Of Wolves* And Bats...

Of wolves* and bats...

*A response to DD September 18 in two parts; I talked about wolves in another post.

Bats. VAMPIRE BATS, specifically.

Today our beloved cowboy, Quincey, relates the story of the overnight exsanguination of a horse, *relating the incident overtly to Lucy's illness." He describes damage to the "gorge" aka throat.

I have to conclude this was Stoker slapping the reader upside the head just in case due to their inexperience with vampire fiction they might not yet have figured out what was going on with Lucy. What with Victorian Lady Dying Disease being a thing, or whatever it's called.

But come on, Seward. COME ON. Did you not JUST NOTICE that Lucy's throat puncture marks look mangled? Have you not been racking your brain to think of how she could possibly be losing blood? Have you not SPOTTED BATS flying around in the sky?

I'm certainly not suggesting Jack should realize it's a vampire monster. But when Quincey told his story how could Jack not respond "HOLD UP. A bat drained your horse of blood overnight, you say? And Van Helsing insists we keep the windows shut in Lucy's room? DEATH TO BATS!!!"

"Yes but Cherry, vampire bats aren't native to England."

Of course not, but ships are docking in London from all over the world, friend. You really want to argue that ONE vampire bat couldn't have stowed away?

I get that up until now it was reasonable for no one but VH to have a clue about what the illness afflicting Lucy could be. But Quincey dropped *that* story and Jack didn't pick it up I'm dtvgdggdhhgjj

Of wolves and bats*...

*actually I'll do two posts because otherwise hello novel-length musings.

Anyway. Wolves. I'm puzzled. That's an understatement.

First of all, I love wolves so I was never very happy with their association to evil in Dracula. Imagine my pleasant surprise when Mr. Bilder and the count were chatting about them and Drac said that wolves *wouldn't* like him.

This is so interesting to me.

It made sense for Stoker to cast them in the role of evil children of the night. I'd have been more surprised if he portrayed them positively because there's such a long history of fear of wolves in all corners of Europe. Just consider the fairytales! Of *course* they'd be vampire familiars.

And now, they're not?

I think this is Stoker's way of saying that all natural animals hate Dracula on sight. I wonder if bats and rats hate him too?

Then Dracula mindcontrols them. *He's* the one choosing animals that creep humans out. There's nothing inherently evil about wolves, it's Dracula that chooses to make them evil!

Honestly Stoker really exceeds all my expectations if that's the case.

What do you all think happened to poor Bersicker ? Speculation only, please, no spoilers.

You don't win D&D by pissing off the DM, you win D&D by having a good time with your friends. <3

Van Helsing, trying desperately not to get put in a straitjacket: don't tell anyone about this. in fact I'm not even going to tell you. just make sure you don't go to sleep. the garlic is medicine okay and it stays. you wouldn't dig up a corn, would you? CORN, Jack. guys she ran out of blood we need your blood don't ask why. I'm off to Amsterdam don't die.

Quincey Morris, showing up a week late with Starbucks: hmmm sounds like vampires to me

Catch me SCREAMING in the subway for a PLOT TWIST from a 1897 book. NOT THE FLOWERS C'MON!!!

I can imagine a retelling of Dracula where what Jonathan really encountered in Transylvania was a village struck by a devastating illness that primarily killed infants. The terrifying women who he sees murder a baby are nurses removing a child who has died of the disease; the mother is wild with natural but inconsolable grief. Rather than seeing her ravaged by wolves, he witnessed her suicide. The thing on the Demeter is likewise this illness; the "brain fever" which would explain the "hallucinations" Jonathan and then the crew and captain experience. All that's missing is a couple of scenes showing the transmission of the disease--to the sailors, to Lucy--and you could cut from the reality of it to the hallucinations people afflicted suffer from. It would be a very interesting adaptation, I think.

And pretty timely for our current age, as well.

Fascinating to me how Dracula goes from this regular personified, well, person, into this sort of... Formless, malevolent disease; A faceless and nameless horror, not quite tangible and feeling more like a curse than a physical monster walking around. It’s surreal and even though we KNOW of Dracula, even if you knew nothing until you read the book, even if you read it in the proper order because Jonathan’s journal comes first; It’s still unsettling how Dracula has become this messed up, briefly glimpsed idea of an approaching malady. Like the inevitability of death and doctors and loved ones doing all they can to stave it off.

He almost doesn’t feel real within his own narrative, like maybe Dracula really is just Lucy’s sleep demon that her mind has made up to rationalize and explain this inexplicable condition of hers; Which just adds to her uncertainty and the dream-like surrealism of it all, that gaslights Lucy into not talking about what happened and causes her to forget. Dracula’s like a cryptid you barely catch in the dark with shining red eyes, you can’t quite pin him down because he’s so undefined and thus protean. He’s like a hallucination, an omen of death; A mere visualization of a much deeper and untouchable force, given a face to mock victims with, existing only within the mind because the illness exists in the body like a parasite. It’s creepy.