Dracula Daily Spoilers - Tumblr Posts

this book is freaking MADE of parallels.

The forehead marks on Dracula and Mina.

Two John’s paired with enigmatic foreigners

Renfield playing with his insects planning to eat them, Dracula doing the same to Johnathan.

3 women in Dracula’s castle, 3 men following Vanhellsing. ( THE FUCKING KISS SCENE WHERE ART SAYS GOODBYE TO LUCY AND VANHELLSING GRABS HIM AND THROWS HIM BACK JUST LIKE DRACULA DID WITH THE WOMAN WHO TRIED TO FEED ON JOHNATHAN- THE PLACEMENT OF THE CHARACTERS IN THAT SCENE, EVEN THE DESCRIPTORS USED, ITS ALL THE SAME!!!!)

There are more that I’m forgetting but the point is that the little details in this book drive me insane.

ok spoilers under the cut but I was thinking about the placement of the gash Jon gave to Dracula w/ the shovel and...

it's the same place Mina is burned after she semi-turns later; on the forehead 👀.

One thing I’m seeing on this re-read of Dracula Daily that I’m already really enjoying, it’s all the little details we didn’t catch before

When we first started we didn’t know who Jonathan Harker was and to us he was just a silly little British man who was ignoring the obvious warning signs, so there was a comedic element to the dramatic irony of him going to Castle Dracula

But now that we know who Jonathan is and we care about him, it hits much harder all the subtle horror elements we missed while focusing on this good friend telling us about his travels

From the first entry, people picking up on the dog barking under his window and being like “is that Dracula? Does it start this early?” Being skeeved out by Dracula’s overly familiar letter to Jonathan, which at first seemed perfectly reasonable except for the name attached at the end, and picking up on all the terrible foreshadowing for what will be Jonathan’s living hell over the next month in his Castle.

And people this time picking up on the bravery of the wife of the innkeeper who gave him a crucifix, begging him to stay or wait, to not go to the castle, of the terror of knowing that Dracula was in correspondence with her husband to get the letter to Jonathan and the sort of subtle threat they must be under at all times, of the significance of “for your mother’s sake” knowing what Dracula does to children. She is no longer perceived as a random background character, but an active player forced to be a bystander who is trying desperately to help this ignorant soul in any way she can even if she knows it might be useless.

I love people realizing Jonathan is skeptical and off-put, but not enough to deter his mission. He’s not oblivious, just making an effort to remain open-minded to the culture and superstitions and beliefs he is not familiar with, since he’s aware it will be wildly different from his own (to the best of his ability for being an Englishman from the 1890s) and pointedly dismissing the things that might be red flags as an attempt to rationalize because nothing truly concerning has happened yet to provoke him to leave, and he doesn’t want to be deterred by something he’s getting worked up for for no reason yet, he couldn’t do his job otherwise and people are depending on him

Idk, I just like this deeper analysis and thought now that people are already familiar and attached to his character, and now know what happens, so they can properly point out when something is foreshadowing later events or themes in the novel, and they can pick up on it quicker

Even something as simple as people noticing the other meals mentioned in the first entry because of all the focus on Paprika Hendl last year makes me happy :)

I like that they are giving our protagonist more credit now, knowing the character he turns into later in the novel (a badass)

It is satisfying :)))

The Count literally sent Johnathan out of the room under a pretext, rushed like a madman to clear the dishes, then pretended to be relaxing on the couch casually reading a book of train schedules when Johnathan returned.

Dracula is a comedy

I was surprised to find in my second reading of Dracula Daily that Jonathan has canonically taken pictures of Dracula's home in England with a Kodak camera! I didn't realize this since the name was not capitalized.

He says in today's entry that "I could not enter it, as I had not the key of the door leading to it from the house, but I have taken with my kodak views of it from various points."

This is historically accurate as the first Kodak camera was released in 1888 so Jonathan would have had one in 1897. Here's what it would have looked like:

Before Dracula Daily starts tomorrow, people eager to hear from Jonathan Harker might be interested in knowing that there's good evidence that the first chapter of the book was originally Chapter III, and that in the first two chapters, Jonathan was possibly supposed to have:

Checked out the Pinakotek art museum.

Visited a leichenhaus in Munich where Count Dracula was seemingly hanging around pretending to be a dead body before apparently popping back to life.

Attended a performance of Wagner's The Flying Dutchman (which probably ties into Stoker's fascination with the play Vanderdecken, which Henry Irving starred in) .

