#but he writes a diary in shorthand

[the-crooked-library]

On Horror, Queerness, Mirrors, and Dracula

Your wish is my command (you may or may not regret this). 

Here’s the thing - I love horror, and I love patterns, and I think the best horror is always in some sense symmetrical.  It might not be obvious, but what’s the point of staring into an abyss if you can’t see your own face reflected back?  The symmetry itself comes in any number of different twists, whether it is familial, communal, erotic, or individual, and most of these apply to Bram Stoker’s Dracula. 

The centre of our novel rests on the Harkers.  So, starting with Jonathan - his experience in Transylvania is a twisted version of his life back home.  Dracula is reserved but eloquent, seemingly caring and occasionally affectionate, he reads train schedules and they spend hours upon hours in conversation; which is a dark mirror to Jonathan’s train schedule-loving, passionate but serious Mina.  It may even be said that the Count is re-enacting a caricature of traditional heteronormative domesticity - he maintains the household, waits on his guest himself, and blows him kisses from the stairs.  His possessiveness of Jonathan is the only way a vampire like Dracula is capable of understanding the bond Jonathan shares with Mina.  The Count states that he, too, feels love; but he is written by a closeted gay man in the late 19th century, so his imitation of married life is both a lie and a tragedy.  He is a shorthand for forbidden, wrong, and corrupting desires. 

At the same time, Mina herself also has a same-sex connection in the beginning of the story, and her relationship with Lucy mirrors the relationship between Jonathan and Dracula.  They cling to each other, in a sense; despite being excited about the prospect of their impending marriages, there is some trepidation associated with this new stage in life.  A common part of a dowry used to be a shroud, simply due to the frequency at which Victorian wives died in childbirth soon after the wedding; and even provided a survival, the transition to married life was still a loss of innocence.  As such, Lucy’s affection for Mina is the last expression of her girlhood, and she herself is the personification of Mina’s.  Lucy is, therefore, the direct antithesis of the Count; her death and subsequent rising change Mina the same way that Dracula does Jonathan, establishing a firm duality between the Harkers and their respective vampires. 

The other characters are reflections of each other, as well; the suitors defend while the brides terrify, Van Helsing wants to preserve life while Renfield wishes to consume it - and even further, the old Hungarian lady cares enough about  a stranger to give Jonathan a cross for protection, while Lucy’s own mother lets Dracula into the house herself, selfishly ignorant of her daughter’s needs and the doctor’s orders.  Another parallel is drawn again between Jonathan and Renfield, who represents directly what he could have been, had he not escaped from Dracula’s grasp; which makes Renfield’s vehement, last-ditch attempt to protect Mina perhaps all the more poignant.  In him, she sees the resilience of Jonathan’s humanity; while he gets to see exactly what she could become after her turning  - in Dracula himself.  These dualities are integral to the story’s thematic structure, and therefore inextricable from each character’s development. 

There is really too much to say about each individual dynamic to fit into one rant, but for the current purposes, I can forgo the details.  They all converge as it is on Jonathan and Mina, and thus, the central theme of this story is devotion.  If Jonathan had truly broken, like Renfield, Mina would have stayed by his side; and if she had fully turned, like Dracula, he would have adored whatever shred of her still remained.  In madness and in death, in happiness and sorrow, in sickness and in health - until the echoes start to sound like wedding vows. 

@stripedshirtgay​

@bluberimufim​

#dracula #dracula daily #jonmina #jonathan harker #mina harker #dracula meta #bram stoker #y'all asked for this #now scream with me bc i've been internally screaming about this for years #it's about the DEVOTION #lucy westenra is mina's innocence #dracula is jonathan's fear of inadequacy #renfield is his humanity #dracula is an evil version of mina i said what i said #that's Partially why jonathan wasn't weirded out enough #like yes yes eccentric old count #but he writes a diary in shorthand #and his fiancee loves train schedules #who's he to judge

[dathen]

I found a soft quietude come over me. Here I am, sitting at a little oak table where in old times possibly some fair lady sat to pen, with much thought and many blushes, her ill-spelt love-letter, and writing in my diary in shorthand all that has happened since I closed it last.

This segment gives me so much joy, but is a great example of what makes Jonathan incredibly unique among similar types of horror victims in Victorian literature.

A lot of academic analysis notes Jonathan’s traditionally feminine role in the early chapters of Dracula, but chalk it up to “the horror of emasculation”—that Dracula imposing femininity on Jonathan expresses the gender role anxiety of the time and is part of how Dracula terrorizes him.

But that’s just straight-up not how the book is written. Jonathan is comforting himself with his connection to the sweet, soft ladies of old, wishing he were writing love letters to his own love far away. He soothes himself with the image as a way to escape the horrors surrounding him. He encourages himself with the comparison to Shezerade and her cleverness earlier.

It’s the difference between “Jonathan is facing horrors traditionally imposed on female characters” and “the horrors INCLUDE the connection to female characters.” That distinction is enforced by how he, on his own, finds comfort and encouragement by thinking of himself among their number.

It’s a distinction that wouldn’t be obvious from just reading a summary of the story, which in all honesty seems to be what some academic analysis is working from.

#dracula daily #jonathan harker #gothic heroine jonathan harker

[prettyboysdontlookatexplosions]

on a slightly more serious note, mina’s little joke about the shorthand is indeed a weird and funny bit of characterization for her, but it’s also i think an interesting choice by stoker. van helsing is introduced via seward’s hype as the expert of all experts, one almost superhumanly knowing and wise, and the text does not do much to contradict this notion of him despite his colorful weirdness, but in his first meeting with mina, despite the fact that he has her type up the diary so that this situation could totally be avoided, stoker writes in an exchange such that for a moment, mina is the one with the power in their dynamic through her mastery of a kind of knowledge he doesn’t have. it’s lighthearted in tome, but i do think you can read it as a moment that establishes that the dynamic between van helsing and mina, despite their considerable gap in age, experience, knowledge, and training, is not going to be a subordinate one.

#dracula daily

[leafcrunch]

the fact that mrs. mina harker was like “hey yeah i kept a diary of this whole thing” and shows it to van helsing who’s like “oh word you write in shorthand? that’s really sexy but i can’t read this” only for her to be like “yeah i know i just wanted to show off” before handing him the copy she typewrote out for his convenience before he came over. absolute girlie of all time that’s my friend that’s my wife that’s mina from dracula

#dracula daily

[vickyvicarious]

Every scrap of paper was gone, and with it all my notes, my memoranda, relating to railways and travel, my letter of credit, in fact all that might be useful to me were I once outside the castle. I sat and pondered awhile, and then some thought occurred to me, and I made search of my portmanteau and in the wardrobe where I had placed my clothes.

