Quincey Morris - Tumblr Posts

Such a great job you did, i really appreciate it.

When i was reading the Bram Stoker's book i thought about this questions, happy that you found the answers to them🤍📚

On September 6th, 2022, I shared this realization with my friends on Tumblr and I remember going bonkers over it:

I shared this with Maddie. I realized something while I was going through the novel, Dracula, again. So the events take place in the month and year the book was published in May 1897. But doesn't that seem off? Then it occurred to me that the seven-month-long events of the book happened before it was published.

Then I remembered that Jonathan and Mina have a son at the end of the book and it's mentioned that seven years had passed. So the events of Dracula took place in the year 1890 or as early as 1889 before the book was published.

So my idea is Abraham Van Hellsing had Bram Stoker publish the book with the year changed.

Also, while a sequel was written by one of Bram Stoker's descendants (which wasn't well received by the fandom) it did mention Abraham had Bram Stoker publish the book because he wanted to help other people that went through the same ordeal he and the others had with Dracula.

So according to Jonathan he and Mina had Quincey on November 5, 1890. One year after Quincey died and Dracula was defeated.

======

So I am making this post because I not only made a mistake on the year the events of the book take place, but I have two possible years the book is set in.

The clue I am going by is the conversation Mina has with Abraham Van Hellsing when she recounts to him Jonathan's shocking although justified reaction to Dracula showing up in London. She mentioned it happened on a Thursday, and earlier in the book she wrote and dated the episode happening September 22nd.

With this information, I went to Time and Dates to look at 17 calendar years for a September 22nd landing on a Thursday and found three: 1881, 1887, and 1892.

I want to believe the events happened in 1887 since not only would Quincey Harker have already been born and seven by the time his family and their friends return from visiting Dracula's Castle in Romania but following these events Abraham Van Hellsing gathers the handwritten and audio accounts of their time dealing with Dracula.

He writes the manuscript that would become the Dracula novel or he meets Bram Stoker who writes the novel after meeting Abraham because Mr. Van Hellsing wanted to help other people that would likely deal with vampires like he and his group did.

After having a difficult time getting the novel published Dracula finally hits the shelves on May 26, 1897, which is ironically Dracula's Day.

I needed to dig a little more before settling on which year Dracula took place in, and boy I hit something and find another clue I overlooked: the Demeter.

After reading up on Bram Stoker and an interesting article about his time studying for the elements pertaining to his novel on Time's website, apparently, the book was centered around real-life events and real-life people.

Jonathan Harker, his wife, and Dr. Seward were real people. The Demeter Incident was real, but the ship was called Dmitri. The sailors said the incident happened a few years ago. Bram Stoker started working on Dracula in the summer of 1890. So I can without a doubt say it was set in 1887. Which gladdens me.

When he tried to hand over the manuscript to be published as a non-fiction book his editor refused it since it pertained to events centering around a mass murder and then before it was finally published in 1897 101 pages were cut out, the epilogue was shortened, and other alterations were made to avoid a mass public panic since the madman was believed to still be around.

I never expected to learn this much about the book and its events to this magnitude but I was certain I would need to change some of the dates on my previous post about vampires and ghouls.

Sources

------

Dracula by Bram Stoker

Tumblr

My Homework on Vampires and Ghouls

======================================================== Corrections for Mercy’s Background Story: Vampirazation =========================

Encyclopedia Britannica

Bram Stoker | Biography, Books, Dracula, & Facts

Bram Stoker, byname of Abraham Stoker, (born November 8, 1847, Clontarf, County Dublin, Ireland—died April 20, 1912, London, England), Iris

Time

Bram Stoker Claimed That Parts of 'Dracula' Were Real. Here's What We Know About the Story Behind the Novel

Bram Stoker claimed that many of the characters in his novel 'Dracula' were real people

@merumely @thirstyforlulu @alucardownsmyass @doodleferp @diamond-star @sundove88 @michi-tala @amikartest @trashbaby92 @goblins-riddles-or-frocks @blood-and-cigars @the-hellsing-organisation @icecry @thecrimsonwingsfckerabridged @elixirvitae @therejectkat @alucrd @autumnaaltonen ​ @valentine-bites @theloveandthedead

