Week #5: Dracula & deconstruction.

No blog as such this week, since you should be preparing your essay outlines. However, if you have questions about Dracula and/or the theory readings, please post them here. Deconstruction can be difficult, so don't despair if you can't work it out immediately. But ask questions--I can't help if you don't ask.

Hint: The correct way to refer to this week's theory is "deconstruction," rather than "deconstructionism" or "deconstructionalism." Be sure to get it right in your journals.

Also, just for kicks and in keeping with this week's theory, here's the song "Jacques Derrida" by British band Scritti Politti.

Have a good weekend!

Dreamy state of desire?

Regarding the psychoanalytical perspective, a distinct moment in Stoker’s Dracula sticks out in my mind as one of the most important moments in which as Foster states, “The ambivalent experience of desiring something that will terrify us [which] can be understood psychoanalytically” (483). This moment appears distinctly in the very beginning of the novel when the captive Jonathan ventures into a closed but not locked room in Dracula’s castle. Literally giving that, “‘Don’t, don’t open that door’” effect that Foster relates to, Jonathan finds himself forcing open the door through which he makes his encounter. Relating back to Freud’s, “theory of repression” which according to Murfin, “goes something like this: much of what lies in the unconscious mind has been put there by consciousness…that it deems unacceptable” (468), Jonathan appears to fall perfectly into this scenario upon encountering the three vampire brides. As Jonathan, “lay quiet, looking out under [his] eyelashes in an agony of delightful anticipation” (61), images of repressed sexual desire arise within his seemingly dreamlike state of mind. The final line for Jonathan of that evening uses the choice word of, “unconscious” to display his feeling as the “horror overcame [him]” (63), adding to that imagery of the dreamlike state. Further, Stoker's use of words such as, "dim, shadowy and faded away" (63), help to add to this illusion of the dreamy state in which Jonathan himself is seemingly not capable of distinguishing from.

unconscious psyche

In Bram Stoker’s Dracula, we noticed that there were times when narrator mentioned about an incident where a character was in unconsciousness and dreaming of imaginary things, which can be compared to the psychoanalytic criticism. I agree to Freud when he mentioned about unconscious mind and all.I find it interesting and related it to Bram Stoker's Dracula, the part where Mina Harker was not being able to sleep and was dreaming in state of an unconscious mind, which I guess was happening in reality. And if we go in the middle chapter’s something exactly like this situation was faced by Lucy, when she could not being able to sleep because she was afraid that she would get weak if she fall asleep, which proves that in the novel, many times we noticed the unconscious mind situation of the characters, which shows that somewhere Stoker is closely in relation to this characteristics of mind.

Psychoanalytic

All of the characters in Dracula fight battles within themselves. There seems to be a struggle with the characters to behave "accordingly". For Johnathan, this was shown when he had an urge to be with the three vampire women who bestowed upon him. Dr. Seward fought very hard to hide his urge to be affectionate with Lucy at her darkest hour. Even Van Helsing fought his urge when he found the three coffins with the vampire women in it. He wanted to fall under their beautiful spell but had to fight the urge. As Freud points out, everyone has an unconscious desire or urge that is repressed. Freud had believed that writers wrote out their unconscious thoughts onto paper as a way of coping with the thoughts. One thing that I would like to point out is the child-like behaviour that Count Dracula displays. When the Count realizes he is being hunted, he resorts back to a familiar ground: his first Castle. Often when a person is fearful, they will resort to a familiar environment for shelter of the mind and body.

Double psyche

Psychoanalytic criticism allows us to believe it is our “uncanny self who stands behind us but casts no reflection in the mirror of [our] unconsciousness” (484) that draws us to crave for something we want, like “Dracula [who] knows what he wants and moves relentlessly towards it” (489). In some sense psychoanalytic criticism provides a ‘scapegoat’ for adults to relieve ourselves of the consequences of our actions by allowing us to believe we are not to blame for our actions in life because it’s the repressed child of our unconsciousness that is desiring these cravings that wouldn’t be displayed by our “adult, rational self” (476). Take Mina Harker for example, a very rational adult woman with her head on her shoulders. Why would she fall under the influence of the monster her rational mind sought out to destroy? Was it because her unconscious “bad child” (476) longed or craved for the desire to be kissed by Dracula himself as Lucy was or to become superior as a man un-caged by restrictions because of their gender. Or was it as Dennis Foster pointed out, she wanted to “enjoy the pleasure normally reserved for the vampire” (489) – her true desire.

Dracula's self-definition

There is an interestingn passage that Foster starts his article with - "We become who we are - we take on our subjective identities - by denying, refusing, or negating the other person we might have been: the male or female we are not, the sibling we envy, the bad child who has all the fun. (483)" This is interesting because as we define ourselves in life, it seems that according to the novel we also define ourselves in death - or more specifically, un-death. The reading exposes that as a living mortal man, Dracula was learned. In his un-dead state, he is redefined by accepting "...the other person [he] might have been" and becomes a slightly feminine, orally-fixated monster. Lucy underwent similar transformation, turning from a Victorian-era "girly-girl" into a bloodthirsty child attacker with a deep manly voice. Her good nature turned to pure evil as she became undead, until her soul was reclaimed in death.

