#we just know very little about Renfield in the book

[captainsparklefingers]

How do you think Dracula and Hawkins met? He refers to the man as a friend, but he also refers to Jonathan, who he just met, as a friend...which I assume is a disarming tactic to make people feel more comfortable.

The most likely scenario is that Dracula simply did his research about estate law in England, contacted somebody and got a referral to Peter Hawkins, and that was that. Which of course leads to the question of who Dracula's contact in England is...

.... so uh. How much do we know about the life of Renfield before he ended up in the asylum?

[saltiestgempearl]

Today is the day! At long last, I can talk about my absolute favorite headcanon about Dr. Seward with you all.

I'm writing a new post about it instead of just reblogging my post from last year because that post is not spoiler free. That is, I posted October 22 of 2022, so it does mention things from entries that have not happened yet in the 2023 Dracula Daily.

That said, most of it is still fine now that the September 3 entry has arrived, so I have put together a slightly edited version that does not touch on anything that happens after the September 3 Dracula entry:

It starts out with this passage from today's entry:

How can he'—and he pointed at me with the same look and gesture as that with which once he pointed me out to his class, on, or rather after, a particular occasion which he never fails to remind me of—'know anything of a young ladies? He has his madmen to play with, and to bring them back to happiness, and to those that love them.

The thing is, that's not exactly the wording in the original book. In the original book, it says “He has his madams to play with, and to bring them back to happiness, and to those that love them.” Many people write this off as a typo to the point of changing it to “madmans” or “madmen” in some versions.

But what if it wasn’t a typo?

The word “madam” implies an older woman, like anywhere from middle-aged to elderly. And at the time, it was not at all uncommon for women in this age group to be sent to asylums to recuperate. Sometimes it was just a way to get female relatives you didn’t like out of the way, but sometimes it wasn’t.

You see, many Victorians (men and women alike) unironically bought into the “delicate woman” narrative. People really, genuinely thought women were just psychologically more predisposed to mental instability.

Anyway, the headcanon is that Seward actually started out as a relatively low-level psychologist at an asylum, primarily working with middle-aged to elderly women. And being the inquisitive man he is, he interacted with the patients in a less-than-conventional way, letting them talk about things that would normally be considered signs of imbalance by the contemporary medical community (e.g., “sometimes I wish I’d never had my children,” “sometimes I just want as little to do with my husband as possible,” “honestly those suffragettes make some good points,” etc.). This isn’t to say he was some feminist icon mind you; he didn’t even necessarily agree or legitimize these ideas. But he didn’t shoot them down either—he just listened. And by engaging with the women in this way, he was essentially exploring some of what we now call talk therapy, which was very much not a thing at this time. He may have also tried to be supportive of their hobbies, which while not unheard of (institutions like Bedlam set a precedent for this), was not the most common thing either.

So he did this for a while, and surprise surprise, it actually helped these women quite a bit. He quickly got a reputation for being someone who was unusually gifted in turning around cases of “nervous disorders” that were so common with these delicate womenfolk.

But then some higher-ups decided “oh, well if he’s good with this, he must be good with insane people too.” So despite being a 29-year-old budding psychologist in a very young field, he suddenly found himself the head of an asylum with a very different sort of population to treat.

Given why he was put in this position, Jack naturally continues using the methods that helped his former patients recover so spectacularly. The issue is, of course, that people who are dealing with psychosis or other more serious conditions generally need a different approach than neglected women with anxiety. Basic talk therapy isn’t going to cut it with someone like Renfield.

But again, this field is very young, so Seward is actually relatively limited on how much he can research this. So he continues with his talk therapy, but then adds things like straightjackets into the mix when his patients have meltdowns because that was also a relatively accepted solution at the time (though not universally so; even in Bram Stoker’s time, there were some professionals in the field who had figured out that this type of manual restraint was not helpful and honestly not humane.)

It’s also possible that Jack might have had some criticism early on for not being firm enough with his more “difficult” patients, so he might have overcompensated for that by using the straightjacket solution more often when things got out of hand.

And finally, Jack also has his mad scientist tendencies that he openly grapples with in his diary—you know, the sort that caused him to make wildly irresponsible decisions like “let’s let Renfield escape, but supervised, and see what happens.” And since Jack was the head of the hospital, no one shot down this obviously ridiclous idea because they probably didn’t have the authority to.

TL;DR: The headcanon is “maybe Van Helsing did mean ‘madams’ because Jack started off wildly successful in treating older women with anxiety, and as a result was catapulted into a much more powerful position he was neither properly trained for nor mentally ready for.”

[twistedtummies2]

Top 10 Portrayals of Renfield

The time has come to cover our last supporting player in Bram Stoker’s Dracula. I’m skipping over Arthur Holmwood and Quincey Morris, on account of a lack of really great interpretations for either, which means our next major character of note is Renfield: the deranged lunatic who acts as the Count’s mortal servant.

Renfield is interesting in that, much like Van Helsing, his role has become more pronounced over the years. In fact, Renfield caught on as a major character EARLIER than Van Helsing, as even the very earliest Dracula films included a Renfield character of some sort, and many movies that don’t have ANY of the other characters from the novel rather frequently feature either Renfield or some sort of “Renfield surrogate.” In the book, however, the madman is actually a relatively peripheral character: he doesn’t really DO a whole lot, in the grand scheme of things, but rather acts as a sort of “warning siren.” Renfield’s psychic connection to Dracula makes him a sort of living bookmark: someone who can track the vampire’s moves throughout the novel, even when the other characters aren’t physically near the Count. He also acts as an interesting counterpoint to Dracula and his Brides: they are powerful, seductive, grandiose figures of evil who represent a sort of decadent “gold standard” of vampirism. Renfield is a disheveled psychotic who scavenges for bugs and other small animals to feed his growing appetite, worshiping Dracula in a cultist-like fashion. He is the bottom-feeding parasite in comparison to the Satanical power Dracula seems to exude. Over the years, creators have built up Renfield’s character in a variety of ways, expanding his role in the story and giving him more depth and focus. It makes sense, when you think about it: if any character is going to be as memorable as the great and powerful King of the Vampires, it’s going to be his scurvy little henchman who eats insects in-between bursts of mad raving. For actors, it’s a great role to sink one’s teeth into (no pun intended), as Renfield allows a performer to go wild in ways other roles can’t provide, and make some interesting choices through. There are lots of vampire familiars to go through, so let’s waste no more time: these are My Top 10 Favorite Portrayals of Renfield!

10. Roland Topor, from Nosferatu the Vampyre.

In the first remake of “Nosferatu,” French artist Roland Topor was cast - in a rare acting role - in the role of Renfield. I don’t know much about Topor or any other work he may have done as a performer, beyond this movie, but I will say this, he doesn’t do half bad! His Renfield is delightfully creepy and yet rather funny at the same time. I love the way Dracula just sort of shrugs him off, clearly irritated with his sycophantic servant, in the scenes they share together. My only problem is that Topor’s Renfield just sort of vanishes from the movie after a certain point; we never find out what happened to him by the end of the picture. For all we know, he could still be out there…dun-dun-dunnn…

9. Tony Haygarth, from the 1979 Film.

Among other roles, I know Tony Haygarth for voicing a rather depraved version of the Mad Hatter, in the movie “Dreamchild” (which came out six years after the Frank Langella picture). I don’t know who decided to cast this man as two of literature’s most famous maniacs, but I’m glad it happened. In the film, Renfield first appears as a dockyard worker, who has a grudge against the Jonathan Harker and his family for past injustices. This makes him all the more fitting a stooge for Dracula. As the film goes on, Renfield grows increasingly insane, visibly changing from a relatively rational human to a broken mess before his final destruction.

8. Pablo Alvarez Rubio, from “Spanish Dracula.”

Much like its English-language counterpart, the Spanish version of Universal’s acclaimed 1931 “Dracula” conflates the characters of Renfield and Jonathan Harker: Jonathan still appears, but it’s Renfield who visits Castle Dracula, and then returns to England with the Count aboard a doomed ship. This works as a sort of origin story for the character, which several other versions have taken influence from. Rubio may not be as iconic as Dwight Frye’s scene-stealing Renfield, but he’s not a bad interpretation, either. However, I think the Spanish version makes some choices in edits that ultimately hinder his performance, and bring it down in the ranks.

7. Nicholas Hoult, from Renfield.

In this movie, the partnership between Dracula and Renfield is hamfistedly examined as a study in toxic relationships. More of a dark superhero film than a proper Gothic Horror outing, Hoult’s Renfield eats bugs not out of an urge to consume life, but because munching on insects and arachnids gives him superhuman abilities for brief periods of time. While not by any means the definitive version of the character, he is fun to watch and Hoult turns in a spectacular performance.

