#dracula's fiancee

[weirdlookindog]

Brigitte Lahaie and Sandrine Thoquet in La fiancée de Dracula (1999)

[uspiria]

Dracula’s Fiancée (2002) dir. Jean Rollin

[vickyvicarious]

It also seems that so far Jonathan mentions Mina every day. Day 1. Get recipes for her. Day 2. If I am to be a Dark Souls environmental storytelling corpse, whoever finds this journal, tell her I said goodbye. Day 3. No imposter syndrome for me because Mina would Dislike That 💗

Fun fact: If you unfocus your eyes and tilt your head just right, you can actually see the message "💖I love Mina so very much💖" hidden on every single page he writes...

Yeah, I especially love the imposter syndrome moment so much. It's possibly the scariest moment for him from yesterday, just stuck waiting alone on the doorstep of a crumbling castle in the middle of the night after the most harrowing drive ever with nowhere to go and no one to help him... And midway through going "is this normal? this can't be normal, right???" he has to redirect because he dared to still think of himself as a mere clerk and Mina is Proud Of Him for being a full-blown solicitor now. She won't have anyone looking down on her man, certainly not the man himself. It's adorable.

[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​

[v-thinks-on]

The impulse to do a crossover of all the Victorian horror novels is a strong one, and I got to wondering how they might intersect...

[clonerightsagenda]

Arthur: Lucy is a member of the cursed undead so it’s my duty and honor to kill her to release her soul. Jonathan: If Mina goes I’m going too; out of my fucking way.

[thegoatsongs]

“When your master, employer, what you will, engaged that someone should come on his behalf, it was understood that my needs only were to be consulted. I have not stinted. Is it not so?”

What could I do but bow acceptance? It was Mr. Hawkins’s interest, not mine, and I had to think of him, not myself.

That part always gets me... because he's really just an employer (without a family, or a home of his own) who has to put his boss' needs above his own.

It shows also when he's all but dying at the hospital and he tells Mr. Hawkins that he got the job done and that he apologizes for the delay.

[summersfirstsnow]

Dracula Daily catch-up is really making me think that it would be a very fun project to read/see the story in the orders that each character encountered it...

[burekstation]

Dracula: This is great no one will see me feed on this girl and when she's found sleeping here tomorrow it'll be explained away as sleepwalking

Dracula: Like how no one suspects anything about all those sailors, I have left no trail behind

Dracula: Or how I will never stumble upon anyone who may care about my pet solicitor's fate

Jonathan's fiancee: *naruto running towards him at 2am*

[captainsparklefingers]

One of the things I'm taking away from the second go round of Dracula Daily (and particularly from David Ault's excellent performance in Re: Dracula) is how much I like Lord Arthur Godalming.

Like. On the surface and the first time round he stands out the least of Lucy's suitors, and given how much time we hear from Jack, he can come off the most developed. Quincy, of course, gives us a heck of a lot of personality with relatively little (again, compared to how much we get from Jack). Arthur, though, doesn't have the same volume of words to develop, nor the instantly clear personality. He's just Lucy's fiancee, Jack and Quincy's friend, the heroes of light's wealthy benefactor.

But God, this poor man. He's suffered several immense losses in a very short period, been forced to see the woman he loved as a monster, and then had to put her down so she could rest in peace. Beyond the emotional burdens of such losses, he has to deal with the legal matters and the settling of affairs for three different people, probably doing whatever one needs to do to take his father's place in the House of Lords (something I know absolutely nothing about but I assume there's things to do there), AND the earth shattering revelation the supernatural is real, monsters do exist, and the one who killed Lucy is still out there.

And all of that while having to abide by the Victorian standards of manhood. Stalwart, strong, showing no emotions that could make him seem weak.

I think the scene in September 30th, where Mina comforts him and finally he has the chance to let go of all of these burdens he's felt he must carry alone, all of the grief and sorrow he's been forced to carry, he can for at least a moment put aside the mask of manliness society insist he wear and just let himself be a man who has lost his father and his fiancee within days of each other, who is dealing with situations beyond belief.