Rational Self and the Bad Child

In Foster’s essay he describes Freud’s theory that we are “fundamentally divided on a psychic level,” by simply stating that “we contain an adult rational self and another self, a bad child.” (p. 483) We bury this child deep in the unconscious. This child is the side of us that Freud describes as “Not me” but “another child who becomes the wild, perverse, desiring, violent creature of our nightmares.”
This is demonstrated in Dracula when Jonathan Harker is sleeping in the Counts castle and the three female vampires came to visit him. The three vampires seem to appear from the moonlight. Though Harker’s journal we know that he describes his feelings as “uneasy, some longing and at the same time some deadly fear. I felt in my heart a wicked, burning desire that the would kiss me with those red lips.”(p. 61) Though Jonathan is engaged to Mina and we knows that he loves her, he is intrigued by them. His rational side is fearful of this women because he has never seen them before and knows that they have materialized in front of him out of moonlight. Though in his head he knows that something is wrong with this situation, the “bad child” within him wants to know what they are going to do to him. He describes his longing for them to kiss him as “ an agony of delightful anticipation.”(p.61) As the passage moves on we see how Jonathan fights with his own thoughts and describes that though he is scared he can not bring himself to stop the women which is the side of the “bad child.”

Psycho Derivations

Dennis Foster states that "[a]t the heart of Dracula is hunger, that blindly mechanical oral impulse that each of us discovers in the first days after birth"(484) and that Jonathan's primary "duty seems to be to chatter (yet another oral task)" (490) as examples of Dracula's psychoanalytical imbuement. The issue with such statements, which threaten the psychoanalytic approach in general, is the problem of creating a situation and explanation from the words which are just not present. If desired, one could argue that almost any action is rooted in "the pleasures of childhood" (490) or in some way connected to a child's actions that was written with a deeper meaning, where it really was not. If Stoker meant to line his story with psychoanalytic meaning, he would have done so more clearly and openly, as seen in our analyses from the Gender Criticism and New Historicism approaches.

Dracula as a Child

In the essay, "Psychoanalytic Criticism and Dracula" the postulation is made by Freud and others that infantile sexual desires are often repressed due to social taboo but can surface from the subconscious in literature. We see this again in the Foster essay, "The Little Children Can Be Bitten", in which he says, "At the heart of Dracula is hunger, that blindly mechanical oral impulse that each of us discovers in the first days after birth."(484) Here the association between the oral fetish that is present in Dracula is with the oral stage of child development. Van Helsing even goes so far in his own psychoanalytic criticism of Dracula to say, "In some faculties of mind he has been, and is, only a child"(300). Whether or not this comment is in direct correlation to Dracula's oral fascination is unclear but it does lend itself to this type of criticism, especially when you consider the fascination with food as well.

“They don’t realize we’re bringing them the plague”

In Foster’s essay on psychoanalytic criticism I thought the quote “They don’t realize we’re bringing them the plague” by Freud was interesting. I thought that this represented the story of Dracula perfectly in more ways than one. Firstly the obvious and a topic that we previously discussed, Dracula is “invading” London and infecting the population. I like how this quote applies to the story because at the beginning Jonathan and his employer are so insistent in helping Dracula with his acquisition, and move to London. It is only till it is too late do they realize what sort of trouble they created.
The other way this quote can be interpreted according to the novel, is they topics touched in the novel, the hidden desires that come through the book in the characters. Being that the time period is still during Victorian times, the topic of sex is somewhat taboo, and obviously a big deal. I think that the quote (above) definitely represents the novel as the ideas of the novel spread like a plague amongst the readers.

Week #4: Dracula & psychoanalysis.

[Saturday: I just noticed that this never went up on the blog, so here it is, a bit late.]

This week, I'm looking for two things in your blog postings: your close reading skills and your understanding of psychoanalysis. Parts of psychoanalysis may be difficult, while others may be familiar--we live in a post-Freud world, after all--but do your best to work through the essays.

Part one: Rather than me give you questions you might apply in a psychoanalytic reading, I'd like you to generate them yourself, based on what Murfin explains and how Foster (he's definitely male, by the way) approaches the theory in his essay. What do you think a psychoanalytic critic might ask of a text? What kinds of symbols or patterns might s/he look for? Could it intersect with other methodologies we've discussed? What might be problematic about psychoanalysis?

Part two: Choose a psychoanalytic element that interests you. (Review Murfin and Foster for ideas.) Find a passage or two from Dracula that reflects this element and explain how it reflects it. Remember, general rule of thumb in literary criticism: claim --> evidence to support that claim --> explanation of why you chose this evidence to support that claim.

Also, as I mentioned yesterday, focus on just 1-2 ideas rather than unleashing the tidal wave of your genius thoughts out at me. I'm only one person! Seriously, though: developing a few ideas with close reading and in-depth analysis leads to a much stronger argument than just a laundry list of ideas.

Enjoy the snow--and I'll see you next week.

P.S. As the paper's coming up, you should start giving it some consideration. Please e-mail or come to my office hours if you want to discuss it or need help. You can also visit the 150 tutoring sessions or Writing Center for outside help, as well.

Schools of Thought in Gender Criticism

In the pieces, "Gender Criticism and Dracula" by Ross C. Murfin and "Corruption of the Blood and Degeneration of the Race: Dracula and Policing the Borders of Gender" by Sos Eltis, bot readings play off each other very well in regard to the role of gender in Bram Stoker's Dracula. Murfin's reading sets the stage and gives an explanation of the essentialist point of view in gender theory and Sos Eltis's article plays it out by giving valid examples of its presence directly from the text. I agree with Eltis's opinion that Stoker's Dracula expresses a clearly essentialist point of view by presenting its male, supporting characters as "manly men" or what society deems as having characteristics that are typically masculine. This essentialist school of thought is very old fashioned and typical of the society that Stoker writes about in Dracula, but it is also present in our present day society.

