Today we have a classic: Dracula, by Bram Stoker, and I'm please to say it still holds up!
We are all, I'm sure, at least passingly familiar with the concept of vampires, as well as Dracula himself. The monsters have existed across cultures long before Dracula was penned, but it is this book's incarnation that lead to our modern conception of them as sophisticated, elite, and sexy.
The story is told through 'found' sources; that is journal entries and newspaper excerpts that have been transcribed, in-universe, by characters within the story. Not only does this allow for easy switching between multiple perspectives, but it gives an air of 'authenticity' to the fiction, much ;ike the aesthetic of 'found footage' films. Both use their framing devices to ask the audience to play along; to pretend, for a moment, that they have stumbled upon this story in reality. Of course, a willing suspension of disbelief is easier when the story itself is compelling, and Dracula is excellent at building tension and characters.
The story itself is divided into three arcs. We start first with the journal of Jonathan Harker, an English solicitor traveling to Transylvania to aid one Count Dracula in purchasing property in England. He stays with the Count and realizes, slowly, that he is trapped with a monster. After growing increasingly desperate and fearing for his life, he tries to escape by scaling down the castle walls to the chamber where Dracula sleeps, and we leave him shortly thereafter, his fate unclear. We then cut to England, and learn about Jonathan's wife-to-be Mina, and her close friend Lucy. This second arc follows Lucy as she deals with personal drama involving a trio of suitors, and then her death at the hands of Count Dracula, who arrives shortly after the perspective shift. It is during the Count's slow predation of Lucy that one doctor Van Helsing arrives, and though he fails to save Lucy, he realizes what is occurring and begins to make a plan to track down and destroy the Count. The third arc centers around the group of Mina Harker, her now husband Jonathan, Van Helsing, and Lucy's former suitors all racing against the clock to hunt down Dracula and destroy him before he can retreat to the safety of Transylvania.
Jonathan Harker, though he doesn't do all that much after returning to England, does an effective job of setting the tone for the rest of the book. We barely see the Count after he reaches England, but through Jonathan's experience we see enough to understand how much of a threat he poses to Lucy and the others back in England. I would say this early portion is the only part of the book that is solidly 'horror' in tone. Jonathan is one man being held hostage by an increasingly inhuman host, and it ends with him going mad from fear.
The tension from Lucy's part of the story derives more from the human drama of her situation, rather than the immediate mortal peril. As Lucy has her blood drained and is turned into a vampire over the course of weeks, we see how it affects both her and those she loves. She has three suitors, and though she chooses only one man to be her husband the story does not use this as a set up for petty revenge of jealously. Instead the three men unite, and repeatedly work together with Van Helsing to try and save her. There is almost a sort of polyamory on display; each man, in turn, gives their blood to Lucy in a transfusion to keep her alive, and each expresses that they are willing to give their life for her, if they could. The novel even points this out when Lucy's would-be husband, Arthur, links the giving of his blood to being "his wife in the sight of God," and the Van Helsing informs him that they have all given blood. The dynamic is refreshing; it would have been all too easy to have the three suitors becomes jealous or work against each other, but instead they each recognize Lucy's desires, accept her decision, and are able to stay friends with her and each other.
In this second portion Dracula is portrayed as a force of nature: he arrives in an unnatural fog, appears only in the forms of a bat and a dog, and then plagues Lucy like an unseen disease until her strength finally fails. This analogy makes Lucy's portrayal much more... interesting, I guess is a good word, because she as a character has very little agency and does little beyond exist to be Dracula's victim. Van Helsing is the only one with a clue as to why she is wasting away, but he repeatedly decides not to share the information with anyone. He insists the women (such as Mina, Lucy's mother, and the maids in their house) not be told about what he is doing or why (such as lining Lucy's room with garlic); and each time he does so someone inadvertently removes or undoes the protections he has put in place. It is frankly comical the extant to which the men's obsession with chivalry kneecaps their efforts to protect their woman, and I believe that irony is intentional, given how Mina is portrayed.
By the time Lucy dies, Jonathan Harker has returned to England and married Mina. He is in denial about his experiences, but after Mina reviews his journal she realizes that they are linked to what happened to Lucy. She expresses this to Van Helsing, and he realizes it is beneficial to let Mina into his confidences; indeed that he must share all he knows with everyone involved. Although Mina is the next to fall victim to Dracula she does not sit idly by and waste away as Lucy did. Each time the men are at an impasse, or Dracula seems to have given them the slip, she is the one to deduce where he must be or to come up with some idea that lets them continue on.
When the men find Dracula attacking her, the scene reads as them walking in on an assault. Though she does declare herself "Unclean!" there is no other language or sentiment of
victim blaming; if we read it as an assault allegory, it is relatively empowering, as it does not relegate Mina to being only a victim. After Mina recovers from the shock she is able to use her link to Dracula to help track him down and, as I said, makes critical deductions that allow their group to track him down. As the men rush across Europe to reach Transylvania before the Count, Mina is with them, and even ventures with Van Helsing toward the Count's castle. Although she does not strike the killing blow, Mina is an agent in her own salvation. I would hardly call it 'progressive,' but it is without a doubt a refreshing portrayal of a female character that actively tries to empower her even as she is subsumed by a culture that wants to leave her behind and let the men handle things.
The book is far from perfect, of course. Many things have aged poorly, such as how it portrays anyone of 'lower' class with accents that imply they are illiterate or incapable of speaking 'proper' English (interestingly, Mina points out how their pursuit of the Count is only possible because of their status: "It made me think of the wonderful power of money!"); there are many stereotypes portrayed whenever we are in non-English lands; and although Mina specifically is well-written, the lack of agency given to most of the other woman who appear is grating, even though the novel seems to be somewhat aware that Helsing's chivalrous misogyny helped Lucy die in the first place. However, this may be a case where it is hard to tell irony from a genuine depiction of regressive ideas.
As far as classic go, Dracula has so far stood the test of time and is interesting in its own right; definitely worth a read. It is also worth mentioning that much of the mythological details from Dracula have not, in fact, been adopted by popular culture. So even if you are familiar with modern depictions, I am sure the book will read as its own interesting take on the mythos.
Dracual can be found wherever books are sold.
"Do you not think that there are things which you cannot understand,
and yet which are; that some people see things that others cannot?" -Van Helsing
