

Dracula is essentially an old vampire that attacked people for blood. I haven’t encountered Dracula in the reading form at all before this course. I have seen a really old movie of Dracula however where he turns into a bat and takes in pretty women in order to taste their blood. Who doesn’t know about Dracula though? He’s in very modern forms of media and if people don’t know exactly who he is they know similar kinds of  vampires like Dracula such as vampire diaries, count chocula, and true blood. The media today has sexualized vampires and their no longer scary creatures of the night, but beings that walk among us whom we could fall in love with.

                                                   

The story starts off with Jonathon Harker. He overly criticizes every piece of information that he come in contact with from the spices that people use in food to the way that Dracula appears physically. Every sign is telling Jonathon Harker to turn the opposite way and run, but instead he waits until the last possible second. Even the townspeople are scared for him and tell him not to leave. Jonathons encounter with Dracula seems like a set up since his friend knew Dracula and purposefully sent him to Dracula.

I was expecting a lot more violence and blood sucking. The closest thing that I got to something horrible happening  as a reader was Dracula scaling down a wall and threatening Johnathon. What perplexes me is why Dracula would allow Jonathon to leave. It was easy prey.

I find the journal entries were interesting. The detail in which he describes people made him seem idiodic. In situations where I’m not sure what’s going on and I feel uneasy, I find it best to follow my gut instinct. However, I feel that Johnathon ignoring signs makes the reader more engaged because I just want to shake him and tell him wtf and point him in the right direction. But, we are reading a book of horror so I guess there has to be a little bit of ignorance. 

Dracula: Not What I Expected

So this is the first time I'm reading Dracula, and I have to say that it's not really what I was expecting. To be honest, I'm not sure what I was expecting, but narrative through letters definitely was not it. It's interesting though, and the Count, even though he is eloquent and whatnot, just oozes disgusting to the point that his words are tainted as well. That was well done.
The appearance of the Count himself was slightly unexpected as well. When I think "Count Dracula" I think a man in his 30's ish, who is darkly attractive, but instead we get an old man, with a bird-like face, and hairy palms. At least I was right about the strength, shapeshifting, and mirrors bit.

I have to say, I really enjoyed the first chapter, before we even meet the Count. Here we have Jonathan Harker, who's just loving the journey, and then when he gets to the Golden Krone Hotel, things just progressively get darker and creepier and the carriage ride is just all sorts of sitting on the edge of your seat, waiting for something bad to happen. 
I have a couple of questions though. What was up with the attitude of the other passengers in the carriage? They seemed excited to see the Count, but the driven I can't tell. It seemed as if he arrived at the meeting point an hour early (if I'm reading that correctly) to come up with the excuse that the Count's messenger wasn't there. Was this the correct reading? Also, later on, when Lucy starts sleepwalking, why is she sleepwalking? Did I miss something? It seems like it's the Count's influence, but he hadn't arrived in London just yet, so I'm not sure how to interpret that. Do we get answers later or did I read that wrong? Send help.

Dracula

            Like the rest of the topics we’ve read/discussed about—aside from Romeo and Juliet, Dracula is a popular subject with which I’ve never actually read the original story of, so I was excited to read this novel for our class. Naturally, I’d assume we will have all heard about this idea of vampires (much like zombies and werewolves), whether it be portrayed within a movie, TV show, fanfiction, you name it. So when details about Jonathan Harker receiving a garlic charm from one of the locals or not seeing Count Dracula in a mirror was interesting to just have these little, but commonly-known, features about vampires being mentioned.

            I’ll be blunt here by saying that I’m not the most observant person (at least not in terms of reading). There were some things discussed from our previous topics that I thought to myself, “I probably would’ve never seen it that way.” Well, either me being unobservant or just not a big reader to see things from different perspectives. When I was reading Dracula, I picked up on some of the basic plot that was occurring when Harker was staying at Dracula’s prison… But when they were talking about the history of Transylvania, the business side of Harker’s visit, and the questions Dracula had on basic societal notions, I felt a bit lost. Maybe just too much information at one time? But I honestly wasn’t sure if there were subtle cues to pick up on, or I was merely trying to better understand minuscule details irrelevant to the story as a whole.

