Dracula: A Modern Conundrum

A Modern Conundrum

Bram Stoker emphasises a societal shift in his famous work, Dracula. I will explore how this shift to ‘modernity’ is exemplified in Stoker’s work, contrasted by Dracula’s character that embodies a historical past and the folklore surrounding the mythology. The distinction between the two – modern and historical – is established and fused together by Stoker, creating a tension in the text for both the characters and the reader. The characters hunting Dracula must rely on modern medical techniques and scientific advancements in communication but also folklore and the knowledge of Van Helsing, who straddles the line between modernity and ancient knowledge and practice. Through my study of the novel, I will explore some of these scientific advancements and modern elements that indicate a societal shift. In doing so, I will seek to prove that Stoker deliberately creates a contrast between the modern and the historical through his use of technology and the contrast between characters. He creates this tension as a way of rendering fear for any reader of the text, the resonating and palpable idea of a past that was once forgotten superseding an evolving modern realm. He creates a tension on the present deriving from the past that threatens the gains and advancements that the human race worked toward attaining. In this way, Stoker warns his readers the consequences of abandoning the traditional and relying too heavily on the modern.

Modernity in Dracula lies directly at its core, specifically, in its narration. As an epistolary novel, Stoker frames the narrative in a number of unique ways contemporary to the time in which it was written at the end of the 19th century. Each character deploys various methods of recording instances throughout their encounters, from journal entries and telegrams to the phonograph recordings of Dr Seward (Stoker 68). In the use of this technology, Stoker already creates a distinction between new and old. The characters have various means of communication and data recording, all of which prove to be a worthy defence mechanism against Count Dracula. What’s more, telegram allows the characters to correspond over vast distances in short periods of time. This essentially allows them to converse with one another in order to apprehend the Count wherever possible. However, in developing this contrast, Dracula traverses the streets of London with relative ease, and flees because of the powers at his exposal. In many instances in the text, Dracula de-materializes into a foggy haze in which a large bat can be seen fleeing from. Like the technology of the vampire hunters or “Crew of Light”, Dracula has ancient powers at his exposal that allow him to counter their modern advancements.

Another distinction between the past and the present that Stoker creates is in its characters: specifically in Mina and Lucy, to start. Lucy embodies the old: someone merely searching for a suitable suitor that will cater to her needs as a women living in a society where economical resources are becoming more prevalent and sought after. Mina however embodies a different persona: she seemingly represents the new Victorian Woman but in a different way. Stoker emphasises her resourcefulness in the text and essentially makes her a kind of heroine. Mina embraces many abilities that render her useful in the defence against Count Dracula while she herself is a victim. Lucy relies heavily on others while she slowly deteriorates as a result of her attacker. Lucy then becomes a victim, relying on her suitors only to be overcome by Count Dracula and transformed into a vampire herself. She fully represents a fearful transformation, and proves to be vulnerable in her state as a ‘new woman.’ Count Dracula easily preys on Lucy and invades the modern realm.

Stoker begins his novel in a Transylvania town and ruined castle – which Harker notes is like taking a step back in time (7) – but soon moves the action to Victorian London. When Lucy falls victim to Dracula’s spell, neither Mina nor Dr. Seward – both devotees of modern advancements – are equipped even to guess at the cause of Lucy’s conundrum. Only Van Helsing, whose knowledge of modern medical techniques is tempered with open-mindedness about ancient legends and non-Western folk remedies, comes close to understanding Lucy’s affliction.

A doctor, philosopher, and metaphysician, Van Helsing arrives, versed not only in the modern methods of Western medical practices, but with an unparalleled knowledge of superstitions and folk remedies. He straddles two distinct worlds, the old and the new. First he embraces – and also embodies a fearful respect for – tradition. Secondly, he is a contemporary of the ever-progressing modernity in practice. He contrasts his former pupil, Dr. Seward, whose obsession with modern techniques blinds him to the real, horrifying nature of Lucy’s sickness. Van Helsing not only diagnoses the young girl’s affliction correctly, but offers her the only opportunity for a cure, which is ultimately stifled by those unfamiliar with said traditions. A maid removes the “horrible, strong-smelling flowers” (Stoker 144) placed on her neck designed to keep threats at bane. This ironic twist contributes to the argument of the past superseding the modern. Lucy is well-off enough to have maids; however their ignorance and naivety ultimately lead to Lucy’s demise.

Van Helsing is an intriguing character who again, adds to this contrast and tension in the text. While learned in contemporary scientific methods, he also has knowledge of historic methods of practice that allow him to fight this ancient evil directly. He proves to be a saving grace for the team in many instances in the text. Stoker’s contrasting use of characters in this way and emphasis on what they represent allow for a tension in the text between new and old. When Dracula’s motive involves directly taking over the new London, and transforming it back into what it used to be, this suggests a type of fear that allows the old to supersede the new; a fear pertinent in a society where everything was changing. In Chapter XVII, when Van Helsing warns Seward that “to rid the earth of this terrible monster we must have all the knowledge and all the help which we can get” (Stoker 245) he literally means all of the knowledge. Van Helsing works not only to understand modern methods of practice, but to incorporate the ancient and foreign schools of thought that modern study may dismiss. Van Helsing points to the dire consequences of subscribing only to contemporary currents of thought. Without an understanding of history – and different understandings of history at that – the world is left terribly vulnerable when history inevitably repeats itself. Stoker makes this distinction abundantly clear in the text, and surely exemplifies