Posts Tagged ‘Dracula’

Having been engrossed in the reading of Stoker’s novel, Dracula, when I looked at my watch, it was way past my bedtime (midnight); so I meandered to farthest bathroom at the end of our long hallway, since I didn’t want to awaken Mary Patricia (my wife). Halfway there I was seized with a primal fear that froze me to the spot: I could swear the evil vampire Dracula –lurking in the shadows– was welcoming me to his kingdom, fangs bared, blood dripping, arms outspread.

Fear I’ve felt before, but this was different.
Dracula is a book one has to revisit once in a while. Finally it dawned on me that Dracula scared the living daylight out of me not because of his appearance or ill-fame, but because the vampire owns something I don’t: non-human knowledge.

Bram Stoker’s Dracula is one of the scariest books ever written, and the reasons for its perennial appeal are basically two:
(1) The vampire theme in which the supernatural is thrown into the natural world
(2) Writing techniques: use of Absolutes.

When Count Dracula says, “There are far worse things awaiting than death.” Ah, what could that be? Orpheus, Tiresias, and Dante, belong to the set of personages who returned from the other shore; and what they had to say was horrifying, but they said things within human understanding. So, what are the “worse things” that Dracula mentions in passing? Is it something unmentionable? Is it something so tremendous and non-rational and unholy that he must leave unsaid?

Human fear I can live with. Take  Stephen King –the unsurpassed master of horror– who terrifies us with human knowledge: sins, transgressions, and human cruelty. With adroit prose and distinctive voice Stephen King exploits our fears and dark emotions, often appealing to grossness and revulsion. Bram Stoker also uses this sense of repugnancy in his novel: “As the Count leaned over me and his hands touched me… a horrible feeling of nausea came over me, which, do what I would, I could not conceal.”

Yet, what always puts a chill in my heart and mind is the lingering question of the beyond: what worse things did Dracula refer to?

Because the novel Dracula raises questions rather answering them, it will go on delighting readers for many generations. And what a treat it is! Not sparing a single rhetorical figure, Bram Stoker stabs and twists the reader’s central nervous system where horror resides. In some scenes, the narrating voice employs the ‘Nominative Absolute’ to add the sensation of simultaneity.

Watch closely this excerpt:

“As my eyes opened involuntarily I saw his strong hand grasp the slender neck of the fair woman and with giant’s power draw it back, the blue eyes transformed with fury, the white teeth champing with rage, and the fair cheeks blazing with passion.”

“Eyes transformed” is a past participle Absolute: “Teeth champing” and “Cheeks blazing” are both present participle Absolutes.

While we think that Ernest Hemingway was the inventor of the Absolute, Stoker was way ahead of him. Hemingway abused the technique, Bram Stoker was measured and sober in his use of it.

Subjunction is a rhetorical device that repeats contiguous words. Notice how Stoker makes use of it:

“I closed me eyes in a languorous ecstasy and waited-waited with beating heart.”

Rhetoric isn’t dead. It is always present in the great works of literature.

Humans instinctively seek beauty in what they read. In Dracula we find it not in the theme or the plot, but in the composition itself, since it is masterfully written. Readers, students and blossoming writers who are serious about literature will find elegant and yet thrilling writing that will seize both their minds and viscera. And if one reads this novel at night, don’t go to the bathroom!

What makes Dracula such a beautiful piece of work? There’s only one answer: it is well balanced by the power of well-balanced sentences; it is harmoniously woven, and its prose sparkles with a radiance that is short of wondrous.

There is no doubt that Freidrich Willhelm Murnau’s Nosferatu, Eine Symphonie des Grauens (Symphony of Horror) is a piece of landmark cinema, both for its Expressionist filmmaking and its unique treatment of the vampire as plague. Yet few people saw this monumental film prior to 1960.

Though slated for destruction by Bram Stoker’s widow, the film managed to survive, popping up in the most peculiar places.