GENDER CRITICISM

In the Dracula, middle chapters, Bram Stoker spoke about the manly power and the women's helplessness, which we all noticed while we read the text. When Dr. Van, he said to Arthur, the man, who has young, strong blood and Lucy , as an sweet , weak girl which shows the gender difference and In " Kiss me with Those Red Lips" , Christopher Craft, mentioned about Joseph Sheridan Le Fanu , who observed in Carmilla 1872 that "the vampire is prone to be fascinated with an engrossing............."by the gradual approaches of an artful courtship" and recognized " the analogy between monstrosity and sexual desire that would prove, .......future readings of vampirism". I kind of connected Crafts acknowledgement to Stoker's Dracula, when count ( the vampire) , in the form of a bat, always goes to the windows of Lucy's room and make noises through his flapping. I was thinking that why did he pick Lucy, why didn't he pick her mother, i guess may be because Lucy is young and beautiful girl, with pink cheeks which shows that she have a lot of blood. This specifies that the evil(vampire) loves blood and on the other hand sexual desire, can be noticed in Dracula, where Arthur wanted to kiss Lucy, but Dr. Van stopped him, as he did not wanted Arthur to kiss Lucy’s red Lips. The reason why is that, i guess because he had an idea that there is something wrong.

Defying Gender Roles

Two characters that defy gender roles in Dracula are Mina Harker and Van Helsing. The classic women of the 19th century were expected to fit into a certain stereo type. Throughout Dracula, Lucy seems to fit this mold best. As we read her letters we learn she is mostly concerned with parties and marriage proposals. Mina on the other hand is very different. Though she is described as a “Sweet faced and dainty looking girl,” she emerges to be a more complex character. She helps to define the term “New Woman” described by Sos Eltis. We come to learn that she is a former school mistress. She reads and keeps up on current events, as well as travels alone, can read and write short hand as well as us a typewriter. Van Helsing himself even admits that he, a doctor and a lawyer, can not read shorthand. This shows that this is an accomplishment especially for a women in this particular time.Men’s roles in gender even seem to be blurred through out Dracula. Though men are supposed to be considered tough we see a lot of emotion displayed by them throughout the reading. When Mrs. Westenra opened up Lucy’s windows and Van Helsing find out he “ breaks down….Putting his hands before his face, (begins) to sob, with a loud, dry sobs that seemed to come from the very racking of his heart.”(p.149) His emotional side is displayed again after Lucy’s death. We read in Dr. Seward’s diary that Van Helsing breaks, “He laughed till he cried… the he cried till he laughed again; and laughed and cried together, just as a woman does. I tried to be stern with him, as one is to a women under the circumstances.” (p.185) This display of emotion blurs the line because though men can have an emotional side it is rarely displayed. Van Helsing is an educated man who is a strong character in the story. When he shows an emotional side of himself he is becoming more vulnerable and “as a women.”

Gender and Dracula

Although gender defines the masculinity and femininity of a person it also constrains and sets boundaries on a person due to their sex as it somewhat did during the Victorian era. A period where women were seem as the fragile of the sexes and men were the more governing sex in the sense that they were the “the doer, the creator, the discoverer, [and] the defender” (kiss me with those red lips, 108). But the gender barrier of the Victorian era was slowly breaking because women were being to challenge the limits of their gender by “crossing borders and redefining categories (450),” as Mina Harker did by working to help support herself and her soon to be husband. She and Bram Stoker were challenging the rules (or changing the rules if you may) by showing that they are not the weaker of the sexes who “prefer emotions to reason” (453) and should be at home running their homes and adhering to the customs and norms associated with their gender and not worrying their ‘pretty little heads’ with matters beyond their control such governmental issues or the cargos on a incoming ship.

In SoS Eltis essay he mentions the term "New" woman. We can see in his essay he talks about New historic background into the time surrounding the penning of the novel. Eltis say's in the second sentence, " As numerous women fought for a larger role in public life and challenged the traditions that defined women's nature as naturally submissive, passive, self-sacrificing and domestic, so the debate inevitably extended to include masculinity and men's natural role."(450)". Also, we can see Van Helsing is the main character who shows a victorian viewpoint of gender. Not only does he say that men are vital to women, he even takes it one step further saying," we men are determined---to destory this monster, but it is no part for a woman,"(240)". In my opinion women may have some power to do something but they should not use it because is not fit for them.

Ambiguity?

Within this new context of gender roles and the feminist idea, a few new ideas arise regarding Stoker’s Dracula, portraying a different light to the work when compared with the related essays of defining gender criticism, Craft’s “Kiss Me With Those Red Lips’”, and Eltis’s “Corruption of the Blood and the Degeneration of the Race”. Each one, addressing various levels of the feminist idea, begins to add depth the multiple layers of Victorian feminism, sexual energy and gender roles, as portrayed throughout the novel. The interesting thing though, as portrayed by Stoker’s comments, is his somewhat ambivalent state regarding the feminist position within the work. On one hand Stoker represents Lucy as for the most part, a submissive, weaker, well kept, young proper Victorian lady, who when in times of distress needs the “strength” of four men’s blood to keep her alive. This is juxtaposed with Mina, the working woman, who with her own strength plays the stronger support to Jonathan as he struggles with his position within Mr. Hawkins home post his traumatic experience. As Mina states it is, “my belief in him [that] helps him to have a belief in himself” (Stoker 170) representing a complete role reversal from the “norm”. Craft’s work brings the imagery of sex one step beyond in discussing the “wicked desire” as portrayed earlier with Jonathan’s run in with the 3 vampire brides. So does it, for the moment it seems that Stoker appears to perpetuate this ambiguity?

It is obvious that Stoker was writing from a perspective relating to the issues of the day regarding gender roles, specifically women, and their changes to "New Women". It seems that throughout the text, Stoker is against this "revolution" and thinks it will have an affect on society overall. Dracula is the "evil" which is coming over the late nineteenth century England which is affecting not only the women, but also the men who, when interacting with them, will "rub off" on their morality as well. An allusion to this in the story is the sequence of transfusions which are given to Lucy in order to revive her. Dracula, who attacked Lucy after each transfusion, is now linked to the men as well. This is also portrayed in the scenes where Harker almost wanted to be attacked by the three women or when Holmwood is almost drawn in by Lucy when she tries to reenter her grave. Stoker may be stressing that the idea of the "New Woman" is more dangerous than originally thought.

