The Universal Vampire: Origins and Evolution of a Legend – review

Editors: Barbara Brodman & James E Doan

First published: 2013

Contains spoilers

The blurb: Since the publication of John Polidori’s The Vampyre (1819), the vampire has been a mainstay of Western culture, appearing consistently in literature, art, music (notably opera), film, television, graphic novels and popular culture in general. Even before its entrance into the realm of arts and letters in the early nineteenth century, the vampire was a feared creature of Eastern European folklore and legend, rising from the grave at night to consume its living loved ones and neighbors, often converting them at the same time into fellow vampires.

A major question exists within vampire scholarship: to what extent is this creature a product of European cultural forms, or is the vampire indeed a universal, perhaps even archetypal figure? In this collection of sixteen original essays, the contributors shed light on this question. One essay traces the origins of the legend to the early medieval Norse Draugr, an “undead” creature who reflects the underpinnings of Dracula, the latter first appearing as a vampire in Anglo-Irish Bram Stoker’s 1897 novel, Dracula.

In addition to these investigations of the Western mythic, literary and historic traditions, other essays in this volume move outside Europe to explore vampire figures in Native American and Mesoamerican myth and ritual, as well as the existence of similar vampiric traditions in Japanese, Russian and Latin American art, theatre, literature, film, and other cultural productions.

The female vampire looms large, beginning with the Sumerian goddess Lilith, including the nineteenth-century Carmilla, and moving to vampiresses in twentieth-century film, literature, and television series. Scientific explanations for vampires and werewolves constitute another section of the book, including eighteenth-century accounts of unearthing, decapitation and cremation of suspected vampires in Eastern Europe. The vampire’s beauty, attainment of immortality and eternal youth are all suggested as reasons for its continued success in contemporary popular culture.

The review: I do like books like this but they come with two problems. One is the price tag – though I understand that an academic piece is not going to sell as well and that influences the tag. The second is a variance of quality between contributors’ pieces and the Universal Vampire is no exception when it comes to that.

Looking at the blurb, for a moment, the premise of the book is looking for universal roots within the vampire genre. The book doesn’t actually do that, in totality at least, though it does take us on an international journey.

However the first chapter, Draugula by Matthias Teichert, certainly did this and I find the exploration of both Draugr and Revenant myths and legends fascinating. It is clear that there are heavy similarities to the vampire myth that developed amongst the Slavic nations. The biggest difference was the vampire seemed to have a fixed focus on blood drinking (often, it seems, assumed due to the corpse state when exhumed) and the other types not so much. Blood drinking and flesh eating do appear within some of the myths, but not so much in this essay, which nonetheless was informative and thought provoking.

Flying to the other end of the spectrum, the piece Biomedical Origins of Vampirism by Edward O. Keith could have been left out of the book altogether. A tired re-hash of the discredited porphyria theory (with an almost embarrassed admission that the theory does not fit) is followed by equally tired looks at Pellegra and Rabies. This misses the point that illness as a source of the myth does not rest with a condition suffered by the accused vampire (as they are dead by the time an assumption of vampirism is reached) rather it is with the victims. As such this chapter managed to completely avoid tuberculosis – a disease that we know certainly did influence folk opinion in the 19th century American panics. It was amusing, therefore, that the next chapter, Evidence for the Undead by Leo Ruickbie, shot down Keith’s chapter in a couple of paragraphs. The Keith Chapter also showed a lack of remembrance or knowledge of Dracula with suggestions that the Count avoided daylight (he certainly was abroad in daylight and one of the supporting quotes for this assertion is misattributed to the Count when it was Van Helsing’s dialogue) and only preyed on women prior to their marriage (Mina was married before she attracted the Count’s nightly visitations).

If that chapter is the low point in the book there was a Lilith chapter that was pretty light and a view that Stoker (and subsequently Dracula scholars) got details of Transylvanian society and cuisine wrong was met with a mighty shrug of the shoulders as it is clear that Stoker only used travel books to research that setting. In honesty the argument was very sound but the point of the debate was lost on me.

