Course Blog

Moral Transgressions in Dracula

At a first glance, the worst transgression of vampires appears to be their physical violence, as seen by the fact that they feed off humans, however their worst transgression is the sexuality they evoke from their victims. When Dracula bites Mina her, “white dress is smeared with blood.” Mina’s white dress is symbolic of sexual purity and the blood is reminiscent of a woman’s hymen breaking when she first has sex. When Harker is finally aroused from his deep sleep, he fears this and repeats, “In God’s name what does this mean?” and finally Mina says, “Unclean, unclean! I must not touch him or kiss him no more.” Mina has just been the victim of a sexual assault, and yet her and her fiance’s first concern is her sexual purity. So despite the physical violence Dracula causes, it was the moral violence against Mina’s soul that is of the utmost importance.

This can even been seen when the four men go to kill Lucy, and Holmwood drives a stake through her heart. The fact is that they kill her, however it is necessary because they must purify her. The cross is an antidote to vampirism because vampirism is a transgression of morality. Jesus is born to a virgin mother, and maybe the sexual purity of Jesus can somehow cleanse the sexual impurity of vampires. Vampires may be dangerous creatures but the danger of them is somehow connected to what they can evoke from their victims. This concept is reinforced in the fact that vampires are very humanesque creatures, and even feed off of humans. The fact that vampires are blatantly sexual creatures may be representative of a hidden part of humans, and one that is clearly immoral and must be suppressed.

A Woman’s Saving Grace

While femininity is an underlying theme in most novels of this time period, Bram Stoker, in his novel Dracula, takes this theme one step further and delves into how women can only be saved by a man.  Granted, Lucy is nearly killed by Dracula however, most of this novel focuses on the men in Lucy’s life attempting to save her from near death.  When Lucy is losing a great amount of blood each night and becoming closer and closer to dying, the only thing to save her is a man’s blood.  “A brave man’s blood is the best thing on this earth when a woman is in trouble” (Stoker, 160).  This quote by Van Helsing is an excellent example of how men during this time period thought of women in trouble.  Men are the heroes always swooping in to save the day.  In this novel, no women are there to save Lucy.  Perhaps one of the nurses could have used their blood to conduct the transfusions however, it ultimately ends up being one of the men to always aid in this process.

Ultimately, it ends up being Arthur who turns Lucy back into a human.  “Arthur took the stake and the hammer, and when once his mind was set on action his hands never trembled nor even quivered” (Stoker, 230).  Arthur, without hesitation, drives the stake into Lucy’s heart declaring him her saving grace.  Lucy could not save herself, no woman could save her, but a man was the only person who could save her life.  This passage is also a great example of a man taking possession of a woman.  Throughout the novel, Lucy had received blood from many different men symbolizing her many relationships.  Arthur, however, declares her his own by physically taking her heart for himself in this somewhat sexual resurrection of Lucy’s life.

Masculinity and femininity are a quite common theme among novels of this time period, yet Stoker takes Dracula a step further offering insight on how women not only need men in their life but they quite literally need men to save their life.

The Use of Blood

Bram Stoker’s Dracula uses blood in different ways. One function being, the feeding of blood by Dracula to represent sexual desire and the exchange of bodily fluids associated with sexual intercourse. In Victorian England at the time of this novel, women’s sexual behavior was dictated by society’s strict expectations. She was either a virgin, the model of purity and innocence, or she was a wife whose job was to bear children.

Lucy was a pure and innocent woman, but Dracula changed that. Dr. Seward describes in his diary how “the sweetness was turned to adamantine, heartless cruelty, and the purity to voluptuous wantonness” (225). He goes on to say, “…on Lucy’s face we could see that the lips were crimson with fresh blood, and that the stream had trickled over her chin and stained the purity of her lawn death-robe” (225). Lucy is now like Dracula, desiring blood, therefore desiring sex. A death-robe was usually white, which is playing on the idea of purity and the image of marriage. In Victorian England, women almost always wore a white dress on their wedding day since white is a color used to indicate purity. However, once a woman is married she loses her virginity and innocence. That is exactly what Stoker is trying to touch upon. Lucy is not yet officially married, but the blood stains on her white dress infer that she has lost her virginity and her purity is gone. Dracula has penetrated Lucy, taken blood from her and changed her into a blood thirsty vampire/sex desiring woman. This behavior coming from a women was not socially acceptable, so the men want to kill her in order to return her to a purer state, the only state in which women can be respected.