Gender Criticism

It seems that while writing Dracula, Bram Stoker was making a huge statement about the roles of men and women in his society. Throughout the chapters, I noticed how many times Lucy was referred to as "sweet, little, poor, miss, etc", making her seem like a very helpless character. Then, arrives the three brave men to save poor little Lucy from her illness! Often enough, Dr. Helsing refers to Arthur as a man, a real man that will save the day. Stokers portrayal of Lucy enraged me a bit because of how weak she was and how strong these men were claimed to be. Even the women servants who were summoned to help rescue Lucy proved to be of no help because of the drugs they accidently ingested (pg 159). Sos Etis was correct in saying that "The manliness of these men is frequently asserted and emphasized throughout the text" (pg 458). Many times, when the men began to break down and sob, they were viewed in a feminine demeanor. Dr. Seward comments many times about his lack of masculinity at Lucy's ailing side. It's very interesting to read Stokers Dracula as not only a horror story, but as a story that can open your eyes to the male and females struggles of today and yesterday.

Eltis and the "...androgynous mixture"

Eltis' article makes valid points, and in reading it I realized a few times that he was saying things that I was thinking while reading. His claims that certain characters embody both male and female traits is dead on, and he offers a lot of textual proof to back it up. He focuses mainly on Mina Harker and Dracula as the characters with the most evidence of possessing both masculine and feminine traits. He remarks on p. 456 at the top about how Dracula embodied certain female characteristics, namely his "...red lips, long pointed nails, and his housekeeping skills - making Harker's bed and preparing his meals with invisible ease - [which] are suggestively effeminate." On the other hand, he also says that "Mina is the character who most clearly subverts traditional gender categories" (459). She is repeatedly said to have the appearance of a woman, but the brain of a man. She is a learned and skilled protector whose contributions are vital to the eventual conclusion of the story. On page 463 of the essay, it becomes clear that the androgyny exhibited by both Dracula and Mina is a good thing - "...a fusion of masculinity and femininity is viewed admiringly as an ideal for men and women."

The New Women In Dracula

In Eltis’ essay he mentions the term “New” Woman. We can see representations of the “New” woman in Bram Stoker’s Dracula. With the introduction of the “Brides of Dracula”, who are the opposite of the “traditional” Victorian woman, who are pulsing with sexuality, something normally unheard of in this time. Although this introduction is brief, it does allude to the behaviors of Lucy who later becomes a victim of Count Dracula, also possess these qualities. Although Lucy does not have the qualities to the extent of the brides, as she has not completely turned into a vampire thus far.

The “new” woman described in the novel strays from traditional roles and has no regrets. As Eltis states “Vampirism infects women with masculine sexual aggression and perverts their maternal instincts…” Although I do agree that the women who are turned into a vampire, I would not necessarily say that it turns them into a masculine state per se; I think that it unhinges hidden or oppressed feeling of sex and violence. Essentially it undoes what makes us human, the capability to know what is right and wrong.

Masculinity in Stoker and Eltis

Sos Eltis introduces his essay by giving an almost New Historic background into the time surrounding the penning of the novel. He says in the second sentence, “As numerous women fought for a larger role in public life and challenged the traditions that defined women’s nature as naturally submissive, passive, self-sacrificing, and domestic, so the debate inevitably extended to include masculinity and man’s natural role.”(450) It is evident in Stoker’s writing that some of the men are concerned with the masculinity of the others when it comes to dealing with such grave events. First we see Van Helsing using the term ‘man’ as a compliment to Quincey Morris before the transfusion when he tells him, “A brave man’s blood is the best thing on this earth when a woman is in trouble. You’re a man, no mistake. Well, the devil may work against us for all he’s worth, but God sends us men when we want them.”(162) In these lines Van Helsing is falling into a misogynistic view of the role of man as being necessary for saving woman, claiming that man is a Godsend when woman is in trouble.

Week #3: Dracula & gender criticism.

On with Dracula!

This week, you're reading about gender criticism. Make sure you're clear on what is meant by "gender" in these essays. Think about gender in light of the Victorian era's gender issues, rather than from your modern perspective. (I know it's hard not to be judgmental about it, but keep in mind historical context, eh?) Also, note any questions you have about either the theory or Dracula.

Some useful questions to ask in gender criticism that you may want to apply here:

How does this text encode/construct a cultural standard of femininity and masculinity?

How does this text subvert contemporary cultural standards of femininity and masculinity?

How do the genders or sexual orientations featured in the text intersect with social status or ethnic identity or national identity?

In what ways is gender performed in this text, both consciously and unconsciously?

One thing I'd like to see more of, both in your posts and in your journals, is the use of textual evidence. When you make a point about the novel and/or the theory, back it up with a quote or example. Follow that up with analysis of your evidence--in other words, how does it illustrate the point you were trying to make? Don't just assume that your reader will understand automatically what you're talking about.

I expect everyone to come in on Thursday prepared for discussion of Dracula and of the criticism! Have a great weekend and I'll see you next week.

Dracula; A Catholic Vampire?