As well as the Draugula chapter and Ruickbie chapter particular favourites included a chapter by Ridenhour comparing Carmilla and Let the Right One In and Ruthner’s look at Visum et Repertum, the report of the Arnold Paole case.

All in all, for the full volume 7.5 out of 10.

The Poet and the Vampyre – review

Author: Andrew McConnell Stott

First Published: 2014

Contains spoilers

The blurb: Love affairs, literary rivalries, and the supernatural collide in an inspired journey to Lake Geneva, where Byron, the Shelleys, and John Polidori come together to create literature’s greatest monsters.

In the spring of 1816, Lord Byron was the greatest poet of his generation and the most famous man in Britain, but his personal life was about to erupt. Fleeing his celebrity, notoriety, and debts, he sought refuge in Europe, taking his young doctor with him. As an inexperienced medic with literary aspirations of his own, Doctor John Polidori could not believe his luck.

That summer another literary star also arrived in Geneva. With Percy Bysshe Shelley came his lover, Mary, and her step-sister, Claire Clairmont. For the next three months, this party of young bohemians shared their lives, charged with sexual and artistic tensions. It was a period of extraordinary creativity: Mary Shelley started writing Frankenstein, the gothic masterpiece of Romantic fiction; Byron completed ChildeHarold’s Pilgrimage, his epic poem; and Polidori would begin The Vampyre, the first great vampire novel.

It was also a time of remarkable drama and emotional turmoil. For Byron and the Shelleys, their stay by the lake would serve to immortalize them in the annals of literary history. But for Claire and Polidori, the Swiss sojourn would scar them forever. 16 pages of color and B&W photographs.

The review: The story of the night at the Villa Diodati has been much told and, in truth, it was a focal point that led to two of the enduring horror figures – Frankenstein and the vampire. With the secondary title The Curse of Byron and the Birth of Literature's Greatest Monsters, this book is written in a way that makes it feel almost like a biography rather than a reference work. The end of the book is packed with notes – though strangely these numbered notes do not have corresponding numbering in the body of the text. There is also an extensive bibliography – though, again, the actual body of text does not contain citations. This approach lets the text flow, but makes it disjointed (at best) as a reference work.

However, whilst examining all the primary characters, I did like the fact that Stott offered more clarity than most offer to both Polidori and Claremont. Indeed to me these two where the primary focus of the work.

Polidori was my personal focus and it was great to see more of his works than just the Vampyre being considered. It is interesting to note that Polidori used the symbolism of a vampire bat in his poem Chatterton to his Sister:

 “As vampire bat excites a breeze 
 Soft, cooling, lulling to repose 
The child whose life’s blood quickly flows, 
Feeding the filthy beast with all 
A mother’s fondest name may call.”

Another vampiric connection I noticed was the fact that Shelley was accused of being a vampire by his estranged wife Harriet (“The man I once loved is dead. This is a vampire.”)

I also noticed a mention of zielverkoopers, the notes in the book suggest that these “soul sellers” were gangs in the habit of pressganging farmers into service for the Dutch East Indiamen but Campbell’s Guide through Belgium (1815) suggested they were accused of murdering victims and draining their blood to sell – Stott’s endnote on the subject wonders whether this was a vampiric urban legend.

So, a nice focus and a good read. The lack of marrying up notes (and citations) in text was frustrating but the prose is sprightly, the subject interesting and the book deserves 7.5 out of 10.

Frankenstein and the Vampyre: A Dark and Stormy Night – review

Director: Philip Smith

Release date: 2014

The story of the events at Villa Diodati on the shore of Lake Geneva in 1816 was the subject of this dramatised documentary shown by the BBC over Halloween 2014.

Villa Diodati

Of course the story has been fully dramatised several times most poetically with the film Gothic and also in the film Rowing With the Wind (which I did not feature on the blog as the Polidori aspects were absolutely marginalised).

