Explain some ways Dracula remains an icon in today's popular culture. Compare and contrast the different ways Dracula is portrayed in movies, television, and other texts. is Dracula's power as a symbol increased or diminished when he is "rewritten" into new texts?
Post your own observations, questions, and remarks. When you respond to this posting, DO NOT simply repeat the thoughts of your classmates. You can add something new to a previous comment. You can comment or critique a previous posting, but your main goal is to add something new to the discussion. Remember, try to include direct quotes as much as possible!
23 comments:
Okay, straight to it. Dracula has lost his power quite significantly over the years. I'm assuming that when this book was first published, it terrified people. Just the mystery of not knowing what this man, or creature is, coupled with the fact that you never know when or where it may strike....but all of that is somewhat ruined by the recycling of this once powerful character.
Children are introduced to Dracula at a young age, but to be honest, this isn't the sly, manipulative, monster that I have personaly come to enjoy reading about. No, the Dracula most of us are familiar with is one that looks like Sesame Street's Count Von Count and is completely obsessed with blood...it's the only thing he will ever talk about...ever.
So thank you Bram Stoker, for giving me a true vampire, one that I may respect and possibly fear.
While Dracula himself isn't quite an icon in today's society, all the vampires that you hear about nowadays are based off his image. However, I would beg to differ with Jacob that the vampire that we are all most familiar with is Count Von Count. Face it, sparkly nice vampires are cool now. There's hardly anything to make you quake in your boots anymore. Saying that, I think that Dracula himself hasn't gotten diminished. When you think of Dracula, you think of bloodcurdling terror, of shadows in the night, not anything nice or, god forbid, sparkly. Dracula himself has become more powerful by the wussies that are today's "cool" vampires. The comparisons make him that much more scary.
I believe Dracula, like anything, is most powerful in his undiluted form. Writing him into new texts both increases and diminishes his power. It increases it by bringing his name to light again and raising the attention of the general public to his being again. However, depending on how he's portrayed, his image can be severely diminished, especially if he's portrayed as someone weak or altogether not vampiric.
Dracula in today's culture is both increased and diminished. Increased because as time goes on, movies, TV shows, and books get more and more graphic and in today's modern culture, more blood means more money. But Dracula is also diminished in the way of, in modern times, knowing who Dracula really was. Count Dracula was in fact a real person. He was such an evil and twisted ruler that stories told over time transformed Dracula into what we know him as today. So in many ways, Dracula's influence has increased in today's society. But also in many ways it has decreased.
The character Dracula has been twisted and reshaped so many times over the years that people have totally forgotten the original. But still, Dracula is a very popular horror and Halloween character. He has appeared in roles as minor as The Count in Sesame Street to the sensual and sadistic villain in the film Van Helsing. But thanks to Bram Stoker's novel, vampirism has exploded in today's culture. So you could say that those stupid Vampire Diaries books, various films (including Twilight and The Lost Boys) and costumes all came from Dracula.
Simply said Dracula has become a joke as time has progressed. It was once a blood curdling story that could terrify anybody in their right mind, but now has fallen victim of Hollywood and mainstream media. While Dracula still remains a timeless classic in its pure and original form, each unsuccessful reboot slowly hurts the reputation of this story. Much like Brett Favre, each comeback ends up a little bit worse than the last. It's like a good song, great when it comes out but eventually overplayed. Originally; Dracula was a sinister representative of evil, but overtime he has went from sinister to silly. Once a bone chilling bad guy, but now some creepy old guy with a weird accent saying "I want to suck your blood." With spin-offs such as: Count von Count, Count Chocula, Sam Dracula from The Munster, and countless Halloween costumes, Dracula now has this family friendly appeal. While still a media star and a timeless classic, Dracula has simply been replaced as the king of fright.
I think we have a major disagreement here. YEAH!!
Okay, so Hannah says that the wussy vampires of today actually make Dracula seem more powerful. Joe says that the family appeal effect has just diluted the whole essense of Dracula. What does everybody else think?