Done all the stuff in the short story "Dracula's Guest," which includes (1) having a scary time on Walpurgisnacht before having his scary time on St. George's Eve, (2) finding a mysterious mausoleum in which a blonde woman--implied to be the blonde vampiress who later features in Dracula's castle--has a giant iron stake in her and gets struck by lightening in a storm, (3) spending the night in the snow with a wolf--who is probably Dracula--sitting on him to keep him warm and abrading his throat with its file like tongue.

Dracula Daily (again) day 1 thoughts:

Was that Dracula howling under Jonathan's window even from day one? Was it not even the paprika that gave him queer dreams...

there is so much "falling in friendship at first sight" in dracula methinks

There truly, truly is. And while I adore it as is, enough that I have included a selection on quotes down below to illustrate the point... also, I love how they all get to know one another and make that decision to be friends for life because they're already connected - through documents, through stories, through trust in a loved one being extended outwards to someone that loved person trusts.

Mina knows the suitor squad from Lucy's descriptions, and trusts van Helsing knowing that Seward and Lucy trusted him. Van Helsing knew Mina from Lucy's letters, and then got to know her and Jonathan through their respective journals. Jonathan trusted van Helsing, and the suitor squad later, after learning about them from Mina. Arthur and Quincey and Lucy trusted van Helsing because Seward did. The suitor squad trusted in Mina on van Helsing's word and Lucy's love, and then got to know her and Jonathan through their journals. They all make those decisions to be devoted friends to one another almost immediately, but it's not only uninformed instinct; these people are already connected through a web of trust and love and shared documents (which give physical form to the trust and love).

It's really wonderful, and it's why they succeed in the end. Anyways, have a collection of quotes to be emotional about...

Arthur and van Helsing, on their second or third meeting in person:

"I must not call you 'Mr.,' and I have grown to love you—yes, my dear boy, to love you—as Arthur." Arthur held out his hand, and took the old man's warmly. "Call me what you will," he said. "I hope I may always have the title of a friend."

Van Helsing meeting Quincey:

Van Helsing strode forward, and took his hand, looking him straight in the eyes as he said:— "A brave man's blood is the best thing on this earth when a woman is in trouble. You're a man and no mistake."

Mina on the day she meets van Helsing:

Dr. Van Helsing must be a good man as well as a clever one if he is Arthur's friend and Dr. Seward's, and if they brought him all the way from Holland to look after Lucy. I feel from having seen him that he is good and kind and of a noble nature.

van Helsing on the day he meets Mina:

"Oh, but I am grateful to you, you so clever woman. Madam"—he said this very solemnly—"if ever Abraham Van Helsing can do anything for you or yours, I trust you will let me know. It will be pleasure and delight if I may serve you as a friend; as a friend, but all I have ever learned, all I can ever do, shall be for you and those you love. There are darknesses in life, and there are lights; you are one of the lights."

van Helsing meeting Jonathan (and Jonathan's reaction):

"And you, sir—I have read all the letters to poor Miss Lucy, and some of them speak of you, so I know you since some days from the knowing of others; but I have seen your true self since last night. You will give me your hand, will you not? And let us be friends for all our lives." We shook hands, and he was so earnest and so kind that it made me quite choky.

Seward, the day he meets Mina:

"You are quite right. I did not trust you because I did not know you. But I know you now; and let me say that I should have known you long ago. I know that Lucy told you of me; she told me of you too. May I make the only atonement in my power? Take the cylinders and hear them—the first half-dozen of them are personal to me, and they will not horrify you; then you will know me better."

Mina, the day she meets Seward:

"...I have been more touched than I can say by your grief. That is a wonderful machine, but it is cruelly true. It told me, in its very tones, the anguish of your heart. It was like a soul crying out to Almighty God. No one must hear them spoken ever again! See, I have tried to be useful. I have copied out the words on my typewriter, and none other need now hear your heart beat, as I did."

Seward meeting Jonathan:

He is uncommonly clever, if one can judge from his face, and full of energy. If this journal be true—and judging by one's own wonderful experiences, it must be—he is also a man of great nerve. That going down to the vault a second time was a remarkable piece of daring.

Mina and Arthur on the day they meet:

"I know now how I suffered," he said, as he dried his eyes, "but I do not know even yet—and none other can ever know—how much your sweet sympathy has been to me to-day. I shall know better in time; and believe me that, though I am not ungrateful now, my gratitude will grow with my understanding. You will let me be like a brother, will you not, for all our lives—for dear Lucy's sake?" "For dear Lucy's sake," I said as we clasped hands. "Ay, and for your own sake," he added, "for if a man's esteem and gratitude are ever worth the winning, you have won mine to-day. If ever the future should bring to you a time when you need a man's help, believe me, you will not call in vain."

