History Headscratchers / Dracula

** So far, the earliest version of this story I can find -- my research, admittedly, being mainly clicking on links to various adaptations on Wiki/TheOtherWiki -- is a 1973 adaptation of the novel starring Jack Palance (also called ''Bram Stoker's Dracula'', funnily enough), which suggests that Lucy Westenra is a reincarnation of Dracula's dead wife. Then there's Fred Saberhagen's ''Literature/TheDraculaTape'', published in 1975, which involves a RelationshipUpgrade between Dracula and Mina as part of the overall PerspectiveFlip on the original novel. I assume (although, given the earlier note on the depth of my scholarship, I wouldn't exactly stake my life and reputation on it) that it kind of emerged from those two works over time in the way that WordOfDante does.

* While Stoker was certainly a man of his time and was not likely to champion women's rights to any great degree I think you are giving him a little less credit than he deserves here. Yes, there was an attitude that a rape victim was "ruined" and indeed Mina herself is clearly terrified by this concept when Dracula urns his attentions to her. However all the men in the story assure her that she is not ruined and any corruption that has occurred can be reversed. It's not a modern attitude but at the same time it doesn't jibe with the idea Lucy is being somehow punished for her supposed moral failing. Furthermore the idea that Lucy is "sexually curious" seems quite a stretch to me and likely based on later versions of the story. In the book she only ever shows romantic interest in her fiancee and never even mentions anything to do with sex. She certainly doesn't show "curiosity towards a mysterious and beguiling stranger." She never so much as meets Dracula when not mind controlled. The interest is entirely one sided on Dracula's side and the book never once implies that Lucy is in any way to blame for her fate, rather that she is the innocent victim of a monster.

* Playing ''TabletopGame/DungeonsAndDragons'' as a kid, I quickly realized that Strahd von Zarovich was an {{Expy}} of Count Dracula, so I sort of assumed that the plot element of Tatyana continually being reincarnated was an element taken from the original story. Bear in mind that I had never read or seen other versions of Dracula before. So when the [[Film/BramStokersDracula Coppola version]] came out in 1992, I assumed the fact that Mina looked exactly like Dracula's dead wife was part of the original story, and that that was what [=TSR=] drew on for the Tatyana curse for Strahd. Imagine my surprise when I read the novel not long after that and discovered that that wasn't part of the original story. I thought it was weird but then sort of forgot about it until recently, when two other Dracula adaptations, ''Film/DraculaUntold'' and ''Series/{{Dracula}}'' used the same plot development. I thought this was kind of funny, because it seemed as though this idea has fully entered the Dracula canon from a possible plot for the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenloft_%28module%29 original Ravenloft adventure module]] back in 1983. Is that right? Was there any earlier origin to this plot development?

[[WMG: Where do people get off saying this is about destructive female sexuality?]]

** Van Helsing is not, despite how he is portrayed elsewhere, is not a vampire expert. He's just a very clever man open-minded enough to consider the supernatural when presented with the appropriate evidence. As such while she is doing his best to research how to kill a vampire he's ultimately never tried it before. As such he's going to try everything his books say even if much of it is probably superstition. As it turns out just stabbing the heart will get it done but without the pressure of time present in the Dracula chase Van Helsing was hedging his bets.

** Not every feminist scholar is so negative about ''Dracula'' -- Nina Auerbach for instance sees some value in the way that Mina turns Dracula's power against himself.
** It's Academia, it's what they do.

*** Lucy is a self-described "horrid flirt" and describes the exultation she feels at getting multiple marriage offers. he even asks, albeit in jest, "Why can’t they let a girl marry three men, or as many as pleases her?” It's not like NONE of her sexualization is present in the novel, and it's relatively easy for a reader to construct her fate as punishment for her promiscuous appetites. It is after all Van Helsing who proclaims (to her own fiancé) that she is headed to heaven after being staked; it's hardly "confirmed" in a broader sense. Also, her sleepwalking may be understood as noy strictly "innocent" -- criminologist Cesare Lombroso (whom Stoker mentions in the text) lists it among characteristics of female criminal types, so it may be that “Lucy’s latent criminal nature ‘bids’ Dracula to come to her, despite her acquired morality and her betrothal to Arthur” (to quote Ernest Fontana). Dispute these interpretations if you wish to, but it's not as if there's no basis for them.