            Nonetheless, it’s an enjoyable story so far, and I am intrigued to see what others think to possibly better understand the story as a whole. Because with all of the journal entries from different people at different times, I tried going back to understand what happened in their lives in a previous chapter in order to make connections (although I’m still not sure). Also, was there a reason we read Mina’s journal entry for August 1 early? Meaning there were journal entries for July 24 and August 1 in one chapter, then starting from July 26 in another chapter… Maybe I just missed something but that part struck me as a “Wait, what?” moment. As a note, I don’t mean for this blog post to sound like I’m just saying I’m confused about this part, that part, these other parts… That was kind of how I felt afterwards, so I’ll looking forward to our discussions.

No more Edward Cullen

               This is now my second time reading through Dracula, I read it my freshman or sophomore year in high school, and I’m starting to remember why I like it so much. It’s a very interesting way to write a story by making it a series of different types of notes and writings, instead of having a narrator talking about everything that is going on. Having a bunch of separate people narrating everything that is going on adds another dimension to the story because we can get behind the thoughts of the different characters, and how they feel about the Count. The only bad things about the story are that there are certain things that make the story boring to read, the times going on and on about random things and some unnecessary writings that we don’t need to continue the story.

                Even though the novel isn’t considered a mystery but instead a horror, it still reads as a modern-day suspense story or thriller. I always really liked Dracula’s character in this story, he makes me feel somewhat uneasy and uncomfortable, knowing what he is and the way he talks to people and interacts with those around him. Stoker just does such a great job in creating this super creepy and suspenseful character that is the best way to show a vampire. If you think about who Stoker took inspiration from, Vlad the Impaler, it makes Dracula even that much creepier. Vlad the Impaler was someone who would put his enemies up on stakes in front of his castle, scaring those that would come to talk to him and make sure that no one else would even dare to mess with those in Vlad’s kingdom. This makes the Count ten times creepier, knowing that there was someone that did something like things that are in the book, and that there are accounts of his terrors.

               This is the real way that vampires and werewolves should be portrayed, none of that Edward and Jacob crap that there is now. Vampires should be creepy, Dracula always makes the situation suspenseful, and they should be something that people do not want to be around, avoiding them at all times. Having someone that is as creepy as Dracula creates a much better dynamic for the story, people are so afraid of him and do not want to go near him at all.

Dracula...

So Dracula.
I had never read it before now and didn't quite know what to expect by it. Least to say, I haven't been disappointed per say. It had a slow start, an achingly slow start. But then I started caring about whether Jonathon actually got away, and if he lived. I didn't know quite how to feel about the doctor's passages at first, but upon a second reading, I also found his patient to be quite amusing. The concept of gaining life based on the number of lives he had consumed was so... Dracula.

I also liked reading where Dracula detailed his family history to Jonathon, and reading all of the footnotes along the way. Some of the places where the "slips" were pointed out, I wouldn't have really noticed without the footnotes at first read.

Plus, this book gives us the opportunity to talk about Transylvania, and I love castles.

I remember growing up, the one Dracula I can remember is Count from Sesame street, and an episode of Scooby-Doo with a vampire, but honestly, I can't remember many others until Hotel Transylvania came out not long ago.  I'm looking forward to reading the rest, it should prove to be a really interesting book, and probably the only horror story I really like.

Mr. Dracula Goes to London

Everyone has heard of Dracula at some point. There's been like, a thousand adaptations/parodies, and I've even seen some of them- but I've never actually read the book, before now. And honestly, it wasn't quite what I expected.

Admittedly, some parodies are stranger than others.

And some of the really strange ones are some of the best ones.

In my opinion, anyway.

I always sort of knew Dracula was a horror story, but somehow it never quite clicked until now. Reading through it and seeing some of the gruesome descriptions, all the death, and the supernatural weirdness just sort of made me realize, 'Oh yeah, this is totally a horror novel.' However, I'd have to say the horror itself hasn't really aged well- nothing has actually creeped me out or frightened me in the story so far. In fact, as horror goes, I find it to be rather light. I suspect this has something to do with the period it was written in, with horror still being a relatively new genre and peoples sensibilities being a tad more delicate, or something like that.

I also found myself amused when Dracula said some of his infamous lines, most notably the 'Children of the Night' thing. I think that line manages to worm its way into like, every Dracula adaptation/parody ever.

Much to my disappointment, a Google Image search for 'children of the night'

just brings up like a ton of My Little Pony images. Sigh.