The suit in which I had travelled was gone, and also my overcoat and rug; I could find no trace of them anywhere.

The items Dracula takes have some fun implications. Regardless of whether you think he rushed off to steal these things as soon as he locked Jonathan in the study last entry, or if you think he took them a few days later, he has two clear goals here: prevent Jonathan from writing, and more importantly prevent Jonathan from leaving. Both point to him having a fear of losing control of the situation.

Sure, this escalates the mental torture. But it also suggests that, after seeing Jonathan's shorthand letter, Dracula became aware that his guest is more resourceful than he expected. Jonathan has access to at least one kind of knowledge which Dracula does not. There could be others (in fact, there is the diary). So. He takes away his writing materials - he won't be able to write any more coded letters. But Jonathan does still have access to paper as long as he has access to the study. If he's very resourceful he could rip pages out of a few books, fold up notes, maybe craft a sort of envelope by folding paper. It's not nearly as likely but it isn't impossible. The other aspect of preventing Jonathan from getting a message out is probably to keep a closer eye on him, to isolate him further from the people around him.

But he's already tried to send one letter. He arrived in the castle weighed down with anti-vampire gifts. Whatever language barrier he has is obviously not enough to keep him from receiving aid from the locals should he get out somehow - and after the incident with him encountering the vampire ladies as well as this letter, Dracula is no longer just assuming Jonathan can never get out. He is taking precautions to ensure he won't get far when he does.

He won't be able to get money with his letter of credit. He won't have access to his notes about the surrounding area or the dictionary that helped him to communicate better. He won't know where to go or when to get on a train heading far away from here. And more than that - he won't have his travel clothes, he won't have his coat and rug (basically a travel blanket to keep you warm). This might make him less likely to try an escape, which is a bonus, but the focus is on ensuring Jonathan cannot get out of Dracula's reach. He will be slowed down enough - by weather, by difficulty communicating, by uncertainty about where to go - that Dracula can catch up to him and stop him.

If needed, of course. It's not to say that this will be needed, and certainly Dracula would prefer it not to be, because that would spell a firm end to this game. But he now feels the need to prepare for such an eventuality. It's not just about stepping up the encroachment on Jonathan's space/privacy/belongings. That's a bonus for sure! But taking these things also points to him feeling threatened to some degree.

And not just by Jonathan, either. If his control over the locals were as complete as he presents it, I don't think he would be this worried. But his actions here actually support the interpretation that he was bluffing when he implied that the man to whom Jonathan entrusted his letter sold him out. Or at the very least, Dracula doesn't have confidence that everyone would sell Jonathan out. He fears that they might take a message, so he has to steal his writing materials. He fears that Jonathan might find a way out of the castle, so he ensures he won't get far.

Implying that the Romani who work for him will never help Jonathan is intended to build a sense of isolation in Jonathan. He wants to erode trust, to make Jonathan feel like he cannot rely on anyone else (except his friend Dracula, who protects him from worse dangers). That means, even if they did want to help him, he will try to make Jonathan think no one is even interested in doing so. It means he will keep him separated from them as much as possible. It means that he will do anything to break down trust and ensure Jonathan cannot access a support system.

Because if he has no support system, then if (when) he tries to escape he will have to do so all alone. And without the things Dracula took from him today, it's not likely that he will get very far. Not before Dracula catches up to him, anyway.

.

A few more spoilery notes below the cut:

In the last entry Dracula tried to ensure Jonathan wouldn't seek help from the Romani. When he goes out in Jonathan's clothes to kill people, he is trying to ensure the local villagers will not offer him help. Both are aimed at isolating him, and when you think about it they imply Dracula is concerned that Jonathan would be able to get help if not for these measures. Later on the wolves escalate matters even further, adding yet another layer of difficulty aimed to ensure Jonathan doesn't try to just leave. Because Dracula no longer puts it past him to somehow manage to do that.

And yet, at the same time, he's enjoying his time with Jonathan too much to end it prematurely by stopping him permanently. Dracula is arrogant enough to believe he can control the situation long enough to have his cake and eat it too, basically. But in the end, he was wrong to not ensure that Jonathan was taken care of, because as soon as he knew there was no more time to play the waiting game, Jonathan acted. And yeah, he was indeed capable of getting out. He was capable of moving very quickly, even with the obstacles put in place by the missing belongings, and he was capable of finding people who were willing to be kind to him. Jonathan's timing was perfect in the end because he waited out Dracula who could and would have hunted him down. The vampire ladies either don't have the control, the range, or the interest to do so.

Dracula is forced to acknowledge that Jonathan is clever, but he refuses to see just how much. He insists on treating him merely as prey trying to escape, who just needs a better trap. But Jonathan isn't merely going to flee, he eventually becomes the predator himself. The knowledge he has is absolutely vital to defeating Dracula; he's aware that he is a threat to the Count from early on. And if Dracula had been willing to truly play it safe here, he would have killed Jonathan before leaving. But that would require treating him as a legitimate threat. That would require Dracula to stop indulging himself with Jonathan. And Jonathan is so good at playing along, so good at being fun to toy with, that Dracula really doesn't want to stop. Not to mention his arrogance and expectation that he can surely handle this one man. And he can - until he leaves his castle. Then Jonathan is finally free to act.

And sure, it's no immediate victory. It's certainly not a one-man crusade or dependent on Jonathan alone. But that was never the danger Jonathan represented anyway - his escape represents knowledge getting out, spreading freely. His escape represents people freeing themselves from Dracula's control, acting without his awareness. And it happens, and it leads to Dracula being killed once and for all. Because Jonathan plays along, and because Dracula enjoys it and doesn't want to admit to the threat.

#dracula daily #count dracula #jonathan harker #dracula daily spoilers #but only under the cut #dracula meta #my meta

[bidrums]

Isabel Adomakoh Young’s Mina is so warm and I love it. Of course this is because she’s writing to Lucy, but it’s still a wonderful quality to hear just like with Jonathan you can hear the absolute love and adoration in Mina’s voice when she talks about learning shorthand and going to read her fiancé’s travel diary and wondering if they’ll see the world together and her excitement in sharing her journal plans with her best friend and making travel plans together and the way she asks about Arthur (the curly-haired gentleman, for those of you who haven’t read Dracula before) like they’re at a sleepover I just- AAAAAAAH

THE REASON JONATHAN LIGHTS UP WHENEVER HE TALKS ABOUT MINA IS BECAUSE MINA QUITE LITERALLY IS SUNSHINE INCARNATE THAN YOU FOR COMING TO MY TED TALK

#isabel adomakoh young #mina harker #re: dracula #re dracula

[yallemagne]

Once more have I seen the Count go out in his lizard fashion.

