The Character of Dracula & the Worst Essay I've Ever Written

Rather annoyed at myself after last lesson. Last Thursday, I spent my lunchtime looking over Dracula notes with Rosie so, during the first lesson we had that we spent discussing the character of Dracula as a class, I felt confident in what we were talking about but when it came to doing the timed essay on 'What strikes you about the character of Dracula?' I went completely blank and for some reason couldn't get what was in my head onto the page. Long story short...worst essay ever. I won't dwell on that any longer - needless to say I really need to brush up on my exam skills. Hopefully the revision I'm doing at the moment for the Lit re-take will help me out with that though.

Anyway - on to the specifics - the character of Dracula. Basically we talked about the different sides to Dracula's character - still the factor most fascinating to me is the overly friendly facade that the Count has to hide his beast-like side. We also talked about how Dracula's physical appearance holds significance with regard to giving an indication of character - apparently called 'phrenology' (relationship between facial features and character) - quite relevant when discussing Dracula as Harker is unnerved by the Count's manner and appearance even when he's supposedly acting like a human! I can remember writing in my essay about the fact that Dracula can't be pinned down in terms of physical form and whether dead/alive, asleep/awake which adds to the spookiness in that he could be anything, anywhere. The novel's structure reflects this as for a lot of the text, Dracula isn't actually present in his human form but his presense is felt throughout (through Lucy's illness, Renfield's behaviour, the dog arriving in Whitby e.t.c.) and hints are given that Dracula is around - increases the sense of the invisible trap falling down over Harker, Mina, Van Helsing e.t.c. Adds to the novel's drama as Van Helsing struggles to find a way to fight against something he can't define or even be sure is there. This links in with the queer theory idea that no-one should be labelled and the Victorian idea of individualism.

On Thursday, Rosie kindly let me look at her York Notes book on Dracula which I found really useful and have now got my own copy of. I was interested in certain aspects of Dracula's character that the text focused on e.g. Dracula using his sexuality and idea of 'love' to benefit himself and gain power...which got me thinking that Dracula is, in a way, a challenge to Victorian gender roles as, Dracula uses his sexual powers and version of 'love' to gain power in the way that a Victorian woman would have to do - as we learnt from studying Rossetti's poetry last year, in many ways, sexuality was the only currency with which a woman could deal in Victorian society. Dracula, in using his sexuality to gain power, is taking on the assumed Victorian female role.

The religious themes that the York Notes book brought into focus also intrigued me - for example, the idea that both Dracula and Van Helsing are both serving higher powers, with Dracula serving the devil and Van Helsing being like an angel of justice and mercy. This idea particularly interested me as we had worked, during the week, on comparing the two characters - the conclusion that I came to through doing that was that there were some distinct parallels between the two (in terms of similarities and differences) but the main difference between characters was that, even if they had something in common e.g. both are driven and determined...the motives behind actions and feelings were always very different, with Van Helsing always wanting to do something for the benefit of others and Dracula simply wanting to help himself. The York Notes idea that the two are working for higher power certainly adds an extra dimension to this observation and makes me understand the significance and symbolic nature of the two characters more.