Q # 6: Are the characters consistent in their actions? Adequately motivated? Plausible? Does the author successfully avoid stock characters?

Throughout the book, I would have to say that most of the main plot characters are consistent in their actions. They all show a wide range of emotion in role, seem adequately motivated for various reasons, and above all, they seem plausible. However, like all things in life, there are exceptions to the rule. Arthur and Quincey Morris, particularly the latter, are stock characters that serve no other purpose but a) to provide financial support for the group, and b) be heroic-- in that order, respectively. Both are motivated, as her suitors, by the death of Lucy Westenra who dies and tragically returns as a vampire, but their desire to hunt the vampire down always seems to be in a tag-along fashion. Though Quincey does deliver the killing blow to Dracula, he serves nothing to the plot but be the idealized American male; he is strong and brave, and doesn't do anything else, really, except those things. Only once that I can remember throughout the book does he actually make a suggestion that the group uses, and he is perhaps the only character that isn't consistent in his actions. One minute he speaks overdramatic Texan, and the next he speaks Victorian English. If one pays attention to Quincey Morris too much, it might just ruin the whole book for them. Arthur, as well, rarely speaking throughout the book, just funds the group to carry out their quest against Dracula-- only speaking when he mourns Lucy's deaths. If it were not for these characters, or if they were constructed more meaningfully, perhaps the book would be better.

Q #5: If the pov is that of one of the characters, does this character have any limitations which affect his/her interpretation of events or persons?

Throughout Bram Stoker's Dracula, the various points of view all have limitations; some of these limitations are larger than others, but this is still very important to the plot. It is the gaps in the plot that certain characters cannot relay that make the book interesting, because the reader knows that another character will fill them in. This is particularly important for Mina Harker and Lucy Westenra, who both get bitten by the Count and are doomed to become vampires. As they eventually whittle into a form that is either too weak or too transformed to write, or they cannot see the changes in them that others can, Dr. Seward or Jonathan Harker must describe the story from a different perspective so that the reader can get all of the details. The epistolary format of this book makes this very easy to do for Bram Stoker, and it becomes very interesting when you hear different characters relay the same event in completely different ways.

Q # 4: 2. Does the theme reinforce or oppose popular notions of life? Does it furnish a new insight or refresh or deepen an old one?

In this book, the theme of superstition vs. science opposes popular notions of life. Though in no part in the book is science denounced, superstition is definitely endorsed in a way that opposes popular belief. In order to challenge this in a way that readers relate, the book is comprised of rational, straight-minded thinkers, such as Jonathan Harker and Dr. Seward-- two people who have never believed in vampires or the undead in their lives. Like most people in the time, and even moreso today, they are bewildered when an intelligent and respectable scientist such as Dr Van Helsing describes to them what that an ages-old vampire has just sucked the life out of Lucy Westenra. Jonathan is the only one in the story who actually believes Van Helsing immediately, but only because he considered himself mad after having lived in the count's castle for over a month. Dr. Seward is a little more resistant to superstition, and Van Helsing changes his mind by taking him to Lucy's tomb and seeing for himself the horrors they are dealing with. Since Van Helsing boasts an exceedingly open mind that is willing to live out no solution to a problem, he helps diagnose Lucy and almost saves her. Nevertheless, he prepares the characters for the challenge that is ahead by rooting out the cause of their perils. This idea, to me, is deepening an old insight in which the supernatural must be respected and feared for one's own safety.

Q # 3: What pov does the story use? Is it consistent in its use of pov? If shifts are made, are they justified?

In this book, Dr. Seward, Jonathan Harker, Mina Harker, Lucy Westenra, and Van Helsing (at short times) all share their points of view by the usage of the epistolary (letter and journal) format of the book. All of these are told first person, obviously, and the book never deviates from this unless the author adds newspaper articles from the area surrounding the story. This is mainly for the purpose of revealing parts of the plot that the main characters cannot witness themselves, such as the ship that is travelling to Whitby with Dracula's boxes. Other than in this case, the book is very consistent in its usage of point of view. Because of this, we are able to understand the ideas that are happening in the book from many perspectives. It is also necessary for this to happen, as the characters that are turning into vampires (Mina and Lucy) describe the feelings they have during their slow transformation, while the onlooking characters who are not experiencing the pangs of vampirism can describe them from an outsider's perspective. This plays an important role when the characters are too weak to write, or are silent for various reasons. In addition to all of this, the characters all have markedly different personalities, which make their tellings of the plot all very different. This is very interesting, because on many occasions the same story is told for parallel perspectives.

Q # 1: Does the story have a theme? What is it? Is it implicit or explicit? Is it universal? Does it make you see things in a new or different way?

The book Dracula by Bram Stoker certainly does have a theme, and the one I recognized was the importance of superstition in relation to science. This is evident throughout the book as the group is slowly forced to realize that Lucy Westenra has been bitten by a vampire. Only Dr. Van Helsing is willing to recognize this idea because he boasts an exceedingly open mind, but the rest of the group is very wary of this concept. For example, Jonathan Harker, who lived in Dracula's castle for over a month and saw horrifying things there, was unable to accept or believe what he saw simply because he lived an extremely rational life, and was led to regard monsters such as vampires as superstitious nonsense. This led him to think himself mad and develop brain fever. Similar to this was Dr. John Seward, who also refused to believe that his patient could be a vampire, until he witnessed her as an undead himself. These two examples clearly illustrate the theme, which certainly does make me see things in a different way. Perhaps phenomena that people claim to witness every day, such as ghosts, are yet to be explained by science, though disregarded by the general population in much the same way as the characters in the book naturally disregarded vampires as not being real. This theme is implicit, because I extrapolated it from the book, which does not say this theme directly.