6. Samuel Barnett, from Penny Dreadful.

In Season 3 of Penny Dreadful, Renfield goes beyond simply being a vampire’s familiar to slowly being transformed into a vampire proper. He starts off as a seemingly mild-mannered, proper Victorian gentleman…but when Dracula learns of some dark secrets in Renfield’s life, he uses that to his advantage and snatches Renfield up to act as a spy against his enemy. Barnett’s Renfield is deliciously creepy, mercurial, and runs the gamut from somewhat sympathetic to utterly detestable. He was easily one of my favorite parts of Season 3.

5. Klaus Kinski, from the 1970 Film.

In this Jess-Franco-directed adaptation, Klaus Kinski - who might be the only actor to play Renfield who was probably insane in real-life (seriously, Kinski was…QUITE the piece of work, as a person, behind the scenes) - plays a mute Renfield. While he never speaks a word, and does relatively little throughout the film, he steals every scene he’s in, and is given a more sympathetic portrayal; this Renfield often seems more like a scared, confused child than anything else, and has a tragic backstory behind his madness. At the same time, he’s still dangerous, even trying to strangle Mina while under Dracula’s command at one point. Apparently, Kinski had no idea he was even in a Dracula movie during the making of the film, which seems a bit far-fetched to me…but if it is true, I guess there were worse ways to handle it than just giving this utterly demented individual free reign to just…do whatever the heck he wanted for a while. :P

4. Alexander Granach, from Nosferatu.

Referred to as “Knock” in this version, Renfield is given a role that is in some ways expanded upon from the novel, and yet also somehow still very peripheral. He’s in a lot of the movie, but much of what he does is totally separate from the main plot of the film. At the start of the movie, the character is already clearly on an uneven keel, and is indicated to already be working for Count Orlok (Dracula): the Harker character is actually his employee, and Knock sends him out fully knowing what horrors await him. As the movie goes on, Knock goes increasingly more insane, desperate to find and reconnect with his Master. While delightfully over-the-top, there are actually a few legitimately creepy moments with the character too: at one point, he gets hit in the head with two stones, thrown by angry villagers, and…just…doesn’t even REACT to them. I don’t know why, but that particular moment always unnerves me when I watch it.

3. Tom Waits, from the 1992 Film.

While Tom Waits is no stranger to acting, it was still surprising to see him pop up in this star-studded adaptation of the Bram Stoker novel, directed by Francis Ford Coppola. This version seems to take some subtle cues from the Universal films of 1931, as its indicated Renfield preceded Jonathan in doing deals with the Count, and returned to England a changed (and deranged) man. While his role is, once again, relatively set to sidelines, Waits is memorable every time he shows up, ranging from a relatively reasonable-sounding gentleman to a raving, bloodthirsty psycho at the drop of a hat.

2. Jack Shepherd, from the 1977 BBC TV Film.

While this television production mostly sticks to the novel, one of the more noteworthy deviations it takes is with Shepherd’s portrayal of Renfield. In this version, slightly more focus is given to Renfield’s relationship with Mina, and the character actually goes through a sort of redemption arc. At the start of the story, he is Dracula’s bloodthirsty slave; more like a sort of two-legged dog than a human being. As the story goes on, instead of going more crazy, Renfield begins to regain his sanity and morality. Instead of helping Dracula and being slain by the Count as a way for the vampire to cover his tracks, Shepherd’s Renfield stands up to his Master in the end, effectively sacrificing himself to try and help the other characters. Eat your heart out, Nicholas Hoult: the BBC got there a lot sooner, and STILL made him crazy. XD

1. Dwight Frye, from the 1931 Film.

For me, just as it’s next to impossible to separate Bela Lugosi (and Christopher Lee) from Dracula, it’s impossible to separate Dwight Frye from Renfield. In some ways, I actually think his performance is the best in the entire movie, trumping even the work of Lugosi and Edward Van Sloan as Van Helsing! Frye’s Renfield is legitimately scary, even by today’s standards, but is also a very sympathetic and tragic character (and at times genuinely funny, too). You really feel sorry for Renfield: an initially innocent man driven mad by Dracula’s corruption, who has to struggle between his loyalty to his Master and his desire to keep his soul clean of guilt. Frye maneuvers through all of Renfield’s moods and modes, from sane and gentlemanly to absolutely freaking off his rocker, with great aplomb. Without a shadow of a doubt, he is My Favorite Renfield.

[vickyvicarious]

anytime someone says "I must have slept" in this book it is Bad. when you aren't sure it's because a vampire has done it to you pretty much

Renfield and Mina's mingled "god bless you" :(

Mina is crying alone so much I hate it

YOU WILL WANT THE POWER OF WAKING. AAAAAGH

oh my god, Jonathan confusedly repeating "ask for the... de-PITE...?"

honestly sending mina away would be safer. not at all for the reasons you think but it would get her away from Dracula at least.

I love how generous Jonathan is with bribery tips the instant he comes into money

jonathan STOP saying the dialect words that way oh my god. ridiculous

Dracula's moustache got white again fast. This should be notable because it means whenever his hair is described as black or even gray it means he has been feeding quite recently.

"How this phrase thrilled through me!" the almost shuddering quality of this line. Jonathan thinking that the Count doesn't throw a shadow

"The whole nine?" the urgency of his ask

Jonathan this is the first time you haven't immediately picked up on someone talking about being thirsty. I can tell how distressed you are

feels weird for Dracula to be described as a good tipper. wouldn't've have thought it of him

the way he chuckles as he says Dracula was ready to throw one of the workers down the stairs... it's great, but I imagine Jonathan was fearful because he knows exactly how easily and how violently the Count could do just that

Dracula's taste in architecture continues to lean heavily towards "old" "dusty" and "in disrepair"

Jonathan was ready to go in right away if he could get someone to take him. It's daytime, he is very ready to act while he can

the lawyer's insistence on calling the Piccadilly house a 'mansion' is so funny

ahahahaaha the controlled frustration in Jonathan's "Pardon me"

"Surely, you do not mind letting me know so much" he's HOLDING BACK so hard

"a prig of the first water" ehehehehehe

oh man the sarcasm in the way he says "so resolute a guardian"

I love Jonathan just using Art's name freely here. There's been no indication that he's been given permission (not that I think he'd refuse, but it probably hasn't occurred to him)

Jonathan can't stand the thought of hiding things to Mina when she's SAD and RIGHT THERE

"so after dinner—followed by a little music to save appearances even amongst ourselves—" WAIT don't just skip over music night I wanna hear all about it

Mina's fearful affection.... :( :( :(

Art speaking confidently in front of the group :)

awww Jonathan's yawn is so cute

he loves Mina so much, auuuugh

everyone is sleeping so soundly. why am I not reassured

Art always there with the animals <3

it's wild that Jack is still trying to do his normal job during all this. like I get it but. it's wild to think about

I love how smarmy Mitchell sounds

COUNT DE VILLE

"He had heard him yell; and when he went to him found him lying on his face on the floor, all covered with blood." oh shiiiiit here we go......

[spiders-rob]

NSFW Headcanons for Renfield 2023 Characters

Robert Montague Renfield

I saw someone else headcanon that he has a mostly Phantom of the Opera sex playlist and God, that's so true. You're absolutely right.

more submissive type stuff:

Likes:

His hair played with

Light choking

Hand feeding

(Off) Limits:

Being told in detail what his partner is about to do to him

Pain (receiving)

Blood (weird memories yo)

Drugs

Insults

more dominant type stuff:

Usually being in restraints but it depends. Occasionally he's into it.

Biting

Picking his partner up/holding them in place

Calling his partner bug or bugbug (yeah don't think about that one too much, dude)

Rebecca Quincy

Honestly he's not particular he just enjoys being in control

Cowgirl (lol. Because of the book. Do you get it? Do you get it??)

Competence kink!!!!

Wrestling and grappling with one another

Compliments: Giving compliments and Getting compliments

Will make lots of awkward jokes to relieve the tension/anxiety

Once accidentally killed the mood by making herself laugh so hard (at a funny voice impression she did) that her wine came up through her nose.

Tedward "Teddy" Lobo

Will do a line or three (or a centipede) off of like, any body part.

Look, let's be honest we all know he has a barely-repressed Mommy kink that will surface the second he loses composure, ok?

Claims to be a dom. Is absolutely not that. 100% submissive brat.

Will attempt dirty talk but will frequently stumble over his words (when he doesn't plan them out extensively ahead of time) and then backtrack trying to correct himself.

Likes to record it so he can "prove he fucks" (??? Babe, what)

"Teasingly/knowingly" asks "do you like that?" But is absolutely not actually bragging and is genuinely unironically seeking reassurance

Carol

The type of guy who thinks the stripper/prostitute/cam worker actually likes him lmao.

He'd do pretty much anything to be called a "good boy" but he has to get over himself or just be unbearably horny to admit that instead of claiming to hate it/viewing it as an "accusation"

He has had so much unfulfilling/uncomfortable sex because he tells himself that the mild panic he feels when taking control is "exhilaration". (Exhilaration is supposed to be fun, dude)

Body painting on her partner

Tantric sex

Likes to make jokes/laugh to deflect from the vulnerability

Idk man she's really hard to get a read on honestly.

