MINA HARKER'S JOURNAL
30 September.--When we met in Dr. Seward's study two hours after dinner, which had been at six o'clock, we unconsciously formed a sort of board or committee. Professor Van Helsing took the head of the table, to which Dr. Seward motioned him as he came into the room. He made me sit next to him on his right, and asked me to act as secretary. Jonathan sat next to me. Opposite us were Lord Godalming, Dr. Seward, and Mr. Morris, Lord Godalming being next the Professor, and Dr. Seward in the center.
The Professor said, "I may, I suppose, take it that we are all acquainted with the facts that are in these papers." We all expressed assent, and he went on, "Then it were, I think, good that I tell you something of the kind of enemy with which we have to deal. I shall then make known to you something of the history of this man, which has been ascertained for me. So we then can discuss how we shall act, and can take our measure according.
"There are such beings as vampires, some of us have evidence that they exist. Even had we not the proof of our own unhappy experience, the teachings and the records of the past give proof enough for sane peoples. I admit that at the first I was sceptic. Were it not that through long years I have trained myself to keep an open mind, I could not have believed until such time as that fact thunder on my ear.`See! See! I prove, I prove.' Alas! Had I known at first what now I know, nay, had I even guess at him, one so precious life had been spared to many of us who did love her. But that is gone, and we must so work, that other poor souls perish not, whilst we can save. The nosferatu do not die like the bee when he sting once. He is only stronger, and being stronger, have yet more power to work evil. This vampire which is amongst us is of himself so strong in person as twenty men, he is of cunning more than mortal, for his cunning be the growth of ages, he have still the aids of necromancy, which is, as his etymology imply, the divination by the dead, and all the dead that he can come nigh to are for him at command , he is brute, and more than brute, he is devil in callous, and the heart of him is not, he can, within his range, direct the elements, the storm, the fog, the thunder, he can command all the meaner things, the rat, and the owl, and the bat, the moth, and the fox, and the wolf, he can grow and become small, and he can at times vanish and come unknown. How then are we to begin our strike to destroy him? How shall we find his where, and having found it, how can we destroy? My friends, this is much, it is a terrible task that we undertake, and there may be consequence to make the brave shudder. For if we fail in this our fight he must surely win, and then where end we? Life is nothings, I heed him not. But to fail here, is not mere life or death. It is that we become as him, that we henceforward become foul things of the night like him, without heart or conscience, preying on the bodies and the souls of those we love best. To us forever are the gates of heaven shut, for who shall open them to us again? We go on for all time abhorred by all, a blot on the face of God's sunshine, an arrow in the side of Him who died for man. But we are face to face with duty, and in such case must we shrink? For me, I say no, but then I am old, and life, with his sunshine, his fair places, his song of birds, his music and his love, lie far behind. You others are young. Some have seen sorrow, but there are fair days yet in store. What say you?"
Whilst he was speaking, Jonathan had taken my hand. I feared, oh so much, that the appalling nature of our danger was overcoming him when I saw his hand stretch out, but it was life to me to feel its touch, so strong, so self reliant, so resolute. A brave man's hand can speak for itself, it does not even need a woman's love to hear its music. When the Professor had done speaking my husband looked in my eyes, and I in his, there was no need for speaking between us.
"I answer for Mina and myself," he said.
"Count me in, Professor," said Mr. Quincey Morris, laconically as usual.
"I am with you," said Lord Godalming, "for Lucy's sake, if for no other reason."
Dr. Seward simply nodded.
The Professor stood up and, after laying his golden crucifix on the table, held out his hand on either side. I took his right hand, and Lord Godalming his left, Jonathan held my right with his left and stretched across to Mr.Morris. So as we all took hands our solemn compact was made. I felt my heart icy cold, but it did not even occur to me to draw back. We resumed our places, and Dr. Van Helsing went on with a sort of cheerfulness which showed that the serious work had begun. It was to be taken as gravely, and in as businesslike a way, as any other transaction of life.
"Well, you know what we have to contend against, but we too, are not without strength. We have on our side power of combination, a power denied to the vampire kind, we have sources of science, we are free to act and think, and the hours of the day and the night are ours equally. In fact, so far as our powers extend, they are unfettered, and we are free to use them. We have self devotion in a cause and an end to achieve which is not a selfish one. These things are much. Now let us see how far the general powers arrayed against us are restrict, and how the individual cannot .In fine, let us consider the limitations of the vampire in general, and of this one in particular.
