4/24 Concluding thoughts on Dracula and Vampy things

Well, this was all sorts of what I wasn't expecting. Besides not being set in the country (Transylvania in specific), for most of the novel, Lucy's three suitors aiding in killing Dracula was not lurking in my mind. Also, what the hell? Why did Quincey have to die??? Rude. More importantly, where the hell was Van Helsing getting all of the communion wafers from? The man must have bags up bags that he pulls out of nowhere. Is he like Legolas and constantly having arrows even though, visually, he clearly only has a handful?

Also, am I right in reading that Dracula could turn into a wolf? Is he a mixture of vampire and werewolf? If so, it would make sense as to why he has hairy palms. Otherwise, I can only guess that he's like a spider, and the hairy palms are how he sticks to walls. =_=

On another note, apparently vampires having arithmomania is a thing? You apparently always have a bag of rice on you and if you come across a vampire, you throw rice and they'll be compelled to count the grains, giving you enough time to run away.

Another fun fact, apparently in the Balkans, vampires didn't have any bones and that's how you would identify them, or so I've read. And apparently if a vampire and a human have a child, a dhampir, the child will also be boneless. It's a strange notion, but this got me thinking, it was never mentioned if Dracula and his brides had offspring. Were they unable to because they're undead? I know in Van Helsing, they did have offspring (and lots of them).

If the women are no longer able to have children due to being dead, then logically the male vamps wouldn't be able to as well, so how would vampires have children (for the Balkan mythology)? Would it then be like with Blade and his mother being bitten by a vampire while she was pregnant with him?

It's amazing just how much vampire lore has expanded and been built upon since Dracula, but also very confusing as there are conflicting viewpoints and "facts," although conflicting myths have always been a thing (looking at you Greek mythology).

*sigh* Let's Talk about Rape

I wanna start by saying that I enjoyed this book. It was really interesting, it was thrilling, and creepy as all get out. But going from Pride and Prejudice to Dracula really made the disappointing quality of the female characters in this novel glaringly obvious. So, who are the female characters in this novel? Lucy, Lucy's mother, Mina, and the three vampire brides. First, Lucy's mother is just a bafoon, and largely one of reasons that Lucy ends up dead. Then, let's look at the remaining five characters. The main purpose they serve in this universe was to be figuratively raped by the Count. Yes, I said rape. What the Count does to them is an unwanted, penetrative act that leaves these woman forever changed. There has always been a sexual tone to vampire stories, so the scenes between Mina and Count Dracula have a very "rape-y" feeling to them. Additionally, after the scene with Mina, Dracula, and Jonathan, when Mina is burned by the Communion wafer,  she claims that she is "unclean." This idea is one that is often shared by many initial sexual assault victims because of the trauma that has been forced upon them.

Then, lets think about the differences between the male vampires (the only one we have in the novel is Dracula) and the female vampires (Lucy, the brides, and sort of Mina). Dracula is sentient. He is aware of his surroundings and he is smart. He plans things out meticulously enough to transport 50 boxes of dirt to 4 different locations for safe keeping. Meanwhile, the female vampires are animalistic. They don't seem to be able to control themselves.  Lucy especially does not attempt to hide herself when she is hunting and is see by so many that she earns a nickname for herself. I've always been a big fan of the movie Van Helsing and I really love the Vampire Brides in that movie, but now because of this book, I worry that I'm never going to look at them the same way again because they are just not strong characters.

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...

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.