Bellafrancesca Lobo

Her partners have a habit of turning up in little pieces throughout the city dumpsters once she's done with them so like...approach with caution

Attracted to power

Mark :)

Like she's dominant but she's only attracted to other doms and then they compete to see who can keep up with eachother

Pretty vanilla tbh

Has a surprising amount of hangups

Likes sexy dancing as foreplay

Gentle

Caitlyn Bergman

Running hands over each other's faces

Generally considerate

Wants a fairytale romance (or maybe a bodice-ripper fantasy)

Attracted to witty remarks/sarcasm

Honestly still figuring out what she likes after Mitch.

Likes dressing up in sexy lingerie

Kate Quincy

Ace so nope

"Wait, people actually experience sexual attraction? That wasn't a joke?"

Bob

Surprisingly gentle and tender

Like for such a tense/angry guy he basically just wants very gentle sweet intimacy

Says a lot of reassurances

Checks in a lot to make sure his partner is ok

He's very masculine and "tough" and people tend to expect him to be the one doing all the pursuing/masculine role stuff, so little sweet romantic gestures like getting him flowers or complimenting him etc go a LONG way. Just genuinely calling him pretty without irony or sarcasm makes him blush like crazy and his heart races.

Kevin

Really likes it when his partner wears perfume. Especially something floral.

Long makeout sessions

Trevanté

Takes a long time for him to trust someone enough for anything

A bit of a showoff

Will put his hand over his partner's and guide them

Very direct communication. Will say plainly what he wants/likes and ask questions upfront.

[thecarnivorousmuffinmeta]

Young Carlisle Cullen thought he was starring in the 1897 book "Dracula", for all that Van Helsinki and his crew hadn't been imagined until 250 years after Carlisle was turned.

What if Twilight-Era Carlisle woke up in the 1897 world of that esteemed book, where presumably the only vampires descend from the man himself. Would the good doctor recognize where he was? Would he again play vampire hunter?

... I should just write the fic, right? But writing is haaaard! Please, muffin, spare me some crumbs?

You know, I say write the fic really for your own benefit, because I can answer this question but you're not going to like it.

Twilight and Vampirism

First off, we have to remember that Twilight vampires work very differently than most vampires. They not only have none of the traditional aesthetics but they have none of the weaknesses and are ten times as murder-oriented while being twenty times less inherently evil.

Twilight vampires are much closer to Xenomorphs than they are vampires.

So you have to remember that while Carlisle calls himself a vampire, if he ended up in this universe, what he'd see is something entirely different than what he is.

They just use the same word.

But alright, enough of that

Carlisle and ISEKAIIIIIIIII

Obviously, it depends where he is.

Is he in London? In that case, he notices Lucy's eating of everyone and everything. He likely, however, does not conclude it's a vampire as the killings are too tame for lack of a better word. Twilight vampires have impossible strength and I imagine most victims end up blood splatters. You don't get these neat little puncture holes only at the neck.

Then you also have that these victims are getting repeat visits. The death toll isn't high enough (one every two weeks), not violent enough, and you have people becoming increasingly anemic until they die (where Twilight vampires it's one bite then your done).

Carlisle's likely not sure what's going on but he doesn't conclude vampire and he's certainly not being brought into the Harker and Van Helsing Scooby Doo gang even if he is working at the mental hospital where Renfield is located.

But this is skirting around the issue.

Carlisle and Vampire Hunting in General

The thing is that Carlisle didn't in the books.

There were vampires in his world, he was turned into one himself, however rather than continuing his vampire hunting quest he stops cold turkey. We're given no indication of Carlisle having a period where he ran around murdering vampires (he'd probably have died a quick death had he chosen to do so).

Given that, and the decisions we see him make in canon, he's not inclined to pick it up again especially with a species he knows nothing about.

Yes, these vampires are clearly plaguing London/Transylvania, but that does not necessarily make them inherently evil creatures (they are in the Dracula universe, but Carlisle doesn't know that).

I imagine he'd tried to persuade the vampires to go elsewhere or get them on the animal diet. Everyone should do the animal diet!

I doubt he takes up vampire hunting though.

TL;DR

If you have something you want, and you already know exactly what it is, then you should write the fic.

The world is your oyster and isekai Twilight Carlisle can be a vampire hunter in the Dracula universe if you want him to.

[raraeavesmoriendi]

dast-pilled tinfoil hat speculation about last voyage of the demeter below:

(written when my adhd meds have worn off a fair amount so like reader beware)

alright, I’m cobbling together few different adaptations/timelines of dracula here so bear with me

obviously we’re not doing this movie strictly by the book (pun v much intended). we’re taking the log entries from the novel and running with it (which is. just how Adaptation Theory works, I know. but hang on.)

the introduction of new characters/fleshing out of people who were just barely named in the novel got me thinking about how in the lugosi/villarías simultaneous films in 1931, which were in turn based off the 1924 hamilton deane stage play (revised by balderson in ‘27 but w/e), renfield is present on the demeter. he is part of the journey as drac is picking off the crew one by one, instead of just waiting and growing more agitated at whitby, and it’s highly implied in the 30s films that it’s this trip that sent him fully over the edge into the manic state we see him in for the rest of the film.

this big reveal at the end of the journey, his discovery as the lone survivor of the ship by a horrified crowd, is a moment that was heavily referenced (beautifully, I would argue) in the recent nicholas hoult film, in which I think he knocked his dwight frye impression out of the fucking park.

(top: frye in 1931, bottom: hoult in 2023. again I say: goddamn!!!)

(not pictured: pablo álvarez rubio, who played renfield in the spanish language drácula filmed on the same sets during the same period but only at night IIRC bc Studio Racism to put it v bluntly, and who I honestly think was almost more horrifying in his manic laugh moment than frye.)

but so the thing I’m getting at, here, is there is room for a little… creative wiggle room, in just who turns out to be onboard this boat in this upcoming movie.

so I watched the trailer today while I was sitting around waiting for the new insidious (which imho was good if you like the franchise but that’s another post), and as someone who was already stoked for this movie and then got More Stoked when dast was cast, I found something kind of… interesting.

he’s really not featured in it a lot.

I mean I didn’t have a stopwatch out or anything, but in the most recent trailer, we maybe get a couple quick closeups of his face looking Alarmed/Concerned. but comparatively, we do get more footage of other crew members getting menaced/hunted/stalked/mauled.

so I was like “okay, maybe this is like the boogeyman, where he did a lot of press for it and then [spoiler].” so I went and checked imdb just to see what was up:

…he’s fourth billed.

so clemens is obvi the protagonist, anna seems to have a lot of lore to talk about in the trailer so she might be around as a key member, and then obviously the captain bc he’s our main point of view in the novel through his logs, IIRC. and there isn’t anyone else in the cast blatantly named “renfield.”

this does raise the question of “why is renfield using an alias and disguising himself as a deckhand to travel with drac” but then again, if I came onboard a ship and was openly associated with mysterious giant boxes of earth as cargo, and then something began fucking picking people off one by one when it got peckish, people would probably figure out there’s something fairly fishy about me and my giant fucking Dirty Boxes p quick. and in the ‘30s versions, the chapter was really presented as more a montage with some voiceover IIRC, only revealing renfield in the hold at the very end.

so what is dast doing in that particular spot if he’s just playing Some Guy? and why is he billed higher than dracula himself, javier botet? (whom I must add I adore from many things, and is one of my favorite Creature Guys next to the man himself, doug!)

(he’s like - eighth or ninth I think? and I get that he’s not billed v high bc we want to keep his onscreen presence fairly minimal to be properly scary, but in a film that’s ostensibly about dracula, it does make me wonder about the significance of the other characters listed before him.)

now look, I could be totally wrong on this - dast is also fourth billed in the boogeyman on imdb, and if you’ve seen it - well, You Know. but still! I don’t think this is totally impossible here!

bc he’s also been plugging an interview he did with botet in this month’s upcoming issue of Fangoria, which has LVoD as its cover

(I haven’t got my copy yet so I can’t confirm what all’s in there)

and one with horrorhound to boot:

so like! Idk! I could just really really want this to be the case, and the movie marketing team knows dast has a reasonably sized fanbase they can use to plug the movie to (me being a perfect case in point).

but I’m just saying… it’s not impossible we might get a second or third act plot twist that ends with dast having his own hysterical laughter closeup at the bottom of the deck stairs, yknow??

(god, that would be so rad. as a fellow horror nerd I would legit be so excited for him to get to have his own version of one of Thee Big Moments in film history.)

anyway, if anyone’s read anything somewhere that shoots this down, please feel free to lmk so I can adjust my expectations accordingly. I think I’m going to go back through the original chapter and see if there’s a Wojchek I happened to totally forgor (and not the historic bear I already associate with the name).

do with this what you will, maybe I’m totally delulu but I did at least want to bring up the possibility bc if I’m right that would just be the coolest shit in the world, imho.

also watch the old 30s movies if you can find them — they usually have cheap dvds of them at walmart during spooky season, in my experience, or try your local library. the lugosi version is iconic, but the villarías never got the recognition it deserved imho.