Hannah Taylor Gordon as Mary Shelley

The reason, of course, that the events are so very important is because, at the urging of Byron (Rob Heaps), the residents of Diodati had a story writing competition that eventually led to the composition of Frankenstein by Mary Shelley (Hannah Taylor Gordon) and the Vampyre: A Tale by Polidori (Sam Swann). As such it spawned two of the pillars of modern horror, one of which being the first English language vampire prose.

Neil Gaiman

This documentary tracks the events and is narrated by Claire Foy (Vampire Academy) and has commentators such as Neil Gaiman involved. The documentary does tell us the bare bones of the story (though perhaps more could have been said about the origins of Ruthven’s name amongst other things). There was nothing within it that was factually incorrect, that I noticed, and is thus a perfectly good primer for those unfamiliar with the story but offered no new or keen insights for those of us more conversant with the events. 6 out of 10.

The imdb page is here.

The Theology of Dracula: Reading the Book of Stoker as Sacred Text – review

Author: Noël Montague-Étienne Rarignac

First published: 2012

Contains spoilers

The Blurb: Few books have so seized the public imagination as Bram Stoker's Dracula, even more popular now than when it was first published in 1897. This critical work represents a rereading of the horror classic as a Christian text, one that alchemizes Platonism, Gnosticism, Mariology and Christian resurrection in a tale that explores the grotesque. Of particular interest is the way in which the Dracula narrative emerges from earlier vampire tales, which juxtapose Apollonian and Dionysian impulses. A strong addition to vampire and horror scholarship.

The review: There is no doubt that Noël Montague-Étienne Rarignac is both highly intelligent and well read. Yet there was something about this book – as strongly as it was written – that left a bad taste in the mouth on an intellectual level.

It wasn’t the tying in of Polidori’s the vampyre, along with Nodier and Dumas into a spiritual development of the vampire trope. More it was the concept that this was a conscious choice on behalf of the authors/playwrights.

If Rarignac had suggested that he could see these patterns within, that is one thing, but I believe it to be a step too far to believe that Stoker was writing a book of gnosis. For instance, I was struck by a footnote that suggests a line from Lucy, regarding Desdemona, was not the casual racism that it is accused off but something more profound. Of course the likelihood is that an Othello reference was there because Stoker was employed in the theatre (indeed Irving had played Othello certainly just before their partnership) and the apparent casual racism was what it looked like – Rarignac, however, suggests Stoker is “attempting to clarify more strongly the significance of Quincey Morris—i.e., More is: The man subjecting Desdemona’s ear to a flow of words, Othello, is not a black man; he is a “Moor”. Quincey Moor-is Is-more than Quincey; he is Adam.” I adore Dracula and thus have high regard for the book’s author, but Stoker was not James Joyce and Dracula is not Finnegan’s Wake – I fear Rarignac reads way too much in.

The author also leaves things out. I mentioned the timeline of prose/plays that is used as evidence. Rarignac tells us that pre-Stoker the female characters in vampire tales were, “Passive objects lacking original volition.” One questions whether that is true of, say, Ziska – the ghoul in Dumas’ play that the author uses as a piece of his puzzle. But the author has certainly overlooked, entirely, Carmilla - being the best known of the 19th century vampire stories with strong female characters/female-centric plots and a story which we are fairly sure Stoker was aware of.

However, turning back to Stoker’s novel, not only was the description of Arthur staking Lucy as "wielding Thor’s hammer" very quickly covered, to the point that it felt almost ignored, but the entire devil aspect of the story was ignored. We know Stoker believed Dracula meant devil, we know the Count used the pseudonym Count De Ville and we know he was schooled in the Scholomance by the devil himself. Stoker clearly included these references for a purpose and, whether they fit with the hypothesis put forward here or not, they should be explored due to the direct Christian mythology invoked. Not mentioning this at all undermines, for me, any argument that Stoker was deliberately creating an alchemical or gnostic text – as the author has not addressed the content of Stoker’s text. I also noted that Rarignac uses Un-Dead in the modern sense of the word, however Anthony Hogg did uncover an earlier use of the word, which had a religious connotation that could have built into the author’s argument.

Nevertheless (and despite the bad taste I mentioned) this was a great piece of theoretical writing, I disagree with the conclusion but I enjoyed the journey. 6 out of 10.