Mina and Quincey the day they meet:

"I wish I could comfort all who suffer from the heart. Will you let me be your friend, and will you come to me for comfort if you need it? You will know, later on, why I speak." He saw that I was in earnest, and stooping, took my hand, and raising it to his lips, kissed it. It seemed but poor comfort to so brave and unselfish a soul, and impulsively I bent over and kissed him. The tears rose in his eyes, and there was a momentary choking in his throat; he said quite calmly:— "Little girl, you will never regret that true-hearted kindness, so long as ever you live!"

Jonathan and Quincey, less than a week after meeting:

I grasped his hand instinctively and found it as firm as a piece of steel. I think he understood my look; I hope he did.

.

bonus: "you just rejected my marriage proposal so I will hold your hands and promise that we will be friends forever" to Lucy.

Jack Seward:

And then, Mina, I felt a sort of duty to tell him that there was some one. I only told him that much, and then he stood up, and he looked very strong and very grave as he took both my hands in his and said he hoped I would be happy, and that if I ever wanted a friend I must count him one of my best.

Quincey Morris:

"Tell me, like one good fellow to another, is there any one else that you care for? And if there is I'll never trouble you a hair's breadth again, but will be, if you will let me, a very faithful friend." [...] I was right to speak to him so frankly, for quite a light came into his face, and he put out both his hands and took mine—I think I put them into his—and said in a hearty way:— [...] "Little girl, your honesty and pluck have made me a friend, and that's rarer than a lover; it's more unselfish anyhow."

One little detail that sends Jonathan reeling but is easy to overlook is how Dracula opens the front door without a key. Jonathan’s been taking potentially fatal risks to try to get through those locked doors, and it’s the only thing keeping him from just fleeing into the forest and taking his chances there.

Then lo and behold! All he has to do is ask, and the door was never locked at all! Why would I need to lock you in, friend Jonathan? I’d never dream of keeping you here against your will, you could have left at any time!

Of course, Jonathan had examined the doors before and knew they were locked. It’s a massive gutpunch of gaslighting that seems to hit harder than all of Dracula’s other manipulations. Meanwhile, I’m pretty sure that Dracula just unlocked the door at a touch, just so he could twist the knife deeper.

Now that today's entry closes the book on Renfield, I'm confident saying the chap doesn't deserve the bad rap he gets.

My pop cultural understanding of Renfield was as a simpering minion of the baddie who actively helps seduce or misdirect other people towards evil. The Monster of the Week RPG even has an NPC minion type that it explicitly labels a "Renfield", whose motivation is "to drive others towards the monster".

But your man straight up doesn't do that! Yes, he seems to admire and worship the Count at first, but based on later scenes, my take on that is that it's vampire mesmerism working on a vulnerable subject - vulnerable because the thinking that landed Renfield in the asylum, about consuming life, lines up so neatly with what the Count does and can offer. But unless I missed something, there's no scene where Renfield tries to drive anyone into the Count's clutches, or where he wilfully puts anyone in danger. He's the reason Dracula is able to get into polycule HQ, but it seems pretty clear Drac mesmerised and/or terrorised him into "inviting" him in.

In fact Renfield seems to spend most of his time trying to warn people about Drac, but being either dismissed or unable to get his meaning across coherently. Wherefore this reputation as a slippery quisling? Renfield's as much a victim here as anyone else!

All the humans in Dracula are in a survival horror but Drac himself is playing a Soulslike.

He did a first run into the London dungeon, got appreciably far but then got cornered by some enemies, dropped all his loot, lost all his safe return points and had to head back to the overworld to heal up and try again. Ok, each run at this dungeon takes months or years, but he's a vampire, that's the timeline he's on.

To me that's the attitude that makes most sense of him jumping ship back to Transylvania so seemingly abruptly. He's like "ok, decent run, pretty sure I know how to avoid that trap next time, better get out and plan the next try".

Why garlic? I asked a while back and today I read this:

“Straining the Limits of Interpretation: Bram Stoker's Dracula and Its Eastern European Contexts” by Ludmilla Kostova, published 2007

So...yeah. I did not see the phallic aspect at all, but now that you mention it...

In the article, Kostova argues that part of what's unsettling about Dracula is that he is both masculine and feminine. The efforts to defeat him ultimately force him into full feminization through staking (I hope that's not a spoiler at this point but I'll tag for it just in case).

Also fyi if you want to read the article, be warned, it does spoil something we haven't run into yet reading Dracula Daily.