[thebibi]

i never thought of those 3 old man/young man parallels before! and they happen one right after the other... (though the seward/van helsing one has a backstory spanning years before the novel)

and it's a variety too! old abuser/young victim with drac/jon, old victim/young abuser with ren/jack, old equal/young equal with helward

I wish there was more analysis about this. But honestly you could read the same book a million times and not see what's right in front of you. As I said before, the first 1/5th of the novel has an insane grip on people, so theres a lot of introspection on Drac/Jonathan's relationship and not a lot on the other two. Then usually people discuss Mina and her relationships with Dracula and Van Helsing, or Lucy, but really not so much Renfield. Like I could go find a post about the same three relationships and someone would interpret entirely the opposite of me.

Like, last year I was really uncomfortable in discussing RenfieId because reading the novel alone by yourself vs reading it together collectively on the Internet are very different things! Like I just didn't feel as empathetic towards him, and ultimately I had to reflect on why I felt that way. Also last year I was less involved in DD during the summer months because everyone was so cagey about RenfieId and Jack, it felt like I had no voice on the issue. But the truth is I was more that comfortable with my own assumptions and didn't realize how much more I needed to learn.

Even helward, I geniunely loved their bromance pre- DD and I did mourn the fact that no adaption has captured their friendship, but I didn't think about it too deeply (also tumblr dracula fandom pre 2020 was like, tiny). Its only when I slowed down and read each entry day by day that I realized how important their relationship is to the plot! Not only that, it really grounds the book as being about the spread of information, of what qualifies madness, there's a lot that doesn't even need to be about romance or sexul tension. And I'm kind of baffled at the lack of interest, to be honest. Especially since Jack is literally one of the main characters and voice of the story and Van Helsing went on to become the iconic figure we know today.

So yeah, thank you for liking my little essay. I am really happy you liked it, and I hope to see more people discuss these points in Dracula more!

[thenightling]

Renfield Review

Renfield Review: I just got done watching Renfield and I liked it a lot.  It was a decent horror-comedy, especially if you like the cheesy, over-the-top acting of Nicolas Cage though his only real “Nicolas Cage-ism” is when he got to shout “HAIL SATAN” while making the heavy metal devil horns hand gesture shortly before being (likely temporarily) “Killed.”

The plot is that after ninety-two or so years serving Dracula, Renfield has finally decided to leave his toxic relationship with his boss.  I’m a little surprised the movie didn’t play on the fact that many book historians believe Renfield was a metaphor for homosexual attraction but considering how abusive the relationship was depicted in this film it might be for the best that they didn’t touch on that.  

  Now I’ll start with the negative and then work my way to the positive, the opposite of how I usually do my reviews but I have more positive things to say than negative.

First negative thing is I am not a fan of how they do Dracula’s teeth.  Having all of his teeth be pointed is a bit distracting to me.    The other things I dislike are related to the mythos.  We never see Dracula take wolf-form but we do get to see him as mist and a flock of bats. This bothers me a bit as I happen to like wolves and so few people remember he can take wolf form.  He even did take wolf form in the Bela Lugosi movie but it’s off camera, you hear others describe his wolf form running outside. I also don’t really like that he burns in the sun.  I know this is based on the Universal Studios Dracula but in the first Bela Lugosi Dracula movie he didn’t actually burn in the sun.  That wasn’t added until the sequels.  He was just Nocturnal.  And in Stoker’s novel he could move around by day just fine.  He just couldn’t shapeshift by day. Also the message about being in codependent / abusive relationships is a little heavy handed. I also found it odd that Dracula’s blood could heal the badly injured and even raise the dead and yet those the blood was used on weren’t turned into vampires.  Usually that healing factor in his blood has that tiny side effect of... You know... making you a vampire... There’s one small mistake in Renfield that I noticed.  The magical circle used to contain Dracula should not be called a protection circle. That kind of circle is a binding circle. When the magical circle is used to contain or trap a supernatural entity it’s called a Binding Circle. When the Circle is around you or others to protect you from supernatural threats getting in, that’s a Protection Circle. In Hocus Pocus when Alison makes the circle of salt around herself to protect herself from Winifred’s power, that’s a Protection Circle. In The Sandman when Morpheus is trapped, that’s a binding circle. In principle they work the same way in that the supernatural entity cannot cross the barrier of the circle.  But when the entity is trapped in the circle it’s a binding circle. When the entity cannot enter the circle, that’s a protection circle.    It appears the writer for Renfield got slightly confused on this subject.  They called the circle that trapped Dracula a protection circle. As I said, it’s petty.   

Now for what I like...

I do like the over-all message.  This version of Dracula is not the charming and sympathetic version you get with Frank Langella or Gary Oldman.  This version is pretty evil.  He’s also manipulative and an abuser.    There is a great homage to the 1931 Dracula movie and Nicolas Cage plays Count Dracula really well (if I could just get past the teeth).   And Renfield even does the classic Dwight Frye laugh at one point if you listen carefully.    There’s a fun cameo appearance from William Ragsdale (Charley Brewster in the 1985 Fright Night and Fright Night: Part 2, 1988).    

The movie has a good moral about standing up for yourself, rescuing yourself, and freeing yourself from codependent and toxic relationships while also depicting a delightfully over-the-top and very evil version of Count Dracula.  And though this is connected to the Universal Studios Dracula I can’t help but feel that Hammer’s Dracula is being referenced when Renfield talks about the routine of Dracula’s feeding sprees and then getting “killed” and the various ways he’s been defeated.   Though they made him burn in sunlight like the later Universal movies and Hammer Horror movies they did show off a lot of Dracula’s traditional powers.    One of my favorite moments is near the end and it is a shameless commercial for Tumblr but I liked it just the same. A protection circle (read: Binding circle) is used to contain Dracula.  The person who uses the binding circle got the instructions from a “Wiccan Tumblr.”    It’s always good to see pro-Wicca content. Usually it’s only Catholicism used to contain or defeat Dracula.  And even though it was a shameless advertisement for Tumblr I was still amused by the reference.     I liked the ending and I like the affirmation for Renfield that he is enough and that he does not need Dracula to function.  He can finally be his own person.  And he learns how to socialize and make friends and rebuild his sense of self. 

I still prefer The Invitation (2022) for a more serious modern Dracula movie for its Gothic ambiance and charismatic depiction of Dracula but this was still fun and I would happily watch it again.

[anamardoll]

Film Corner: The Invitation (2022)