"All we have to go upon are traditions and superstitions. These do not at the first appear much, when the matter is one of life and death, nay of more than either life or death. Yet must we be satisfied, in the first place because we have to be, no other means is at our control, and secondly, because, after all these things, tradition and superstition, are everything. Does not the belief in vampires rest for others, though not, alas! for us, on them! A year ago which of us would have received such a possibility, in the midst of our scientific, sceptical, matter-of-fact nineteenth century? We even scouted a belief that we saw justified under our very eyes. Take it, then, that the vampire, and the belief in his limitations and his cure, rest for the moment on the same base. For, let me tell you, he is known everywhere that men have been. In old Greece, in old Rome, he flourish in Germany all over, in France, in India, even in the Chersonese, and in China, so far from us in all ways, there even is he, and the peoples for him at this day. He have follow the wake of the berserker Icelander, the devil-begotten Hun, the Slav, the Saxon, the Magyar.
"So far, then, we have all we may act upon, and let me tell you that very much of the beliefs are justified by what we have seen in our own so unhappy experience. The vampire live on, and cannot die by mere passing of the time, he can flourish when that he can fatten on the blood of the living. Even more, we have seen amongst us that he can even grow younger, that his vital faculties grow strenuous, and seem as though they refresh themselves when his special pabulum is plenty.
"But he cannot flourish without this diet, he eat not as others. Even friend Jonathan, who lived with him for weeks, did never see him eat, never! He throws no shadow, he make in the mirror no reflect, as again Jonathan observe. He has the strength of many of his hand, witness again Jonathan when he shut the door against the wolves, and when he help him from the diligence too. He can transform himself to wolf, as we gather from the ship arrival in Whitby, when he tear open the dog, he can be as bat, as Madam Mina saw him on the window at Whitby, and as friend John saw him fly from this so near house, and as my friend Quincey saw him at the window of Miss Lucy.
"He can come in mist which he create, that noble ship's captain proved him of this, but, from what we know, the distance he can make this mist is limited, and it can only be round himself.
"He come on moonlight rays as elemental dust, as again Jonathan saw those sisters in the castle of Dracula. He become so small, we ourselves saw Miss Lucy, ere she was at peace, slip through a hairbreadth space at the tomb door. He can, when once he find his way, come out from anything or into anything, no matter how close it be bound or even fused up with fire, solder you call it. He can see in the dark, no small power this, in a world which is one half shut from the light. Ah, but hear me through.
"He can do all these things, yet he is not free. Nay, he is even more prisoner than the slave of the galley, than the madman in his cell. He cannot go where he lists, he who is not of nature has yet to obey some of nature's laws, why we know not. He may not enter anywhere at the first, unless there be some one of the household who bid him to come, though afterwards he can come as he please. His power ceases, as does that of all evil things, at the coming of the day. Only at certain times can he have limited freedom. If he be not at the place whither he is bound, he can only change himself at noon or at exact sunrise or sunset. These things we are told, and in this record of ours we have proof by inference. Thus, whereas he can do as he will within his limit,when he have his earth-home,his coffin-home, his hell-home, the place unhallowed, as we saw when he went to the grave of the suicide at Whitby, still at other time he can only change when the time come. It is said, too, that he can only pass running water at the slack or the flood of the tide. Then there are things which so afflict him that he has no power, as the garlic that we know of, and as for things sacred, as this symbol, my crucifix, that was amongst us even now when we resolve, to them he is nothing, but in their presence he take his place far off and silent with respect. There are others, too, which I shall tell you of, lest in our seeking we may need them.
"The branch of wild rose on his coffin keep him that he move not from it, a sacred bullet fired into the coffin kill him so that he be true dead, and as for the stake through him, we know already of its peace, or the cut off head that giveth rest. We have seen it with our eyes. "Thus when we find the habitation of this man-that-was, we can confine him to his coffin and destroy him, if we obey what we know. But he is clever. I have asked my friend Arminius, of Buda-Pesth University, to make his record, and from all the means that are, he tell me of what he has been. He must, indeed, have been that Voivode Dracula who won his name against the Turk, over the great river on the very frontier of Turkey-land. If it be so, then was he no common man, for in that time, and for centuries after,he was spoken of as the cleverest and the most cunning, as well as the bravest of the sons of the `land beyond the forest.' That mighty brain and that iron resolution went with him to his grave, and are even now arrayed against us. The Draculas were, says Arminius, a great and noble race, though now and again were scions who were held by their coevals to have had dealings with the Evil One. They learned his secrets in the Scholomance, amongst the mountains over Lake Hermanstadt, where the devil claims the tenth scholar as his due. In the records are such words as `stregoica' witch, `ordog' and `pokol' Satan and hell, and in one manuscript this very Dracula is spoken of as `wampyr,'which we all understand too well. There have been from the loins of this very one great men and good women, and their graves make sacred the earth where alone this foulness can dwell. For it is not the least of its terrors that this evil thing is rooted deep in all good, in soil barren of holy memories it cannot rest." Whilst they were talking Mr.Morris was looking steadily at the window, and he now got up quietly,and went out of the room. There was a little pause, and then the Professor went on.