Ben Galpin truly captures the defeat Jonathan's feeling here. When you've seen something so incomprehensibly unsettling that the life is drained from you, and you can only think "okay, but what the fuck am I supposed to do with this? Oh? Is this normal? Is this normal? Can I ever financially recover from this?" It's a funny line for how bizarre it is, but it's hard to laugh when you hear Jonathan so dispirited.

Just, mwah. But, in contrast, Jonathan doesn't give up. He takes the opportunity that is presented by Dracula being away and tries all those damn doors again.

And then... he comes to the Room...

Dracula... warned him not to go into the locked rooms... but this room isn't locked. The door is stuck in such a way it would only open if Jonathan put his back into opening it. Now, one could say Dracula simply wasn't diligent enough in locking all the rooms that were off limits... or he anticipated, in some way, Jonathan finding this room by himself. He anticipated that Jonathan would put in the effort to open this one unlocked door. Either way, technically, Jonathan is breaking no rules, but technically, Dracula could still get away with this incompetence if someone were to try to hold him to it. Which, no one can or will.

Then, there is the latter half of Dracula's rules... he told Jonathan he may not sleep anywhere but his own room and the rooms they have both occupied. It, too, feels like a trap: reverse psychology. Jonathan is already weary to be where he knows Dracula goes, especially asleep. And then, Dracula, under the guise of caring for Jonathan's wellbeing, tells him he will only be safe in the rooms that he himself has occupied? Of course, it feels like leaving himself out as bait for the Count.

My lamp seemed to be of little effect in the brilliant moonlight, but I was glad to have it with me, for there was a dread loneliness in the place which chilled my heart and made my nerves tremble. Still, it was better than living alone in the rooms which I had come to hate from the presence of the Count, and after trying a little to school my nerves, I found a soft quietude come over me.

This is the first time that Jonathan is really harsh about the Count. He hates him. He hates his presence, and he hates how it lingers after his absence. But once he can put away his hate, he finds peace:

Here I am, sitting at a little oak table where in old times possibly some fair lady sat to pen, with much thought and many blushes, her ill-spelt love-letter, and writing in my diary in shorthand all that has happened since I closed it last.

He calms himself by imagining himself as a lady writing a love letter. Anxious - pen shaking and fumbling with some of the spellings - but not fearful. Not scared. Not in danger. He then remarks on the decor. Apparently, it is modern.

It is nineteenth century up-to-date with a vengeance. And yet, unless my senses deceive me, the old centuries had, and have, powers of their own which mere "modernity" cannot kill.

Even with the redecoration, Jonathan can sense the difference between what Dracula would call a new house vs an old one. This room has been done up to fit better with the current era, but nothing could strip away the history lying dormant underneath. Nothing can kill the spirits who linger. No place old enough to have a history is safe, not even London, which prides itself on its cutting-edge technology and its abandonment of the old and backward.

EDIT: okay so maybe I'm wrong about the decor being up-to-date. What if shhhh just enjoy the post.

#dracula #dracula daily #re: dracula #jonathan harker #may 15

[areyougonnabe]

I know nothing about polar exploration! Or Shackleton! But you seem excited about it!

Have a favourite fact you'd like to share?!?

well my two favorite facts have already been shared which are the cautionary tale of the toxic polar polycule and the story of the antarctic lovebirds !!!

but here is a contender for #3... the tale of jessamine.

let's start with our homies Deb (left) and Griff (right), aka Frank Debenham and T. Griffith Taylor, the geologists of terra nova's cape evans shore party:

they would both later go onto impressive careers in academia, start families, basically be well-liked hard-working guys (also participants in 20th century imperialism but let's take that as given based on our starting point of this expedition lol)

BUT we are meeting them here, in antarctica, aged 27 and 30, "Early Career Researchers" as we might call them now. trying to keep busy with SCIENCE during the long antarctic winter night of 1911!!!!!

these guys go way back btw. Deb was born and raised in Australia and and Griff moved to Australia when he was a kid, and they both attended the fancy-schmancy King's School near Sydney, the Australian equivalent of british public school (e.g. Eton). according to griff they were family friends at that time although they would have been a few years apart at school.

later around 1908 they both studied at the University of Sydney under leading geologist Sir Edgeworth David, who had been on Shackleton's Nimrod expedition and reached the South Magnetic Pole with Mawson. They both ended up being hired onto Scott's expedition through university connections, Deb via Professor David and Griff through a scholarship to Cambridge where he met Wilson.

okay. backstory established. now one thing you need to know about Griff is that he was a total freak. like Racovitza, he was a Poster before there were online platforms to Post on. if you had that kind of brain back then, and no access to adderall, you had to just sit around inventing new kinds of science instead of deep-frying spongebob screencaps. he was a consummate edwardian memelord who would read a novel per day and still have time to write 20 pages of diary in which he would floridly record the silliest things that happened since the morning, the various quirks and quotes of expedition members, and then complain about captain scott in shorthand.

to say nothing of his passion for CREATIVE WRITING! vitally, Griff was one of the main contributors to the Cape Evans hut magazine, the South Polar Times edited by Apsley Cherry-Garrard. there were 3 issues of this during the winter of 1911 and 1 issue during the winter of 1912, the latter of which included much material written/submitted during 1911 before the polar party met with tragedy.

Griff was a versatile writer, and his pieces (which would sometimes cumulatively make up nearly half an issue of the SPT by page count) ran the gamut from expository nonfiction to speculative poetry to comedic epistolary to magazine pastiche. he had certain motifs that he frequently returned to—none as compelling, in my opinion, as that of Jessamine. or Jasmine, or Jessie, or Jessica, as the case may be...

it all began, according to Griff's diary, early in the austral winter of 1911, when Deb was "christened Jasmine by Titus [Oates]."

where this nickname came from is unclear—many of the men had picked up female nicknames on the voyage down (see "Jane" Atkinson, "Marie" Nelson, "Penelope" Pennell) but Deb had not been on the voyage down because he had gotten picked up in Australia, so this may have been a belated attempt to correct that omission. Griff wrote in his book about the expedition, "We were short of female society—which lack also accounts for Jessie Debenham as an alternative to Deb."

in any case, the name clearly caught on: on midwinter day, a little under two months after the nickname's debut, Griff recorded that during the gift exchange after dinner "Every second present or so was a necklace or earrings for Miss Jessie Debenham."