Metamorphoses of the Vampire in Literature and Film: Cultural Transformations in Europe, 1732-1933 – review

Author: Erik Butler

Release Date: 2010

Contains spoilers

The Blurb: For the last three hundred years, fictions of the vampire have fed off anxieties about cultural continuity. Though commonly represented as a parasitic aggressor from without, the vampire is in fact a native of Europe, and its "metamorphoses," to quote Baudelaire, a distorted image of social transformation. Because the vampire grows strong whenever and wherever traditions weaken, its representations have multiplied with every political, economic, and technological revolution from the eighteenth century on. Today, in the age of globalization, vampire fictions are more virulent than ever, and the monster enjoys hunting grounds as vast as the international market.

Metamorphoses of the Vampire explains why representations of vampirism began in the eighteenth century, flourished in the nineteenth, and came to eclipse nearly all other forms of monstrosity in the early twentieth century. Many of the works by French and German authors discussed here have never been presented to students and scholars in the English-speaking world. While there are many excellent studies that examine Victorian vampires, the undead in cinema, contemporary vampire fictions, and the vampire in folklore, until now no work has attempted to account for the unifying logic that underlies the vampire's many and often apparently contradictory forms.

The review: It is a singularly impressively difficult task to undertake; attempting to “account for the unifying logic that underlies the vampire's many and often apparently contradictory forms.” A Grand Unified Theory of the media vampire, so to speak.

In truth Butler does not succeed, in my opinion anyway, which is not to say that this book is without merit – indeed it is brimming with merit. I just think that such a theory, such a logic is ethereal – running from the light like Nosferatu at dawn and obfuscated by each piece of literature, theatre or film that does not fit in with the logic.

However Butler takes us on a fascinating jaunt through the hubbub of the media vampire drawing into parallel with cultural changes in Europe. The date range should have kept us firmly away from the burgeoning Hollywood vampire but it does rear its head on occasion.

Interesting to me was some of the sources that I had not come across before. Potocki’s The Manuscript Found in Saragossa is now in the “to read” pile as is Memoires of my Nervous Illness. The latter by Schreber has a chapter built around it and, whilst I believe that its association with vampirism might prove to be less overt, I find the idea of it fascinating.

This is not a book, however, for the casual reader. Butler has a PhD in comparative Literature and thus this volume is very scholarly – not that it should put you off, and his style prevents the contents from becoming dry, but the warning is there. Indexing, citation lists and notes are all present and correct allowing the student to use the volume properly as a source itself. 7.5 out of 10.

Written in Blood: A Cultural History of the British Vampire – review

Author: Paul Adams

First Published: 2014

The blurb: The British Isles has a remarkable association with vampires – chilling supernatural creatures of the night. From the nineteenth-century writings of John Polidori, James Rymer, Sheridan Le Fanu and Bram Stoker, to the modern literary horrors of Clive Barker, Ramsey Campbell, Brian Lumley and Kim Newman, the vampire casts a strange and compelling shadow that spreads from the realms of fantasy into the world of the living. Here you will find vampire murderers and vampire hunters together with the real-life mysteries of Croglin Grange, Alnwick Castle, the Vampire of the Villas, the Yorkshire Vampire and the enduring phenomenon of London’s famous Highgate Vampire.

In this thought-provoking book, illustrated with never before seen photographs and drawing on extensive original research, writer and paranormal historian Paul Adams explores the fascinating history of British vampirism in both fact and fiction. With extensive chapters on the post-war revival of Gothic cinema horror and the influence of cult studio Hammer Films on the vampire in British television and music, here is a modern guide where every page is truly written in blood…

The review: Paul Adams takes us on a whistle-stop tour of vampirism as it ties in to British culture, running the gamut from 1816 to 2013 and looking at everything from Penny Dreadfuls through to Hammer films and beyond. He looks at legends (such as Croglin Grange) and some of the earlier appearances of the restless dead (as recorded by William of Newburgh and Walter Map). He touches on continental Europe, of course, and delves into vampire murderers – which does see him veering off the Isles as well as into general occult orientated killings, I think as a need to pad out what would have been a thin chapter had he remained in Britain.