And let's talk about some positive and negative ways vampires have evolved in popular culture.
I agree with Joe. In today's society when you think of vampires the images that you see are of the characters from Twilight or the vampire from Sesame Street. You don't think of the original Dracula. People today have grown accustomed to seeing these spin offs of the original. Many people have never heard of Dracula and to be honest, I had never been introduced to the original Dracula until this assignment. I knew of the vampires that are mentioned in above comments along with a few others, but had never even heard of Dracula from Transylvania.
When rewritten, Dracula's power is diminished and increased. In "rewritten" works he is less of a threat. Rewriting him takes away his image as someone to fear.
On the other hand, Dracula is still powerful in today's society, but only as the original vampire.
While I did previously mention that Dracula has lost most of his power and has been recycled into, in my opinion, lesser vampires; there are still those who cling to his original power and even bolster it!
For example: In Stephen Sommers "Van Helsing" Dracula is not harmed by crucifixes, Holy water, or a stake to the heart! In fact, this version of Dracula is nearly invincible! The only thing that can kill the Count in this spin-off is a Werewolf. Now don't assume that all the vampires are like Dracula, the 3 "ladys" are killed..no, destroyed in the same manner that one has always heard: Holy Water, stake to the heart, etc.
So I decided to get some outside thoughts on this one..
I asked my ten year old brother if he knew who Edward Cullen was. He said "yea, off of Twilight? The one that likes Bella.?" Then I asked if he thought he was scary. Of course he said no..
Then I asked him if he knew who Dracula was. Given that he hasn't read the book, I thought that would be interesting. He said yes. But he didn't know anything more than he says "I've come to suck your blood". And he wears a cape.
I asked my mom and she said the same thing. She obviously hasn't read the book either.
So if new generations don't actually know the real Dracula then how can he be twisted? I don't think anyone who has actually read the book can take the symbol of Dracula's power as any less than it is meant to be. I guess ignorance is bliss because like Jacob said I'm sure people were afraid of him when this book was written. I don't really know where I'm going with this.. getting off subject..
Bottom line:
Dracula is a powerful figure in the novel, as he is meant to be. New vampires are not Dracula. They may be less scary, but that's okay because they aren't Dracula. He's the big daddy vampire more or less. I don't think the new vampires have any affect on Dracula.
Kortney...I love your research. Your doing a little cultural anthropology here which is excellent. I'd like to see the results if even more people were asked. Great idea...and I like that you bottom lined your thinking.
So beyond the obvious...what made Dracula so scary to Victorian readers?
I believe with today's movies and depictions of vampires has ruined Dracula's reputation and a cold blooded killer. In these days, Dracula would hardly suffice as a scary story to tell someone's kids before bed.
Meant to say "as" not "and"
Korky (Kortney) made an excellent statement. When you think of Dracula you think, "omg, thats the scary vampire that takes your blood and kills you." Then you think of Twilight and you think, "oh, thats the sweet romantic novel/movie about a human and a GOOD vampire falling in love."
I think Draculas image has stayed the same actually. I don't hear about him much but when i do its always the same thing.
--- Chandrrraa :)
Well. For some reason, the Josh Darn thing didn't let me post the comment with all my thoughts, so let's try this again in a few minutes.
This is a test comment, to see if my computer can handle commenting. If not, I may or may not be forced to chop it into a million pieces, and pay the hundred dollar fee for breaking the school macbook.
*sighs deeply*
I think Dracula has diminished, yet has retained the original power he has always held. Though this may sound rather contradicting, Dracula, as in the vampire count Dracula is still as scary as ever, but the vampire race has now been transformed into Twilight's gorgeous Edward Cullen that any teenage girl would love to be seduced by. (lol)
Dracula is so much different to modern day vampires that I think it's hard to even compare them. I think it's safe to say that vampires have changed dramatically since the time of Dracula, but Dracula will always be the terrifying and less attractive grandaddy of these new fashionable "vampires."