(deb and titus at midwinter dinner)

THIS GOT REALLY LONG SO CLICK READ MORE IF YOU ARE INTERESTED!!

in the second SPT issue of 1911, Griff's 17-page narrative "The Bipes" describes the inhabitants of the Cape Evans hut from the perspective of a rabbit who lives in the stables. you can read the whole thing here and please do!!! (you'll need a VPN outside the US) BUT here is the relevant bit dealing with Deb:

U. PULCHERRIMA. This Bipe inhabits a strongly defended Bungkh in the Ubdug burrow. It is supported by mighty baulks of timber and can only be reached by means of a dangerous ladder. The Bungkh is supplied with heavy hammers, piles of stones and other offensive weapons. These precautions are, I believe, necessary in the Bipe courtship, for she is often called upon to repel members of other burrows who approach her balcony with blandishments. Her time is chiefly occupied with a primitive quern or handmill, and at this she grinds for long hours every day. I judge that this merely satisfies some primitive habit, for no flour seems to be produced. But it is pleasant to see how strong is the feminine instinct.

the species name "Pulcherrima" is also the species name of the pointsetta flower, and can be translated to "beautiful woman" (i think??)

here's the illustration produced by Bill Wilson (based on Griff's sketch) to accompany the above - yes that's a portrait of Griff in her bunk and Birdie below attempting to woo her:

it must be noted that Meares, nicknamed "Mother," also gets cast in a female role in the Bipes piece, but does not receive the privilege of being drawn in a skirt, rip.

anyway, the next issue of the SPT, vol 3 issue III, is the last one to be produced before the end of winter. Griff decided to one-up himself and write a piece in which Jessamine takes center stage. The Ladies Letter is a pitch-perfect parody of the "Ladies Column" sections that appeared in many periodicals of the era—full of french fashion terms and simpering style suggestions. Griff brilliantly adapts the format for a pastiche on the subject of Antarctic fashion; not free, naturally, from general whiffs of period-typical misogyny, but as those being mocked in specific are fellow expedition members and not any actual women i forgive him.

written in the form of a letter from Jessamine to her absent friend Cynthia (whose identity i'm unsure of BUT i'm tempted to say is supposed to be Priestley, away at Cape Adare), the piece again features multiple expedition members in female roles, including Silas as "American" Sally Wright, Cherry as "Madame Chérie - that dear delightful person - who builds her beautiful creations on strictly scientific principles of hygiene and aesthetics" and Birdie as Madame Berdé, who "finds that for well developed figures it is most distinctive to use a cross-gartering well above the ankle. She herself is naturally a consistent exponent of this latter fashion."

and then of course there is Jessamine's star turn. she is wearing the newest fashion, "a modification of last year's 'tube skirt' [which] even more closely swathes the lower limbs, and it is necessary that the wearer should be rolled along by her maid."

Jessamine reveals that she is planning to induce Titus Oates to bring her a proposal of marriage through the clever use of themed charms on her chatelaine.

All the smartest girls have wreathed chains of mascots around the skirt, and a pretty idea, which I commend to you, is to have silver model made of those articles which interest THE ONLY MAN WHO COUNTS. Breathe this to no one! But Mappin & Webb are making me such a choice set. The cutest little pony; a horse snowshoe (this is very lucky); a dead rabbit; a popgun; and a silver blazon PER MARE PER TERRAM PRO TITO; this will be attached to my 'tube', and then I really do expect to bring him to a proposal.

this scenario was illustrated hilariously by Bill, complete with Jessamine being rolled along, and Titus ignoring her as could be expected, in favor of a pony (Christopher?):

now, Deb is on record saying that Titus was his best friend on the expedition, but it may well be a classic case of "you are not your best friend's best friend," because per other accounts Oates was much closer to Meares and Atch than he was to Deb. that's just an observation to add a little flavor to Jessamine's desperate pursuit as portrayed here...

and not to look a gift horse (ha) in the mouth, but i do feel that Bill's illustrations don't quiiiiiite do the genderfuckery of Griff's text justice—Jessamine describes herself as wearing a frock inspired by the aurora, but Bill instead draws Deb in normal sledging gear plus some non-dress-shaped colorful streamers. a missed opportunity...

also, lest you think that Griff was the only one partaking in the Jessamine joke in the SPT, there is also a sneaky reference in the anonymous feature "My Favorite Book":

(J-SS-- [JESSIE]: "Not like other girls")

BUT WAIT. THERE'S EVEN MORE.

viewing the handwritten drafts of the SPT held at the SPRI (because all of this is going to be an actual academic paper someday hopefully lol), i learned that there were a fair handful of references omitted from the final version, presumably thanks to Cherry's editorial oversight.

one "answer to correspondents" written by "Marie" Nelson went as follows:

Jessica: A single lady cannot be too careful about the respectability of her lodgings or the character of her companions.

(referencing Deb bunking with Griff and Gran, two of the more annoying/messy people in the hut)

and an unused entry in "Songs And Their Singers" by Teddy Evans was:

Oh What’s Womans Duty - Jasmin

lastly, and most importantly, the drafts contained the one instance i could find of deb firing back about this whole thing.

vol IV of the SPT consisted of one issue released during winter 1912, when a lot of people had gone home (including Griff), and everyone left behind knew the polar party was dead and they'd have to go look for their bodies in the spring. it was not a fun time. vol IV contained a lot of material written the previous year but not included, since for obvious reasons folks weren't really up to being silly. one of those pieces was "A Day's Doings, Told By Our Diarist," written during winter 1911 by Deb as a parody of Griff. it's pretty funny in published form (p. 72 of this pdf)—Deb is on-point mocking Griff's dislike of eating ("Breakfast is an unintellectual meal, so gave it a miss. Better a bit more bunk than a bite more breakfast.") and his never-ending theorizing ("Thought out a new theory as to the origin of debris cones: yesterday’s wasn’t good enough").

however, the draft is exponentially more hilarious. Cherry, damn him, cut the absolute BEST BIT:

Made a genre sketch of Jasmine brushing her (his) hair – it’s a fool nickname anyways, mixes up the genders. 

knowing Deb—quiet, patient, chronically non-confrontational—that's about as explicit as he was willing to get, as far as revealing how he felt about the nickname. writing Griff realizing that it's a bit silly, he reveals to some degree his own discomfort. now, was it a "protest too much" situation or had he genuinely gotten fed up with being the Designated Girl Of The Hut? we shall never know!!!!!!!!

however the draft of the piece ends thusly: "[I] got paralysed at chess by the wily Jasmine, it’s a mud game, if ever there was one. Hinc illae lacrimae!"

so despite all the aspersions cast on her honor, and the failure of Titus Oates to accept her proposal, Jessie still triumphs in the end :)))

#polar exploration #now with more gender

[warrioreowynofrohan]

Now that we’re starting to see the fallout from the men’s sidelining of Mina, I want to discuss one of the central themes I see in Dracula, which is a critique of the Victorian ideal of womanhood.

