Week 1 - Dracula, Chapters 1-4

[Sam]

At least, David. Everything in the story has an opposite, a yin/yang. JH has gone into a mirror world. All reversed. Faery Land, where the faery kind are evil in our world, but good in theirs. It's positively (spell this right for $1) Nietzschean!

[Borum]

Tamara wrote: "David wrote: "Plus the work is rife with sexual taboos and their lure. For example, the following description alludes to the common sexual myth.
Strange to say, there were hairs in the centre of th..."

Same here. I thought the hairy palm was something of beastly origin. So much to learn about vampire folklore. I didn't know about the Mercy Brown incident, either, but it's sad that so many misconceptions of supernatural horror was built on family tragedies such as infection or hereditary disorders. Porphyria and many genetic disorders (especially mental disorders) must have been connected with notions of vampires or other supernatural stuff. An aristocratic lineage in a remote area is more prone to inbreeding and hereditary disorders. Even the goiter described in chapter 1 may be due to both iodine deficiency and inbreeding. There is also a rare genetic disorder that causes hairy palms (I knew this disorder but this is the first time I heard about a sexual connotation!)

[Borum]

Emil wrote: "In folklore, vampires are described as monstrous, bloated, blueish, smeared with blood and usually unable to talk properly. That's not the case with Dracula. He is classy, smart, presentable and he can hide his nature. That's the most disturbing thing for me.
..."
Yeah, the vampire described in folklore reminds me of normal corpses that becomes blue and bloated or incoherent like zombies in the media.. It's more scary and uncanny when the feared subject is more intelligent and closer to human beings.

[Borum]

David wrote: "Good one!. Now as far as the three women, I don't know how to interpret their interaction with Dracula here.
‘How dare you touch him, any of you? How dare you cast eyes on him when I had forbidden it? Back, I tell you all! This man belongs to me! Beware how you meddle with him, or you’ll have to deal with me.’ The fair girl, with a laugh of ribald coquetry, turned to answer him:— ‘

You yourself never loved; you never love!’ On this the other women joined, and such a mirthless, hard, soulless laughter rang through the room that it almost made me faint to hear; it seemed like the pleasure of fiends. Then the Count turned, after looking at my face attentively, and said in a soft whisper:—

‘Yes, I too can love; you yourselves can tell it from the past. Is it not so?..."

Is it just me, or is there something of a homoerotic/obsessive possessive vibe coming from D here? Homosexuality must have been regarded as something of a mental illness and evil taboo at the time, so perhaps there is some connection. It also implies some kind of hidden past life of D and the ladies before they became their current selves.

[Borum]

Sam wrote: "At least, David. Everything in the story has an opposite, a yin/yang. JH has gone into a mirror world. All reversed. Faery Land, where the faery kind are evil in our world, but good in theirs. It's..."

Sam's comment reminded me of Alice in Through the Looking Glass. Alice is another unreliable and pretty clueless narrator who wonders if she herself was just a figment of the Red King's imagination and ends the book with 'Life, what is it but a dream?' Perhaps entering Dracula's domain has thrown off the modern rationality and shakes the stable faith on one's objective reality. This dreamlike atmosphere also echoed with David's comment beforehand where it's weird how he describes the mirror being shattered outside without any daylight.

Before I saw Sam's comment I just thought of the vampire having no soul like ghosts (and therefore no self-reflection) but that is a very intriguing meaning.

[Borum]

Borum wrote: "Sam wrote: "At least, David. Everything in the story has an opposite, a yin/yang. JH has gone into a mirror world. All reversed. Faery Land, where the faery kind are evil in our world, but good in ..."

Of course there is another explanation that in the 19th century mirrors were backed with a thin layer of silver, which is believed to be a pure element that is perfect for repelling werewolves and vampires (and also detecting poison in food). Today mirrors are baked with the cheaper substitute of aluminum, so maybe it will be more difficult to detect them?

