When Lucy needs blood transfusions, she is said to require the blood of a man who will provide her with the strength she needs. Van Helsing remarks, “A brave man’s blood is the best thing on this earth when a woman is in trouble.” Stoker is implying that a weak woman needs masculinity in order to balance out the femininity implicit in weakness. When Lucy takes in masculinity through the form of blood, she is less delicate and less vulnerable to working herself into feminine hysteria.
When Van Helsing states that “the devil may work against us for all he’s worth, but God sends us men when we want them,” Stoker suggests that while men serve god’s purpose, women work against it. In additional service to this point, Dracula drinks the blood of women and is, not unrelatedly, the embodiment of evil and sinfulness in the novel. While taking in the blood of men makes Lucy heartier, taking in the blood of women makes Dracula more depraved. He retains his masculine form and therefore still has physical strength, but his mental strength is degraded and perverse.
I really like this, especially your comparison of Lucy receiving men’s blood vs. Dracula consuming women’s blood. It highlights the undertone of sexism within the time period the book is set in, of men being these saviors to women, and women being hysterical or weak and not being taken seriously.
I absolutely get what you’re saying. The novel, and specially this passage, reflects the Victorian era’s troubling views on gender roles and female weakness. The notion that Lucy requires the blood of a “brave man” to counter her perceived weakness perpetuates the idea that femininity is inherently frail and in need of male strength for balance. I feel like you did a great job by pointing out how Van Helsing’s comment further marginalizes women by implying that they work against God’s purpose, reinforcing a misogynistic narrative.
The point you bring up about blood transfusions being gendered is very interesting because it follows the theme of women being weak and impure. As seen when Dr. Van Helsing refused to use any maids blood when Lucy was in critical condition. He put himself under the stress and danger of the transfusion rather than let Lucy have the blood of another woman. The blood transfusions can also be seen as sexual and causing the loss of innocence. After Arthur gives his blood to Lucy, they are considered as good as married.
When considering discussions of the Victorian idea of your body being equated to your morality and your blood equated to your character, blood transfusion becomes a extremely intimate act. Lucy, full of four men’s blood, notably, four men of upper class status, is given the strength and purity to survive for days longer than she should have. Inversely, Dracula explicitly feeds on women’s blood, both Mina’s and Lucy’s, and is seen as sinful. But I would like to add that Dracula’s sinfullness is also because the people he was feeding on before coming to England were likely lower class locals from Transylvania, and thus he is “unpure” like them. With this in mind, drinking Lucy and Mina’s blood might actually be an improvement in his sinfullness, due to their higher class status.
I think this is an interesting viewpoint, and clearly reflected in the novel. The idea that despite Lucy being a woman, her blood is taken by Dracula, and then replaced by more men, is one that I think is often overlooked. I think Stoker, possibly without the correct knowledge of blood transfusions and blood types, just sees men as better, and like many pseudo sciences of the 19th century, believes biologically therefore their blood is better. But, also as you point out, it is just another way to say men are stronger than women.