Lucy fits the Victorian ideal perfectly. She is beautiful, sweet, kind, and fragile. She never displays any specific skills or interests of her own besides love for her financé, friends, and family. Her role is to inspire others’ action of her behalf by her passive goodness and purity, not to act herself; she dies without ever having known what is attacking her, or ever knowing about any of the blood transfusions she was given. This isn’t a criticism of Lucy; she is never (before her vampirism) portrayed anything but positively; I don’t buy the interpretation of her vampirism being a “narrative punishment” for sensuality or unorthodixy, because she is not, except as a vampire, ever portrayed as sensual or transgressive of social norms (even when she says “why can’t a woman marry three men” it is entirely in the context of being sweet and kind and not wanting to make her other suitors sad). On the contrary: she is the epitome of social norms. She is an icon of Victorian femininity - and that’s what gets her killed. Treating women as passive objects gets them killed.

Mina, despite one chapter’s digressions into having her condemn the “new woman,” is a very different and more modern figure. As if the start of the book, she works for a living (as a teacher). She pursues modern skills such as shorthand, typing, and reporting, and she is very good at them. Her letters and diary entries, even her writing style, show a sharp intelligence and a vivid sense of humour. She is brave and cool-headed in a crisis (as we see in the incident of Lucy’s sleepwalking). She makes her own decisions based on observation and good judgement (as with reading Jonathan’s diary), and she plans ahead and sees what needs to be done. She is crucial to bringing together all the necessary information about Dracula. And, for much of the book, she accomplishes all this completely untouched by him.

Until the moment the men decide to exclude her on the basis or her womanhood, at which moment she is almost immediately - on that very night - attacked by Dracula. (Not a spoiler - as of today, Oct 1, it is obvious from her diary entry). Even more, that exclusion not only endagers her by denying her relevant information, it endangers her and everyone because she can’t be open any more either. She fears that if she shows her unhappiness - if she tells anyone of her ‘nightmare’ - they will see it as further proof of nervous weakness and exclude her even more, perhaps send her away from London. (And - I didn’t realize ths until now - today’s very entries show she is right in fearing this. When Renfield presents his case rationally and is refused, he becomes emotional and desperate - and Seward sees that very emotion and desperation as a further reason not to listen to him!)

There is a very clear theme here. Treat women accoding to the Victorian ideal, neglect or ignore their talents, treat them as if their only purpose is to inspire men to greatness by their passive beauty and sweetness and purity, and you endanger both them and yourselves. Treat women as equals and helpmeets and partners, employ their skills and intelligence in concert with your own, and you can achieve amazing things together. Mina is absolutely still treated in the story as an inspiration to the men through her goodness, but that inspiration is in addition to real, practical contributions.

That’s not to say Dracula isn’t sexist. There’s a limit to how far the theme goes. Women are allowed to be talented and smart only provided that those talents are being employed in support of men - Mina learns shorthand to help Jonathan, memorizes the train timetables to help Jonathan, will no longer have a job after marriage but will help support Jonathan in his career, always acquiesces uncomplainingly to the men’s decisions and praises them. She never steps out of her assigned social place as a Victorian woman. It’s sexist not only by present-day standards, but also by the standards of the late 1800s/early 1900s women’s suffrage movement; it’s far from being at the forefront of progressivism even for its time. But it is a departure from typical Victorian ideals in that women’s place is seen as not just being beautuful, sweet, innocent, and an inspiration to men’s action, but in being an active partner to men, with talents, intelligence, initiative, and courage of their own. And men waste and ignore those talents at their peril.

#dracula daily #dracula #mina harker #lucy westenra

[charaznablescanontoyota]

prompt bingo fill -- "notebook" takes place between eps 8 and 9

the casino discotheque is brilliant and startling, so loud that al can still feel the music reverberating in his ribs when he and audrey stumble out onto the third floor landing. his eyes water as they readjust to the light; audrey makes a low, annoyed noise next to him as hers presumably do the same.

“food,” al suggests. his brain is still buzzing a little from the tequila shots, but years of sneaking into the fields or up onto granny’s roof to drink with ed and winry have taught him enough about how to avoid a hangover the next morning. 

“food,” audrey agrees.

like with shadow earlier in the evening, al trusts her to steer him towards whatever is good to eat–they end up with hot pretzels wrapped in paper and frozen drinks that audrey calls slushies. the syrup in them tastes more chemical than fruit-flavored, but al can still feel his body welcoming the sudden onslaught of sugar.

“you’ve had pretzels before,” audrey quizzes him, as they find a table to sit at. it’s closer to the quieter lounge, the one with the small stage and the jazz band, and a safe distance from the throbbing bass of the discotheque.

“of course i’ve had pretzels,” al says, a little amused. “we have bakeries.”

“listen, i almost flunked world history, i don’t know shit about what was invented in the 1910s. you have soda, right?”

“we have pop. ed drinks it, i don’t like it very much.”

“is it, like, the kind with cocaine still in it?” audrey leans forwards, eyebrows arched.

“i don’t think so,” al says. he frowns. “your soda pop had cocaine in it?”

audrey hums, and doesn’t answer the question. “can you alchemy food instead of cooking it? if you have the ingredients?”

“uh–yes and no,” al says. he takes a bite of his pretzel and swallows it, considering how to explain in terms audrey won’t write off as scientific gibberish. “there are alchemical circles for food. but you have to understand all the exact measurements of ingredients in whatever you’re making, and there’s no room to improvise or taste it in the middle. so you’re better off just cooking, unless you’re trying to show off.”

the explanation reminds him of the small notebook in his breast pocket; al takes it out and flips it to the last entry, the oversized snacks from the arts and crafts car. underneath, he prints everything new he’s eaten since. small shorthand annotations and symbols go next to each one, nearly incomprehensible unless you know what you’re looking at.

