Freeland, Cynthia A. The Naked and the Undead: Evil and the Appeal of Horror. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2000.

In Chapter 4 of The Naked and the Undead: Evil and the Appeal of Horror, Freeland offers a feminist interpretation of Stoker’s novel, Dracula, and three of its film incarnations, including Browning’s Dracula (1931). She focuses on the sexual transformation of Dracula and the changing nature of his evil through his incarnations in these works.

This section of the book is ordered chronologically and charters the evolution of Dracula through Stoker’s original novel Dracula (1897), Browning’s Dracula (1931), Badham’s Dracula (1979), and Coppola’s Dracula (1992). In the novel, as in Nosferatu, Dracula is unremittingly evil, symbolized by his ugly, disgusting appearance, hairy palms and nostrils, and bad breath. He is an abomination of nature, a thing that causes revulsion and disgust. Freeland asserts that, for this Dracula, “the threat of gender transgression lurks amid scenes of erotic abnormality and rape.” She compares this Dracula to Browning’s, noting Dracula’s transformation into a “sex icon with continental flair.” Perhaps this sort of Dracula was more appealing to contemporary audiences. The nature of this Dracula’s evil was primarily that of a sexual threat and male predator, not that of the intrinsically foul. Freeland goes on to analyze more recent films, in which Dracula is increasingly portrayed in a sympathetic light and with a greater depth of character.

Holte, James Craig, ed. The Fantastic Vampire: Studies in the Children of the Night : Selected Essays from the Eighteenth International Conference on the Fantastic in the Arts. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002.

In Chapter 5, Ploeg discusses the evolution of Dracula in film, literature, and stage since Stoker’s novel.  He specifically focuses on the extent to which Stoker’s Dracula is “Gothic.”  He perceives the common labeling of Stoker’s Dracula as being Gothic as breeding misunderstanding as to the nature of Dracula.  Ploeg asserts that Stoker’s Dracula is not a Gothic novel, but that increasingly recent incarnations of Dracula have become increasingly Gothic (or neo-Gothic).  He cites Stoker’s nephew, who claims that “Dracula succeeds partly because it is not Gothic; to the Victorian it must have seemed darlingly modern.”  Ploeg believes that Stoker’s Dracula has far more in “common with the developing genre of the crime story.”

Ploeg concedes that Dracula is full of Gothic conventions, but asserts that Stoker does not rely on the Gothic belief in the supernatural to structure the novel.  The ultimate “debunking” of Dracula in the novel separates it from the film version.  Ploeg argues that in the novel, Dracula is presented more as an accident of nature than as a supernatural entity.  He cites Van Helsing’s explanation of Dracula as a unique phenomenon that arises “doubtless, [from] something magnetic or electric in some of these combinations of occult forces which work for physical life in strange way.”  The film Dracula is purely supernatural.  Unlike earlier films, such as The Cat and the Canary, Dracula (1931) offers no rational or logical explanation is for the horrors that occur.  This lack of explanation was new to American audiences, and likely contributed to the success of the film.  The palatability of the film’s more charismatic version of Dracula also played a part in this success.  Ploeg recounts the embellishments to the vampire since the Stoker’s original vampire:  “They fly by their own powers… they have incredible mental powers of control, telepathy, telekinesis… they are immortal… they battle with demons and alien gods… they are great seducers… they have culture, discernment, and style.”  The latter two are introduced by Lugosi’s Dracula.  Ploeg cites these as examples of the evolution of Dracula away from the scientific rationalization and mystery elements in Stoker’s novel and towards the realm of the Gothic supernatural.

Stoker, Bram. Dracula. Ed. Maud Ellmann. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.

The preface details the history of the Bram Stoker’s original novel Dracula (1897). It also discusses numerous critical interpretations of Dracula.

To truly understand the film Dracula (1931), it is necessary to understand Bram Stoker’s original novel Dracula. The preface to this edition details Stoker’s early life and his works up to the creation of the novel, which it refers to as “one of the most successful pot-boilers ever written.” For example, the preface discusses Stoker’s relationship to Henry Irving, who is often credited as being Stoker’s inspiration for Dracula, and how it mirrors the relationship between Harker and Dracula. Other influences in Dracula are discussed as well, such as the legend of Vlad the Impaler, the novel Carmilla, and folkloric vampires. Dracula is compared to contemporary literature such as War of the Worlds, which was published at almost the same time and also describes the invasion of a superior foe that feeds on human blood.

The preface also discusses numerous critical interpretations of Dracula. Dracula is read as an allegory of empire, of monopoly capital, of female emancipation, and of closeted homosexuality. He represents society’s anxieties about invasion, class conflict, and sexual perversion. Dracula is interpreted as a figure for venereal disease, menstruation, the feudal aristocracy, and the proletariat. The preface discusses Stoker’s ironic publication of The Censorship of Fiction (1908), which was a tirade against the evils of sexually suggestive novels. The author suggests that considering “some of the perversely erotic passages in Dracula, [The Censorship of Fiction] may seem hypocritical, but it suggests that Stoker himself was unaware of the innuendoes of his book, as indeed were his first reviewers, who said nothing of the sexual component of the novel. Like [Lucy], virgin in life and whore in death, Stoker was prude and pornographer at once.” Such was not the case for the makers of the film Dracula, which was advertised as “the story of the strangest passion the world has ever known,” and in which the use of Dracula’s vampirism as a cover for sexual desire is fully intended.