Obviously we've seen him cry and grieve before but it always felt like he was stifling it to a degree because, well. He only has his male friends to lean on now and the stupid proprieties of society mean he can only lean so much. But now he's had a chance to finally let go, made a connection with Lucy's dearest friend and a new sister of choice. He has his friends, he's finally been allowed to mourn in the way he's truly feeling...and now he's ready to help in whatever way possible to avenge Lucy.

Arthur comes off to me as a very strong character, a man driven by great love, who's emotions, as constrained as they may be, are one of his greatest strengths (and, of course, every good monster hunting group needs a financial benefactor). He's not a flat character at all, he's not forgettable character. Lucy loved him for a reason and, I think, in the moment his grief finally breaks, we get a glimpse at that.

I think that one of the good things of Dracula Daily has been making people realize how good of a character Jonathan Harker is, how pop culture has done damage to the true character of Lucy and Mina…I think we should add that its done a good job of making one care for a character as Arthur, who at first glance seems flat and boring.

Or at least it's made me appreciate him more. And I still want to know how he and Jack and Quincy became friends and what sort of shenanigans they got up to before the events of the book.

[uspiria]

Dracula’s Fiancée (2002) dir. Jean Rollin

[thebibi]

One of things I still find so interesting about the original outline of Dracula is the inclusion of the Count into upper class society, particularly related to Jack.

Since Arthur doesn't exist in the outline, Jack is the one engaged to Lucy. And there's a part before she gets bitten, where she feels uncomfortable about the creepy house next to the asylum, and Jack tells her he would need permission to check it out. Later on she still gets bitten, but Jack in the meanwhile invites his new neighbor, Dracula for his dinner party. These two moments strongly imply how Jack is in many ways Dracula's true accomplice in the story. Jack welcomes him as as an equal, even though his fiancee suffers and later dies by Dracula's hand.

Of course we don't know what the whole story would have looked like. For one, it makes Lucy's death more tragic: if only Jack listened to Lucy, then maybe everything else would be different. However, Jack still tries to save her after getting bitten, and later after her death he and the Professor vow to find out the truth. But I can't help but wonder how different the book would have been if this subplot had remained in the final novel.

[see-arcane]

Dracula: "Worry not my good friend Jonathan. I shall promptly send your letter to your boss (which I read) that tells him to speak to your fiancee! (the coded letter to whom I just burned)"

Rage and hate unending :)))))))))

Doubly so because I have to wonder whether the Hawkins letter was sent at all. The coded letter--WITH MINA'S WHOLE ADDRESS ON IT, NEW NIGHTMARE UNLOCKED--was burned in front of Jonathan as a power play. The Hawkins letter was kept intact and resealed to keep the threadbare 'performance' going. Dracula takes that letter out of the room, locking Jonathan in for his Misbehaving Gothic Damsel Timeout...

...and then (minor spoilers) we never hear of the Hawkins letter again. Not from Hawkins himself or from Mina.

Implying that this letter was also destroyed while Jonathan couldn't see it happen. Just to be safe.

I wonder if Jonathan found more ashes waiting in his room. A neat letter-sized pile with his own wax seal left resting on top. And he just opted not to bother mentioning it. Because what would be the point?

Despair has its own calms...

[annabelle--cane]

finally got around to finishing dracula 1931. thoughts: I was honestly a bit underwhelmed, usually when I go to watch an old classic black and white movie it blows my tits clean off, but my tits remained firmly on my body for this one. it felt a bit undertempo, both in terms of the actual pacing and more metaphorically across the board. I did like how they did vampirised mina, her creepiness made a good contrast with her previous hollywood starlet vibes and I liked that they visibly had her bloodlusting after her fiancee.

[immediatebreakfast]

Gotta love how the locals ALL react to Jonathan. They see him head to the wolf's jaws, one who is known for his taste for youth and go "oh that's a baby... I must give up my OWN good luck charm for this kid!"

Jonathan's whole beginning is such innocence facing its first big experience. Very first step out of the hearth.

It also juxtaposes with Jack, Quincey and Arthur, who are experienced men who have had many adventures overseas already!