"And now we must settle what we do. We have here much data, and we must proceed to lay out our campaign. We know from the inquiry of Jonathan that from the castle to Whitby came fifty boxes of earth, all of which were delivered at Carfax, we also know that at least some of these boxes have been removed. It seems to me, that our first step should be to ascertain whether all the rest remain in the house beyond that wall where we look today, or whether any more have been removed. If the latter, we must trace . . ." Here we were interrupted in a very startling way. Outside the house came the sound of a pistol shot, the glass of the window was shattered with a bullet, which ricochetting from the top of the embrasure, struck the far wall of the room. I am afraid I am at heart a coward, for I shrieked out. The men all jumped to their feet, Lord Godalming flew over to the window and threw up the sash. As he did so we heard Mr. Morris' voice without, "Sorry! I fear I have alarmed you. I shall come in and tell you about it." A minute later he came in and said, "It was an idiotic thing of me to do, and I ask your pardon, Mrs. Harker, most sincerely, I fear I must have frightened you terribly. But the fact is that whilst the Professor was talking there came a big bat and sat on the window sill. I have got such a horror of the damned brutes from recent events that I cannot stand them, and I went out to have a shot, as I have been doing of late of evenings, whenever I have seen one. You used to laugh at me for it then, Art."
"Did you hit it?" asked Dr. Van Helsing.
"I don't know, I fancy not, for it flew away into the wood." Without saying any more he took his seat, and the Professor began to resume his statement.
"We must trace each of these boxes, and when we are ready, we must either capture or kill this monster in his lair, or we must, so to speak, sterilize the earth, so that no more he can seek safety in it.Thus in the end we may find him in his form of man between the hours of noon and sunset, and so engage with him when he is at his most weak. And now for you, Madam Mina,this night is the end until all be well. You are too precious to us to have such risk. When we part tonight, you no more must question. We shall tell you all in good time. We are men and are able to bear, but you must be our star and our hope, and we shall act all the more free that you are not in the danger, such as we are." All the men, even Jonathan, seemed relieved, but it did not seem to me good that they should brave danger and, perhaps lessen their safety, strength being the best safety, through care of me, but their minds were made up, and though it was a bitter pill for me to swallow, I could say nothing, save to accept their chivalrous care of me. Mr. Morris resumed the discussion, "As there is no time to lose, I vote we have a look at his house right now. Time is everything with him, and swift action on our part may save another victim."
I own that my heart began to fail me when the time for action came so close, but I did not say anything, for I had a greater fear that if I appeared as a drag or a hindrance to their work,they might even leave me out of their counsels altogether. They have now gone off to Carfax, with means to get into the house.
Manlike, they had told me to go to bed and sleep, as if a woman can sleep when those she loves are in danger!I shall lie down, and pretend to sleep, lest Jonathan have added anxiety about me when he returns.
What gives with Quincey Morris? A Texan who shoots a bat at close range and misses!!!
Posted by: Elizabeth | September 30, 2005 at 11:23 AM
"It is that we become as him, that we henceforward become foul things of the night like him, without heart or conscience, preying on the bodies and the souls of those we love best."
When vampire wanabees proclaim how much they would like to become vampires, I suspect that they are thinking how it wouldn't be so bad to gain longevity in exchange for having to suck blood from someone they hardly know. But when it is looked at in the way that van Helsing describes "...preying on the bodies and the souls of those we love best...", I wonder if the vampabees feel the same when they imagine themselves sucking that blood from the necks of their children, their mothers, their sisters and brothers, their best friends and damning their souls, too, to an existence of eternal unrest?
THAT is the vampire of Stoker's novel, not the glittery, superpowered playboys of Ricean creation.
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 12:07 PM
"I took his right hand, and Lord Godalming his left, Jonathan held my right with his left and stretched across to Mr.Morris. So as we all took hands our solemn compact was made."
I can't help but think of the sealing of the fellowship in _The Lord of the Rings_ and of the quest on which both groups are about to set foot.