Nosferatu debuted at the Marble Hall of the Berlin Zoological Gardens in 1922. The movie was the first and last product of a small art collective called Prana Films — the brainchild of artist Albin Grau (later Nosferatu’s production designer). A month later Florence Stoker caught wind, and she started the legal machines rolling. Her only income at this point was her deceased husband’s book Dracula, and she would not let some German production company steal her meal ticket. During the 1920s, intellectual rights were a bit dodgy, so Florence paid one British pound to join the British Incorporated Society of Authors to help defend her property. Never mind that the society would also pick up the tab for the potentially huge legal bills.

Florence seemed unaware that a second vampire film, this one called Drakula, was produced by a Hungarian company in 1921. Although the title harkens back to Bram Stoker’s novel, the resemblance ends there. This film, now lost save for some stills, was more concerned with eye gouging than straight out vampirism. Nosferatu on the other hand took much of its plot from Stoker’s Dracula, changing only the names.

The film continued to be exhibited in Germany and Budapest up through 1925, though Prana was beleaguered by creditors and harassed by Florence Stoker. They tried to settle with the society, offering a cut of the film’s take in order for them to use the Dracula title in England and America. Florence would not relent.

She not only wanted Prana to halt exhibition of the film, she wanted it torched — all prints and negatives of the film destroyed. And she got her way. In 1925 Florence won her case and the destruction order went through. Nosferatu, Eine Symphonie des Grauens vanished into thin air just as Count Orlock, the vampire in the film, does when exposed to the rays of the morning sun. Nosferatu did not stay dead. Like any good horror movie, the villain revived himself and carried on the fight. A print of the film resurfaced in 1929, playing to audiences in New York and Detroit. However preeminent Dracula scholar, David J. Skal, writes that the film “was not taken seriously” and that most audiences considered it “a boring picture”. The print was then purchased by Universal to see what had already been done in terms of a vampire movie. The film was studied by all the key creative personnel leading to the Universal production of Dracula in 1931.

The undead film continued to rise from the grave throughout the years. An abridged version was aired on television in the 1960s as part of Silents Please, and subsequently released by Entertainment films under the title Terror of Dracula, and then again by Blackhawk Films under the name Dracula. Blackhawk also released the original version to the collector’s market under the title Nosferatu the Vampire. An unabridged copy of the movie survived Florence Stoker’s death warrant and was restored and screened at Berlin’s Film Festival in 1984.

Despite its influence on the making of the 1931 Dracula, Nosferatu has few film decedents. It’s theme of vampire as a scourging plague has only been seriously taken up by two films: the 1979 remake by Werner Herzog, Nosferatu: The Vampyre, and the 1979 television miniseries of Salem’s Lot, directed by Tobe Hooper. Perhaps if the original Nosferatu, Eine Symphonie des Grauens had been allowed regular release, this would not be the case. It remains to be seen if Nosferatu will vanish again with the daylight or if this rare film will rise again in a new form.

For more information on the making of the original Dracula, check out David Skal’s book Hollywood Gothic: The Tangled Web of Dracula from Novel to Stage to Screen.

If you want to see how vampire films have changed from Dracula to Underworld, pick up a copy of my book The Changing Vampire of Film and Television. Also you may visit  www.timkanebooks.com for more vampire articles and fiction.

Having been engrossed in the reading of Stoker’s novel, Dracula, when I looked at my watch, it was way past my bedtime (midnight); so I meandered to farthest bathroom at the end of our long hallway, since I didn’t want to awaken Mary Patricia (my wife). Halfway there I was seized with a primal fear that froze me to the spot: I could swear the evil vampire Dracula –lurking in the shadows– was welcoming me to his kingdom, fangs bared, blood dripping, arms outspread.

Fear I’ve felt before, but this was different.

Dracula is a book one has to revisit once in a while. Finally it dawned on me that Dracula scared the living daylight out of me not because of his appearance or ill-fame, but because the vampire owns something I don’t: non-human knowledge.

