For me at least it appears like that. Dracula is different and he is not accepted at home in Transylvania, nor is he accepted in England and since he cannot handle it he chooses the path of a monster to make people aware of him. If he had been accepted as whom he is, a different being, and then him being made into a monster would not have been possible. So, Dracula is monster and warning together and fulfills the conditions set by the etymology of the word ‘monster’. Bibliography: McKee, Patricia, 2002.
Dracula: a name that inspires thoughts of intrigue, fear, romance and in some a life style that is all its own. Yet one thing that is not always known is that there is a true story hidden behind the legend of Dracula. More than one actually, one in which a man is a demon who executes a hundred thousand men, impaling them, and dinning on their blood. Then there is the story of a patriot who cares for his people and is only doing what he must to protect them from the invading armies. The latter of which is less known, yet in the most famous book about Dracula, Bram Stoker brings forth many of the true facts about Vlad Țepeș also known as Vlad the Impaler.
In Dracula, by Bram Stoker, good versus evil was symbolised throughout the book as two antithetical forces without an in between. By clearly demonstrating the relationship between the dualistic ideas of intuition versus logic, good characters facing figures comparable to the devil, and symbolism within the natural world, Bram Stoker effectively recounts a “holy war” between the antagonistic forces of good and evil. Firstly, good and evil was seen throughout the aspect of intuition versus logic of the book. Dr. Seward writes in his diary that, “Yesterday [he] was almost willing to accept Van Helsing’s monstrous ideas; but now they seem to start out lurid before me as outrages on common sense. I have no doubt that he believes it all.
"As the Count leaned over me and his hands touched me a horrible feeling of nausea came over me, which, do what I would, I could not conceal. "(Chapter 2, pg. 20) Count Dracula managed to surprise you with something new or some sort of new power he has. Unlike the rest of the characters, Dracula stands out because he is evil and he does not have a heart surely because he is undead as Van Helsing explains. But what does Dracula really represent?
Next is the chapter where Jonathan Harker openly questions the group’s interpretations of the unsettling events that occur from meeting Dracula, and the sanity of the whole. Several characters could be considered emotionally unstable. Senf suggests that Stoker made the central normal characters hunting Dracula ill-equipped to judge the extraordinary events with which they were faced. The central characters were made two dimensional and had no distinguishing characteristics other then the... ... middle of paper ... ...evil and good, as Dracula and the narrators rather than the obvious differences. She points out that Stoker had created unreliable narrators to tell a tale, perhaps if he had done it all from the first perspective of Dracula the similarities would stand out more then the differences.
Studies in Speculative Fiction 19. Ann Arbor: UMI, 1988. 231-45. Leatherdale, Clive. Dracula: The Novel and The Legend.
Dracula attempts to hide his lumpen nature and exude an aristocra... ... middle of paper ... ... "stagnant and foul" air (111). Vampires and the poor are projected as animal-like, and both prey on others. Since the vampires in Dracula can be seen as a representation of the lower class, we can draw some assumptions. If one draws this parallel to its logical conclusion, the battle with the vampires, it can be seen that in the end the lower class and their perceived values are soundly defeated by the righteous ruling class, and the threat is expelled from Britain. However, this ruling class does not come out of the battle unscathed, and the Victorian tradition is mostly lost.
‘Frankenstein’ did not frighten me at all, I merely found it a very tragic story demonstrating both the corruption of an innocent being by an immoral society and the dangers of playing God with science. Frankenstein was responsible for the creature and as soon as he showed signs of life, instead of deserting him due to fear and embarrassment because of the ugliness of the creature, he should have taught the creature right from wrong and accepted him as a person, not a monster. Any brutality in ‘Frankenstein’ was due to Victor Frankenstein himself and not his monster. ‘Dracula’ is a novel that probes deeply into people’s superstitions, fears and beliefs of the supernatural. The creature Dracula is an evil being with no concern for others, he kills for his own ends and cannot be stopped, and this is what makes ‘Dracula’ truly frightening.