[Jen]

Why do you all think Dracula keeps Jonathan a prisoner for so long? He doesn't seem to want to turn him into a vampire, he's not trying to make his case. Why keep him in the castle, observing all the creepy phenomena and prey to the vampire ladies? Wouldn't it be smarter to send him back as soon as possible promising to look him up when he arrives? Now when Dracula arrives in England and a bunch of weird stuff starts happening, he's got someone who has already seen it and can make the link.

[Tamara]

Jen wrote: "Why do you all think Dracula keeps Jonathan a prisoner for so long? He doesn't seem to want to turn him into a vampire, he's not trying to make his case. Why keep him in the castle, observing all t..."

I wondered that, too.
Dracula is very intelligent and he obviously has a plan. Maybe Jonathan has a role to play in some sort of diabolical scheme that will become apparent later in the novel.

[Lily]

David wrote: "...'hung my shaving glass by the window, and was just beginning to shave.' ..."

Hmm -- stream of consciousness took me to James Joyce's opening scene with Steven Dedalus shaving in the tower. Wondering if it was an allusion to Stoker.....?

[David]

Jen wrote: "Why do you all think Dracula keeps Jonathan a prisoner for so long?. . .Now when Dracula arrives in England and a bunch of weird stuff starts happening, he's got someone who has already seen it and can make the link. ."

Great question. I can propose some ideas, none of which are very compelling.

1. Dracula is just evil and cruel and seems to enjoy toying with Jonathan, e.g., telling Jonathan he can go and holding the door open with the wolves outside to until the last moment.

2. Dracula is keeping him around for his solicitor skills to smooth out any last minute problems and mine him for more information about England and English customs.

3. Dracula needs him and uses the promise of turning him over to the three ladies after he leaves as a bargaining chip to keep them from killing him before Dracula is done with him. During Jonathan's encounter with the three ladies, they seem willing to disobey Dracula and kill him then and there. The three ladies also seem somewhat dependent upon Dracula for their meals.

4. Dracula needs a scapegoat. While this could be done without Jonathan alive, Dracula is setting Jonathan up to take the blame for his own evil deeds. We've seen the baby bag Dracula returns with once, and it is seen a second time leaving with Dracula dressed in Jonathan's clothes.

It was a new shock to me to find that he had on the suit of clothes which I had worn whilst travelling here, and slung over his shoulder the terrible bag which I had seen the women take away. There could be no doubt as to his quest, and in my garb, too! This, then, is his new scheme of evil: that he will allow others to see me, as they think, so that he may both leave evidence that I have been seen in the towns or villages posting my own letters, and that any wickedness which he may do shall by the local people be attributed to me.

This may be extra insurance against Jonathan, for If he is ever seen again by the locals, the locals may kill him.

5. I have to admit, Dracula does behave like a lot of other villains by explaining their plans to the hero and then leaves the hero to his certain doom, only to have the hero escape and use the information to stop him later. It only remains to be seen if Jonathan survives and is such a hero. If Jonathan or his journal does not survive, then the knowledge of Dracula's plans will simply serve to heighten the dread the readers feel for knowing his intentions.

[Jen]

It only remains to be seen if Jonathan survives and is such a hero. If Jonathan or his journal does not survive, then the knowledge of Dracula's plans will simply serve to heighten the dread the readers feel for knowing his intentions.

We should know from the table of contents that he survives, right? In chapter 8, it's Mina Murray's journal, but then in chapter 9, Mina Harker is writing to Lucy Westenra. Then we have several more chapters from Jonathan or Mina Harker's journals.

Anyway, the most plausible to me is a combination of your first and fifth theories: Dracula's a jerk and he's keeping Jonathan there as an exercise in power. However, he's not doing much to win Jonathan over to his side and he's exposing more and more of his secrets to him the longer he keeps him in Transylvania. So he's not a very smart villain if he doesn't want people to know who and what he is when he gets to England. Either that or he thinks he's got Jonathan completely under his thumb so he doesn't care if he knows, because he'll just re-activate his hypnotism when he gets to the UK. Even if that's a case, only a dumb villain doesn't double-check the locks.