 

Stoker, Bram. Dracula. London: Penguin Group, 2003. Print.

Power vs. Limitations of Vampires

Dracula by Bram Stoker seems to be about the manipulative powers vampires have due to their superficial human appearance, but is really about the limitations vampires have.

Count Dracula appears to be invincible because of his many supernatural forms, such as the “thin white mist” (Stoker, 246), “I saw a bat rise” (Stoker, 245), and “stood a tall, thin man, all in black” (Stoker, 246). He can appear and vanish into any three of these forms: mist, a bat or man. Since Dracula can transform into these varied forms he has a greater chance of taking blood from humans by being able to fit into different spaces and situations.

However, there are more limitations to Dracula’s powers. While he can look young and full of life, which increases his chances of luring in women, he can only look this way and have strength with the blood from humans. Dracula, or vampires in general rely on their looks to live. For example, after Lucy had been bitten by Dracula and was considered dead, she looked “more radiantly beautiful than ever” (Stoker, 171) which Arthur began to “loathe” (Stoker, 172). Beauty plays with the human mind and manipulates one.

Also while Dracula could live forever, and has for centuries he has to hide, constantly change location, “the Count may have many houses” (Stoker, 250) and fake his death. In order for him to live he has to constantly mold to societies fashion in each new era. Vampires are also limited to man’s powers from sunrise to sunset, “to-day this Vampire is limited to the powers of man, and till sunset he may not change” (Stoker, 261). While vampires have a superficial human appearance and use it to their advantage, they also are limited by it. Their powers become leveled to actual humans during certain times of the day. It’s interesting because while Dracula has lived for centuries and had the time to gain all the knowledge possible through experimentation, he was still not ahead of human knowledge, “for had he dared, at the first, to attempt certain things he would long ago have been beyond our power” (Stoker, 260).

What I am trying to say here is that while vampires seem invincible, they are not, they have many limitations. Viewers can even emphasize with them because their souls are trapped, and cannot be set free until they are dashed with a stake through their heart.

(Page numbers may vary- Dover Thrift Editions of Bram Stoker Dracula)

The Meaning of Sleep when Monsters Walk the Night

A motif that features prominently in Bram Stoker’s Dracula is that of sleeping and dreaming. The act of sleeping itself becomes congruent with various meanings. Apart from the traditional associations of ‘eternal sleep’ as a metaphor for death, a good night’s sleep, for example, is considered to be “deep, tranquil, life-giving, health-giving’’ (202). However, for Lucy Westenra and Mina Harker, their nights turn into “presage[s] of horror” (201) that do not grant the two women rest and peace but leave them “feel[ing] terribly weak and spiritless” (419). The reader knows that both women feel weakened in the morning because Count Dracula visits them at night to feed on their blood. Sleep therefore also becomes a human (and predominantly female) weakness in Stoker’s novel. It takes men like Dr. Seward, Professor Van Helsing and Jonathan Harker to protect these two women in their sleep. Dracula only ever manages to come close to Lucy and Mina when, for some reason, none of the men is close by. What seems especially interesting in this context is the fact that the male characters in Stoker’s novel desperately need sleep to mentally and physically strengthen themselves in order to defeat the antagonistic Count Dracula. Prioritizing their own sleep, however, forces them to abandon Lucy and Mina which in turn, leaves the women defenseless and therefore weakens the novel’s female characters.  Thus, Stoker creates a framework in which male strength equates female weakness.

All in all, by falling asleep and transgressing into an unconscious state, Stoker’s (female and male) characters lose all capabilities of taking active agency for themselves. Therefore, they surrender themselves to Dracula. In Jonathan Harker’s case, by falling asleep in a different room in the Count’s castle (Chapter 3), he similarly surrenders himself to the three female vampires. The very idea and practice of nightly sleep is therefore inverted by monsters that walk the night. To be even more precise: the sheer existence of a supernatural creature such as Bram Stoker’s vampire contorts the natural order of Victorian England including the traditional human activity of sleeping.