Thank you, I just want this to be a thing now

Modern Day Dracula Fan Cast

Whether your particular poison is Sherlock, Elementary, or Watson and Holmes (which is a comic that’s worth looking at if you like Sherlock Holmes) you can’t deny that the idea of modern day Sherlock Holmes really works. I think the reason for that, beyond just having strong, archetypal characters, is that the original Sherlock Holmes stories were very modern at the time. It was a scientist applying the latest methods to crime solving in a world where the police ran like that John Mulaney bit about getting away with murder in olden times.

Somewhere along the way we got stuck in the Victorian conception of it, but it’s got the soul of modernity to it. Another novel that has the soul of modernity to it but has been locked to the period, Bram Stoker’s Dracula (not to be confused with the film Bram Stoker’s Dracula, which I do not care for the most part, though I bear no ill will to those who do). The world has sort of latched onto it as a Romantic era story about a brooding vampire and swooning maidens, but it really is more of an enlightenment story. I’d compare it to Pacific Rim or Ghostbusters which are films about regular folk (primarily young folk in the case of the former) who apply science and friendship to defeat old world evil (admittedly among other uncomfortable Victorianisms).

That’s the adaptation I want to see, where a band of young people join together with science and friendship to defeat the avatar of an outmoded, parasitic medieval worldview.

So here’s the cast….

Mina Murray(-Harker): Saoirse Ronan

Stoker was Irish, Murray is an Irish name, and so I think that it’s fitting for the co-star of this movie to be Irish as well. I don’t think anybody can doubt Ronan’s acting chops at this point so I’ll just say that I think she’s got the ability to be kindly and strong, and be the one to take charge of the Crew of Light (which is the badass name the heroes call themselves in the novel).

John Harker: John Boyega

I don’t think I’m the first person to say Boyega would be a great Johnathan. Based on Star Wars alone Boyega can pull off Harker’s mix of “what the F—k is happening” and “touch my friends and I’ll put a Kukri through your neck.” This character has been done wrong throughout decades of film and stage shows and I think Boyega would be perfect to make the character the active, brave, down to earth, kind and loving husband of the novel.

Lucy Westenra: Lily James

Lucy, another character that has been, in my opinion at least, misinterpreted by most adapters. I picture Lucy as Mina’s upper class best friend. A little more deliberately glamorous but a total sweetheart who we believe the Crew of Light would band together to avenge. The idea of an actual Disney Princess in the role of Lucy is a pretty solid way of looking at the character.

Doctor Jackie Seward: Hannah John-Kamen

Yes, I think Seward should be a woman. The cast needs to an overhaul so it’s not all dudes and one Mina once Lucy dies. Kamen has the capability to play a sort of brooding badassery that works for Seward. Seward is a character who is dealing with rejection, being overworked, and probably dealing with some kind of clinical depression but rises to occasion and teams up with the man her ex-girlfriend was going to marry to make sure nobody has to go through it again.

Arthur Holmwood: Tom Felton

As much as I don’t want this to be a total angst-fest, I think Arthur doesn’t really have much of an arc in the novel. Felton can obviously play upper class Englishman and sort of dorky friendly guy (watch his later episodes of the Flash). I think he could also play an Arthur that slowly breaks down at all the loss until he lets the rest of the Crew of Light support him and ends the movie a little more world weary, but ultimately standing upright.

Quincey Morris: Lucas Till

Guy’s actually Texan, which is fun. I’m mostly basing this on his role as Havoc, but I do think he’s got it in him to play Arthur’s supportive, adventurer best friend, who bonds with everyone and sacrifices himself for John and Mina. Just a fun, friendly action hero in the middle of a survival horror thriller.

Abraham Van Helsing: Mark Hamill

I’m sure he can do the accent, and he’s definitely got the look. I imagine him doing a variation on old Luke Skywalker in TLJ. Someone who knows more than the young people around him, who’s hurting from loss and past mistakes (remember book Van Helsing lost a son and has a wife struggling with mental illness) and ultimately gives his charges the tools they need to save the world on their own.