But really, it seems to me that Jonathan is kept in Transylvania for the sake of exposition: we'll know how creepy and scary Dracula is when he shows up in London and weird things start to happen. So obviously the point of the book is not to figure out at the end that Dracula is a vampire.

[David]

Jen wrote: "We should know from the table of contents that he survives, right?..."

You can't look in the table of contents!, that is cheating. :)

We don't know yet whether these journal entries are new ones that Jonathan survives to write himself, or if only his journal has been found and the surviving characters are reading additional entries we have not been privy to yet. Maybe Jonathan stuffed his journal into a bottle and threw it into a river before dying and it found its way back to Mina by Chapter 14. . .

[Jen]

David wrote: "Jen wrote: "We should know from the table of contents that he survives, right?..."

You can't look in the table of contents!, that is cheating. :)

We don't know yet whether these journal entries a..."

Right, but then Mina Murray is his fiancee when he arrives in Transylvania and she later becomes Mina Harker. You might be able to tell people in 2021 that you're marrying your dead boyfriend and taking his name, and that wouldn't even be the weirdest reason the records clerk has heard for changing a name that day. But they took this kind of thing more seriously in 19th century England. It was a property transaction after all, Mina is going from being her father's possession to her husband's, so it was very important to label your goods properly lest someone else try to claim them. And I still know so many women who automatically take their husbands' names at marriage despite knowing this.

[Lily]

David wrote: "...You can't look in the table of contents!, that is cheating. :)..."

That's not how I remember Mortimer J. Adler/Charles Van Doren.... (But maybe they did have different rules for different kinds of books?)

[David]

Lily wrote: "David wrote: "...You can't look in the table of contents!, that is cheating. :)..."

That's not how I remember Mortimer J. Adler/Charles Van Doren.... (But maybe the..."

Ha! I think the Inspectional reading, systematic skimming or pre-reading was mostly for expository books. Maybe we are better served by skipping those tasks for imaginative literature to avoid spoilers?

[David]

Jen wrote: "Right, but then Mina Murray is his fiancee when he arrives in Transylvania and she later becomes Mina Harker. "

Maybe Jonathan has a brother, Jerry Harker? Ok. I give up. Stoker should have stuck to numbered chapter titles and ditched the chapter subtitles in the TOC. LOL

[Borum]

This is why I don’t read many of the Penguin introductions.;;; Aaaargghhh

[David]

Borum wrote: "Is it just me, or is there something of a homoerotic/obsessive possessive vibe coming from D here?"

I wondered about that too.

Then the Count turned, after looking at my face attentively, and said in a soft whisper:— ‘Yes, I too can love; you yourselves can tell it from the past. Is it not so?

What does that attentive look from Dracula mean? Is Dracula implying he can love Jonathan, or is he underscoring a hyper-heterosexual condition in which he loved three women? Both?

[Alan]

1 : mindful, observant attentive to what he is doing. 2 : heedful of the comfort of others : solicitous an attentive waitress. 3 : offering attentions in or as if in the role of a suitor an attentive boyfriend.

In this instance, it seems the third meaning is implied. It is even more unclear whether it is implied that he has been with the three women in the past or whether all took part in other witnessed affairs in the past, whether that be with men or women or both. Great writing leaves much to the imagination of the reader.

[tom]

David wrote: "Jen wrote: "Why do you all think Dracula keeps Jonathan a prisoner for so long?. . .Now when Dracula arrives in England and a bunch of weird stuff starts happening, he's got someone who has already..."

As I read the opening chapters I wondered whether Jonathan would have been free to go...if he had only followed the rule about where to sleep. But then Jonathan broke the rule, and encountered the three vampire women. Perhaps it was at that point that D. concluded that Jonathan "knew too much" (as Jonathan remarks in his journal) and had to be neutralized.