Reading from a new historical perspective allows the reader to identify what influence history played on Stroker’s Dracula. Castle focuses on “the relationship between the Anglo Irish ruling class (the Irish Protestant Ascendancy) and the Catholic Irish natives.” Viewed from this perspective Dracula can be a representation of either of these social structures for “when we read Dracula with an awareness of Stroker’s ambivalent Anglo –Irishness, the emphasis shifts from a binary structure in which a Protestant England is invaded by Catholic vampires to an ambivalent structure in which Anglo-Irish Protestants must negotiate between the Catholic peasantry they mistreated and the English politicians who hold their future in their hands” If Dracula was to represent a catholic vampire, it would not make sense that a cross would be harmful to him. The cross is used by the catholic peasants to defend themselves from Dracula. Jonathan who is an English protestant was also able to find solace in the care of catholic nuns. It is understandable that Jonathan would be hesitant to accept the crucifix given to him by the old lady at the Golden Crone Hotel. Though he later finds comfort holding the crucifix “It is odd that a thing which I have been taught to regard as disfavor and as idolatrous should in a time o loneliness and trouble be of help.” (52)

An Allusion or Insanity?

As explained already by others, there are clearly references to historical events in the story. This is what examining narratives from the view of New Historicism is all about! However, to what degree can we say that Stoker really intended there to be a connection? For example, in my interest and research online, I stumbled upon the thought that Dracula may have in part been modeled after the countess Elizabeth Bathory of Hungary who is famous for murdering hundreds of women in order to bathe in their blood to look more youthful. This is why, some propose, Dracula looked younger after feeding on the blood of his victims. Although one may think this is far fetched, it may not be all that out of line. At what point may we say that a particular scene or characteristic is an allusion to a historical event while another is just too unbelievable to really have a connection? I would be interested in hearing your thoughts.

Dracula and the Gothic Genere

Dracula fits into the gothic genre of fiction. Throughout the novel we see classic signs that fit into this genre. The counts spookey old castle is one of the largest signs that the gothic genre is evident. The atmosphere of suspense and mystery is also clear throughout the first nine chapters. It is showen throughout the first few chapters as Jonathan Harker goes through his travel to Count Draculas castle and also describing what he experinces while living there. There is a sense of impending doom as we read through Mr. Harpers journal because he does not know how to escape from the castle or how to get help. Another element of the gothic genre is the element of romance. This is showen in Mina Murrays journals entries. In them she describes her feelings of worry for Mr. Harker because she has not recieved a letter from him since he left for the castle.

New historicism in Dracula

Hi everyboby

The text of Dracula provides the reader with an interesting dichotomy between morden and the past. New historicism views a story from a historical context. Writter try to define a specific time period to relate the novel to a historical context. Also, the castle text, a ambivalence and ascendancy in bram stoker's Dracula" states that, " critics typically interpret the contradictory
interdependance of supersition and modernity in Dracula as a reflection of the ambivalence generated by comprting ideologics of gender, race, class and nationlism with in modernity. Stoker does give the reader several clues that allow us to narrow down the historical setting of the novel.

Religion

After reading the first nine chapters of Bram Stokers Dracula, followed by the two essays, “What is the New Historicism?” and “Ambivalence and Ascendancy in Bram Stoker’s Dracula”, an obvious emphasis on the historical content within the work of Dracula becomes apparent. The use of crucifixions, religious superstitions, and the placement of an “Englishman” in Jonathan Harker, truly helps to establish the imagery of some form of real life tension on a religious basis. Gregory Castle’s description of the, “relationship between the Anglo-Irish ruling class (the Irish Protestant Ascendancy) and the Catholic-Irish ‘natives’” (518), makes a compelling argument for the failure of “political and cultural hegemony” (518), within the historical context portrayed throughout the work symbolically. It is in this manner that “New Historicism” as a style appears to play a powerfully dramatic role. I have to say though, as quickly as I picked up on the religious connotations as an overall meaning throughout Dracula, my first instinct was not the conflict as presented by Castle, but a conflict more directly rooted with a Catholic verses Pagan relationship. The images of nature and the moonlight represent to many degrees worship for nature, in direct conflict with the religious undertones of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church, turning Pagan worship into a demonic practice, the worship of the devil and portrayal of demons and the un-dead, appears as a much more predominate image while still containing a historical background throughout the narrative. Did anyone else find a similar religious relationship that varied with Castle’s?

New Historicism and Dracula Intertwine

New historicism and Bram Stoker’s Dracula intertwine with each due to the fact that history is seen by the reader through a different light in the sense that new historicism allows the reader to “wonder whether the truth about what really happened can ever be purely and objectively known (Dracula, pg. 502),” there’s hardly any fact. Do what we believed to be the truth of history really the truth or is the truth camouflaged so that it can only be seen or read from a analytical point of view. For example in the beginning of Dracula, the Englishman Harker talks about the way the landlady, his driver and fellow riding companions acted towards him. They wouldn’t out rightly tell the truth of the danger he was headed to but they camouflaged the truth with making the sign of the cross and placing a cross around Harker’s neck instead of just out rightly telling him the truth.

What does Dracula represent?

Count Dracula, as a character, has a lot of mystery surrounding him (at least at this point in the book, having read up to Chapter 9). The supplemental essay by Castle offers a few theories of what he represents to the historical value of the novel as Stoker might have intended.
On page 521, the theory that Dracula "...represents the 'return of the repressed,'" is brought up. Page 529 offers the idea that he "represents [a] monstrous 'parasitic social formation.'" These are both interesting ideas that hadn't even crossed my mind while reading. The essay on "The New Historicism and Dracula" discusses the idea of new historicism and describes new historicists as critics who "...view history as a social science and the social sciences as being properly historical." (p. 502)
"Many of the social issues alluded to in Dracula - social decadence, racial degeneration, poverty, disease..., the fear of immigration from the colonies - were very much English concerns." (521)
This is only one of many sentences alluding to the fact that the new historicist perspective on the novel has some literary weight to it.