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 12:11 PM
"[The vampire]...flourish in Germany all over, in France, in India, even in the Chersonese..."
According to my dictionary, "the Chersonese" refers to any of a number of peninsulas, e.g., Jutland, Malay, Crimea, or Gallipoli. Any idea to which Stoker is referring?
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 12:16 PM
"He can transform himself to wolf, as we gather from the ship arrival in Whitby, when he tear open the dog..."
It may have already been said, but when Dracula first landed at Whitby, a large mastiff [dogs bred for their huge jaws] was found dead with its throat torn away and its belly slit open. Apparently, it had been fighting with Dracula.
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 12:24 PM
"...he can only change himself at noon or at exact sunrise or sunset..."
This may stem from the belief (in Gypsy lore, IIRC) that at certain moments of the day or year (e.g., noon, midnight, equinox, new year's), when the world changes from one day or time to another, these moments are suspensions in time and create portholes through which spirits can move between both worlds and wield their powers.
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 02:19 PM
"He must, indeed, have been that Voivode Dracula who won his name against the Turk, over the great river on the very frontier of Turkey-land."
Just how much did Stoker know about the voivode from whom he took the name "Dracula" for his vampire?
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 02:27 PM
"What gives with Quincey Morris? A Texan who shoots a bat at close range and misses!!"
Elementary, my dear Elizabeth. Had Quincey killed the bat, the story would have ended right there, assuming, of course, that Stoker meant for the bat to be Dracula. Another possibility is that the hotshot Texan DID hit the bat but, it being Dracula, the bullet did not hurt him.
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 02:37 PM
Sorry about the number of comments, but this is one of my favorite passages.
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 02:38 PM
One of my favorites too!
Re Chersonese, he's referring to Malay peninsula. His notes contain references to a book entitled "The Golden Chersonese" bi Isabella Bird (has a section about vampires).
Posted by: Elizabeth | September 30, 2005 at 04:53 PM
How much did Stoker know about the historical figure (the voivode Dracula) from whom he borrowed the name? This is one of my primary areas of research. It irks me no end to hear the incessant repetition of the Big Fallacy in Dracula studies: that Vlad the Impaler (the name by which the "voivode Dracula" was and is best known) was the inspiration for Stoker's novel, or that Stoker based his Count on him. Nonsense! Rubbish!
What we KNOW that Stoker knew is precisely what is in the novel (identical to what appears in his Notes): that there was a Wallachian voivode named Dracula who fought against the Turks in the 15th century, had momentary success against them, and was succeeded by an unworthy brother. Stoker liked the name because his source stated in a footnote that the word Dracula meant "devil."
That's it. There is not the slightest bit of evidence that Stoker knew that the voivode's name was Vlad, that he was infamous for impaling, what he looked like, the legends that grew up around him, etc ad nauseam. Some scholars have even invented "evidence" to "prove" their flimsy theories (eg that Vlad once dipped bread in the blood of his victims and slurped it down, technically making him a vampire and thus appealing to Stoker). The mind boggles!
I could go on and on - but I won't. If you want to read more, go to www.blooferland.com/drc follow the link for "Bram Stoker and Dracula: Miscellaneous Articles" and read my "Filing for Divorce." If still not convinced, buy my book Dracula: Sense & Nonsense.
In case you haven't noticed - I have strong views on this topic! :)
Posted by: Elizabeth | September 30, 2005 at 06:34 PM
"...that Vlad the Impaler...was the inspiration for Stoker's novel, or that Stoker based his Count on him."
It certainly does give a very different interpretation and feel to the novel to think that Stoker based his vampire on Vlad Tepes as opposed to thinking that Stoker dreamed up his vampire story and found a nice name as he was nearing the end. To some, that difference might be a small thing, but it's the difference between Stoker being an historical fiction writer versus a writer who created a fictional character all on his own. Plus, to think that the vampire Dracula originated in Stoker's mind, not from an historical model, makes Dracula even more horrific!
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 06:53 PM
"found a nice name as he was nearing the end"
Not quite accurate. He found the name "Dracula" early in the process - in Whitby in the summer of 1890. But he had by this time already decided to write a vampire novel and had selected a name (Count Wampyr).
The decision to use "Dracula" as the title of the novel, however, came very near the end - just before the book went to press.
Posted by: Elizabeth | September 30, 2005 at 08:12 PM
"He found the name "Dracula" early in the process - in Whitby in the summer of 1890."
Hmmm. Then maybe there's some merit to the theory that he "based" his fictional Dracula on the real one.