[Jen]

David wrote: "Jen wrote: "Right, but then Mina Murray is his fiancee when he arrives in Transylvania and she later becomes Mina Harker. "

Maybe Jonathan has a brother, Jerry Harker? Ok. I give up. Stoker should..."

Or Jonathan's mother happens to also be named Mina and even though his entire diary in Transylvania is talking about his fiancee and he never mentions his parents at all, his mother suddenly becomes a major character in the second act.

Or maybe we can just assume that Jonathan survives and marries Mina and the point of the novel is not that the rest of the characters will spend the rest of the time trying to figure out what happened to him and why the client he went to visit is so strange.

[David]

Jen wrote: "Or Jonathan's mother happens to also be named Mina"

LOL. Jonathan's mother is going to go medieval on Dracula. Why not, even Grendel had a mother. Fortunately we only have to wait until Chapter 8 to find out. :)

[Marieke]

I just read these chapters. What stood out for me was the incredible pace of the story. Already a lot has happened (which nowadays would've probably been spun out more).

Besides the topics already discussed I wonder about mr. Hawkins: it is made clear that in first instance he ought to have gone to Transylvania but he became ill. So what were Dracula's first intentions on having the sollicitor come from England to Transylvania? The business of signing papers for the new house don't really seem to excuse such a trip.

About Jonathan's behaviour: it didn't seem terribly odd to me. As stated in the first paragraphs (and througout) he is a man of science, proficiently warned against the enormous superstitions of Transylvania. So at first he doesn't pay much attention to those superstitions and merely cares about the task he has to carry out. I guess it got to him more than he first wants to admit, as he is already quite scared traveling with the others, but I guess it's the same feeling you could get after a night of ghost stories at the campfire: in your heart you're convinced no ghosts can excists, but the shadows surely look suspicious.

If you regard it that way, it's not surprising he does get in the coach. I do think, already not really being at ease, he quickly finds out something about Dracula really is of, but then it already is too late.

[Emil]

Lily wrote: "David wrote: "...'hung my shaving glass by the window, and was just beginning to shave.' ..."

Hmm -- stream of consciousness took me to James Joyce's opening scene with Steven Dedalus shaving in t..."


Nice one! It might be, the scenes are really similar.

How about this:

"He comes, pale vampire, through storm his eyes, his bat sails bloodying the sea, mouth to her mouth’s kiss." ( Ulysses, Proteus)

And there is the last sentence of Proteus:

"He turned his face over a shoulder, rere regardant. Moving through the air high spars of a threemaster, her sails brailed up on the crosstrees, homing, upstream, silently moving, a silent ship."

I'm currently rereading Ulysses and there is something about dracula...stoker...dublin...shore...ship...joyce...bloom...budapest-eastern...europe...wandering...jew...vampire.....bat...blood....

[Lisa Bianca]

tom wrote: "how his journal sounds like he's gathering anecdotes to tell to Mina and other friends about the local customs, recipes, and fashions in Transylvania. He seems to come into this trip treating it like an exotic little getaway that he can recall as a bit of an adventure...."

tom wrote: "David wrote: "What is weird about the ways Jonathan is acting? Does Jonathan's position and Western perspectives in l..."

Yes I agree that is what Jonathon is doing, he is always in part removed, an observer.

[Lisa Bianca]

Emil wrote: "The Mercy Brown vampire incident occurred in Rhode Island, US, in 1892. It is one of the best-documented cases of the exhumation of a corpse..."

I read the article you suggested. Poor sick Edwin!

[Lisa Bianca]

Tamara wrote: "David wrote: "At a minimum, he might say something along the lines of, “I say, old chap, would you mind telling me why you’re taking me in circles on a pitch black night when there are wolves howling all around us?” But he doesn’t even do that.."