“what’s that?” audrey asks.

“food diary,” al says, mid-stroke on the word slushie.

“you write down everything you eat?” there’s a tiny flicker of judgment in her eyes. “why?”

“when i didn’t have a body, i couldn’t eat,” he says succinctly. audrey knows about the soul-bond and the suit of armor, so there’s no point in dancing around it. “i couldn’t remember what a lot of foods tasted like, and nobody was good at describing them to me. so i made a list of things i wanted to eat when i got my body back, and then i wrote down what they all tasted like. and then i…kept going.”

“oh,” audrey says. she’s quiet for a moment, then, “but you’re not gonna lose your body a second time, right?”

“it’d be pretty hard to,” al says, smiling wryly. he draws a little circle next to slushie–he wants to figure out what it’s made of. what that chemical, imitation-fruit component breaks down to. “but i do it just in case. is that strange?”

“i think strange is fine.”

“me too.” al flips the notebook shut. he slides his small nub of a pencil back into its place in the wire binding, and tucks the whole thing back into his pocket. “you know–my number, the number it started at was 250. exactly the grams of salt in the human body.”

he doesn’t want to explain how he knows that; it feels like it would ruin the moment. audrey doesn’t ask. instead, she takes a long sip of her slushie, her lips twitching into a small smile.

“how’s your salt content now?” she asks. the inside of her mouth is bright blue from the faux-fruit syrup.

al turns his hand over to check his palm. “better.”

#interstitial infinity #marn writes

[rachello344]

OKAY, so as a former lit major (with, to be clear, a master's in literature), I have some really fun information to share with the class for this last installment of Daily Dracula.

Now, first thing's first, I'm going to post the section I'm talking about specifically so we can refer back to it more easily. Namely:

In a voice which, though low and almost in a whisper seemed to cut through the air and then ring round the room he said:— "How dare you touch him, any of you? How dare you cast eyes on him when I had forbidden it? Back, I tell you all! This man belongs to me! Beware how you meddle with him, or you'll have to deal with me." The fair girl, with a laugh of ribald coquetry, turned to answer him:— "You yourself never loved; you never love!" On this the other women joined, and such a mirthless, hard, soulless laughter rang through the room that it almost made me faint to hear; it seemed like the pleasure of fiends. Then the Count turned, after looking at my face attentively, and said in a soft whisper:— "Yes, I too can love; you yourselves can tell it from the past. Is it not so? Well, now I promise you that when I am done with him you shall kiss him at your will. Now go! go! I must awaken him, for there is work to be done." ... They simply seemed to fade into the rays of the moonlight and pass out through the window, for I could see outside the dim, shadowy forms for a moment before they entirely faded away. Then the horror overcame me, and I sank down unconscious.

Now there is a Lot to unpack here, and a lot of people have already pointed out the surface layer homoeroticism (I mean, he says "love" outright and clearly means it), but there's some stuff I haven't seen anyone mention yet.

First of all, if you haven't seen it yet, please take a look at this post which shows Bram Stoker's notes on the novel. The important takeaway is that Bram Stoker had one line of dialogue from pretty much the very beginning: "This man belongs to me." It repeats thrice, and well before the characters are more than "Old Count."

What this says to me is that Stoker was, like any of us, writing his novel to write that One Scene that just fucks so hard. This scene was written to be horny. It is meant to be. Stoker wrote this scene with his whole dick in the way of all the horror greats. He's my hero. By this time, Stoker had already at least acknowledged his own leanings (see Stoker's love letters to Walt Whitman, the first of which was written well before he wrote Dracula), so we can guess that he had this image and wanted to see it on paper for himself. (Good for him, and Same.)

Straight audiences would have seen Jonathan's feminization by the narrative and the Count's clearly sexual interest in him as horrifying (cowards), but queers are and have always been queer. And I suspect they all read this scene in the same way we're reading it now. BUT they had an extra bit of info that we've since lost track of.

In the peak of epistolary writing, there was a bit of well-known shorthand. (If you've seen Mamma Mia, this is the equivalent to the "dot dot dot" in the mom's diary from her slut phase.) In epistolary novels, when your heroine is alone with a man, and she says she swoons... She got laid. Now, how far it went, I couldn't say, but this was At Least heavy making out, if not full on sex (I suspect it may have been up for interpretation, but I don't know). My professor pointed this out with a young woman swooning while alone in a carriage with a guy she was kind of seeing. "She says she swooned because this letter is to her father figure, but the audience would have known exactly what she meant."

So Jonathan swoons, and when he wakes up, he is undressed and in his own bed. The readers at the time would have immediately read this as a sexual assault.

For a long time, I was confused by how passive Jonathan is throughout this part of the novel, but he is playing the role of the maiden fair, trapped by the diabolical (and much older) seducer. And then, he is in survival mode as he is assaulted more than once, his virtue stolen before he can marry his beloved.

I mean, God, you have this whole romantic build, the count saves the maiden Jonathan and plans to "awaken him, for there is work to be done." And then Jonathan swoons, and the Count carries him to bed? Not to put too fine a point on it, but... well, it really only makes sense if Dracula DID wake Jonathan up and... made his claim abundantly clear. Clear enough, too, for Jonathan to feel like his "gloomy" rooms are in fact his only sanctuary. And like... Jonathan was undressed by the Count. That really does mean exactly what it sounds like.

So uh. Yeah, after that supremely possessive display and declaration of love, the Count fucks Jonathan (as with all maidens of the time, his consent is... dubious. Would he consent if he were able? We'll never know tbh) and carries him (undressed) to bed. Bram Stoker knew EXACTLY what he was doing, and I hope you all enjoy that fact. I know I will. ;D

ETA: Sources for my information about swooning are in my reblog, but you can also find them here, here, here (this blog post is referred to in more than one article), and here, and this one references this exact scene directly.

#daily dracula #my meta #dracula #I may or may not be planning out how I would write the sex scene that I think is implied here #you know #for fun #haha

[lullabyes22-blog]

FnF characters ranked by most likely to least likely to own a diary.

Most likely to least:

Jinx: Canonically has a diary in the Council archives. Also doubles as her schematics file/doodle pad/scrapbook. It's also her vision journal, where she records all her girlish aspirations c:

*doodles hearts around a sketch of Piltover on fire*

"And we all lived happily ever after. Boom."