New Historicism

Whilst reading Dracula, I found it very easy to understand why the theory of New Historicism pertained well to the text. The reader must understand the historical context of the novel in order to understand the relationship between Johnathan and Dracula. The reader must also understand why Mr. Harker was so notriously ignorant of the warnings he received before arriving at the Count's Castle. He viewed these people as peasants and because of that, he ignored their warnings. Mr. Harker's ignorance can be viewed as a socially set state of mind which deals with New Historicism. To understand his actions best, you must understand what was going on in that time period and understand his peoples culture thoroughly.

Analysis of Bram Stoker’s Dracula

Bram Stoker’s Dracula shows a great work of old criticism, which means that “the writer provides you with necessary background information you need to know before you could fully appreciate the separate world of art” (pg 503). The example of old criticism is shown broadly in Stoker’s Dracula.
Also, according to Foucault “related reason for keeping prisoners alive, punishment indoor & changing discipline from physical torture into mental rehabilitation: colonization” (pg 505), relates widely in context with Bram Stoker’s Dracula, in which Dr. Seward was approving all the demands of his patient and prisoner named Renfield, whom later Dr. Seward started calling zoophagous because of his violent behavior with the pets he had. Dr. Seward did not kill Renfield or give him a death-sentence but kept him in the prison and instead of torturing him; Dr. Seward observed him and gave him the opportunity to rehabilitate.

Superstition and Modernity

The text of Dracula provides the reader with an interesting dichotomy between modernity and the past. Dracula himself embodies this contradiction by the simple fact that he has existed for centuries at least. The Castle text, “Ambivalence and Ascendancy in Bram Stoker’s Dracula” states that, “Critics typically interpret the contradictory interdependence of superstition and modernity in Dracula as a reflection of the ambivalence generated by competing ideologies of gender, race, class, and nationalism within modernity.”(Stoker, 525) Superstition and modernity are laced throughout the novel, as Stoker has Harker being given garlic and crucifixes to protect him right before Seward records his contribution to the novel on a phonograph, which is one of the first recording devices of its type.
At one point while exploring the castle Harker makes a similar remark about modernity and superstition when he speaks the line, “And yet, unless my senses deceive me, the old centuries had, and have, powers of their own which mere ‘modernity’ cannot kill.”(60) These powers of centuries old can be considered the superstitions which despite all the advances of science, as represented by Seward, still hold a certain level of influence on all of the locals who try to ward off the evil eye as Harker rides away.

New Historicism in Dracula: Does it fit or not?

New Historicism views a story form a historical context, in Bram Stoker’s Dracula, there is little to define a specific time period to relate the novel to a historical context. The most obvious way to define new historicism in Dracula is with the castle of Count Dracula himself. The castle is located on the border of Transylvania where the Count is the only one who resides there.
This does fit into the historical context of the novel; however the fact that Dracula is the only one who resides in the castle does not necessarily fit. The fact that Stoker does indicate that Dracula’s castle is not maintained at all does make us aware that the castle is virtually abandoned. In reality however, a castle that size would most likely be maintained, and have a large staff, for maintenance. In this way I do not think that the “condition” of the castle would be plausible in the story.

Week #2: Dracula & New Historicism.

This week, you're beginning Dracula. To reiterate, I realize that the theoretical readings cover the novel in full, which you haven't read yet, but you should be able to think about the issues they raise without having finished the book. (By the way, please feel free to read ahead.)

In your postings this week, you want to consider New Historicism in the context of Dracula. Obviously, the Castle essay does this, but I'd like to hear your reaction to and/or spin on New Historicism and the novel. (In short, don't summarize Castle. Do feel free to challenge him and poke apart his argument.) Some other possible talking points: the narrative structure of Dracula (note the paragraph that begins it), the Gothic and horror genres, and any other issues or questions you may have regarding the novel.

Also, using those questions I offered you yesterday (why would people choose specific methodologies? etc.), think about New Historicism in comparison to New Criticism and structuralism. In general, you should apply these questions to each new theory you learn.

I'd like to remind you that you need to complete the blog assignment (at least one original thread, at least two responses to your classmates' threads) by midnight on Wednesday. Not after that. If you still need to be invited to the blog, please e-mail me as soon as possible.

Have a great weekend and I'll see you on Thursday.

The Barthes and Doyle Connection

After much confusion and some boredom that I underwent while reading The Structural Analaysis of Narratives by Roland Barthes, I wondered how I would ever connect this to the enjoyable Adventure of the Speckled Band by Arthur Conan Doyle. After much thought and review , the connection hit me. Although Introduction to the Structural... can be difficult to decipher, it is apparent that it has a common bond with The Adventure of the Speckled Band. Barthes's theory and defenition of the structural makeup of narratives is evident in "Speckled Band" in a few ways. First, the story is complex, "eluding all unilateral investigation" (Bartes) The story is multidimensional with clues that serves as a monkeywrench to your attempt to solve the mystery. Also, the story aligns itself with Barthe's theory of narrative structure being similar to Aristotelian poetry, where the characters of the stories are always secondary.

Analysis of descriptive sequence of events

When i was reading "Structural analysis of Narratives" written by Ronald Barthes, i highlighted many words that i wanted to know the meaning of. I mean the level of the writer is very high. Why did the writer in detail discussed about the language of narrative ? I thought a lot about the answer and i didn't got my answer until i finished reading" The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" written by A. Conan Doyle. Then i thought of making a relation between Barthes and Doyle which really helped me getting the answer of my question. In Barthes writer is talking about language of narrative because narrative(a story) can consist of some words which means different in real world of language but if you read the whole sentence you can figure out the meaning of that unique word. For instance, in Doyle's article, when Dr. Grimesby Roylott(the killer) met Holmes(the detective) at his house, Holmes said "Pray take a seat"(Pg 114). I got stuck at that sentence, so i read it again and then i understood that according to the writer,in the above mentioned sentence , "pray" means "please". So, in order to know what excatly the writer meant by that word is to read the whole sentence over again.That is how i understand why barthes wrote in detail about the language of narrative.