I've always found it harder to review movies I liked than ones I don't like; somehow it's easier for me to lay out nitpicks in an orderly manner than it is to explain in essay form what worked in something that left me Kermit-flailing with joy. I've been ruminating on how to tell you all about movies I've liked lately when I suddenly remembered the wonderful old "Movie Yelling With X and Y" and realized that was precisely the format I've been needing, and immediately roped Kissmate into a Discord where we could yell happily at each other. I'm very happy with the result and I hope you are too! --- The Invitation (2022) Songbird: (singsong) Soooo, now we've seen The Invitation (2022). I sort of knew what to expect because I'd seen the trailer way back in the day (it was quite a hit on Twitter when the trailer was released, if I recall correctly!) and was expecting suspense and probably some sort of vampires. Whereas you went into the movie completely unaware of what it would be about. What did you think? Kissmate: You told me there was a girl who goes to meet up with new family and vampires are involved. That was all I knew going in. Once we started and all the subtle Dracula hints began, and maids started dropping like flies, I was still a bit surprised by the ending. Not surprised that the handsome asshole was Dracula, just surprised by what he wanted her for. Songbird: Oh my gosh, the Dracula hints! This was such a fun ride for people who love that book (me!), especially coming down off of the "Dracula Daily" tumblr fun. The house is called "New Carfax" (Carfax Abbey is the estate purchased by Dracula in the book, the sale of which Jonathan Harker facilitates and which is why he later knows where to find the count), one of the brides is named "Lucy" (Lucy Westenra being one of Dracula's most memorable victims), and the Butler is named "Mr. Field" in the movie and credited as "Renfield" in the script/credits (Renfield being Dracula's devoted servant even whilst imprisoned in the asylum run by one of Lucy's suitors). And I'm pretty sure there's a couple named Jonathan and Mina Harker! Just so many delightful Easter Eggs if you're a fan, but you don't have to know the book to enjoy the film. But, yes!! How applicable is this film to all of us? You're lonely, you're looking for a little human connection, you take one of those Ancestry DNA tests, you find a long-lost cousin, he invites you to Britain to meet the rest of the family (who are all super sweet and super psyched to meet you!), and then it turns out they are planning to marry you off to an ancient vampire (implied to be *the* Dracula) as part of an ancestral tri-bride blood pact codified centuries ago because it turns out that (a) your family is that particular vampire's lawyers, and (b) they don't have a lot of marriageable women at the moment and you showed up in just the nick of time as far as they're concerned. Whomst among us hasn't had that happen? Kissmate: Oh god, the Alexander Family. You have Oliver, the long-lost cousin, being such a delightful little manipulator. Anyone who knows the red flags are seeing them pop up all over the place from his first scene (he's overly generous to get her to England alone, mentioning the family scandal being something the family is Totally Happy about now, keeps bringing up the hot rich Dracula figure as such a nice guy to know, etc). And then when she walks into the room to meet her whole Alexander side of the family, the camera is careful to show that only 3 other women are in that room full of men, and they are clearly either serving maids or older women who married into the family (rather than blood relations and eligible debutantes). The elder patriarch even says something about how the Alexanders keep having boys like that's a bad thing. How Evie, a biracial Black woman, didn't fucking run out of the room right then and there is amazing. Like, *I'm* a white man and that room was way too white man for comfort. I do have, like, ONE nitpick I have about the whole thing, but provided that the bad guys are totally desperate, it might not be fair. Songbird: Yes! Oliver's manipulation, really the manipulation being practiced by the *whole family*, is just so delightful because it walks that perfect delicate line between "is this overly intimate to the point of being creepy" or "are they just really sweet people who aren't very good at boundaries". I love the conversations between protagonist Evie and her friend Grace because they really tease out those concerns in a realistic way! Evie and Grace are both Black and they have reasonable concerns about this lily-white British family and whether it's normal for them to be so accepting and overjoyed at finding a Black offshoot of the family. An offshoot created when a ancestral lady of the family had a secret out-of-wedlock biracial baby with a Black footman, no less! They have big meaningful conversations about British colonialism and racism (and I'm convinced that's why some reviewers got pissy about the movie, but that's another thing) and whether Evie should be suspicious of all this positive attention and love-bombing being heaped onto her. What's your nitpick? I'd love to hear it. Kissmate: Well, the vampire Alexander Bride died rather than kill and eat the help. And there's no more Alexander women to replace her with. They're fucked, but wait what's this, another Alexander woman found through the magic of the internet and DNA matching! Awesome! But there's a Problem: She's a waitress, and has been for a long time. She's seen helping the serving maids from minute one of her arrival. She even says to them, "if we don't help each other out, who will?" WE. As in she sees herself as one of the hired help. So doesn't that mean THE CYCLE WILL FUCKING CONTINUE? and Evie will starve herself the way the previous Alexander Bride did? Anyone who spends five minutes with Evie can tell she'd rather starve than eat a servant. Did no-one think to consider that? Songbird: I don't think they *can* consider it, to be honest. Dracula, the brides, and the Alexander family all seem so genuinely puzzled that Evie isn't ecstatic, delighted, *grateful* to be plucked out of artistic obscurity and financial hardship to be given this amazing "gift" of ultra-wealth and eternal life and youth. Down to the very end, I think every single one of these rich people just cannot understand that there are people out there who wouldn't trade a stranger's life for wealth and comfort. Even Lucy, the most sympathetic of them all, says that the previous Alexander Bride (Evie's ancestress Emmaline) was "sick" and "confused". Lucy seems to think that Emmaline got some kind of vampire dementia rather than simply unable to remain a monster-married-to-another-monster any longer than she already had. I did think it was interesting that Lucy brought up that "women had fewer choices in my time" and Dracula sneers that "modern women" are so ungrateful. There's a lot in the movie about class and gender and social/family pressures. Evie is being pressured by her family to marry Dracula for the good of the Alexander clan, but the pressure doesn't really have any weight behind it (emotionally and psychologically, I mean) because *she doesn't know these people and doesn't care about them*. Like, I can well imagine it may have been hard for Emmaline Alexander to refuse when Dracula came a' courting back in the day because she wouldn't have wanted him to slaughter her people. But Evie? These assholes are strangers to her! So when she gets a chance to run, of course she does! I love that. Kissmate: You bring up Lucy, and I want to continue that. She's only 100 years old. Women had- Wait. American women had the right to vote by the 1920s era. British women had to wait a couple more decades, right? Don't remember when, but that would explain Lucy's more sheltered views. Was Lucy British? Viktoria was Bangladesh, Emmaline was British. What was Lucy? Songbird: I think they're all British, regardless of where they call home. Wait. Hang on, what was the list? "At the dinner table, Walter welcomes the three great families: the Billingtons from Whiteby, the Klopstocks from Budapest, and the Alexanders of London." (LINK) ...Oh my god, it's another Dracula reference. London, Budapest, and Whitby are all locations that are meaningful to Dracula in Bram Stoker's novel. But yes, Lucy is British by birth. As for British vs American suffrage, they were basically around the same time. 1918 for British women and 1920 for American women. (Mind you, this was still just for *white* women. Which Lucy is. But Evie is not.) Though it is interesting that when we talk about, say, women's right to work (for example) we're often talking about *white* women's right to work and ignoring the fact that women of color were already working because they were slaves or servants to the upper classes. So Lucy probably was raised with the expectation that she would marry and her husband would take care of her in exchange for her perfect obedience. So even if Evie had been raised contemporary to Lucy, they would have been raised with different expectations: as a Black woman in 1920s England, Evie would've had to get work. If she married well then good for her, but she wouldn't have been raised with a "good marriage" in mind as an end goal for her. She would've been taught from day one to work hard and take care of herself. I just think that's interesting, when we're talking about the contrast between "modern women" and women from Lucy's era: it matters very much what social class we're talking about! Kissmate: That is very true, and Lucy does seem like she was meant for good breeding with nobles, not so much the physical need of busy body and hands. Poor girl. Complete tangent here, but hear me out: the entire bit with "thorned bars to keep the shrikes out" always had me baffled. Because it wouldn't keep shrikes out! It would do the opposite! Shrikes love to pick up grasshoppers and lizards and impale them on nearby thorn bushes, or metal spikes, and pick off the food from the kabob. So it's a nice little nod to Vlad "Dracula" Tepis the Impaler, but those bars would just attract them, not keep them away. Also, and I could be wrong, but I swear the bird that flies into the window looks more like a swift than a shrike. Which is the bird her servant is probably named after (Mrs. Swift). So you're being warned about impalement, but then it's a songbird that flies into the window. So many metaphors to put there. Songbird: The bars on the window are strange. The movie makes a thing of them that never seems to go anywhere. I wasn't sure if it were another Easter Egg (there's no bars on the windows of Dracula's castle in the book, as far as I can recall, but it may be a visual element from one of the many movie adaptations?) or if it had something to do with Emmaline's captivity (do we ever see if the other rooms have bars on their windows) or something else entirely. So the bars were strange to me. If the bird hitting the window is foreshadowing for poor Mrs. Swift then it's one I admit I missed! Can we talk about how charismatic Walt is, to the point where you're rooting for him and Evie to get together even though you suspect it's not a good idea? Can we talk about Bride Viktoria and how I usually hate womanly "cat fights" in movies, but really she's just embracing being a gaslighting chaos demon as a way to pass the centuries? Delightful. Kissmate: Regarding the bars, my money is on the captive-keeping option. And yes, we can! That man was 100% Bad Mistake Material. Like, fuck is that actor so pretty! And his smile! Gah, he can turn anyone male-sexual into a mess. It's no wonder he stole Evie's heart. I'm wondering how he keeps Viktoria around, unless he likes her chaotic messes. I can see him getting bored and then she just *does something*, and like that, the evening/eternity is entertaining again. Songbird: Yeah, I definitely got the impression that Viktoria was the Chaos Bride where he enjoys her tendency to let lose and break things (that he can either join in or have the pleasure of cleaning up), that Lucy was the Gentle Bride where she soothes and pets him when he wants an emotional support teddy bear, and I think he was hoping Evie was going to be the creative, artsy, intellectually-stimulating bride that challenges him and keeps him mentally sharp and active. Really, I was deeply impressed with the romance! You know, because *vampires*, that Harry-Hook-Playing-Vlad-Tepes is bad news (just like you know that Cousin Oliver probably isn't as friendly as he seems) but they're all very good at emotional manipulation! I love that because I really do expect someone who is hundreds of years old and who relies on lies and manipulation in order to survive to be GOOD at it, and he is! He's gentle, he's teasing, he's loving, and yet there's those tiny little flashes underneath that I can see as an older, more jaded lover but which I totally would have smoothed over in my younger years like Evie does--like when he says he's not a good guy, just an asshole trying to impress her, and she insists that he's a sweetie and that the tough guy thing is just an act. Sometimes it *is* and act but sometimes it *isn't* and as you get older (and have your heart broken a few times) I think you learn to listen to those little jangling warning bells and remember that sometimes people do tell you exactly who they are. Kissmate: The three Brides being his Ego, Superego, and Id sound fucking perfect, as well as emotional manipulation being honed after eons of practice. This movie had so much love and thought put into it! Like... art and insight blended very well into a blood wine smoothie. Songbird: Beautiful. And such a satisfying ending, too, like genuinely really empowering. I loved every minute of it. ❤

[mood2you]

Blog 13: It's been 2 weeks

And nothing much has happened, just small things. You can find various shorter posts, probably, I know I told the story of almost getting lost at night in a housing tract.