** Not even feminist scholar is so negative about ''Dracula'' -- Nina Auerbach for instance sees some value in the way that Mina turns Dracula's power against himself.

*** Lucy is a self-described "horrid flirt" and describes the exultation she feels at getting multiple marriage offers. he even asks, albeit in jest, "Why can’t they let a girl marry three men, or as many as pleases her?” It's not like NONE of her sexualization is present in the novel, and it's relatively easy for a reader to construct her fate as punishment for her promiscuous appetites. It is after all Van Helsing who proclaims (to her own fiancé) that she is headed to heaven after being staked; it's hardly "confirmed" in a broader sense. Also, her sleepwalking may not be understood as strictly "innocent" -- criminologist Cesare Lombroso (whom Stoker mentions in the text) lists it among characteristics of female criminal types, so it may be that “Lucy’s latent criminal nature ‘bids’ Dracula to come to her, despite her acquired morality and her betrothal to Arthur” (to quote Ernest Fontana). Dispute these interpretations if you wish to, but it's not as if there's no basis for them.

* Or he was out and about in England because it's a new place he'd never seen before, while his castle is where he's spent the last few hundred years and thefore knows so well as to be almost bored of it.

* Note this letter that Quincey sends to Holmwood: "“We’ve told yarns by the camp-fire in the prairies; and dressed one another’s wounds after trying a landing at the Marquesas; and drunk healths on the shore of Titicaca. There are more yarns to be told, and other wounds to be healed, and another health to be drunk. Won’t you let this be at my camp-fire to-morrow night? I have no hesitation in asking you, as I know a certain lady is engaged to a certain dinner-party, and that you are free. There will only be one other, our old pal at the Korea, Jack Seward..."
* Far from having lived their whole lives in England, Holmwood and Seward have travelled the world, and Morris with them. Several times I have encountered this odd idea that people in the 19th century did not travel, when in fact, upper class males were expected to do so.

*** Lucy is a self-described "horrid flirt" and describes the exultation she feels at getting multiple marriage offers. he even asks, albeit in jest, "Why can’t they let a girl marry three men, or as many as pleases her?” It's not like NONE of her sexualization is present in the novel, and it's relatively easy for a reader to construct her fate as punishment for her promiscuous appetites. It is after all Van Helsing who proclaims (to her own fiancé) that she is headed to heaven after being staked; it's hardly "confirmed" in a broader sense. Also, her sleepwalking may not be understood as strictly "innocent" -- criminologist Cesare Lombroso (whom Stoker mentions in the text) lists it among characteristics of female criminal types, so it may be that “Lucy’s latent criminal nature ‘bids’ Dracula to come to her, despite her acquired morality and her betrothal to Arthur” (to quote Ernest Fontana).

*** Lucy is a self-described "horrid flirt" and describes the exultation she feels at getting multiple marriage offers. he even asks, albeit in jest, "Why can’t they let a girl marry three men, or as many as pleases her?” It's not like NONE of her sexualization is present in the novel, and it's relatively easy for a reader to construct her fate as punishment for her promiscuous appetites. It is after all Van Helsing who proclaims (to her own fiancé) that she is headed to heaven after being staked; it's hardly "confirmed" in a broader sense.

** So far, the earliest version of this story I can find -- my research, admittedly, being mainly clicking on links to various adaptations on Wiki/TheOtherWiki -- is a 1973 adaptation of the novel starring Jack Palance (also called ''Bram Stoker's Dracula'', funnily enough), which suggests that Lucy Westenra is a reincarnation of Dracula's dead wife. Then there's Fred Saberhagen's ''TheDraculaTape'', published in 1975, which involves a RelationshipUpgrade between Dracula and Mina as part of the overall PerspectiveFlip on the original novel. I assume (although, given the earlier note on the depth of my scholarship, I wouldn't exactly stake my life and reputation on it) that it kind of emerged from those two works over time in the way that WordOfDante does.