Jonathan being a child in the eyes of the locals is something that has been discussed a lot, but I still feel for them. Because in a way, Jonathan is still a child, he is away from home, fresh from exams and with a fiancee, to have his first job in the field.

So the locals see this young man who doesn't even speak their language, but is polite, and has the kind of freshness that only inexperienced young people have in his eyes. They don't think much of it until he tells them (in broken german) where exactly he is going. Then, after Jonathan's revelation what the locals only see is a walking corpse, or worse another young soul trapped for eternity.

What the inkeepeer's wife sees is a lonely mother in a candle lit home, waiting and waiting for any kind of news of her son, looking at the window for hours so she doesn't miss the arrival of that young man she raised, and sent to a foreing land.

What the locals see is another victim. It seems that horrible being lost the fascination for the taste of their young (or has already devoured so many), and now he is bringing more innocent young people to his cursed tomb of a castle.

So they try, and try to keep that young man away, but he is a stubborn english man (it's his first job he can't mess it up).

They see the determination of his eyes (or desesperation and confusion), and let him go.

Maybe if they give him some protections he can put the clues together, and survive (it's impossible). Maybe if the coachman goes faster than that devil he can make the young man wait for tomorrow.

Compare Jonathan to these charming men, older than him, who had already seen so much more. The three of them have the kind of "mindset" that Jonathan lacks when it comes to danger. However, I think that even with all of their experience, none of them would have survived what Jonathan has been through in the course of these days.

I know it sounds unbelievable, or even cruel. Still, based on their characters, and the kind of masculine archetype that each of them represent, would Arthur, Quincey and Jack see through Dracula? Absolutely they aren't fools. Would they survive the kind of game that Dracula has been playing with Jonathan? I don't think so.

[sepublic]

So in Castlevania game lore, the novel Dracula canonically exists, and is apparently just fanfiction or whatever about the ACTUAL Dracula AKA Matthias Cronqvist. But at the same time, Quincey Morris (spelled without an E) did exist and did slay Dracula, and die doing so.

Which begs the question, how inaccurate was Bram Stoker's account of events? Or was it inaccurate at all? Maybe Dracula DID resurrect and do all that to the Harkers and Lucy and whatnot. And Quincey eventually managed to kill him, though not before siring an actual son named John.

I kinda want to see a Castlevania version of the Dracula novel; One compliant to the lore. So obviously the rules for Dracula and vampires is changed a little, and maybe he's not so utterly alone this time, given he's usually attended to by an entire army of monsters. Or maybe this resurrection, Dracula came back weaker than usual and couldn't summon any of the typical lackeys like Medusa or Death. Maybe he DOES have some minions and they just take a backseat in the roles of the peasants Dracula hired.

The fact that Quincey has John means that he must've fallen in love with someone other than Lucy; So maybe he never proposed to her, or he had a one-night stand sometime between the rejection, and his blood donation. We also know there was a Lucy Seward in Castlevania canon, who was Eric Lecarde's fiancee until Elizabeth Bartley (Erzsebet Bathory) turned her into a vampire and Eric had to mercy-kill her.

This is obviously conflicting with Lucy Westenra and how her story went... And given Eric's own age in the timeline, I wonder if this could be reconciled with the revelation that after Quincey's death, Jack Seward had a daughter he named Lucy in honor of his lost loved one, only for her to tragically suffer the exact same fate, whoops I think I tempted fate right there.

There's also Castlevania Netflix's continuity, which definitely can't use Dracula as the villain because he took a major chill pill at the end of the first series. Now I'm kinda curious to see Castlevania Netflix actually adapt Quincey Morris' story, and it's blatantly the novel Dracula but with a few changes here or there to be canon-compliant; In particular, Dracula is replaced with another vampire who is identical in all but name and maybe appearance.

Because wouldn't it be funny if we got Quincey's story for either the game or show continuities of Castlevania, and despite the lore changes, it unironically ended up being a more accurate Dracula adaptation than all of the other actual Dracula adaptations??? I say this because the Castlevania games kinda get the meaning and sentiments of the novel better than the proper adaptations, somehow.