As you know, it was hot this week, and so I went swimming. I always take to things like that nervously, how do you get to the pool and back (answer: barefoot on the way back), how long do you stay at the pool (answer: couldn't be longer than 2 hours), what if someone looks at you funny at the pool. Actually, someone did have a fit, aparently some kids jumped the fence--silently--and the guy let their very presence ruin his Sunday with his little daughter, and they kept telling him, very eloquently, to mind his own business and not start a scene in front of her, and then called him a Karen. It was kind of funny, but sad of course, very un-neighborly and immature, and they got it on film. He said he'd just called the cops, I didn't let it stop me because he didn't, he did not stop yelling at them long enough to make any call. Both parties left before I'd finished Instructions for a Heatwave, which I mentioned in some other post. The instructions are bits of laws supposedly from the 1976 heatwave about not stealing water, not using water for frivolous purposes. The laws had it laid out, but it said drinking water was okay but it never mentions cooking with water. Some things like bread use water instead of milk, but other things require quarts of water to boil and then throw the water away.

I'd been eating at Jack In The Box a lot last week because I like their pumpkin spice eggrolls (croissants) but I hate their pumpkin spice milkshake and their monster taco is only good reheated as if they don't let their cheese melt properly. Their chicken teriyaki bowl is getting smaller and smaller.

I started The Pisces but it has such mixed reviews and it seems so mean. I see reviews for all manner of books that use the word vulgar negatively, well I think that part is interesting, all the gross stuff, but it's mean. I watched Renfield which was also gross, silly action where people explode into vicera. Both properties have group therapy and both poke fun at the idea that your boss could be abusive. But in Renfeild his boss (the specific person he is in therapy over) comes to a meeting and kills everyone, a typical fear of people with abusive partners in group, but it's not like you can turn people away especially not manipulative people. I thnk the movie has a lot to say but some of it went over my head, "there's more Renfeild-type-people than Dracula-type-people." In The Pisces she is a writer living in her rich sisters house over summer, she's her own boss and she's just dealing with agents and dogs. And now suddenly I'm the mean one for saying that. It's one of the Group members that says she has a pattern of abusive bosses, and it's like, yeah, we all do (except people with no boss) that doesn't make it okay. I'm gonna read the Pisces until the fabled mermaid sex all the reviews have as a sticking point.

[ubyr-babaj]

Dracula Mischaracterization Drinking Game, НП edition

Yeah, I'm still alive, I'm in a bad mood, so I'm gonna play this thing with the writing project I've been on for two years, here we go.

Jonathan

Is combined with Renfield.

Dies at the beginning

Is made into a generic male hero. Let’s make it half a shot. He’s boring and xenophobic, but he’s not very masc.

Is a toxic partner to Mina. Half a shot. Treats her as his last link to his sanity/humanity/lost masculinity, overall codependent as all hell, but so is she.

Barely has any presence at all. I never felt much for him.

Never goes to Transylvania Goes to Dracula and his sisters, stays in their non-Euclidian fuckhouse of horrors, that's the main reason he's such a mess.

Is made to be aggressive and "manly" Half a shot? Develops serious anger issues (like in the OG novel), it gets even worse after he starts turning into Mina’s familiar. How much of it is just C-PTSD is unclear. I need a bland twink to store my intrusive thoughts about stabbing people.

Mina

Is Dracula's love interest/reincarnated wife. That dubious honor goes to Ray.

Is indifferent to or hates Jonathan and/or Lucy Loves them both.

Is made into a one-note damsel in distress

Has none of her original intelligence

Is only there as "moral support" for the men For them, she mostly exists as their religious/political symbol of hardcore Christianity/traditional femininity (like in the OG book). She’s not exactly happy with that but isn’t ready to speak up.

Is a prize to be won by the men

Is swapped with Lucy

Is married to someone other than Jonathan

Dies as a vampire or remains a vampire in the end Half a shot. Ambiguous. She’s left with a vial of juice that pretty much makes you an artificial saint with no tolerance for injustice, so her choice is either to actually become someone who isn’t an Angel in the House, or to finish her transformation into a vampire and marry Jonathan by their laws.

Dumps Jonathan for Dracula. She would never.

Consented to the "Baptisim of Blood" No, Val forced her into it and taunted the hell out of her through her dreams.

Jack

Is an old man/same age as Van Helsing

Is Mina's and/or Lucy's father

Isn't friends with Van Helsing or the rest of the Suitor Squad He wants Van Helsing, feels uncomfortable with Quincey for a one-night stand reason and can barely stand Arthur, because of the class differences.

Is the only present member of the Suitor Squad

Only there to be Lucy's doctor and has no emotional connection to her

Does all the research and work that Mina actually did in the original story Half a shot. Does some of it but arrives to all the wrong conclusions and never actually connects it to anything important.

Van Helsing

Is way older or way younger than his original age

Is a badass action hero vampire hunter

Comes from/started a bloodline of famous vampire hunters

Is the only character other than Dracula from the book

Has a first name other than "Abraham"

Has supernatural powers

Is a woman/combined with Sister Agatha

Is the only one who knows Dracula is a vampire and has to prove it to everyone else

Is the one to kill Dracula

Is not Dutch in the slightest

Quincey

Is straight up nonexistent

Is combined with Arthur

Has so little relevancy he might as well not be there Well, like in the OG novel? I mean he did sleep with Seward at some point of his youth and kept a crush on him, but he literally has no reason to be there and is one of the few characters who are actually allowed to leave.

Is British, or anything other than American/Texan

Is a shallow or douchey lover to Lucy Shallow and fuckboyish (like in the OG novel), but still pretty nice. Him and Arthur are the only people who understand that mutilating vampire!Lucy was kinda not very good.

Has a futuristic descendent with more plot relevance than himself

Arthur

Is straight up nonexistent

Is combined with Jack, or Quincey, or Jonathan, or any combination of those

Doesn't contribute or is entirely absent in the staking vampire!Lucy scene

Is Lucy's or Mina's brother

Is a spoiled rich boy who barely contributes to the plot Barely contributes anything to the plot (except for money), IS rich and sheltered (LIKE IN THE ORIGINAL FUCKING...)

Lucy

Is swapped/combined with Mina

Is Mina's sister

Is shallow/slutty/bitchy IS pretty shallow (like in the… Ok, I’ll shut up). But she’s nice and did nothing to deserve what happens to her.

Is a toxic friend to Mina/secretly hates her

Is framed by the narrative as deserving of her death at the hands of Dracula

Literally asked/invited Dracula to drain from her

Her plotline is ignored/never resolved. She joins the harem of one of Val’s sisters and then I completely forget her.

Is staked by someone other than Arthur

Is engaged/married to someone other than Arthur

Is actually canonically queer, but she still gets killed.

Renfield

Is combined with Jonathan/goes to Transylvania instead of Jonathan

Is the secondary villain/straight up evil Ehhhhh… Ray used to be a prophet in his past life and did try to be a good person in the current one, but the systematic oppression makes him say: “Fuck it” and go off with Val.

Is way older or way younger than his original age

Remains loyal to Dracula throughout the whole story and never fights/turns on him Eh. Does turn on Val, does fight him, then he realizes he can’t stand living with a bunch of homophobic Christian hypocrites who’re buds with his rapist, and re-joins Val.

Never interacts with Mina They interact, they talk, it’s one of the main reasons he realizes the Crew aren’t worth saving.

Is shown as "sane" at the beginning

Becomes a vampire at some point Ehhhh… Becomes A Creature but it’s not a vampire.

The narrative tries to justify his mistreatment at the hands of Jack

Dracula

Is not "evil," just """misunderstood""" Dude, that’s one of the guys who destroyed Sodom and fucked Lot wearing his daughters as flesh puppets. Don’t fuck this cool thing, he’s NPD symptoms on steroids, he’s only safe for former/current prophets.

Is actually the protagonist Half a shot. Is the protagonist’s love interest.

His first name is Vlad His name is Val/Baalzebub.

Appears and regularly interacts with the other characters throught the story Hell yeah, my dude, he’s always there.

Is young/handsome/suave IS in his early forties in the main section of the book (like in the OG novel). IS handsome (like in the…)

Is here to "liberate" Mina from her "toxic"/"boring" husband

Is combined with Vlad the Impaler/some historical figure Half a shot. Is Baalzebub a historical figure?