In conclusion, Dracula is the same old gory vampire he's always been, it's the entire vampire species that has changed.
Okay! So now that I have this jazz sorted out, lets get to it. Commencing commenting.
(ahem) Well. In my opinion, Dracula's once mighty persona has fizzled out, due to the modern idea of the vampire. To today's society, Dracula is somewhat of a joke. The term vampire is immediately brought to mind, but without the accompaniment of terror. We conjure up images of glittering romantics, or bat-counting puppets. Mr. Stoker would not be pleased. He had intended that the name Dracula, along with the term vampire, would be synonymous with ferocious dealer of death and horror, not a topic for a teenage love novel.
Kortney makes some valid points, modern vampires aren't meant to be the caliber of Dracula. However, a hit to the idea of the vampire is in turn a hit to Dracula. Once upon a time, Dracula was a palpable dread. Today, Dracula is a costume at K-Mart. It comes with a cape, some plastic fangs, some white makeup, maybe a bit of fake blood, and it'll run ya about 35 bucks.
So there you have it, albeit late. The seemingly untouchable tower of fear called Dracula has slowly but surely been smashed. His image is faded, crumpled, torn, and it looks like something was spilled on it. Maybe coffee? Who knows.
-Bench
Well I already had a whole thing typed up but it deleted itself?? Ok her it goes again.
Joe I think you are completely right. Just like the vast majority of other people, I'm going to use Twilight as my primary example. Twilight has Edward and his whole clan being vegetarian vampires, meaning that they sucked animal blood instead of human blood! This clearly shows that Dracula's frightening and mysterious image has become an almost comical theme, and even become a love story! If a vampire can not only be a vegetarian, but also date a human, then society today has completely misinterpreted Dracula's original message. In conclusion, I believe that Count Dracula is no longer an icon that can strike fear into readers/viewers.
Well, Mrs. Matysak, I feel that Dracula was so horribly frightening to Victorian readers because they didn't know who, or what this Dracula guy is. They weren't told really about vampires, and they honestly believed that vampires are real! So, all of it felt more realistic to Victorian readers! I felt that some of the mystery and fear that was supposed to be conveyed to me was lost due to my prior knowledge on Dracula.
Dracula's power has diminished throughout the years in the media. Back in the time the book was written, there was no "Vampire Craze" going on, and so vampires weren't a common word, a common story you'd hear about. Bram Stoker wrote about Dracula and introduced him as a menacing, intimidating, completely powerful thing. Stoker had his readers probably trembling in fear at the very idea of this fictional creature. Dracula was supposed to be the symbol of power and an idea of evil. He was nearly invincible and could do so many things not a single person could do. Stoker had him able to turn into fog, disappear, have super-sensitive smelling and hearing, he could shape shift into a wolf or bat... And all of these things made him more terrifying. Now as the Vampire craze begins, we see Vampires and think of super strong, sexy hunks.(well, us girls do anyways..) The idea has been diminished that vampires are 'evil' and now in the media vampires are sweet hearted and would risk themselves to save a human, which is honestly not how a true vampire, especially Dracula, would have been.
While I've read this book, I've had moments when I'm upset, disgusted, confused, and down-right addicted. Maybe I have the same feeling as little girls do when they see Edward Cullen. Miss Lucy was the type of girl that didn't even want her fiance to see her sleeping in the beginning. That all changed when Dracula came along.
The ways Dracula used his sexuality to reel in women is similar to the new Twilight series. Edward has a peculiar look that catches the ladies' eyes. It's the strange, different persona that these characters have that makes people want to read more of. However, without the new hit vampire shows, Dracula's popularity would have dropped. He's on the rise though, for I believe more fame is in store for that monster.
Well I can't believe I'm not the last one to comment. My fellow procrastinators, I salute you.
Post a Comment