Mostly I found his writing balanced, the discussion of the Highgate Vampire steered a fair line between the two primary personalities involved in the case without fawning over either. The book is quite tabloid in its brevity, in places, but Adams chose to write an overview – each chapter may have generated a reference book of its own. The writing style is chatty and engaging but the book does have a bibliography and indexing, allowing further reading into the subjects.

Given the general balance shown, I found it (possibly unfairly) unfortunate that he had not unearthed the potential controversy surrounding the authenticity of the Penny Dreadful story, The Skeleton Count, or, the Vampire Mistress. But, then again, my own reference bookdid not pick up on this when written. More unfortunate was the continued association between Count Dracula and Prince Vlad III. Adams’ suggests that Stoker “immersed himself in the history of the Wallachian warrior knights Vlad Dracul (d 1447) and his son…” but there is absolutely no evidence of this. For more on this please see my article. That aside the balance in the book – when looking at competing theories, was well maintained.

All in all, a fine primer on a plethora of vampire related topics. 7.5 out of 10.

Honourable Mentions: Revenants

The Blurb: “When the damned calls out to the avenger;
“When the Stone missing from the Tomb of Tanneguy is found again;
“Treguern, three times dead, will be resurrected.

“The Prophecy of Treguern.”

1800, On the windswept moors of Brittany, renegade priest Gabriel Le Brec and Fihol de Treguern embark on a scheme to defraud an insurance company by faking the death of the latter. This sets in motion a danse macabre of murders, betrayals, people who change their names, lost birth certificates, false testimonies an Ann Radcliffe romance, a Miltonian struggle between Good and Evil and an impossible phantasmagoria of living men who pretend to be dead and dead men who return to claim vengeance.

The Mention: This is a novel, originally printed piecemeal in 1852, by French author Paul Féval, who is a favourite of Taliesin Meets the Vampires. Other works by Féval that we have looked at are The Vampire Countess, Knightshade and Vampire City . Now, all those books had (at least the belief in) vampires.

Revenants are the restless dead. Arguably they are another form of vampire (or the vampire is a sub-group of revenant), however the primary trait of the vampire (from the 18th century Vampire Panics) was the sucking of blood – an assumption as many of the attacks actually focused on asphyxiation but the presence of blood at the mouth etcetera, when the vampire was exhumed, was taken as proof of blood drinking. Conversely revenant myths would often not mention blood drinking (though there are exceptions where blood is mentioned in myth).

In this case the revenant seems to be simply restless dead, indeed the first occurrence in text is actually one who was still alive but had faked his death. Later in the book (as the time frame jumps to the 1820s) there are several revenants who may be fakes or may be the restless dead. Translator Brian Stableford, in his notes, suggests that there is only one instance of a definitely (or probably) real revenant.

The revenant aspect might be of genre interest enough to earn a honourable mention in its own right. However vampires are mentioned in passing as well. Commander Malo, a warrior priest, is said to be familiar with vampires from Poland, Hungary, Moravia and Silesia.

Also interesting is a discussion about the play The Vampire, referring to the play by Nodier based on Polidori’s The Vampyre. It was a runaway success in 1820, as the story suggests, but Stableford points out that it was having revived success in 1852 too. The character Gabriel de Feuillans is likened in text to the vampire of the play. In truth he is a man who will kill for money, rather than blood.

I enjoyed the book, despite some holes born out of the piecemeal writing style, and it deserves to be looked at as, at least, something of genre interest.

Reading the Vampire – review

Author: Ken Gelder

First published: 1994

Contains spoilers

The Blurb: Insatiable bloodlust, dangerous sexualities, the horror of the undead, uncharted Transylvanian wildernesses, and a morbid fascination with the `other': the legend of the vampire continues to haunt popular imagination.