RM Renfield: Bill Skarsgard

I know Renfield should be older, but I have two points. Firstly, I think it’s fun if Dracula ends up enthralling more of an impressionable young person. Second, just look at that picture. That’s Renfield.

Count Dracula: Hugo Weaving

Credit for this one to my friend Ed. Picture him doing Agent Smith crossed with Elrond in Red Skull’s voice. No sexy Dracula (nothing against Mister Weaving), just a dark, menacing, towering figure with a powerful voice looking down on everyone around him.

I’m broke but I will rob five banks to fund you if that counts for anything

BBC dracula pissed me off so much that I'm considering writing my own adaption to give us those wholesome found family tropes and healthy gay relationships that we all deserve

These are all incredibly accurate and I love them

dracula characters as inspirobot quotes

dracula:

jonathan harker:

van helsing:

renfield:

jack seward:

mina murray:

arthur holmwood:

quincey morris:

lucy westenra:

I have to watch the first 30 minutes of Bram Stoker’s Dracula for a film class and JIMINY CHRISTMAS THIS IS SO PAINFUL ALREADY

ITS NOT EVEN PRETENDING, IS IT? WHAT IS THIS? WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS? I haven’t even seen the title what is this

why is Lucy a slut

WHY IS LUCY A SLUT

Why is Lucy a slut

Why is Lucy a slut

Why is Lucy a slut

I have to watch the first 30 minutes of Bram Stoker’s Dracula for a film class and JIMINY CHRISTMAS THIS IS SO PAINFUL ALREADY

ITS NOT EVEN PRETENDING, IS IT? WHAT IS THIS? WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS? I haven’t even seen the title what is this

Hey wtf??

Has anyone read the Manga Classics Dracula?!?! Because it’s the best fucking adaptation of the book I’ve seen and NO ONE is talking about it???????

Lucy: Y’all.

Arthur: All y’all.

Mina: All’a y’all.

Jack: Y’all’s.

Jonathan: Y’all’ll.

Quincey, in tears: I’m so proud.

Bram Stoker's Dracula

Warning: Spoilers to the ending of an 1897 novel.

Artwork: The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters by Francisco Goya

__________

After having finished reading the Gothic horror classic that is Bram Stoker's Dracula, it must be said that the ending was, to say the least, not expected.

The original story of Dracula is of the hero group (Jonathan, Mina, Seward, Arthur, Quincey, and Van Helsing) discovering the evil deeds of Dracula and putting an end to said vampire.

The premise is a group of good doers taking down the almighty evil. So, it comes to no surprise that the entire novel was building up to the group's final encounter with Dracula. From the beginning when Jonathan first went to his castle to the end where they trailed Dracula on his path home; it has always been about them putting an end to Dracula's reign of terror.

Previous situations involving Dracula such as the turning of Lucy, and even the planning phase of his demise were several chapters long. Yet when the anticipated moment of Dracula's end comes to fruition, it was less than four pages in length.

In storytelling, the moment being built-up to is expected to be grander than any previous plot point. The three-act structure of the hero's journey (a story structure seen even in the earliest of narratives) has everything in act one and two projecting the story upwards towards the climax. That climax being the highest and most dramatic point of the story.

In a novel called Dracula about the terror and downfall of Dracula, it is safe to say that the climatic point is meant to be Dracula's demise. It is also safe to assume that a novel, constantly discussing the mass array of supernatural and insanely powerful powers Dracula possesses, would have the climax be a grand standoff between the group of heavenly mortals and the great hellish immortal. Yet when they come across the cart transporting the said 'great evil', he doesn't even wake from his slumber let alone fight against them.

Remember watching a movie and asking, "Why didn't they do that and have everything be immediately solved?"

It's because mistakes are entertaining.

Perhaps over the decades since its initial publishing, society has become more drama and action craved. Perhaps that is why this frustration came to be. But if 200+ pages are leading to the death of the evil and powerful Dracula, then is it wrong to be disappointed with this anticlimactic, but ideal outcome.