Is obsessed with Mina specifically

Has all queer undertones stripped from him

Is not Romanian/his actor makes no attempt to sound Romanian That’s a fallen angel who’s on a pilgrimage as a vampire, because he lost a bet with his cousin. He has no heritage, the only reason he is Romanian is because he happened to chill in there.

Is basically just a characature of Bela Logosi No, we’re vibing with Louis Jourdan in this house.

Only kills the characters who "deserved" to die I have extreme anger issues, on my bad days I DO think that everyone Val kills deserves it. Usually by virtue of being really boring.

Is hurt/killed by exposure to sunlight

Is Van Helsing's arch nemesis He can’t give two shits about the guy

Is friends with Frankenstein's monster …dude, he’d fuck Adam. He’d totally fuck both Adam AND his father.

Never turns into anything other than a bat Mostly plops around as a black cat with white socks.

[saltiestgempearl]

I wanted to talk about a favorite headcanon of mine regarding Dr. Jack Seward that @throwawaydracula shared with me a while back. It centers around this line, way back in the September 3 entry:

How can he'—and he pointed at me with the same look and gesture as that with which once he pointed me out to his class, on, or rather after, a particular occasion which he never fails to remind me of—'know anything of a young ladies? He has his madmen to play with, and to bring them back to happiness, and to those that love them.

Except, that isn't exactly the wording in the original book. In the original book, it says "He has his madams to play with, and to bring them back to happiness, and to those that love them." Many people write this off as a typo to the point of changing it to "madmans" or "madmen" in some versions.

But what if it wasn't a typo?

The word "madam" implies an older woman, like anywhere from middle-aged to elderly. And at the time, it was not at all uncommon for women in this age group to be sent to asylums to recuperate. Sometimes it was just a way to get female relatives you didn't like out of the way, but sometimes it wasn't.

You see, many Victorians (men and women alike) unironically bought into the "delicate woman" narrative. People really, genuinely thought women were just psychologically more predisposed to mental instability (we saw this most in Dracula with how the group treated Mina— that wasn't really malicious, it was generally accepted as almost medical fact by many during this period.) I don't have the exact quote, but I think Van Hellsing, at one point, mentions a French doctor who had the idea that men could also suffer from hysteria, and that was actually considered pretty groundbreaking at the time.

Anyway, the headcanon is that Seward actually started out as a relatively low-level psychologist at an asylum, primarily working with middle-aged to elderly women. And being the inquisitive man he is, he interacted with the patients in a less-than-conventional way, letting them talk about things that would normally be considered signs of imbalance by the contemporary medical community (e.g., "sometimes I wish I'd never had my children," "sometimes I just want as little to do with my husband as possible," "honestly those suffragettes make some good points," etc.). This isn't to say he was some feminist icon mind you; he didn't even necessarily agree or legitimize these ideas. But he didn't shoot them down either—he just listened. And by engaging with the women in this way, he was essentially exploring some of what we now call talk therapy, which was very much not a thing at this time. He may have also tried to be supportive of their hobbies, which while not unheard of (institutions like Bedlam set a precedent for this), was not the most common thing either.

So he did this for a while, and surprise surprise, it actually helped these women quite a bit. He quickly got a reputation for being someone who was unusually gifted in turning around cases of "nervous disorders" that were so common with these delicate womenfolk.

But then some higher-ups decided "oh, well if he's good with this, he must be good with insane people too." So despite being a 29-year-old budding psychologist in a very young field, he suddenly found himself the head of an asylum with a very different sort of population.

Given why he was put in this position, Jack naturally continues using the methods that helped his former patients recover so spectacularly. The issue is, of course, that people who are dealing with psychosis or other more serious conditions generally need a different approach than neglected women with anxiety. Basic talk therapy isn't going to cut it with someone like Renfield.

But again, this field is very young, so Seward is actually relatively limited on how much he can research this. So he continues with his talk therapy, but then adds things like straightjackets into the mix when his patients have meltdowns because that was also a relatively accepted solution at the time (though not universally so; even in Bram Stoker's time, there were some professionals in the field who had figured out that this type of manual restraint was not helpful and honestly not humane.)

It's also possible that Jack might have had some criticism early on for not being firm enough with his more "difficult" patients, so he might have overcompensated for that by using the straightjacket solution more often when things got out of hand.

And finally, Jack also has his mad scientists tendencies that he openly grapples with in his diary—you know, the sort that caused him to make wildly irresponsible decisions like "let's let Renfield escape, but supervised, and see what happens." And since Jack was the head of the hospital, no one shot down this obviously ridiclous idea because they probably didn't have the authority to.

And then even with the more recent events, Quincey and Van Hellsing didn't voice their doubts about Jack's "we are not going to let Renfield leave the asylum despite him begging us to do that" plan until they were out of the room, and even then gave in pretty quickly because Jack is considered the authority on this in the group.

TL;DR: The headcanon is "maybe Van Hellsing did mean 'madams' because Jack started off wildly successful in treating older women with anxiety, and as a result was catapulted into a much more powerful position he was neither properly trained for nor mentally ready for."

[zoophagist]

Do you have any specific headcanons for your Renfield's Dracula, anything at all? How much does he have in common with the BoR dude?

hmmm, good question! in the respect that this is a roleplay blog i try not to get to invested in the minutiae of headcanons on any character other than my own, because i love playing against all kinds of different versions that other people flesh out. but with a character like dracula, that is so crucial to renfield's life, i'd be lying if i said i didn't have any thoughts or preferences. so here's what i got:

not the first vampire. you aren't SPECIAL, count. yeah, i just think it's more spooky and ominous to have this guy you think is the biggest and baddest and then have to come to the harrowing thought of "what evil begot this evil" you know? and dracula's maker is still out there somewhere (just probably better at being a vampire than he is). personally i'm into the lore tidbit that killing a vampire kills all the vampires that it turned, so dracula's creator MUST be alive undead still, or else dracula would be dust along with them.

sophistication. i love a suave dracula, refined, elegant, a little uncanny. big hulking draculas don't do much for me, and i think that the novel's vibe of "he mimics civility and poise so perfectly you might miss he's the monster until you get too close" is best suited by a dracula who's not the tallest or the most muscle-bound. then his strength and ferocity are even more of a surprise when he reveals them. this is also fun in contrast to a beefy renfield.

inhuman forms. personally the mist is the one i'm most obsessed with, but bats and other such creatures of the night slap too. since you ask about tBoR overlap, i do like the idea that dracula's forms are much more varied than what stoker shows us, and some broader shape shifting abilities are very fun. i love a dracula that's sort of unknowable and myriad because it gives renfield more fodder for both worship of the inhuman and paranoia about the omnipresence of a master he may not understand or recognize at first.

the ur-mind meld. so in canon dracula has the power to see within the minds and senses of those he feeds on or turns. i like to headcanon that power further, letting him see/use the minds of those bitten by vampires he's made. so for example, dracula turns lucy and can exchange thoughts with her, and if lucy turns someone else, dracula can reach through to that person as well. it's all about the shared blood connection, baby. this also sort of draws on the logic of like... chains of command. if your boss is lucy, and her boss is dracula, effectively your boss is also dracula, as she would be bound to him, and you are bound to her, binding you to him... i love making a messed up little hivemind <3 other vampires & familiars can feel these connections to one another too, though more faintly. for them it's less like dracula's direct access to their minds, more an awareness of another being's presence in the same web of vampiric consciousness that all centers on dracula. maybe they have a stronger sense of empathy with one another, or can pick up each others' distress or warnings.

the I.N.B. (international network of brides). i like to headcanon dracula having a much larger number of progeny to spread around the world and do his business. first, it's just FUN. second, it works with the anxieties of vampire 'infiltration' in the book. third, it- well, frankly it makes my life a lot easier for how renfield becomes a familiar with telepathic dracula-alarms. see, if we accept both the I.N.B. and the above point about the psychic link vampires, familiars, and victims share, then i can have renfield get bitten by a bride in england (hello milady in tbor) and be psychically connected to dracula as a servant without having to break the canon of dracula never having been to england before! bc that canon is SUPER significant to me! on that note:

homebody. dracula has not traveled significantly in all the time of his undeath. i think it's just really important to stoker's novel that dracula has never tried something like his attack on england before and is actively learning how to pull it off as it happens. so when i think of dracula, i'm thinking of a guy who hasn't left the flyable-in-one-night distance of his castle since becoming a vampire. it's why his immediate area has become so unworkable for him; he's over-used it, everyone nearby knows what he is , and they've been learning ways to protect themselves from him for years. it's getting very hard indeed to keep himself and his three local brides fed around these parts!

schrodinger's bite. i have multiple, contradictory headcanons about if/when/how often renfield has been fed on by dracula, and if you don't look in the box to check, they're all equally true and correct at the same time. :) but i shift between them for whatever works in certain verses/interactions. for instance if i'm writing with a dracula who's never left transylvania until the harker incident? cool, dracula and renfield have never met face to face and renfield's only had contact with brides. no pre-england dracula bite. writing with a dracula who's from a source version that lets him travel more, maybe through parts of europe and asia? cool, renfield spent a little time in amsterdam where he got bitten at least once by dracula. both these versions are true and neither of them is. that's just how it be.

