I admire the way that Stoker wrote his novel through the use of various journal entries. It allows us to see the inner workings of each character contrasted to how they might physically act. Do you think using journal entries made this story easier or more difficul to to make into the plays, movies, etc. that it has become?
I agree with Madison when you say that the way Bram Stoker wrote his novels, especially Dracula, was admirable and probably very difficult for him to do, but because he does that, he creates a certain tone and voice of the novel. It makes it more suspenseful and dramatic and dark and eery as well. I wonder what it would have been like if he hadn't used the technique and point of view?
To really get a specific reaction out of a reader, the supposed writing would need to be written in a way that the reader can perceive the author’s intended message. I think that you were able to show this very effectively by explaining how Bram Stoker’s choice of literary devices like imagery and metaphors “show” the actions and appearances of Dracula and not just “tell”. Especially the way Stoker uses other characters’ personal encounter with Dracula to describe him. It kind of givers Dracula some mysticism since you said that he doesn’t appear a lot in the novel. I know that this would definitely make me more intrigued about this author and I am sure that is what Stoker wanted when he decide to write the novel this way. This definitely capitalizes the unique style that you mentioned earlier in your presentation. I agree with Alyssa when she wrote that his style creates suspense and a dark tone. The descriptive imagery told by other people about what they see in Dracula is more terrifying than it would be if it was just told by a narrator. Since this novel deviates what was thought to be normal during the Victorian age, do you know where Stoker’s inspiration for writing his novel came from?
I admire you, for reading Dracula, being an avid Vampire fan since 6th grade I tried to read that book and I really couldn't get past the first 10 pages. I would love to go back and read it now. Now to the complements, I really like how you came to the conclusion that "Villain's are characterized by what is and isn't normal within society" I feel that that is very true. Look at Charles Manson for instance, now I'm not saying that what he did wasn't bad, however if our society was full of odd cults than he wouldn't have been really to fault and we wouldn't find him evil. The same might have been true with a lot of other criminals in history. It reminds me of this anime, Death Note, which is about this notebook that this guy Light found that was dropped by a god of death, and society was both for and against Light/Kira for using the death note because he used it to kill criminals. I also really liked how you connected Dracula to Vlad Temps, who was the said person that inspired Dracula.
I agree with the point you made that villany is based on what is and what isn't considered normal in society. I Am Legend which was one of the books I read also deals with the concept of the outsider and normalcy as a majority concept. At the end of the novel, the main character realize that he is now the outsider in the new world of vampires and is the monster that they all fear. He realizes that normalcy is a majority concept and based on the majority he isn't considered to be "normal." Similarly in Dracula, his views on sexuality which were considered taboo for the Victorian era set him apart and Stoker used imagery and metaphors to create Dracula's hideous appearance which further seperated him from society and helped solidify his role as a villan. The concept of normalcy as it relates to villany is still relevant in society today, because the majority is constantly changing so what was once considered evil can be considered ordinary and acceptable later and vise versa.
I love Dracula. Vampires get such a bad rap nowadays because of Twilight. It’s nice to see that there was once a vampire that had the ability to be intelligent, respectable, and feared. I think that describing him in a way as personal as journal entries really upped the ominous qualities and actions of Dracula. On another note, I thought for the longest time that writing in the form of journal entries was a post-modern invention. If he was that creative, maybe I should read more of Stoker’s writing. Back on topic, it’s hard for me to imagine a villain that better represents all villains. He’s a monster, he’s intelligent, and he’s creepy. I think the best part about Dracula is that he’s scary on a psychological level, not a physical, gory level.
I admire the way that Stoker wrote his novel through the use of various journal entries. It allows us to see the inner workings of each character contrasted to how they might physically act. Do you think using journal entries made this story easier or more difficul to to make into the plays, movies, etc. that it has become?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Madison when you say that the way Bram Stoker wrote his novels, especially Dracula, was admirable and probably very difficult for him to do, but because he does that, he creates a certain tone and voice of the novel. It makes it more suspenseful and dramatic and dark and eery as well. I wonder what it would have been like if he hadn't used the technique and point of view?
ReplyDeleteTo really get a specific reaction out of a reader, the supposed writing would need to be written in a way that the reader can perceive the author’s intended message. I think that you were able to show this very effectively by explaining how Bram Stoker’s choice of literary devices like imagery and metaphors “show” the actions and appearances of Dracula and not just “tell”. Especially the way Stoker uses other characters’ personal encounter with Dracula to describe him. It kind of givers Dracula some mysticism since you said that he doesn’t appear a lot in the novel. I know that this would definitely make me more intrigued about this author and I am sure that is what Stoker wanted when he decide to write the novel this way. This definitely capitalizes the unique style that you mentioned earlier in your presentation. I agree with Alyssa when she wrote that his style creates suspense and a dark tone. The descriptive imagery told by other people about what they see in Dracula is more terrifying than it would be if it was just told by a narrator. Since this novel deviates what was thought to be normal during the Victorian age, do you know where Stoker’s inspiration for writing his novel came from?
ReplyDeleteI admire you, for reading Dracula, being an avid Vampire fan since 6th grade I tried to read that book and I really couldn't get past the first 10 pages. I would love to go back and read it now. Now to the complements, I really like how you came to the conclusion that "Villain's are characterized by what is and isn't normal within society" I feel that that is very true. Look at Charles Manson for instance, now I'm not saying that what he did wasn't bad, however if our society was full of odd cults than he wouldn't have been really to fault and we wouldn't find him evil. The same might have been true with a lot of other criminals in history. It reminds me of this anime, Death Note, which is about this notebook that this guy Light found that was dropped by a god of death, and society was both for and against Light/Kira for using the death note because he used it to kill criminals. I also really liked how you connected Dracula to Vlad Temps, who was the said person that inspired Dracula.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the point you made that villany is based on what is and what isn't considered normal in society. I Am Legend which was one of the books I read also deals with the concept of the outsider and normalcy as a majority concept. At the end of the novel, the main character realize that he is now the outsider in the new world of vampires and is the monster that they all fear. He realizes that normalcy is a majority concept and based on the majority he isn't considered to be "normal." Similarly in Dracula, his views on sexuality which were considered taboo for the Victorian era set him apart and Stoker used imagery and metaphors to create Dracula's hideous appearance which further seperated him from society and helped solidify his role as a villan. The concept of normalcy as it relates to villany is still relevant in society today, because the majority is constantly changing so what was once considered evil can be considered ordinary and acceptable later and vise versa.
ReplyDeleteI love Dracula. Vampires get such a bad rap nowadays because of Twilight. It’s nice to see that there was once a vampire that had the ability to be intelligent, respectable, and feared. I think that describing him in a way as personal as journal entries really upped the ominous qualities and actions of Dracula. On another note, I thought for the longest time that writing in the form of journal entries was a post-modern invention. If he was that creative, maybe I should read more of Stoker’s writing. Back on topic, it’s hard for me to imagine a villain that better represents all villains. He’s a monster, he’s intelligent, and he’s creepy. I think the best part about Dracula is that he’s scary on a psychological level, not a physical, gory level.
ReplyDelete