Perfection is not drama.

Drama comes from the conflict created by opposing forces. Now while that conflict has to resolve at some point, in a story full of drama, the climax is the most dramatic part. Yet somehow Stoker made the most interesting part record-keeping.

In short, Bram Stoker's Dracula is legendary in how it was able to be remembered and praised for countless generations even with its disappointment of an ending.

__________

I still enjoyed it.

One thing I love about the book and hate about the adaptations is that little Quincey was born an entire year after Dracula's death, SPECIFICALLY ruling out ANY possibility that he was Dracula's child because this book deserves an unreservedly happy ending dammit. AND YET so many adaptations just completely ignore this despite Bram's best efforts smh my head.

I love Lucy's discussion of Quincey speaking American slang in today's Dracula, so much. There's so much to love about it!

The claim that Quincey only speaks slang to please her when usually he has "exquisite manners", when, for the rest of the book we only hear him speak in his Very Cowboy Way. (I wonder if perhaps he was only speaking "politely" for her sake, and dropped it when he realized how it delighted her).

Lucy going "I do not know myself if I shall ever speak slang; I do not know if Arthur likes it, as I have never heard him use any as yet." Which is delightful for several reasons:

Being besties with Quincey definitely means Art is no stranger to slang, even if he doesn't use it himself

Can you imagine?? Lucy trying to talk American slang the way Quincey does? Putting on that Cowboy attitude? Especially when she thinks all of it is probably made up and would make up her own?? This would be PRECIOUS.

Please compare with me!

Quincey, May 24: "Don't cry, my dear. If it's for me, I'm a hard nut to crack; and I take it standing up."

Lucy, May 11: "He has a curious habit of looking one straight in the face, as if trying to read one's thoughts. He tries this on very much with me, but I flatter myself he has got a tough nut to crack. I know that from my glass."

Now idk the origin of the phrase "hard/tough nut to crack" (online dictionaries are telling me "the 1700s" with no location given) so idk if that truly counts as American Slang for Lucy's purposes BUT

Looks like she has already been picking up some phrases from him :D

I love Dracula because it really shows that the age old tradition of giving men random but identifying nicknames when you’re just talking shit with the girlies™️ dates all the way back the Victorian era

Gasp, is Dracula a big thing on tumblr, I fucking love Dracula

Guys I think this is hopeless there’s no way we can defeat the Count—OH MY GOD ITS QUINCEY MORRIS WITH A STEEL CHAIR

I love how quickly Mina switches up, like one moment girlys hypnotized and doing or saying some unsettling shit and then right after act like nothing ever happend.

¾ of the Dracula cast, including side characters: -takes 10 pages of yammering to get around to making a single point-

Quincey Morris, King of Brevity, reading the situation for 0.5 seconds: Uh huh, cool. So where’s the blood going? 

Jack Seward, in tears, both from the Lucy issue and gratitude at not sitting through another corn metaphor for half an hour: I don’t fucking KNOW– 

Favorite thing about Dracula Daily so far is that yesterday I read a post that had in-depth, well-researched analysis that could easily be mistaken for a published literary criticism of Dracula, except it casually makes a passing reference to "the polycule" without feeling the need to elaborate

maybe if I don't read today's entry, quincey can still hang with the rest of the dracula polycule ;_;

Their son, who they named Quincey, was born on the same day Quincey Morris died 😭😭😭😭

People in Hollywood are cowards because you could totally do a book accurate Dracula movie and it really wouldn’t be that hard.

Johnathan is just vloging his trip to Draculas castle but the castle doesn’t have any service or wifi so he can’t post anything or send it.

Lucy and Mina’s letters are now text messages or voice memos that are super long.

Dr. Steward voice dairy is wouldn’t have to be changed or it could be changed to him filming himself talking. Or even recorded sessions of him and Renfield

The newspaper clippings could become morning news stories.

All the diary entries are now them just filming themselves talking about what happened in like a video diary format.

It would be so easy! Can you see the vision?