Pounding my head against a wall (Need Scholarly Criticism of Dracula!)

My professor insists that in my literary analysis of Bram Stoker's "Dracula" & Matt Reeve's "Let Me In," it's absolutely necesary that I read criticisms of both. I feel somewhat stupid looking for other people to tell me what to think about these, especially when I just want to draw conclusion about the primary sources (novels and screenplays are easy to get, yaknow?).

Regardless, she's speaking as if there is a vast sea of criticism about Dracula out there. I spent ten hours in the library today and came across one, ONE 1993 article that's abstract reads like a genuine criticism of the novel. It's in an issue of "The Spectator," and the snippet I can read actually seems like the author is flat-out trashing Dracula. I've love to read it, but our library databases don't store things past 1996.

Aside from this, all I can find are articles where people have chosen to analyize Dracula through the lenses of various psychological or social theories. That's interesting, I guess, but worthless to me.

I've had it pounded into me by my professor that Dracula isn't a great or deep book; that it's not "High Gothic," and she seems to think this is a common opinion--but I'm drawing blanks.

Google has nothing. Library databases have nothing. Does anyone know of an article or book ANYWHERE that's heavily critical of Dracula? I'm desperate at this point, because I'm locked into my thesis.

=(

Let Me In is a film, actually.

And I've exhausted that specific set of keywords. It was my first or second search. Those millions and millions of hits have absolutely nothing to do with literary criticism. Lots of them are about subjects like "the extent to which Stoker was influenced by the historical figure of Vlad the Impaler in the creation of his famous Count" or "the nineteenth-century lunar influenced, fanged-vampire exploits age-old links between serpents, female sexuality and menstruation."

That's the sort of thing I just can't use.

I'm trying to find articles that specifically say Dracula isn't good literature and then defend their position. I don't really care if someone thinks the book is marxist or if the Victorians were prudes. (It isn't. They were.)

The Lonely One said:

A professor shouldn't be making judgement calls like that, in my opinion; I certainly don't think Dracula wasn't a "good book" whatever the f@k that is.

I'm not even sure what "high gothic" literature is, but I don't think it precludes Dracula from being either good or bad.

That aside, why don't you try an online search through something like JSTOR? If you are at a university their library might give you access to online databases like this through their website.

From JSTOR I got 125 pages (3111 articles) of results on Dracula, and there are a ton of other databases out there especially for literature analysis.

Click to expand...

JSTOR is my least favorite, just because of how old the articles it has tend to be, but I still dragged my net through it.

I know how to use databases; my problems is that none of them are yielding articles I can use.

I'm maybe looking for new ideas on search terms, or less conventional places to look, or the names of specific books or articles that people remember reading.

Thanks!

It might help. I'd prefer artistic criticism, anyway. =)

I found one that suggests that the book is actually dealing with a deeply seated male repulsion of menstruation... sigh. Sometimes, a blood stain is just a blood stain!

The Lonely One said:

A professor shouldn't be making judgement calls like that, in my opinion; I certainly don't think Dracula wasn't a "good book" whatever the f@k that is.

Click to expand...

In my rush to get to my point, I'm afraid I may have misrepresented her point. I think she very specifically believes the characters are too shallow, especially compared to other Gothic Novels, such as Jane Eyre.

Give me Dracula any day. =)

Terie said:

Is this for your master's thesis? If so, don't you need to do a literature review? That's where you're going to find your literary criticism. Honestly, I think you're misinterpreting what your professor is asking. I think you need to sit down with her and get clarification.

Also? The film Let Me In is based on the novel Let the Right One In. It seems strange to me that you're comparing the novel Dracula to the film Let Me In with no apparent reference to the novel on which the film was based.

Click to expand...

shaldna said:

Let me in a remake of the Swedish film 'Let the Right one In' which was based on the book of the same name. Actually.

Click to expand...

I'm aware. I have a giant caveat in my second paragraph about the missing plotline.

Phaeal said:

What willietheshakes and kuwisdelu said: The articles you're dismissing ARE literary criticism. For views less pedantic and from fellow practitioners of the art of the weird, you might check out:

Stephen King, Danse Macabre.
H. P. Lovecraft, Supernatural Horror in Literature.

I'm also curious about why you're comparing Stoker's novel to a screenplay rather than to Lindqvist's excellent novel.

Click to expand...

Thanks! I don't think I would have realized that.

I just feel massively ingenious if I read a 35-page article about the sexual repression of the Victorians so I can make a three-sentence point. >_< So I'd much prefer to find an article that jibes better with the whole of my thesis.

Part of comparing Dracula to the screenplay is that everyone in my class has read it. =) I talk about all three versions of Let Me In, but am focusing on the Matt Reeves' version because I feel it's the one that will bring the novel to wider attention, and because it's an excellent product on its own that deserves some good attention, especially since there's a cult of people writing about how terrible it is against the incredibly lack-luster Swedish version of the film. (Which isn't bad, by any means, but doesn't have the production quality the story deserves, and doesn't deal with the gender sub-plot well at all. Kudos to Reeves on recognizing that he couldn't do it and just cutting it, frankly.)

Filigree said:

Another hand raised, in support of Kuwi's and Willie's take. 'Literary criticisms' are mostly going to delve into contrasts and comparisons, how the work mirrors some aspects of the culture that spawned it, and how the researcher's bias slants their perception of the work. They usually don't mean the latter, but look at reviews published for the same book many decades apart, and you'll see bias in action.

I took a quick look around (cursing at JSTOR and abandoning it like I always do.) There are hundreds of literary reviews and analysis papers on DRACULA. You don't need to do a deep research binge on this -- just pick out points that create a resonance with the Swedish novel, which seems more the focus of your paper.

Not to sound like an old lady, but when I had go through something similar in college, I had no internet. It was all library loan, and days searching through two uni archives, before I even had the fodder to start writing.

Sounds like the prof has a thing against spec fiction, though, so learn to speak her dialect and you'll be fine.

Click to expand...

Oh, I'm being all kinds of horrible, beyond whinging about not finding exactly what I want from databases that instantly sort electronic copies of material by content, title, author, abstract, tone, year, or any number of other things. You should see the deadline!

I also have, you know, physical books that I've checked out from the library--some of which I found and sent for the old-fashioned way. I just need more than what they're giving me. (And even if they gave me everything I need, I have a minimum source requirement.)

Amadan said:

It sounds like you are discovering that literary criticism is hard and doesn't involve answers that can be found with a Google search, and now you want help with your homework.

Click to expand...

When I discover I'm bad at sometime, I typically look for help from wiser people. I find it serves me well.