Dracula’s Mark

In Bram Stoker’s tale of Dracula, the novel reveals in a dark twisted way, how Dracula manages to have full control and effect of leading humans to insanity. For example, Van Helsing tries to protect Mina Harkens by placing the Sacred Wafer to her forehead, but instead, it has the complete opposite effect leaving just a deep red scar. Mrs. Harkens convinced it was Dracula doing, she is left to feel”unclean.” The one benefit that is discovered is that Mina Harkens now has a connection with Dracula.  This is helpful because it helps Van Helsing and the rest of the men figure out where Dracula has run off to. The goal is to get rid of him for good and put the world to rest.  “Now my fear is this. If it be that she can, by our hypnotic trance, tell what the Count see and hear, is it not more true that he who have to hypnotise her first, and who have drink of her very blood and make her drink of his, should, if he will compel her mind to disclose to him that which she knows?”   Mina Harkens serves as an asset to Van Helsing and his crew, but it seems dangerous bringing her along the journey because of the power Dracula has on her.

It is interesting how the men come to the conclusion of bringing Mrs.Harkens along, after being convinced it was a bad idea. I can see the advantage of bringing her along in order to figure out where Dracula might be, yet, it is still very risky to bring her closer towards Dracula; where he will probably have more power over her.    Dracula is a powerful character who manipulates and brings people to insanity. It will be interesting to see how Van Helsing and the rest of the men will work to get rid of Dracula for good.

Dracula and Madness

Ideas of sanity and insanity are both clear cut and obscure throughout Dracula. We have blatant forms of insanity – such as the clearly crazed Renfield – yet we also have other characters who exhibit more obscure signs of madness, such as Lucy and Jonathan. Lucy is put under constant surveillance, as she often sleepwalks throughout the night. Moreso, even when awake she can be found in a trance, as if enchanted by Dracula’s influence. When Lucy spots Dracula on her walk with Mina, she notes “‘his red eyes again! They are just the same’” (126). Mina reflects that Lucy went into a “half-dreamy state, with an odd look on her face” (126). Merely seeing Dracula is enough to cast Lucy into a daze. Somehow he manages to disturb the inner workings of the brain, perhaps in order to get his victims to do his biddings for him. Lucy, for example, is so entranced by Dracula that she leaves her bedroom in the freezing cold to meet him outside, where he consequently sucks her blood.

Similarly, Jonathan goes insane following his time spent with Dracula. While it may be fair to attribute his hospitalization to the disturbed, terror inducing torture he endured in Dracula’s abode, his severe reaction seems to suggest something more than that. After escaping Dracula’s castle, he is hospitalized for brain fever. It seems that Dracula inspires madness in his victims. The mere sight of him is enough to catapult an entire crew of men off of their own ship. Upon seeing Dracula, one of the last men aboard the Demeter emerges from the hold “a raging madman, with his eyes rolling and his face convulsed with fear” (113). After a few moments, “his horror turned to despair and… he sprang on the bulwark and deliberately threw himself into the sea” (113). A single interaction with Dracula is enough to send each man overboard, as each man opts for suicide over enduring the rest of the trip with Dracula. In general, it seems that Dracula’s presence sends characters into a state of self-destructive madness.

Equality and Dracula as the Tragic Elite

We live in an age defined by an ultra-egalitarian zeitgeist so overpowering that it has extinguished the fire or spirit which once illuminated the halls of history with understanding and meaning.

Egalitarianism, the ideology and moral ideal of equality, is the defining characteristic of what we call ‘modernity’. On a physical and metaphysical level it is the destruction of value. It is a source of apathy and is essentially nihilistic because of its destruction of value. Something has value when is different or unique. A world of difference and inequality has meaning and purpose. A world of equality, in an esoteric sense, is a world without meaning. It is a world where no one is stronger, smarter, quicker, wittier,  more beautiful or noble than anyone else. To even assert that anyone is or could be greater than anyone else is the greatest sacrilege, punished with excommunication and shaming. This is probably why marxian socialists and marxian socialist countries with aggressively egalitarian policies have recorded historically the highest rates of suicide in the world. This also might explain why life was so cheap under the soviet system, and also why in a secular state where metaphysics have been abolished and the world is seen purely in physical terms (capitalism/socialism/communism) the number one preoccupation is money. But while money can provide you with means it cannot provide you with meaning.