Actions and characters - does it really need to be so complicated?

When I finished reading Barthes, the first feeling I was struck with was an overpowering desire to drink. The second feeling I had was that of all the convoluted, obfuscated things that he said, none had me quite so frustrated as his chapter on actions. What exactly is the "problem" with the structural analysis of the character in narrative? Why can the agents of actions not be described as persons? It sounds very logical to me. Characters are people. Why is "the definition of the character according to participation in a sphere of actions"? Meaning that in analysis, the character is called the action.
I read over The Adventures of the Speckled Band a second time and I had a thought. Who is Sherlock Holmes? Who is Watson? Who is Dr. Roylott? That's easy. Holmes is the detective who notices every minute detail around him and can make amazing deductions from these clues to solve mysteries. Watson is his companion who follows him on his investigations, supporting him quietly where he may and noting his discoveries with wonder. Dr Roylott is a violent and unbalanced psychotic who keeps dangerous animals and physically attacks everyone that he sees. These characters are naturally defined not by who they are, but what they do. Perhaps this is what Barthes means.

The speckled and narrative analysis

Well I took the advice of the professor and started to read the narrative analysis, it was a very hard piece to read. It was not the most interesting piece to read but I got through it because as I read I got the point of it, which was in my opinion that barthes was trying to explain to us that there are many types of narratives that are carried out in various forms. From what I understood, as a narrative is read you reach degrees of understanding a piece instead of just reading sentences. As it states at the bottom of pg. 90 "In order to determine the initial narrative units, it is therefore vital never to lose sight of the functional nature of the segments under consideration and to recognize in advance that they will not necessarily coincide with the forms into which we traditionally cast the various parts of narrative discourse." As for the speckled band there was a much lighter tone to it because it didnt have words that I had to keep going to dictionary.com for, but the only connection I got after reading both pieces was that I saw how there were levels of a tale just not a couple of sentences being put out "traditionally" on paper.

Narratives and The Speckled Band

After reading Structural Analysis of Narratives you kind of see what Barthes is trying to explain, either we would look at “a narrative [as] merely a rambling collection of events…or a common structure that is open to analysis (p.80)”. Barthes points out that there are different parts to a narrative and sentences are dependent on them. The function of a narrative also helps by “planting an element that will come to fruition later (pg. 89)” as it did in a speckled band with Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. In the Adventures of the Speckled Band you see where narratives play a roll from Holmes investigation of each room at the Roylott estate to the plan of becoming along with Watson a vulnerable victim to solve a crime/mystery. Looking from the point of view of Watson (the narrator) as he tells the story about the Speckled Band, he draws you in and wants you to keep reading to find out as he does what will happen next, from Structural Analysis of Narratives on page 87 “to understand a narrative is not merely to follow the unfolding of the story, it is also to recognize its construction”.

Levels of meaning

Though obviously a difficult text, Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narratives touches upon a very important concept through its section titled, “Levels of Meaning”. Claiming, “a sentence can be described, linguistically, on several levels (phonetic, phonological, grammatical, contextual),” Barthes appears to address the question of is it possible to look too deep into details, looking beyond what the text actually states? In the Sherlock Holmes work, “The Adventure of the Speckled Band”, a work which appears to deal directly with attention to detail, the work seems to incorporate enough depth into its meaning, key to the solving of the crime, while pertaining directly to the story and little more. My question is do the minute details which allow Sherlock to solve the crime, contain meanings which stretch into greater depth as Barthes’ work suggests narratives can do.

The 3 Relationships that characters engage in

In Structural Analysis of Narratives the author mentions the “three major relationships in which [characters] can engage in” being love, communication, and help. I think that these three characteristics is what defines any literally character in narratives. Communication is the most obvious of the three, as the narrator is telling his story to the reader; the narrator is attempting to communicate the events that have been or are being experienced. This may be the most important, because it is a stepping stone for the other two characteristics. The help aspect, I think is not only the literally meaning of the narrator seeking help, but perhaps help through understanding, understanding of what they are going through. Again, with love, I think it means more than just love, maybe the lack of love, the presence of hate (the opposite of love). I think that each character is made up of all of these qualities, be it a villain or hero, they are fighting to have themselves represented in the story. In the case of The Speckled Band, Holmes is working on a case for Ms. Stoner, who posses all of these qualities. She has love for her deceased twin sister, but on some level love for her step father, she needs help because she is trying to figure out what is happening in the room in which her sister dies, and help comes from Holmes. Communication is obvious, in her telling Holmes of her situation. We also see this in the protagonist himself, Holmes has an obvious love for his profession, and we can see this as he rises earlier than usual to hear the case of Ms. Stoner, he provides her with him services along with his partner, and he is able to communicate his thought process throughout the story, and at the end when he described how he solves the mystery.

Sera Ramlal

Don't Judge a Detail By It's Simplicity...

It seems as though Barthes’ essay, “Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narratives,” particularly his segment on the analysis of function in narratives is perfectly explained by the our second reading, “The Adventure of the Speckled Band”. Barthes explains on page 89 that when reading narratives, “even were a detail to appear irretrievable insignificant…everything has a meaning.” What better story to emphasize this point then a Sherlock Holmes mystery! To Holmes, every detail is vital, as we see when he urges Miss Stoner to be very specific in detail when telling over the story. In regards to function within the narrative, Doyle is clearly writing with the function that Barthes is referring to, that of foreshadowing, in many instances throughout the story, such as when Miss Stoner tell Holmes of the Doctor’s “passion for Indian animals [which are] feared by the villagers almost as much as their master.”

Posting on the blog.