Anyhow, I am definitely intrigued by the story, and am learning a lot of things I never knew were part of the original; like, I never knew the plot was about Dracula leaving Transylvania and making his way to London. I was always under the impression that it took place like, at least mostly in said country, but apparently not. Maybe we'll find out why that part of the story didn't really make it into any of the versions I've seen (or maybe not, since I think most of my experience with Dracula came from episodes of cartoons or children's movies.)

Couldn't think of a way to work this one in, but I couldn't not include it.

Not So Dreary Dracula?

I like epistolary novels, but they can get very dry after a while, so I got an audiobook to listen along with while I read. And honestly? Nothing about this novel is scary without it. I think that a large chunk of horror as a genre is based on Dracula or delineated from later work inspired by it, so the source material seems generic to us when it might've been groundbreaking (and terrifying) when it was released. Also there is so much more blood and gore and so many more (and much weirder) monsters in horror movies and literature today than in Dracula, so the original novel seems toothless in comparison. But, as I often find, a good narrator can breath life into even the most tired-out stories imaginable, and I have to acknowledge that Dracula in and of itself isn't tired-out. We as a society have just beaten the concept of Dracula to death. Give the Count a break (even if he is.... ya know.... an absolute monster).

All the same, I think it's really cool to read a book that has had such a significant impact on the way we consume horror and thriller literature (whether through film, print, podcasts, etc.) and depict different kinds of monsters. I love horror movies (even if I am a big coward), so I'm very excited to see where this goes!

This is both me watching horror movies and a gif from my favorite 80s horror movie, An American Werewolf in London.

It’s easy to be upset over Jonathan Harker’s stupidity (I know I am), but we as an audience feel similar things towards idiots in horror movies today, and our poor, stupid Jonathan Harker didn’t have over a century of vampire literature and film to put him through his paces and prepare him for unsettlingly religious villagers, howling wolves, spectral fires, creepy counts, the kidnaping and murdering of children, and generally dangerous women. If we can be mad at the dumb blonde that is brutally murdered and still enjoy a horror movie, then I don't see why we can't be mad at our dear idiot Harker and still enjoy the book.

Shout out to Buffy for smashing that dumb blonde in a horror movie trope. That's my girl!!

Lastly, I didn't like the mess with Lucy and her suitors, but can I just say how much I love how ridiculously and stereotypically Texan Quincey Morris is? He's so funny to me. I hope he doesn't drop off the face of the earth. Or get turned into a vampire. I think True Blood gave us all more than enough Southern vampires to last a lifetime (or several lifetimes, as the case may be).

Vampires and stuff

            I’ve always known who Dracula was –the creepy vampire guy- but I never really knew his story and stuff. I always assumed that Dracula was going to be how everyone perceives Dracula. A man who can’t stop drinking the blood of humans and then the townspeople try to kill him. This is my first time reading Dracula. I always imagined it to seem more gruesome and suspenseful, but it’s more mysterious. I did enjoy some parts of it. I like how the book has diary entries, it makes it more entertaining and easier to read.

           

            The part where people are telling Harker not to go to Dracula’s castle and then he ends up feeling like his prisoner kind of reminds me of Beauty and the Beast in way. Belle gets a weird vibe from the beast’s creepy castle, but she goes in anyway and her father is a prisoner, but then she decides to be the beast’s prisoner instead to her father go. Another part that relates to Beauty and the Beast is when Dracula just says that Harker can just leave and he thinks he’s never going to get out of the castle. Belle was always in the room and the beast always got fed up that she would never leave the room he said if she just wants to leave she can. Those parts aren’t exactly the same, but it’s a similar situation. They’re honestly both so stubborn.

                                 This is basically Harker except he really isn’t locked up in a cell.

            In many other TV shows, movies, etc. they make Dracula seem like a good guy at the end, but in the beginning they make him seem like an awful person. He’s like everyone else except he needs blood to survive, which is bad, but people over-exaggerate his character a lot. Honestly, if I ever met Dracula I’d obviously be afraid, but I know that he could potentially end up controlling it. I also believe people imagine him as wearing all black, hair slicked back, fangs, long nails, cape etc. (typical vampire look). In the book I think he just looks like a regular person to everyone else. Until people find out what he’s really like and what he does. Overall, I did enjoy some parts of the book, but I think it would be better as a movie or a TV show that’s just about Dracula because some movies don’t really focus on just Dracula throughout the entire thing.