** It can be noted that an extremely similar dynamic plays out in ''Film/TheMummy1932'', which is almost a remake of Dracula (1931) in many respects.

* At one point Harker muses on "This was the being I was helping to transfer to London, where, perhaps, for centuries to come he might, amongst its teeming millions, satiate his lust for blood, and create a new and ever-widening circle of semi-demons to batten on the helpless." Similarly, Seward writes, "He is experimenting, and doing it well; and if it had not been that we have crossed his path he would be yet—he may be yet if we fail—the father or furtherer of a new order of beings, whose road must lead through Death, not Life." So the idea of him creating and ruling over other vampires is in there, even if it's just an idea. But yes, there's little enough evidence in the novel of a large number of vampires existing, though those that do appear (the three "sisters" and Lucy) clearly defer to Dracula.

** In the novel Van Helsing notes that Dracula making a plan and looking to increase his influence is unusual for vampires and most just don't seem to do much with themselves, noting that even Dracula has a "child brain" and has only recently started experimenting with something beyond lurking in his castle.

*** Van Helsing's lines in the book suggests that a bite means you will turn into a vampire when you die but will not itself kill you or turn you, since when Dracula flees England he notes that they have kill Dracula or she will turn when she dies, bringing up dying of old age but not suggesting that the bite will turn her by itself. She then does start to turn but I always got the impression the blood he forced her to drink was now causing her to change .

* While Stoker was certainly a man of his time and was not likely to champion women's rights to any great degree I think you are giving him a little less credit than he deserves here. Yes, there was an attitude that a rape victim was "ruined" and indeed Mina herself is clearly terrified by this concept when Dracula urns his attentions to her. However all the men in the story assure her that she is not ruined and any corruption that has occurred can be reversed. It's not a modern attitude but at the same time it doesn't jibe with the idea Lucy is being somehow punished for her supposed moral failing. Furthermore the idea that Lucy is "sexually curious" seems quite a stretch to me and likely based on later versions of the story. In the book she only ever shows romantic interest in her fiancee and never even mentions anything to do with sex. She certainly doesn't show "curiosity towards a mysterious and beguiling stranger." She never so much as meets Dracula when not mind controlled. The interest is entirely one sided on Dracula's side and book never once implies that Lucy is in any way to blame for her fate, rather that she is the innocent victim of a monster.

* While Stoker was certainly a man of his time and was not likely to champion women's rights to any great degree I think you are giving him a little less credit than he deserves here. Yes, there was an attitude that a rape victim was "ruined" and indeed Mina herself is clearly terrified by this concept when Dracula. However all the men in the story assure her that she is not ruined and any corruption that has occurred can be reversed. It's not a modern attitude but at the same time it doesn't jibe with the idea Lucy is being somehow punished for her supposed moral failing. Furthermore the idea that Lucy is "sexually curious" seems quite a stretch to me and likely based on later versions of the story. In the book she only ever shows romantic interest in her fiancee and never even mentions anything to do with sex. She certainly doesn't show "curiosity towards a mysterious and beguiling stranger." She never so much as meets Dracula when not mind controlled. The interest is entirely one sided on Dracula's side and book never once implies that Lucy is in any way to blame for her fate, rather that she is the innocent victim of a monster.

* While Stoker was certainly a man of his time and was not likely to champion women's rights to any great degree I think you are giving him a little less credit than he deserves here. Yes, there was an attitude that a rape victim was "ruined" and indeed Mina herself is clearly terrified by this concept when Dracula. However all the men in the story assure her that she is not ruined and any corruption that has occurred can be reversed. It's not a modern attitude but at the same time it doesn't jibe with the idea Lucy is being somehow punished for her supposed moral failing. Furthermore the idea that Lucy is "sexually curious" seems quite a stretch to me and likely based on later versions of the story. In the book she only ever shows romantic interest in her fiancee and never even mentions anything to do with sex. She certainly doesn't show "curiosity towards a mysterious and beguiling stranger." She never so much as meets Dracula when not mind controlled.