I agree, he really is rather passive to begin with ... just a spectator

[Lisa Bianca]

David wrote: "Jonathan does give reasons for his choices.
I must go at once, and that I was engaged on important business,

there was business to be done, and I could allow nothing to interfere with it. . .I thanked her, but my duty was imperative, and that I must go. . .taking a crucifix from her neck offered it to me. . .as an English Churchman, I have been taught to regard such things as in some measure idolatrous. . .
(Mem., I must ask the Count about these superstitions.)
..."

Yes this explains Jonathon's, at times, frustrating disconnection from what is becoming apparent.

[Lisa Bianca]

Sam wrote: "When D gives his genealogy he says the fighting spirit came from Iceland of all places. Why I thought it noteworthy that the first translation was to Icelandic...."
I noted this also and wondered at the connection.

[David]

Lisa wrote: "Yes this explains Jonathon's, at times, frustrating disconnection from what is becoming apparent."

Maybe Jonathan was just too white? I am reminded of the Eddie Murphy bit about how he would react to a haunted house differently than white people do in the movies.

In "The Amityville Horror" the ghost told them to get out of the house. White people stayed in there. Now that’s a hint and a half for your ass. A ghost say get the fuck out, I would just tip the fuck out the door! Lou Walker looked in the toilet bowl, there was blood in the toilet. And said, “That’s peculiar.” I would’ve been in the house saying: “Oh baby this is beautiful.” “We got a chandelier hanging up here, kids outside playing. Its a beautiful neighbourhood.” “We ain’t got nuttin to worry, I really love it this is really nice.” “GET OUT!” “Too bad we can’t stay, baby!”

Transcript of Eddie Murphy's 'Delirious', stand-up comedy HBO special released August 30, 1983.
https://scrapsfromtheloft.com/comedy/...

Doesn't that nonchalant thats peculiar sound a lot like Jonathan's parenthetical asides, e.g., (Mem., I must ask the count about these superstitions.)

[Sam]

Then there is the movie "Get Out".

[Sam]

Sam wrote: "Then there is the movie "Get Out"."

Emil wrote: "Lily wrote: "David wrote: "...'hung my shaving glass by the window, and was just beginning to shave.' ..."

Hmm -- stream of consciousness took me to James Joyce's opening scene with Steven Dedalus..."

All these jottings to Mina, have me thinking that without much rewriting you could have a Mel Brooks' script. Gene Wilder eating chicken, Drac Hovers over him, but he doesn't notice and sticks to his memo: "must get this recipe for Mina."

[Rafael]

Sam wrote: "All these jottings to Mina, have me thinking that without much rewriting you could have a Mel Brooks' script. Gene Wilder eating chicken, Drac Hovers over him, but he doesn't notice and sticks to his memo: 'must get this recipe for Mina.'"

There's already a Mel Brooks script to Dracula. He also plays Van Helsing in the movie: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112896/...

[Sam]

Thanks. You couldn't write this stuff! (Old Hollywood saying.) Oh, you did.

[Marieke]

I really found Dracula wearing Jonathans cloths quite weird. Everyone already knows evil is goin on at his castle, so why would the villagers believe it was Jonathan who did this, as he just arrived?

[David]

Marieke wrote: "I really found Dracula wearing Jonathans cloths quite weird. Everyone already knows evil is goin on at his castle, so why would the villagers believe it was Jonathan who did this, as he just arrived?"

Good question. I wondered at the necessity and effectiveness of this move as well. Dracula wearing Jonathan's clothes could serve a couple of purposes. I think the primary reason was to enhance the appearance that Jonathan was free to conduct business by being seen around the town instead of Dracula simply posting letters for him. Going out as Jonathan would lessen the chance anyone would worry and come looking for him; because people could say, as witnesses, "I just saw the Englishman at the post office the other day." Additionally, if Dracula was caught, deliberately or not, stealing more babies, it would appear as if Jonathan had done it. Finally, Dracula is evil and will consistently choose to obfuscate matters whenever possible. This kind of behavior must have become habitual after keeping the locals at bay for hundreds of years.