Reading the Vampire examines the vampire in all its various manifestations and cultural meanings. Ken Gelder investigates vampire narratives in literature and in film, from early vampire stories like Sheridan Le Fanu's `lesbian vampire' tale Carmilla and Bram Stoker's Dracula, the most famous vampire narrative of all, to contemporary American vampire blockbusters by Stephen King and others, the vampire chronicles of Anne Rice, `post-Ceausescu' vampire narratives, and films such as FW Murnau's Nosferatu and Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Reading the Vampire embeds vampires in their cultural contexts, showing vampire narratives feeding off the anxieties and fascinations of their times: from the nineteenth century perils of tourism, issues of colonialism and national identity, and obsessions with sex and death, to the `queer' identity of the vampire or current vampiric metaphors for dangerous exchanges of bodily fluids and AIDS.

The Review: I bought Reading the Vampire purely on the basis of having read, and thoroughly enjoyed, Gelder’s New Vampire Cinema. Of course, whilst this is a discussion of vampire literature, it couldn’t help but stray into a discussion about cinema but primarily this is the literary companion of the later cinema book.

As well as looking at Carmilla and Dracula the book explores an ethnocentric look at vampire literature and the influence of Greek lore on Polidori and Byron. It explores the works of Anne Rice, Stephen King, Dan Simmons, Brian Aldiss and S P Somtow. There is a Marxist examination of vampire literature and a look at Carmilla in terms of the uncanny.

This was not as immediately accessible as the later cinema book. This is down to, I believe, a more  academic-centric approach to the work as Gelder looks at vampire literature in terms of literary theory. That is not a criticism but the later book, whilst academically thorough, was more lay-reader friendly and the approach herein might put off the more casual reader, especially if some of the academic research is unfamiliar.

That said, it is an important book for the library of the student of the media vampire. 7.5 out of 10.

Dracula’s Bram Stoker – review (documentary)

Directed by: Sinead O’Brien

First aired: 2003

Contains spoilers

With a turn around of the title Bram Stoker’s Dracula, this is a nice scholarly walk into the life and influences of Bram Stoker that was narrated by John Hurt and which aired on Sky Arts 2. The documentary seeks to find the man behind the novel and in doing so discover, perhaps, where the inspiration for his seminal work came from.

At the head of the documentary the potential source of his childhood, much spent bed-ridden, and the tales told by his mother is offered. Then the documentary wonders if, perhaps, it was within Sir Henry Irving and the almost hypnotic thrall the actor held Bram, his business manager, in or perhaps some of the book was drawn from his passionless marriage…

The documentary certainly mentions the fact that the scene with Harker and the brides was almost identical to a dream Stoker himself had. It also makes it clear that the makers believe that Stoker had, possibly buried, homosexual leanings (or perhaps a bi-curiosity) and the Freudian analysis of Dracula reveals much. I agree, however, with one expressed thought that Stoker was well aware of exactly what he put within the novel on a sexual level.

There isn’t much in way of revelation within the documentary. It is very sympathetic to the man and makes the point that whilst his obituary made no mention of Dracula at the time of his death, if it was written now it would mention little else – the documentary itself was a point in case as it was very orientated towards that seminal work.

One thing that was interesting was a comment by Christopher Lee – film producers take note – when he declared that he would actually reprise the role of Dracula again, if offered, but with one stipulation – it would have to be a faithful make of the book, as one has never yet been produced. Now that would be worth seeing. As for the documentary, for those interested in the man behind the phenomena it was a worthwhile effort. 7 out of 10.

The imdb page is here.

Diary of a Vampire – review

Directed by: Philip Gardiner

Release date: 2008

Contains spoilers

This is a documentary, subtitled “The Legacy of Bram Stoker”, and seeks to discover the hidden meaning behind Stoker’s seminal Novel. Now the thing is, I have read many a thesis on interpreting Dracula. It is a xenophobic look at the influence of the foreigner on Victorian Britain, it is a book of Freudian imagery, and it is a Jungian dreamscape… The list goes on and I would recommend “Dracula: The Novel and the Legend - A Study of Bram Stoker's Gothic Masterpiece” by Clive Leatherdale as a starting place to examine the various themes. Would this offer anything new?

