A retold tale is much like a sequel, a mash-up, a fan-fiction, an adaptation, etc in that it allows us to reengage with a particular narrative we enjoyed. It can give us “more” of the story or just bring us back to those moments we so thoroughly enjoyed. But often, the retold tale tries to re-imagine the story in a way that is oppositional to the original text, decentering the hero/protagonist in favor of other a lesser character(s), antagonist or villain.
Dracula RetoldThis brings me to Dracula. Given the deep and lasting influence of Dracula as “the vampire” and the instantaneous connection we all make when we hear Dracula or vampire separately, (although, that could be currently usurped—at least of the time being with Edward Cullen), a person could argue that all vampire stories are retold stories of Dracula. While vampire tales do exist before him (Poldoris The Vampyre; Rymer’s Varney the Vampire, and of course, that sexy vixen Carmilla, by Joseph LeFanu—who was inspirational ground zero for Stoker’s Dracula), it seems the weight of each vampire story is held up against Dracula. Defined in relation or against the Count’s definition. Thus, Edward Cullen maintains the tall and dark alienated persona associated with Dracula, but does not given into his bloodlust (mostly) and attempts to coexist with humans instead of snack on them.
However, I’m more interested in discussing the most interesting pieces out there that attempt to re-interpret what Stoker has written. There are four that come to mind, though I’m sure there are dozens more out there. With these four, they perform some interesting re-interpretative feats.
Renfield: A Tale of Madness by Gary Reed and Galen Showman (1995)I mentioned this, mostly because I found it really enjoyable and a great example of getting more out of the story. This graphic novel retells the story of Dracula, through the eyes of Renfield, who is my favorite character in the book (Mostly because I read this graphic novel before my first thorough reading of Dracula).
The Dracula Tape by Fred Saberhagen (1975)This book serves as the starting point of a series by Saberhagen about Dracula with him living throughout the 20th century encountering all the changes and differences it brings and eventually coming face to face with the Harkers’ children. In fact, the story starts with Dracula confronting the Harkers’ grandchildren and providing them with cassette tapes that record the story from his perspective. He recounts how his acts were misconstrued—either accidentally or purposely by the protagonists as well as his loving relationship with Mina.
Dracula, the Un-Dead by Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt (2009)This is a “sequel” written in part by the great grand-nephew of Stoker, which attempts to give it some legitimacy. The story picks up a generation later, when Quincy Harker is attempting to achieve his dream as an actor and stumbles upon Bram Stoker who has written a book called “Dracula” that’s all about his parents. Dracula, again reemerges as a misnunderstood figure, trying to find true evil creature, the vampire, Elizabeth Bathory who is the embodiment of evil vampires (while Dracula is the epitome of “good”). This version also has battles and scenes that are evocative of a modern-day superhero narrative and unlike other versions, chooses not to tell itself in the epistolary manner that the original and other texts tend to utilize.
Dracula, My Love by Syrie James (2010)Here again, Dracula’s story is retold by Mina; who in addition to aspiring wife of Harker, also is seeking her own origin (being an orphan), and having inner battles about being appropriate in Victorian culture. Her falling in love with Dracula comes from a series of interactions that she chose not to write in her journal that she submitted for the events, but kept to herself.
Within the pieces discussed above and many other pieces, we find that there are several elements that are continually reconsidered and negotiated due to plot holes, cultural privileging, and reflection on interpretations of the text.
Mina’s Relationship With DraculaThere’s lots of room for interpretation on this one; after all, when Mina is caught in the bed with Dracula and Jonathan is out cold; one has trouble believing her innocence. Typically, it is cast as a love affair.
What Happened on the DemeterThis interesting tidbit provides lots of food for thought. Both James and Saberhagen argue that it was indeed a mad man who did it and not Dracula. Saberhagen has Dracula admit that he was actually stuck within his coffin, unable to escape, while Syrie points out that it would not be useful for Dracula to kill everyone on board and risk losing his precious cargo of boxes of native earth.
Overreliance on Van Helsing and his KnowledgeI think this is the most intriguing element. If the 19th century privileged knowledgeable people (except when there was a fear of them learning too much or “the wrong things” a la Dr. Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll), then the 2nd half of the 20th century has been to challenge, undermine, and be highly suspicious of privileged authorities such as doctors. And given that Van Helsing is an authority on nearly everything (he has several different degrees and everyone seems to roll over and play dead for him), Dracula the Undead, Dracula, My Love, and The Dracula Tape all open up this line of questioning. How does Van Helsing know what he knows?
Lucy’s DeathIntriguing because, taken with the bit above about Van Helsing, Lucy’s death falls at his feet. Since blood types aren’t established till after the publication of the book, many writers are quick to attack Van Helsing for injecting Lucy with no less than 4 people’s blood in a very short period, not knowing their blood type and thereby, quite possibly being the true cause of her death.
Dracula’s DeathObviously, if Dracula is then considered the protagonist, he is spared his death since it is evident that Van Helsing doesn’t know what he is talking about. Dracula’s death turns out to only be temporarily or even faked.
So going way back to the top, I did name this post as the “The Case Against Dracula” and I’m actually getting to my point here. What these writers do is pin together various narratives based upon the shortcomings of Stoker’s writings and this is where it gets interesting. The goal of an author is to lead the reader through a narrative, but at times, the narrator, to create mystery, suspense, curiosity, etc, will not take the most direct route. In fact, to do so, undoes the darker nature of many stories or transitions the suspense into gore. It gives away too much; too easy. Thus, the author tries to let the reader connect events. In the case of Dracula, not only is the reader supposed to connect facts and understand what’s going on; but Stoker has his characters doing the same thing. After all, the book is a collection of journal entries, newspaper articles, and letters that become a central part of the story at one point.
Therefore, Dracula has both intentional gray areas and actual mistakes by the author. A good example of an intentional gray area are the events on the Demeter. No firsthand account comes forward to say that Dracula drank his way through the crew, but by the fact that it’s included in the collection of writings for the protagonists’ case, leads us to believe that it is. As for actual mistakes, there are several inconsistencies within Stoker’s writings about the nature of the vampire.
The circumstantial evidence when properly aligned, leads us to believe Dracula is the anti-Christ as Stoker implies through his characters. However, if Dracula were put on trial, what actual evidence would there be against him? The baby in the bag? Harker never sees the baby; only hears noise; and so Saberhagen calls it a piglet. His actions on the Demeter, again, are never proven. His murdering of Lucy? Of Renfield? Still no dice. It’s interesting that there are college courses and written works other there that look to apply the standards of the law against the facts in a piece of literature (whether an actual courtroom scene, a mystery, or something other debatable element within a story). In some ways, that’s what the writer does when he/she first starts to explore the idea of re-telling a tale.
QUESTIONSWhat are other stories (besides the ones mentioned) that attempt to reinterpret the text? (Don’t just name them, actually discuss them if you have firsthand knowledge).
Are there examples of stories where the reinterpretation surpasses (in some capacity) the original?
What other gaps are there in Dracula? What other alternative Dracula texts are there?
Why would an author tackle a story that’s already been told?
Did you enjoy this read? Let me know your thoughts down below or feel free to browse around and check out some of my other posts!. You might also want to keep up to date with my blog by signing up for them via email.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.