Hi everyone,

Based on an e-mail I just got from Blogspot, I suspect that some of you who haven't posted yet are trying to figure out how to do so. (At least I hope so, as you have until midnight tonight to complete this week's blog assignment.) While you can respond to other people's original threads without having been invited to the blog, you won't be able to post an original thread.

The handout I distributed last week about the blog explains this, but, just to remind you, you need to first create a Gmail account (if you don't already have one) and then e-mail me with the address so that I can invite you to join.

If you're having trouble accessing the blog, please contact me. See you tomorrow.

Sequence in the adventures of the speckled bond

On page 102 in Barnes article, Barnes describes the term sequence as a threatened logical unit. This unit has a minimal risk which can sequentially lead to a maximum risk. The minimal risk is a simple function such a singular greeting as Barnes explains. The Maximum risk is that one greeting leads to a meeting with many people. A connection of these two risks can be made in “"the adventures of the speckled bond" where Doyle presents a minimal sequential risk by Helen coming to visit Holmes to discuss the case. The maximal sequential risk would be Holmes actually taking the case. It is bad enough that he has taken the case but the fact that he went into the house and even had the courage to go into the doctor’s room had a the risk of being caught and murdered by the doctor is the ultimate risk.

Barthes' "Functions" in the "Speckled Band"

An interesting connection that I made between the Barthes article and the Sherlock Holmes story has to do with the idea of the functional unit as proposed by Barthes. From what I understand, the "functional unit" refers to an idea within a narrative that includes the value of its connotation, rather than just the simple idea. The example that Barthes uses to describe this is on page 91 of the article, as he analyzes a segment from a James Bond novel "Bond picked up one of the four receivers." Barthes explains that four doesn't actually mean the number (4), rather it serves to demonstrate to the reader that the technology of having multiple phones is necessary to the operation of the Secret Service headquarters, proving its validity. The connection that I made to the "Adventure of the Speckled Band" is that Doyle makes it clear to the reader, on multiple occasions, that Dr. Roylott kept exotic pets, and Holmes and Watson even come in contact with a baboon as they make their way into the home late at night. Barthes would call theappearances of the exotic pets in the narrative "functions" because of the eventual direct relation they have to the characters and the story.

Functional Details

After reading Structural Analysis of Narratives and The Adventure of the Speckled Band consecutively, I was surprised to find that the ideas of Barthes were not only included in the work by Doyle, but also that in the application of Barthes seemingly clouded ideas, all became much clearer. For example, when Barthes was discussing his idea of detail in a story as a ‘functional unit’ (pg.91) the theory seemed somewhat vague and confusing. However, when reading the Doyle, the presence of these functional details began to reveal itself. The best example of this is the woman in the beginning of the narration with the description of being, “…dressed in black and heavily veiled…”(pg.108) These brief details are provided not only as a physical description of how the woman is dressed but also provides the reader with deeper insight into the woman’s character. The statement that she is heavily veiled implies this woman is a character who has experienced a great deal of grief and possibly is someone very secretive, perhaps should not even be trusted.

Week #1: Doyle & Barthes

Take your time reading Barthes. It's a difficult text and speeding through it won't help your understanding of it. Mark up the print-out as you read, which will help you when working on your responses. You may even want to re-read the theory after reading Doyle.

As I mentioned before, in your blog posts and your journal, you should consider the relationship between the theory and the literature. Think of your responses as a dialogue between "Speckled Band" and "Structural Analysis." Use the posts and journal to work through your ideas and generate an analysis of both Barthes and Doyle. How do Barthes' concepts apply to Doyle's story? How might they apply to literature at large?

Just as a reminder, here's your writing assignments:
1. Post an original thread on this blog about the pieces by Barthes and Doyle.
2. Post at least two replies to your classmates' blog postings.
3. Write a 1-2 page response journal in which you address the Barthes and Doyle more in depth.
(Note: Yes, you can double space your journal. No, you can't use big font and huge margins. Stick to 12-point font and 1.25" margins.)

Final notes: Let me know if you're having trouble accessing the blog, Blackboard, eRes, or turnitin. Also, hang on to the diagnostic handout and bring it to class next Thursday.

Have a good weekend!

How to post on Why theory?*

How to start a thread (basic)
1. From Dashboard: Click the “New Post” link listed under “Why theory?” From the blog itself: In the upper right-hand corner of the window, click “New Post.”
2. Type your post into the text box. You may want to write your response in Word first and then copy and paste it into the box. Don’t forget to include a title for your post!
3. Click the spell check button.
4. Click “Preview” if you wish to look it over before publishing.
5. If you like the way your post looks, click “Publish Post.”

How to start a thread (advanced)
If you want to add images to your post:
1. Click the image button. A pop-up window will appear. (Make sure your browser allows pop-up windows.)
2. Either click “Choose file” to select an image from your hard drive or enter the URL of the image you want to use.
3. Select a layout: none, left, center, or right.
4. Select an image size: small, medium, or large.
5. Click the “I accept the Terms of Service” box.
6. Click the “Upload image” button when you’re finished.
If you want to include labels (keywords that describe the content of your post):
1. Select important words that describe the major themes of your post. For example: Dracula, Barthes, postcolonialism. If you want to see labels previously used by another post, click “Show all.”
2. Type your words into the “Labels for this post” box.
3. They will automatically appear with the thread when you publish it.

How to reply to a post
1. Click the pencil in the lower right-hand corner.
2. Enter your response in the comment box. You may want to write your response in Word first and then copy and paste it into the box.
3. Click “Preview” if you wish to look it over before publishing.
4. If you like the way your post looks, click “Publish Your Comment.”

* In case you were wondering, the title of the blog is not merely a rhetorical question about the purpose of theory. It comes from a song (entitled "Why Theory?") by post-punk band Gang of Four.