Dracula, part 3; ch 9-13

[Jenn, moderator]

Discuss Dracula part 3.

[Danielle]

I've been thinking about this for awhile now but saved it for later chapters. If we chose Stoker for his "Irish-ness," I feel directed to consider this context as I read. My understanding of Irish identity at this time is that the Irish serve as the "other" to the British culture. With that in mind, is it Stoker's perhaps sense of himself as "other" that leads to his use of "others" as both the antagonist (the Count) and the hero (Van Helsing)? Both are continentals, not Brits, and Van Helsing's foreign-ness is constantly reinforced by his syntactically difficult dialogue. Both the force of good and the force of evil come from "outside" Britian. What do you all think?

[[deleted user]]

Interesting thought. While he was born in Ireland, it was to an establishment family, not a radical Irish family. They were protestant. And he lived half his life in England. So while he is Irish by birth, I'm not sure he'd necessarily identify himself with the Catholic or Celtic Ireland that so often is the underdog to the English.

[Danielle]

Good to know. Yes, that is a different Irish cultural heritage than I had in mind.

[Jonathan]

There is definitely more of a Catholic rather than a protestant feel to this book. From the very beginning, when he chooses to focus on the crucifix, I got this impression. This is a relic that is very important in Catholicism, yet the notion of any type of symbolic item in Protestant Christianity is almost sacrilegious.

[Phil]

I found that this section dragged a little. Lucy is pale, give her a transfusion; lucy's a little pale, give her a transfusion; stay awake with her, don't fall asleep; oops I fell asleep and she's worse than ever; oh I'm sure I can leave her a night; oops, that was a mistake; give her another transfusion. It all got very tiring after a while. If Van Helsing was so worried, why didn't they move Lucy somewhere else, or insist that somebody was with her every night instead of relying on garlic alone?

However, the only time so far that I got *really* tired with the writing was the Pall Mall Gazette's escaped wolf piece, which was terrible.

It picked up towards the end though during the final night and morning.

[[deleted user]]

I'm sure this was just me being a cynic (comes with the being a scientist thing) but I did find myself waiting for someone to die quite horribly due to mismatched blood. Unless all of them were coincidentally the same type, or Lucy was a universal recipient (pretty unlikely) that had all the potential for a shocking horror murder twist in its own right. But yes, if she's that much in danger, someone sit with the woman all night. Why didn't I think of that?

[Amanda]

Helen wrote: "I'm sure this was just me being a cynic (comes with the being a scientist thing) but I did find myself waiting for someone to die quite horribly due to mismatched blood. Unless all of them were coi..."

I was wondering about the mismatched blood, myself. I don't know much about medical history, so I'll rely on the expertise of others...is it possible that they didn't know much about blood types at that point, and so Stoker didn't know to write it any differently? Or do you think he knowingly glossed over the facts merely to make the story progress in the way he wanted?

[[deleted user]]

I believe that in the early stages of trials with blood transfusion a number of people did die from being transfused with a mismatched blood type. There was no blood collection & storage, it was simply from person A to person B. Can you imagine being person A, agreeing to donate blood to save their life and and then seeing them deteriorate, with no real idea why? urgh.

[Dolores, co-moderator]

Amanda wrote: "Helen wrote: "I'm sure this was just me being a cynic (comes with the being a scientist thing) but I did find myself waiting for someone to die quite horribly due to mismatched blood. Unless all of..."

I think it is possible that at that time because they didn't know much about blood transfusions, Stoker only wrote what he knew. People did die, but they had no idea it was from mismatched blood because they did not know about matching blood types.

[Jacob]

Danielle-

You make an interesting point about Stoker's "Irish-ness", but I think the central struggle of this book is between east and west, not between Britain and everyone else. Even though colonization and Irish animosity against the British are interesting concepts to explore, I believe the clash between old world customs and new world logic are more relevant to this book. The old world (the East) represents superstition and Gothic supernatural. The new world (the West) represents science and reason. In the end, eastern superstition triumphs where western medicine fails--the protagonists (Jonathan, Mina, Van Helsing, Dr. Seward, etc.) must set aside science to defeat a supernatural being (Dracula).

As far as I know, Stoker himself felt little animosity against Britain. Like Wilde, Stoker was Anglo-Irish--and he spent much of his time working in British theatre. (He was the manager of the famous stage actor Henry Irving.) Even though Stoker's Irish ethnicity bleeds through in a lot of his works (especially his short stories), I do not sense any anti-British syntax.

Then again, I may be completely wrong.

[Jacob]

(Sorry for the double post...)

Jonathan-

Interesting that you bring up Catholicism; there is definitely a lot of Catholic symbolism throughout the book (the rosary scene from Jonathan's journal, Van Helsing's use of the communion wafer against Lucy, etc.). Also--transubstantiation is HUGE in this book, specifically in the scene where Dracula breast-feeds Mina at the asylum.

Interesting note though: Bram Stoker was Anglican. Changes the entire way you read the book...

[Raphael]

Jacob, please flag the spoiler in your comment :)

[Catherine]

Jacob wrote: "(Sorry for the double post...)

Jonathan-

Interesting that you bring up Catholicism; there is definitely a lot of Catholic symbolism throughout the book (the rosary scene from Jonathan's journal, ..."

very interesting points which I hadn't thought of when I read this the first time but will pay more attention for it this time. Thanks :-)

[Linda]

It looks like England is innocent and ignorant, a prime target territory for invasion and exploitation from outside the country. And the answers come from Van Helsing who is also from the continent.

Jonathan, who started as a self-confident solicitor has been turned into a weak and overwhelmed (but wealthy) amnesiac.

I'm getting the message that England is weak and the continent is strong, and that England needs to wake up and realize what's going on before it is too late.

[Renee]

Phil wrote: "I found that this section dragged a little. Lucy is pale, give her a transfusion; lucy's a little pale, give her a transfusion; stay awake with her, don't fall asleep; oops I fell asleep and she's ..."

They did seem a little incompetent during the whole affair. Van Helsing was very concerned about Lucy being alone, yet she keeps needing transfusions because someone fell asleep, her Mother took away all the garlic and opened the window etc. Lock her bedroom door and window and have someone sit with her all night to make sure nothing bad happens. Van Helsing seems to have an idea what he thinks is happening and they should have been more careful to make sure it didn't happen again.

The story of the wolves seemed to take away from the story to me instead of adding to it. I am enjoying it very much though.

[Alana]

Jacob wrote: "(Sorry for the double post...)

Jonathan-

Interesting that you bring up Catholicism; there is definitely a lot of Catholic symbolism throughout the book (the rosary scene from Jonathan's journal, ..."

I must have slept through that section, I totally missed that part! Or is that upcoming?