Dracula and Renfield – an Unleashed Homoeroticism?

In his essay “Gender and Inversion in Dracula,” Christopher Craft discusses the inherent homoeroticism present in Dracula, which is constantly bubbling beneath the surface, yet never quite makes itself manifest: “(…) The sexual threat this novel first evokes, manipulates, sustains, but never fully represents is that Dracula will seduce, penetrate, drain another male.” (446) This “sexual threat” is evident in Jonathan Harker’s encounter with Dracula in his mansion, in which Jonathan cuts his throat while shaving. Dracula, rather than give into his desire to drink Jonathan’s blood, restrains himself:

“When the Count saw my face, his eyes blazed with a sort of demoniac fury, and he suddenly made a grab at my throat. I drew away, and his hand touched the string of beads which held the crucifix. It made an instant change in him, for the fury passed so quickly that I could hardly believe that it was there.” (33)

Why would Dracula stop short of drinking Jonathan’s blood? What is holding him back? This is a testament to Craft’s theory of the “sexual threat” – the act of drinking a person’s blood, a form of “penetration,” has clear sexual connotations. In the novel, this penetration only occurs between a male that penetrates and a female that is penetrated; although Dracula comes close to drinking Jonathan’s blood, with a “blaze” in his eyes that can clearly be read as sexual passion, he must restrain himself lest he disrupt the strict gender binaries on which the novel is constructed. In order to avoid this homoerotic penetration, Dracula has his three vampire women, which embody the masculine role of the “penetrator” – concealed, however, by a pronounced femininity. When the vampire women seduce Harker, the language surrounding the seduction takes on much greater freedom than the near-penetration occurring between Harker and Dracula (“moisture shining on the scarlet lips,” “langourous ecstasy” (45-46)), because the dilemma of the male-male penetration has been eradicated. Despite this, the women are still unable to penetrate Harker, because they would take on the role of penetrator, making Harker the one who is penetrated – a reversal of the heteronormative sexual norms. Thus, as Craft states:

“Here, the ‘two sharp teeth,’ just ‘touching’ and ‘pausing’ there, stop short of the transgression which would unsex Harker and toward which this text constantly aspires and then retreats: the actual penetration of the male.” (447)

Taking this into account, how, then, does one interpret the strange relationship between Renfield and Dracula? Though it is suggested that Dracula had some influence on Renfield, the matter never fully resolves itself, leaving behind only a misty understanding of what actually occurred between the two. After Van Helsing and Seward find Renfield lying on the floor of his room and covered in blood, Renfield tells them of Dracula’s regular visits: “I would’t ask him to come in at first, though I knew he wanted to – just as he had wanted all along. Then he began promising things – not in words but by doing them.” (297) Why does Dracula have a desire to enter Renfield’s room? What is it that Dracuala “does” when he is promising things? Renfield tells them that Dracula would give him “lives” in the form of rats – but why would Dracula do this? What interest does he have in Renfield? Renfield then recounts the moment when Dracula entered his room:

“(…) Before I knew what I was doing, I found myself opening the sash and saying to Him: ‘Come in, Lord and Master!’ The rats were all gone, but He slid into the room through the sash, though it was only open an inch wide – just as the Moon herself has often come in through the tiniest crack, and has stood before me in all her size and splendor.” (298)

Dracula, in this description, possesses a clearly feminine quality, as he is described as being like the Moon – a symbol of femininity. Also, Renfield describes Dracula’s appearance with a sense of awe and admiration (“stood before me in all her size and splendor” (298)), suggesting a sort of homoeroticism. Renfield continues, saying:

“When he slid in through the window, though it was shut, and did not even knock, I got mad with him. He sneered at me, and his white face looked out of the mist with his red eyes gleaming, and he went on as though he owned the whole place, and I was no one. He didn’t even smell the same as he went by me. I couldn’t hold him. I thought that, somehow, Mrs Harker had come into the room.” (298)

Again, there is an element of homoeroticism present in the relationship between Dracula and Renfield – Renfield says that he “couldn’t hold him,” and that he didn’t “smell the same.” This suggests that there must have been some kind of physical contact between the two – otherwise, why would Renfield be saying this? Also, Dracula’s entering of Renfield’s room through the window takes on a form of “penetration” itself (“he slid into the room through the sash, though it was only an inch wide” (298). This penetration seems to resemble an act of rape in the passage above, where Renfield says: “he went on as though he owned the whole place, and I was no one.” (298) Am I reading too much into this, or is it possible that this seemingly homoerotic relationship between Dracula and Renfield is the fulfillment of a male-male sexual penetration to which, as Craft states, the novel “constantly aspires and then retreats”?