I have a copy here if you want to borrow. (I read it on my Kindle this time.)
Rebekah Send a noteboard - 23/01/2011 01:32:59 PM
I remember having some issues with Dracula being referred to as having the "mind of a child" when I read it. I felt he was sometimes undermined as a scary bad-guy. But I will say I read it so long ago, thinking critically about a text was not something I did. I really should re-read it.
Yes, that description goes hand in hand with the physiognomy reading of Dracula. Van Helsing talks about how he looks like a criminal because of his low forehead (I think it was) and that criminals have, in some ways, the mind of a child. Dracula's child-mind was only with reference to how he dealt with people, I think. Does that kind of fit with sociopath?
I like the semi-epistolary form as Bram Stoker uses it. It is tricky to pull off, but he does it better than most others. Better, I would say, than Wilkie Collins in The Moonstone, for example. Or it may be that I was much younger when I read Dracula, and therefore had a different way of reading.
I agree. Much as I like The Moonstone I don't think Collins was all that successful in his choice of style.
I am, however, conflicted about the characters. On the one hand, they’re quite nice to read: upstanding, brave, loving men, and clever, courageous women. Dracula’s evil is quite chilling. But they’re also only one-sided. There’s no depth and no contrast to them. Either they’re fully good – all of the good guys – or they’re fully bad: Dracula and his brides. The one character with ambiguity and shade is madman Renfield; he’s rather fascinating, and I think that Stoker enjoyed writing him. I also got a little annoyed by the way Van Helsing speaks. At first it was quite nice because that is how many Dutch people speak English (I grew up with lots of them, being of Dutch extraction myself), but would all three journal writers (Mina, Johnathan and Dr Seward) really have taken down his words exactly as he said them, complete with the errors non-native speakers make? That doesn’t feel realistic.
Yes, I think I agree about this as well. I do not remember the Van Helsing language-problem, but it does sound silly. Sounds like a case of exaggerated attempts at realism making it non-realistic.
Exactly. It would have been fine if it had just been on the initial meeting, or if it was just Harker who did it.
It can be difficult to get into a story that is told through letters, journal entries and the like, but I think Dracula is worth it. It’s a mystery and a jigsaw, and as the pieces fit together the cleverness of Stoker’s writing becomes evident. And it bears up well under a reread. This time around I found different scenes scary, and was struck by the way Stoker wrote Mina & Jonathan’s love story. (Yes, I’m a sap.) And I’m glad I reread, because I had fogotten some of the vampire characteristics Stoker used. There are almost all of the ones we are still familiar with: no reflection in the mirror, ability to turn into a bat, the nocturnal hours of activity. But Stoker’s vampires can go out in the sunlight. Their only limitation in daylight hours is that they cannot change shape. They are also unable to cross water except at low tide, and they are also able to turn into mist and control the elements to an extent. Stoker’s vampires are more powerful than those in modern literature.
Also, not sparkly.
You know, I never really took in the Mina/Jonathan story. I mean, I know it is there, but I did not focus on it. I really should re-read it.
I didn't the first time around. I think it's partly because I'm married now and it means more to read that kind of thing. I've noticed that with films and loads of other books as well.
I love this book. It’s scary, it’s moving, it’s well-written, and it’s fascinating glimpse into scientific thought of the 19th century. Physiognomy and phrenology were huge in this era, and they play a large part in the sketching of various characters, as does the rapidly developing discipline of psychology. Interesting too are the references to the new technologies of the age: typewriters (that surprised me), phonographs and the like. Published in 1897, Dracula is a fin de siècle novel; that is, an end of the century book, and it certainly has that feel. The new technologies, new scientific though and advancement, and the uneasiness of the Victorians in their wider world all contribute to the mood of the novel: it is a time of change, where society’s balance can be overturned by the smallest of events. Dracula himself is a symbol of this threat. Understanding this context is key, I think, to enjoyment of the book, especially given the number of adaptations over the years. But Dracula remains for me the best, scariest imagining of the vampire, and it’s a book I will reread many times.
I seem to remember Bram Stoker's description of a blood transfusion being rather cutting edge, as well. He is not aware of the tricky stuff with A, B, AB and O and so forth, because that had not been discovered yet. *sigh* I wonder why I remember the footnotes and not the love story.
Oh yes! I really liked reading the transfusion scene. You could really see Stoker's fascination with new things there.
I remember the technology, but I have not thought of it as a central piece of the novel since. Is Mina a New Woman? Does she ride a bike at any time?
I don't recall her riding a bike. Maybe? She preferred using the typewriter to a pen, and she memorised train timetables.
And she organised the men a lot, and she came up with Plans. So probably she is a New Woman.
*MySmiley*
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
Dracula by Bram Stoker: the definitive vampire novel.
- 23/01/2011 01:09:49 PM
7920 Views
And a wee apology:
- 23/01/2011 01:11:12 PM
1429 Views
Re: And a wee apology:
- 23/01/2011 01:14:03 PM
1380 Views
Re: No no, I liked it, I thought it was thinky and evocative of thinkyness! *NM*
- 24/01/2011 08:39:29 PM
709 Views
Okay. I'll have to pick this up.
- 23/01/2011 01:14:01 PM
1441 Views
I had one bad night the first time I read it.
- 23/01/2011 01:15:22 PM
1349 Views
- 23/01/2011 01:15:22 PM
1349 Views
I've been wanting to read Dracula for a while.
- 23/01/2011 01:18:49 PM
1343 Views
It has been a while since I read it (should probably do something about that), but I think I agree.
- 23/01/2011 01:23:10 PM
1526 Views
I have a copy here if you want to borrow. (I read it on my Kindle this time.)
- 23/01/2011 01:32:59 PM
1478 Views
Since Camilla mentioned the topic of where one reads books...
- 23/01/2011 01:58:41 PM
1421 Views
Heh.
- 23/01/2011 02:01:32 PM
1604 Views
THEY WERE NEVER BRITISH!!! THEY STILL AREN'T; 36+6+1!!!!!!
- 23/01/2011 05:06:42 PM
1458 Views
You know, I have to agree with Cannoli, though without the all caps and the queen-fucking.
- 23/01/2011 10:48:36 PM
1499 Views
I won't be as mad as Cannoli, or pedantic as Tom but it is an Irish novel
- 23/01/2011 11:11:05 PM
1461 Views
here there are no misunderstood pacifist bloodsuckers, supernatural heroes or sparkles.
- 24/01/2011 08:42:54 AM
1372 Views
A fun little travel piece about Whitby, where an important part of Dracula is set.
- 25/01/2011 12:44:46 PM
1433 Views