And this highlights the terrible contradiction in egalitarian ideology because its general appeal is not to those who are in the middle – and certainly not those with any confidence in themselves – but to those that are either significantly above or significantly below. Those who are below embrace the language of equality because they stand to gain social status and wealth. Equality policies are like winning the lottery. And those who are above preach equality because they stand to gain legitimacy and a sense of well being. Advocacy of equality makes them appear ‘Enlightened’ (woke) and ‘educated’ (informed) which makes them morally superior to those who reject advocacy of equality… all of which gives them power in the social structure as constructed today. And this highlights what lies beneath all the empty platitudes and ostensible noble intentions: Egalitarianism is about Power. This is why it creates a climate of corruption because on the one hand the language of egalitarianism is used in a cynical fashion by individuals pursuing personal or political advantage while on the other (and because of these individuals) the sincerity of self-proclaimed egalitarians becomes highly suspect. What is more showing however is that among those who have been designated as beneficiaries of egalitarian ethics it is increasingly understood now more than ever that these ethics are not sincere. This is because those who are beneficiaries ultimately comprise a class of parasites who knowingly go along with these ethics as a strategy of not only survival but deception.

And when you look around at the material world in which we live it is undeniable that inequality is not only in abundance but an inevitability. Equality of opportunity is a lie (it is important to note here that the assumption of equality of opportunity precedes equality of outcome which is therefore also a lie). It doesn’t exist and never will. How tall are you? Are you and all of your peers the same height? What is the height of your reach? You may never be able to reach higher than six feet. Why is this? Well, we are at least eighty percent genetic or hereditarian. We exist as organisms in biological substructures just like all other organisms and we are beholden to the laws of nature (unless you are a kook who believes in creationism instead of the Theory of Evolution). In this way we are biologically pre-determined. So equality of opportunity will not ever exist and is therefore a dishonest ideal to pursue because it will never be realized, and you shouldn’t believe anyone telling you equality of opportunity is real or achievable.

You might be asking yourself: Why is it important to explain the greatest falsehood and betrayal of our time? This ideology of Egalitarianism has infected everything including your psyche and moral sensibilities. You have oriented your entire life and understanding of the world around a great lie. It’s not your fault you have fallen for this lie. I don’t believe that someone who has had the truth withheld from them is in any way at fault. You are a victim of historical circumstance. You have not yet been presented with an alternative to this illusion that has been constructed around you. That is where Count Dracula comes in. Continue reading, if not for the extrication of you moral consciousness by understanding anti-egalitarianism, at least for an accurate understanding of who Dracula is.

So, who is Dracula? We know that he’s a vampire and he’s suppose to be very spooky. But more important to his identity and character is his appearance in the novel as an elite or patrician, and an unapologetic and proud one at that (a characteristic that has curiously been entirely erased from or demonized in popular culture). Dracula isn’t an elite in the meritocratic sense either – constructed to be the only acceptable type of elite by moderate egalitarians – rather he is a nobleman. “Ah, young sir, the Szekelys – and the Dracula as their heart’s blood, Their brains, and their swords – can boast a record that mushroom growths like the Hapsburgs and the Romanoffs can never reach.” (Page 37). As a member of the nobility – unlike the rootless, cosmopolitan elites of today – he has a connection to the land and a connection to the people who have served him and who he has protected. There is a sense of pride in who he is, integrally tied to common people. There is also a desire for greatness, glory and status not only for himself but for his people because as a nobleman his success is largely dependent on theirs -again unlike the bankers and financiers of today who benefit from misfortune as much as success.

This is really only a superficial characteristic of the aristocracy based in the material world that is rather common and understandable. What is truly revealing is the sentiment he follows this passage up with. “The warlike days are over. Blood is too precious a thing in these days of dishonourable peace; and the glories of the great races are as a tale that is told.” (Page 37). The aristocracy and the the aristocratic soul has always been organized around ideals found in majesty, glory, strength, beauty and honor (romanticism) through organized violence. Organized violence is seen as the highest and most pure expression of the soul because of its truth value. When someone achieves their goals by way of organized violence they have done so honestly and fairly by way of competition. The yearning desire for the greatness that comes from organized violence/truth is essentially aristocratic during this time period when the aristocracy, traditionally the military class. He is the classically conflicted aristocratic figure. The aristocracy had reached its zenith and had steadily declined because of increasing egalitarian sentiments during the 19th century. Changing military technologies had rendered skill at arms, the years of martial training aristocratic men had engaged in, useless in the face of the bolt action rifle, artillery, and tanks.