Bram Stoker’s Dracula is one of the scariest books ever written, and the reasons for its perennial appeal are basically two:

(1) The vampire theme in which the supernatural is thrown into the natural world

(2) Writing techniques: use of Absolutes.

When Count Dracula says, “There are far worse things awaiting than death.” Ah, what could that be? Orpheus, Tiresias, and Dante, belong to the set of personages who returned from the other shore; and what they had to say was horrifying, but they said things within human understanding. So, what are the “worse things” that Dracula mentions in passing? Is it something unmentionable? Is it something so tremendous and non-rational and unholy that he must leave unsaid?

Human fear I can live with. Take  Stephen King –the unsurpassed master of horror– who terrifies us with human knowledge: sins, transgressions, and human cruelty. With adroit prose and distinctive voice Stephen King exploits our fears and dark emotions, often appealing to grossness and revulsion. Bram Stoker also uses this sense of repugnancy in his novel: “As the Count leaned over me and his hands touched me… a horrible feeling of nausea came over me, which, do what I would, I could not conceal.”

Yet, what always puts a chill in my heart and mind is the lingering question of the beyond: what worse things did Dracula refer to?

Because the novel Dracula raises questions rather answering them, it will go on delighting readers for many generations. And what a treat it is! Not sparing a single rhetorical figure, Bram Stoker stabs and twists the reader’s central nervous system where horror resides. In some scenes, the narrating voice employs the ‘Nominative Absolute’ to add the sensation of simultaneity.

Watch closely this excerpt:

“As my eyes opened involuntarily I saw his strong hand grasp the slender neck of the fair woman and with giant’s power draw it back, the blue eyes transformed with fury, the white teeth champing with rage, and the fair cheeks blazing with passion.”

“Eyes transformed” is a past participle Absolute: “Teeth champing” and “Cheeks blazing” are both present participle Absolutes.

While we think that Ernest Hemingway was the inventor of the Absolute, Stoker was way ahead of him. Hemingway abused the technique, Bram Stoker was measured and sober in his use of it.

Subjunction is a rhetorical device that repeats contiguous words. Notice how Stoker makes use of it:

“I closed me eyes in a languorous ecstasy and waited-waited with beating heart.”

Rhetoric isn’t dead. It is always present in the great works of literature.

Humans instinctively seek beauty in what they read. In Dracula we find it not in the theme or the plot, but in the composition itself, since it is masterfully written. Readers, students and blossoming writers who are serious about literature will find elegant and yet thrilling writing that will seize both their minds and viscera. And if one reads this novel at night, don’t go to the bathroom!

What makes Dracula such a beautiful piece of work? There’s only one answer: it is well balanced by the power of well-balanced sentences; it is harmoniously woven, and its prose sparkles with a radiance that is short of wondrous.

David A. Patrick, a student at Bethlehem High School for three years, finished his first novel in the summer of 2006 and published it the following year in the fall with iUniverse Publishing; he titled it Nero Demare and the Legend of the Vampires.

Patrick’s first horror novel was based largely off his own experiences except for any vampire encounters; however, he did face spiritual attack during the writing of this book. Family issues exploded enormously, ministerial duties swallowed his time, and the book was becoming far more difficult to finish. However, these problems compelled him to complete his writing so that the world could peer into the spiritual realm through the story of a young boy.

Seven-year-old Nero Demare believes in vampires and grows up admiring their mythical slayer, Duke Angtrav. But little does Nero know that he himself carries the bloodline of the vampire slayers.

Throughout his childhood, a mysterious man watches over Nero and saves him from a fleet of the bloodthirsty brethren, who take their orders from King Orthendarh, a master far worse than Dracula ever dreamed of being. Without Nero’s knowledge, this man continues to watch over him, knowing that the world will one day need Nero.

As he grows older, Nero learns that it is his destiny to save the world from the malicious clutches of the vampires. Vampires soon cower in fear at the mere mention of his name. But sinister forces conspire to condemn the entire world to darkness, and only Nero Demare can save mankind from destruction.