dracula's bite. every vampire lore has to talk about what being bitten is like, right? it's mandatory. i enjoy media that plays into the eroticism of the bite, but i think that an angle of plain, straight "it feels good" is BORING and LAME. what are we here for if it isn't also agonizing and making your fight or flight kick in??? i like to imagine the count's bite as an initial stab of pain and terror but then the sensations blur and the fight drains out of the victim, not just from blood loss, but from dracula's manipulative power, lulling them into foggy uncertainty and complacency.

dracula's bite but make it FAMILIARS. when dracula bites someone that he's exchanged blood with (a familiar), there's still the pain of the bite and the looming mind-haze, but because their minds and blood are already linked, there's this sort of reciprocal sensation-sharing that passes between them. for example, if dracula bites renfield, dracula can experience a sense of what renfield feels being fed on, and renfield can expereince what dracula feels feeding on him. this is why a familiar might crave being fed on in spite of themselves - the intoxicating sensation of being both the hunter and the hunted at once is rather heady. victims don't have that blood/mind link, and so are trapped in the horror of the bite, while familiars have had their senses opened to another layer of awareness and connection that can turn being fed on into a pleasure.

those are the things i can think of right now, anyway. but to specifically hone in on the tbor angle and answer that directly, i mean... some? some significant overlap? i think i consider the stoker novel more gospel that tim's 'gospel of dracula' (i think i'm SO clever with my wordplay), so stoker lore supersedes tbor for me if they're ever in conflict. for instance, even though tbor has some strong subtext that milady is 1 to 1 just dracula, i play looser with that in order to keep the stoker canon that dracula has never been capable of going to england before. but in places where tbor can add on top of the dracula novel without contradicting it, i'll use it (example: the above point about his range of shapeshifting!)

i hope this is a satisfying answer! i don't have a lot of, like, physical description hcs or minute behavior hcs, so i hope lots of lore-heavy stuff pleases you instead, anon.

[vickyvicarious]

Do you think it's possible that Jonathan recognised the young Dracula in the Piccadilly crowd because he could feel his presence? His evil intent for the girl? It just seems very weird to spot one person in London, looking nothing like how you remember him, and going "That's HIM but he is decades younger! But it's him!"

Yeah! Actually, back in May I speculated about Jonathan being able to sense Dracula after he seemed to do so during the encounter with the vampire ladies. @animate-mush and I talked about it here. To add context to that last post linked... I personally don't believe Jonathan was drunk from until the last night of his imprisonment, but it was another interesting idea so I wanted to share it. Also, a "genius loci" is essentially a place having a spirit of its own which can be felt when someone is in it; in this case not a friendly one.

We continued that conversation in another post which does discuss the Piccadilly scene, but this one is full of spoilers for pretty much the rest of the book so watch out for that. It also gets into some monster Harker speculation with Jonathan potentially having some nonhuman abilities after his time in the castle.

I will say, without revealing all the spoilery details, and without getting into supernatural Jonathan, I find it pretty compelling to imagine that vampires have a sort of feeling around them. An aura, an electricity, a vibe - describe it how you will, but something that someone can pick up on with enough exposure. Probably even more if you have exposure to a particular vampire, but maybe a bit for vampires in general too. And certain people are better at it than others. I think there's already been enough evidence for this idea, what with Mr. Swales expecting Death, Lucy sleepwalking to the graveyard, Mr. Bilder taking an instinctive dislike to Dracula, everything with Renfield... Admittedly, you don't have to take most of those in such a way. You could say Mr. Swales was old and the weather was getting ominous, Lucy was sleepwalking in a path she follows when awake or that Dracula was deliberately calling to her. You could say Mr. Bilder just though he was a snob and Mina was relying too much on racist physiognomy/feeding off of Jonathan's reaction. But you can't explain away Renfield; he very definitely has some kind of psychic awareness of Dracula's presence right from the start.

I personally like the idea that many people sense something about vampires a little bit, but just don't recognize what they are feeling and dismiss it. Whereas those who know what a vampire is, know this particular vampire, or have specifically had vampiric influence aimed at their minds before, are put on alert more easily. Also, it's probably easier to sense them when they're on the hunt (intent) or actively using vampiric powers (action).

[anddreadful]

full thoughts on frank wildhorn’s dracula having re-watched it in its entirety for the first time in many years:

- I watched a recent upload of an (american) community theater production, specifically because a) its sound quality was surprisingly good and b) my recent interest is because a local theater is putting it on, so given the opportunity, I wanted to see whatever version of the show is currently available for north american licensing

- the production was charming but the community theater (technically dinner theater! I went on a google hunt to find the theater and it’s only two hours from me lmao) was community-ing so I can’t really write home about the acting. or the singing although mina had a nice voice

- the one place I will dunk on the production is how hilariously chaste mina and dracula were. the biting scene was notably stiff and un-suggestive of sex despite taking place on a bed. maybe one of the actors wasn’t comfortable with doing anything more, but they had only one kiss, and it was so late in the show and such a teeny little dry peck on the lips that I hollered. at that point just don’t do it and pretend theirs is an ~intellectual connection or something

- dracula did do a creepy hair-petting thing to both renfield and Mina that I was a big fan of

- “if loving you keeps me alive, then how can leaving me be right?” is such a funny lyric. dirtbag manipulative boyfriend dracula

- I knew not all the songs were on the studio cast recording, but I had forgotten HOW MANY songs aren’t on it. where is How Do You Choose? If I Could Fly? It’s Over????? I had fully forgotten there was a life after life reprise. I was obsessed with the studio cast recording in high school and I know all those songs by heart (except for a perfect life because I think it’s bad) and now i’m like. why was I gatekept from so many of the songs!! why is there no professional english recording of Its Over!! answer me frank!!!!!

- this is not a new thought per se but a) I so love that all the suitors are present and themselves b) this show squanders them. jack has no personality whatsoever (I would trade TWO mina ballads for a jack song please I beg), arthur gets needlessly dunked on, and quincey is delightful and incredible and also narratively extraneous given that he doesn’t kill dracula or die at the end

- on that note, though, I cannot believe they included quincey being the first person to promise mina to kill her if the time comes in a book-accurate version of that scene. even the 1992 version doesn’t do that!!!! and this is basically just an adaptation of that movie!!!!! is this the ONLY dracula adaptation to include that detail? it’s a top five book moment for me so I very literally love to see it

- I understand that we had to beef up van helsing as a character SOMEHOW but was a dead wife song really the best we could come up with

- there are too many sad slow songs in this show for what it’s trying to accomplish! some of them immediately on top of each other! and some of the songs distinctly go on for just one too many verses 😭

- does the mina/ dracula romance make any sense? no. does the show make any effort whatsoever to make it? no. am I into it anyway? yeah. fuck it. I have terrible taste and so i think dracula as a disembodied voice like HI? HELLO? DON’T IGNORE ME? and mina being like “unfortunately, i’m into it” rocks

- “She Devil, Nosferatu” and “the lady in white” from that other dracula concept album are both so superior to “undead one, surrender” I almost feel bad for Frank and co there, but “the master’s song”, “life after life”, and “deep in the darkest night” still fucking slap

- the train hypnotism scene was soooo good except for the part where mina did dracula’s accent. not sure if that’s standard but I wish we hadn’t done that

- i’m not THAT well versed in musical theater as an art form and also all art is derivative etc but i do know that wildhorn has been historically criticized for derivativeness and…… yeah! you can tell where he mimics sondheim, and it doesn’t work because you can’t casually mimic sondheim and get out alive. i can’t think of the moment but there was some bit of music I could have sworn was out of Phantom, and it’s obviously a big general inspiration. not to be Boss Baby Guy but I see a lot of Les Mis DNA in it too (what is It’s Over if not The Confrontation in a goth hat)

- the dialogue between songs is serviceable at absolute best, and it’s a shame that it’s so consistently sacrificed at the altar of moving the plot the fuck along. for the most part, only mina and dracula meaningfully connect via song, so it would be nice to use the dialogue to flesh out relationships more often. lucy and mina being besties is a highlight!!!

- ultimately i had a blast but it must needs be said: the show is not good. the best possible execution of “literally just the novel dracula but dracula and mina are having a secret tragic love affair” is probably what we get in the 1992 dracula movie, and if there’s a way to translate that to stage well, it’s not this shallow, silly speedrun. but again. this trash is my trash. the painted cardboard castle of bad dracula adaptations is where i live.

- I actually think it would be really interesting to be involved in a production only because to make these characters function in terms of acting, I think you’d have to invent and extrapolate a lot in terms of motivation and characterization to supplement the text. which would be fun for me, a person who thinks about versions of dracula characters all the time already