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.