Caitlyn: Has a journal in which she records daily goings-on - and writes cute things about Vi. It's locked, and the key is hidden somewhere even Vi hasn't been able to discover, despite her best efforts.

(Psst. It's in the sugar-pot.)

Jayce: Similar to Caitlyn, he has a diary where he jots down daily activities + interesting factoids re: Hextech. He also doodles Viktor in the corners (and shows Viktor the goofy ones for a laugh). Sometimes it's where he hides those sultry-scented love notes that Mel slips into his pocket, so he can smooth them over later with a giddy little smile.

Ximena: "What's got you grinning, Jayce~?"

Jayce: /fumbling with a note where Mel expresses an interest in sketching him nude. "N-nothing, Mom. Where would you like to go for dinner?"

Viktor: Has more of a record-keeping notebook for various gadgets, full of codes and jargon. But sometimes he scribbles little rants in the margins. They can veer from mundane quibbles with his leg brace chafing his skin to the indelible weaknesses of human flesh. Sometimes Jayce reads the notes and goes:

"Why don't we, uh, take a break, Vik? We'll get sweetmilk and go sit in the park..."

i.e. "Time to touch grass, bro."

Sevika: More a scheduling diary for her daily duties + where she and Silco need to be. The handwriting is fascinating to note, because it veers wildly depending on her proximity to Jinx: from a blunt bold print to deranged rage italic. Sometimes the notes are interspersed with Silco's messages: "Cancel - No, he's an idiot - Reschedule for tmrw - Tedious - Shall we get drinks?"

Mel: Has a sketchpad in which she does line drawings, and tests out color palettes - but also where she sometimes jots down pros and cons of a diplomatic dilemma, or composes prose poems. She also has a fair few sketches of Silco's hands, done from memory, along with things he says, and things her mother says, compared side-by-side.

In the margins: "Madness, madness - why do the same things make sense from his mouth, but not hers?"

Oh, Mel...

Silco: Diaries are a liability - and a security breach waiting to happen. The only time Silco writes down something is to make a work-related list. More rarely, he'll brainstorm, but the writing itself won't be more than shorthand, and will read as absolute gibberish.

Shipped - Location Q - ??? - 5% - Bubbles - Fuckit

Jinx: "Hee, you wrote 'Fuck.'"

He does, however, have a file where he keeps Jinx's notes, and cute little doodles of hers over the years. When stressed, he flips through the pages with an inscrutable little smile.

Boom. Instant serotonin boost.

Is there anything so endearing as a daughter?

<3

#asks #arcane #arcane league of legends #arcane silco #silco #arcane jayce #jayce talis #arcane viktor #viktor #arcane caitlyn #caitlyn #caitlyn kiramman #cait x vi #caitvi #jayvik #melco #silco x mel #arcane mel #mel medarda #meljay #jayce x mel #arcane vi #vi #arcane jinx #jinx #forward (never forget)/xoxo #forward but never forget/xoxo

[anza-redstar]

Loving all the Dracula talk on my dash due to Dracula Daily, and I wanted some writing practice, so allow me to present: Jonathan’s shorthand diary, in actual shorthand. …Probably not the right kind of shorthand. As a hobbyist American who does not own a fountain pen, I went with Gregg shorthand; Jonathan, being English in the 1890s, is much more likely to be writing in Pitman or one of its shorter-lived competitors. But I don’t think he ever specifies, and Gregg isn’t impossible (first documentation published in 1888, it just didn’t take off until maybe the 1910s) so, hey, it’s not not canon.

#dracula daily #starts at ‘left Munich at 8:35’ #and runs to ‘Having had some time at my disposal when in London’ #if it were Pitman it would look generally more spiky #and there would be a thick-thin line distinction #with the right kind of pen that’s easy to do by varying your writing pressure #if you mostly write in mechanical pencil then Pitman is not ideal for your purposes #update to last tag I have been told by Pitman writers that you can write it legibly with a pencil #apparently you vary the pressure to get dark pressed-hard lines or light sketchy lines and this is close enough to be readable #shorthand

[thebibi]

Saw a shitpost about Jack quit his job to join Van Helsing in vampire hunting and I went, huh. And in the Oct 28th entry specifically, there are jokes about Jack becoming Van Helsing's personal assistant/secretary. Kind of like how Mina quit her job to become a lawyer's assistant-- I mean wife.

So now I'm musing over these parallels between Jonathan/Mina and Van Helsing/Seward.

Even though the late 1800s were a changing era, wives were still largely expected to exist in a separate sphere from their husbands. The Harkers, however, make a great working team.  Mina is a school teacher by profession, but she gives up that job to become Jonathan's wife. Mina also actively learns skills that will help Jonathan in his work as a solicitor.  Its not a burden, she really enjoys it. She even uses legal jargon during her funeral speech. Jonathan collects information and Mina compiles it.  They confide in each other. When Mina decides to type up her husband’s diary, she does so with an eye for legal affairs.  You can say Mina is going above and beyond what is expected of a wife, she really is Jonathan's partner. When Jack says "they are hard at it", they are not just in love with each other, they have great work ethic.

The only other two people who share this closeness, are Van Helsing and Seward, who are both doctors. There are some parallels between their relationship and the Harkers.   Mina learns skills like shorthand to be able to work with Jonathan, and Jack learned how to lockpick, breaking and entering, to assist Van Helsing. Their skills complement their companions. When Van Helsing takes out his equipment to stake Lucy, Jack is stimulated because he too is a doctor, while Arthur and Quincey look appalled.  In comparison to how the Harkers write everything down, Van Helsing dictates and Jack orally records.  They confide in each other.  Whenever the professor is unsure about something, Jack gives him a safe space to express his opinion and supports him.  As Van Helsing realizes what really happened to Lucy, he asks they be united, and later, he moves into the asylum.  And even though Jack has a full time job, he prioritizes being Van Helsing’s helper. They give up their individual careers to work together.  Kind of like a marriage.

Going back to the Harkers, this makes them all the more unique because their partnership and work ethic actually blurs the Victorian concept of "separate spheres". They, as a team, share just as much in common with work colleagues than they do as simply husband and wife, which is amazing. As for the doctors, well, they are so close they can communicate with a glance and have no boundaries in the bedroom, so you can argue it swings back into "married".

#dracula (novel) #dracula daily #jonathan harker #mina harker #jack seward #abraham van helsing #jonmina #helward #i started this back in october can you tell LOL #thebibi on vampirez

[yoyo-inspace]

Jokes aside, this short little update from Jonathan exudes so much loneliness. I think it’s really beautifully written, especially the latter part, once he makes it to the rooms. The entire entry is but I love this in particular.