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 08:56 PM
Re basing the Count on Vlad:
How could he have based his character on a historical figure about whom he knew hardly anything? Please elaborate.
A much stronger case can be made that he based Count Dracula on the Gothic villain, on earlier literary vampires, even on Henry Irving.
Posted by: Elizabeth | September 30, 2005 at 09:05 PM
"How could he have based his character on a historical figure about whom he knew hardly anything? Please elaborate."
Well, he knew that "there was a Wallachian voivode who fought against the Turks in the 15th century, had momentary success against them, and was succeeded by an unworthy brother," and he knew that the voivode's name was "Dracula" and that it meant "devil." All these things made it into the novel at some point, so it could be argued that Stoker did "base" his character somewhat on that voivode known as Dracula.
But is that enough to say that the voivode Dracula provided the "inspiration" for Stoker's vampire? I don't think so. To provide the inspiration, the character of Vlad Dracula must have been present in Stoker's mind prior to his conception of a vampire from a foreign place coming to play havoc on English society, and that it was Stoker's musings about this historical Dracula that led him to invision his fictional vampire, and I don't think the evidence shows that, does it?
I would be more prepared to argue that Stoker got his idea from earlier literary vampires such as Carmilla or Lord Ruthven. Likewise, Stoker may have borrowed aspects of Henry Irving for his vampire, but I think Stoker would be enraged to hear that Henry Irving "inspired" his creation.
So by "based," I mean that Stoker used what he had learned about the Wallachian voivode Dracula to give a historical presence to the fictional character he was creating, but that is not the same thing as saying that the Wallachian voivode Dracula inspired Stoker to write a story about a vampire, which is what I think certain Dracula scholars would have us believe.
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 10:15 PM
Re "based". I think what we are dealing here with is a matter of semantics. My dictionary defines the verb "base" as "to form a foundation". To me, to "base" A on B suggests that "B" serves as the foundation of A.
Let's look at it this way. If Stoker had not come across the name "Dracula", the novel would most likely have been much as it is now - with the exclusion of the brief references to the "voivode Dracula who crossed the Danube, fought the Turks", etc. In other words, the foundation (base) would not be significantly affected.
Posted by: Elizabeth | September 30, 2005 at 10:55 PM
Re: "based"
Using your definition of "based," I totally agree. I would argue that it could also be said that the historical attributes given to Stoker's Dracula are "based" on a Wallachian voivode who also went by the name of Dracula, but the argument would be purely one of academic semantics. Besides, we both are "based" in the same argument that Stoker did not fashion his vampire Dracula on the voivode. He merely borrowed a few features, none of which are particularly important to the story...other than the name "Dracula."
Posted by: Baby Jinx | September 30, 2005 at 11:09 PM
Is there anything in Stoker's notes to indicate the growth of his thought processes as he was writing _Dracula_, e.g., the dates of when he read such-and-such a book or came up with such-and-such an idea?
Posted by: Baby Jinx | October 01, 2005 at 01:43 AM
Re Stoker's Notes. While several of the pages are dated (or dates can be determined), many are not. In the case of others, we can apply reasonably accurate dates based on external evidence (eg notes taken while he was on vacation in Whitby during the summer of 1890). In one case, the notes are jotted on a sheet of stationery from a Philadelphia hotel (where, we can trace, he stayed during the winter of 1896).
As important as they are, the Notes pose distinct limitations: several undated sheets make it extremely difficult to establish a clear-cut sequence in the planning stages of the novel; many sheets show no indication as to where they were written; it is impossible to determine when he read many of the individual source-texts that he lists; several sheets contain revisions that were apparently added later; the handwriting is often illegible; the Notes may be incomplete (ie additional pages may have been lost).
But the Notes remain the single most important primary source of information about the writing of "Dracula". Scholars ignore them at their peril.
Posted by: Elizabeth | October 01, 2005 at 07:29 AM
Re: But he had by this time already decided to write a vampire novel and had selected a name (Count Wampyr).
I doubt it. Think of the previous English language vampire stories, some of which were very popular. The word 'vampire' wasn't strange to English speaking people, they knew what it meant.
Why would Stoker name his vampire "Vampire?" It would be like writing "Mr. Private Detective was sitting in his office cleaning his nails with a pocket knife when a soft warning knock came on the door. The door opened and Ms.Knockout Babe, Detective's secretary came in."
I suggest that he used Wampyre as a placeholder.
Posted by: James Knoppow | December 11, 2005 at 01:32 PM