Wednesday, February 13, 2008
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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree with the statement "We wonder whether the truth about what really happened can ever be purely and objectively known (Dracula, pg. 502),” because if they passangers and people from the inn knew he was going some place dagerous why wouldnt they tell Mr Harker?
The line, "wonder whether the truth about what really happened can ever be purely and objectively known" (502) gets to the heart of the idea behind objectivity. All of the information we receive in the novel is given to us by characters who are not aware of the full scope of the situation themselves. Only by piecing together the journals of Harker, the letters from Mina, and the wax recordings of Seward can we begin to get a more complete picture, but certainly still nowhere near the objective truth that we so desire.
Post a Comment