“Here I am, sitting at a little oak table where in old times possibly some fair lady sat to pen, with much thought and many blushes, her ill-spelt love-letter, and writing in my diary in shorthand all that has happened since I closed it last. It is nineteenth century up-to-date with a vengeance. And yet, unless my senses deceive me, the old centuries had, and have, powers of their own which mere "modernity" cannot kill.”

He’s literally taking comfort in ghosts. In the thought of people from the past, sitting in his place. And the comfort it gives is only temporary. It’s a great loneliness and dread, that slowly creeps into your bones.

#Jonathan harker #Dracula #Dracula daily

[vickyvicarious]

Today's entry is another one with strong comparisons to be made between the asylum pair and the castle pair. We start off with Renfield-Dracula comparisons: both his eating other creatures in order to gain life and his cheerful attitude here remind me of the Count. Whenever Dracula had won some new victory over Jonathan (typically by doing something offscreen to foil his latest effort) he tended to get very cheerful and charming. Renfield has circumvented Seward's refusal to give him a cat by eating all his birds and then restarting his experiment, a victory of sorts for him, and is correspondingly quite cheerful.

But it's Seward's response to this behavior which is especially reminiscent of Dracula, and chillingly so: he drugs Renfield to sleep and then goes through his belongings.

I gave Renfield a strong opiate to-night, enough to make even him sleep, and took away his pocket-book to look at it.

While it's never explicitly confirmed, I have a theory that Dracula had been exercising control over Jonathan's sleep throughout his stay in the castle. There are repeated instances where he tells Jonathan to rest well or to sleep soon and Jonathan always follows up with confirmation that direction was followed (when other times there are hints towards unsteady sleep/nightmares). And while it isn't as directly a scene of magical influence, the day Dracula stole Jonathan's papers and other belongings was while also he was locked in a room, sleeping.

That's creepy enough, and it speaks to Seward respecting no boundaries at all with his patient, but the part that sticks out to me most of all is the way this is a direct parallel to a worst-case scenario for Jonathan. Because what is described above is quite simply: the captor, having noticed his captive is keeping notes that he doesn't understand, forces his captive into a vulnerable unconscious state and takes said notes to read and use for his own purposes.

Isn't that exactly what Jonathan lived in such dread of happening, all that time? If Dracula had ever spotted Jonathan writing in his journal, I'm sure it would have happened. And while he wouldn't understand the exact meaning of the shorthand (much the same way Seward doesn't initially understand all Renfield's figures) the gist of the idea would be communicated (he'd realize Jonathan is keeping a secret record and the implications of that, much the same way Seward here is able to finally put together the pieces and figure out Renfield's general ideas). And what comes next? Well, it wouldn't be good for Jonathan, obviously.

Seward doesn't punish Renfield for what he discovers. Not directly. But his reaction is just as terrible because the realization tempts him all the more to indulge his 'mad scientist' instincts. He wants to make a name for himself via Renfield's heretofore unknown madness, and it doesn't really matter how Renfield feels about that or is treated in pursuit of that. Oh, sure, he confines himself here to speculation about whether it might not be worth it to see how far he'd go - tells himself I must not think of this. And yet he's incredibly attracted to the idea (re:dracula did so well with putting voice to how EAGER he is and how reluctantly he pulls himself back - and then only partially before dipping his toes in again), and is already behaving well outside of any appropriate motivation. And so... while Renfield isn't going to suffer in the same way Jonathan would have from the discovery of his diary, he still is worse off. By completing his long-awaited thought and coming up with a name for Renfield ("a zoöphagous (life-eating) maniac") Seward has fully finished shifting him into a mental category entirely separate from all the other patients, and it's definitely not one that has his best interests in mind. He's possessive, too invested, dehumanizing (yesterday's "my friend" has become today's "my homicidal maniac"), and it's all just not good for either one of them.

I think Seward realizes that this isn't good for his own mental health as well, but he can't help longing for it. This is getting more into just me musing aloud here, but... A while ago he spoke about relative dangers of selfish vs. unselfish people, and concluded that people who dedicate themselves to a duty are more dangerous because they throw themselves in fully. And yet that's something he seems to be longing for:

If only there were a sufficient cause! I must not think too much of this, or I may be tempted; a good cause might turn the scale with me, for may not I too be of an exceptional brain, congenitally?

He knows that he is susceptible to that kind of temptation, to ignore all moral qualms for the sake of (making a name for himself with) Science. And he's trying to pull himself back from that brink... but a part of him wants nothing more than to find a cause worthy enough to do it anyway. He wants to dedicate himself fully to something important. He knows that he isn't entirely normal himself, and that once he gave in there would be no turning back. The idea appeals to him, even as it repels him - which in itself is very vampiric, actually. It's like the idea of finding a "sufficient cause" is his own trance which he must try to resist.

And the way he thinks of Lucy right after this seems telling to me. Perhaps he hoped that Lucy would balance him out, would help pull him away from these kinds of impulses, would make him Normal in a way he can't be on his own. But she didn't pick him, in fact she picked a man who is also much more Normal, and they're both wonderful and happy together. And he's happy for them, of course, but it leaves him on the outside. And on the other hand there's Renfield, who seems fully lost (and happy to be so) inside his own mad devotion to his cause. Seward seems to be pining after both Lucy and Renfield in this entry. Not romantically for Renfield, but they represent to him opposite extremes. Lucy is the life he could have if he didn't feel so drawn to odd and amoral ideas; Renfield is the fulfillment he could feel if he didn't feel sufficiently sane to let morals hold him back from indulging those urges. He knows Lucy doesn't love him back (symbolically: that he can't ever be fully normal) and that Renfield isn't someone to imitate (symbolically: that he can't let himself give in fully), so he's just stuck teetering between them at the moment. Of course, with Lucy's rejection leading him to isolate himself in his work (and away from his friends who also pull him back more to better behavior) he keeps tipping more and more towards becoming mad himself in his own way. But he still retains enough control over himself to feel bad about it and refuse to indulge himself fully... even as he fails to notice, or simply doesn't care, just how badly he's already failing to act in Renfield's own interests.

#dracula daily #jack seward #renfield #just kinda thinking aloud do tell me if this makes sense #the audio had this kind of longing tone for BOTH lucy and the mad science which was super interesting to me #count dracula #for those comparisons/parallels #my meta