Nero Demare and the Legend of the Vampires is a fast-paced story of good versus evil and the battles waged by both sides.

This novel was written predominantly for gothic fans and other avid horror readers but only for young adults due to the graphic violence and mature themes.

There is no doubt that Freidrich Willhelm Murnau’s Nosferatu, Eine Symphonie des Grauens (Symphony of Horror) is a piece of landmark cinema, both for its Expressionist filmmaking and its unique treatment of the vampire as plague. Yet few people saw this monumental film prior to 1960. Though slated for destruction by Bram Stoker’s widow, the film managed to survive, popping up in the most peculiar places.Nosferatu debuted at the Marble Hall of the Berlin Zoological Gardens in 1922. The movie was the first and last product of a small art collective called Prana Films — the brainchild of artist Albin Grau (later Nosferatu’s production designer). A month later Florence Stoker caught wind, and she started the legal machines rolling. Her only income at this point was her deceased husband’s book Dracula, and she would not let some German production company steal her meal ticket. During the 1920s, intellectual rights were a bit dodgy, so Florence paid one British pound to join the British Incorporated Society of Authors to help defend her property. Never mind that the society would also pick up the tab for the potentially huge legal bills.

Florence seemed unaware that a second vampire film, this one called Drakula, was produced by a Hungarian company in 1921. Although the title harkens back to Bram Stoker’s novel, the resemblance ends there. This film, now lost save for some stills, was more concerned with eye gouging than straight out vampirism. Nosferatu on the other hand took much of its plot from Stoker’s Dracula, changing only the names.

The film continued to be exhibited in Germany and Budapest up through 1925, though Prana was beleaguered by creditors and harassed by Florence Stoker. They tried to settle with the society, offering a cut of the film’s take in order for them to use the Dracula title in England and America. Florence would not relent.

She not only wanted Prana to halt exhibition of the film, she wanted it torched — all prints and negatives of the film destroyed. And she got her way. In 1925 Florence won her case and the destruction order went through. Nosferatu, Eine Symphonie des Grauens vanished into thin air just as Count Orlock, the vampire in the film, does when exposed to the rays of the morning sun.Nosferatu did not stay dead. Like any good horror movie, the villain revived himself and carried on the fight. A print of the film resurfaced in 1929, playing to audiences in New York and Detroit. However preeminent Dracula scholar, David J. Skal, writes that the film “was not taken seriously” and that most audiences considered it “a boring picture”. The print was then purchased by Universal to see what had already been done in terms of a vampire movie. The film was studied by all the key creative personnel leading to the Universal production of Dracula in 1931.

The undead film continued to rise from the grave throughout the years. An abridged version was aired on television in the 1960s as part of Silents Please, and subsequently released by Entertainment films under the title Terror of Dracula, and then again by Blackhawk Films under the name Dracula. Blackhawk also released the original version to the collector’s market under the title Nosferatu the Vampire. An unabridged copy of the movie survived Florence Stoker’s death warrant and was restored and screened at Berlin’s Film Festival in 1984.

Despite its influence on the making of the 1931 Dracula, Nosferatu has few film decedents. It’s theme of vampire as a scourging plague has only been seriously taken up by two films: the 1979 remake by Werner Herzog, Nosferatu: The Vampyre, and the 1979 television miniseries of Salem’s Lot, directed by Tobe Hooper. Perhaps if the original Nosferatu, Eine Symphonie des Grauens had been allowed regular release, this would not be the case. It remains to be seen if Nosferatu will vanish again with the daylight or if this rare film will rise again in a new form.

For more information on the making of the original Dracula, check out David Skal’s book Hollywood Gothic: The Tangled Web of Dracula from Novel to Stage to Screen. If you want to see how vampire films have changed from Dracula to Underworld, pick up a copy of my book The Changing Vampire of Film and Television. Also you may visit www.timkanebooks.com for more vampire articles and fiction.