Dracula as a vampire also possess’ supernatural strength and power. So he is not only an elite in the social sense but also possess’ the mythical strength and endurance of a figure typically worshiped in a pagan hero cult. He is in a physical sense superior to those around him. Of course this superiority comes at the cost of being a vampire and all of the negative side effects that go along with vampirism. Dracula in this way is a tragic figure. He possess’ the high qualities of a hero but at the expense of insatiable desire that reduces him to a thrall.

Defining Insanity via Beast

Defining Insanity

Bram Stoker’s Dracula presents a cunning relationship between man and beast. The novel seems to be about the supernatural, but is also about the monster inside of humans. The novel contains multiple instances of humans demonstrating animalistic actions and having animalistic qualities. While looking at the relationship of man and beast through a lens of insanity, Dracula poses a question on the Victorian notion that one can identify insanity in a human based off physical features such as one’s face and body. When a human displays physical and psychological animalistic qualities, the character is immediately assumed to be insane opposed to a belief that the supposed lunatic is simply demonstrating primal animalistic tendencies.
Jonathan Harker describes Count Dracula using animalistic language to describe his appearance, clothing, and movement. For example, when Harker witnesses the Count climbing down the castle’s wall, he describes Dracula as a “lizard” as well as some creature “with great wings,” like a bat or a bird (Stoker 41). Harker observes the animal-like features then questions “what manner of man is this, or what manner of creature is it in the semblance of man?” (Stoker 41). Harker questions whether Dracula is a monstrous beast that looks like a man or if he is simply insane. In response to Dracula’s bizarre actions, Harker believes that Dracula is either crazy or an animal. In either instance, Harker uses non-human characteristic to describe Dracula in an attempt to dehumanize and disassociate Dracula with conventions accepted in daily society.
Additionally, Dr. Seward’s patient Renfield presents an interesting counterargument to Dracula’s monstrous appearance and actions. The notion that Seward looks at Renfield’s face and “see(s) a warning of danger” of a “sidelong look which meant killing” demonstrates Seward’s belief in physiognomy, the ability to assess character or personality from a person’s outer appearance. According to Seward’s notes, Renfield is a “zoophagous [life-eating] maniac” (Stoker 79). Similar to Dracula consuming human blood, Renfield consumes live organisms. Humans are mammals. Carnivorous mammals instinctively kill and eat animals lower on the food chain. Renfield, a mammal, feeds animals to a predator higher on the food chain and eats the highest predator. Here lies an example of how animalistic actions in humans render insanity in Dracula even though humans are technically animals.
If animalistic nature innately lies inside humans and demonstrating animalistic nature means a person is insane, then Seward’s claim that “all men are mad” is true (Stoker 129). Human beings can look normal but actually be a monster or insane. If a monster can have humanistic qualities to make everyone think he is human then inversely, a human can have monstrous qualities to make everyone think he is a monster.

The sisters

The passage I chose establishes a link between the monster and human aspects of mortality with both the vampires and humans perspective being on opposite ends of the spectrum. From sexuality to social norms the length that we know both will go to or have tried to go to in order to obtain their desire and who they will risk differing greatly from not just each other, but from what was acceptable in this time period. I see the Stroker as trying to embrace woman as being able to be the monster just as men were, while also keeping their innocence which is found on the other end of the spectrum.

The vampire sisters seduce Harker and then make an effort to drain his blood while keeping him in a vulnerable situation. “I was afraid to raise my eyelids, but looked out and saw perfectly under the lashes. The girl went on her knees, and bent over me, simply gloating. There was a deliberate voluptuousness which was both thrilling and repulsive, and as she arched her neck, she actually licked her lips like an animal. . . . Lower and lower went her head as the lips went below the range of my mouth and chin and seemed about to fasten on my throat. . . . I closed my eyes in a languorous ecstasy and waited—waited with beating heart.” (Stoker). The quote can also be seen as a comparison between Mina and Lucy, pure women who are ideal models of the Victorian woman who one would assume wouldn’t be capable or even think of doing such an act to another human. Comparing this to the three sisters who are complete opposites. Woman of the devil who wants nothing more than to ravage and harm a man’s body. The overall control the vampires had on Harker had him in a vulnerable position that would not have been accepting of this time period, the females could be seen as dangerous regardless if they were vampires.