The look of the documentary is unusual as it is clearly been made under constraints of a budgetary nature. Thus, for the majority of the piece the images shown are computer generated (with occasional live action; namely a man in a graveyard with a sword). However this worked remarkably well and coupled with an excellent musical selection I could have sat and watched the imagery tied into the music for some time.

It is neither the images nor the music that are, ultimately, important within a documentary however. Narration is skilfully handled by Michaela Warrillow, who boasts a lovely voice that I could sit and listen to all day – no bad thing in a documentary narrator.

The message within that narration, however, the base argument if you will… Well I was not nearly as sold on that. Essentially the documentary argues that Dracula, the character, represents occult influx into Imperial Britain from Eastern philosophy, specifically that propagated by Madame Blavatsky, and warns us of this threat to the moral landscape of Victorian England.

It is a similar argument to that, which attempts to show a xenophobic element to the novel. The general ‘anti-foreigner’ contention, however, holds much more water than this. I think that some of the claims were certainly a stretch. The documentary suggests that the Demeter, being named for the Goddess and being a Russian ship, represents Blavatsky – I felt this argument to be interesting but extremely weak. It also ignores the fact that Stoker had extensively researched the shipwreck of a Russian ship – the Dmitry – at Whitby in 1885. With just a slight name change it seems sensible to assume that Stoker had the actual event in mind rather than any deeply obscure symbolism.

However it is when the facts just did not hold any real basis in the novel, whatsoever, that I became concerned. It is clear that the wreck of the Demeter did happen in Stoker’s work but in arguing that Van Helsing represented Max Müller, the documentary suggests that Van Helsing was Austrian (aligning him with Müller, who was German, yet obscuring the identity) – where the text clearly refers to Van Helsing as a Dutchman. The worst, faux pas however came with a quote.

It is suggested that when Dracula says “To die… to be really dead… that must be glorious.” That Stoker is putting forward the concept that Dracula refers to the initiatory death and rebirth of a mystery religion or occult ritual. The trouble is, Stoker never put the phrase in Dracula. Dracula does say it, to be honest, but it is Lugosi who utters the words in the 1931 film version and should be attributed to screenwriter Garrett Fort (or to the preceding playwrights that wrote the stage shows the film was based on). It must be mentioned that the soundbite of Lugosi speaking the line is used (several times actually) but not referenced directly in the narration. Be that as it may, it is not a line written by Stoker in the text of Dracula and thus the argument falls flat on its face.

I found it astounding, also, that the documentary made play on the Order of the Dragon but never mentioned the initiation within the Devil’s academy known as the Scholomance, as mentioned in the novel, which clearly has a dragon element to it. It also seems strange (when arguing that Stoker warned against encroaching occultism, which would undermine British sensibility) that the likening of the heroes of the book to a pagan deity would be missed. I refer to the moment in the book where Arthur kills Lucy “He looked like a figure of Thor as his untrembling arm rose and fell, driving deeper and deeper the mercy-bearing stake, whilst the blood from the pierced heart welled and spurted up around it. His face was set, and high duty seemed to shine through it.”

In actual fact I believe this to underline the, for the time, shocking Freudian symbolism within the novel. Stoker created a paganic (hence Thor) psychosexual scene which symbolises Arthur’s (arguably necrophilic and certainly voyeuristically observed) intercourse with Lucy. Indeed the death of Lucy becomes la petite mort after which Arthur is spent. “And then the writhing and quivering of the body became less, and the teeth seemed to champ, and the face to quiver. Finally it lay still. The terrible task was over.

“The hammer fell from Arthur's hand. He reeled and would have fallen had we not caught him. The great drops of sweat sprang from his forehead, and his breath came in broken gasps.”

Be that as it may, if you are going to argue an occult sub-text or message to the book you really should include the section that directly relates the heroes of the piece to pagan religions – except, of course, that would spoil the very argument that the text was a warning and – in fairness – I don’t believe that scene to have any more deeper meaning other than the Freudian symbolism I have outlined.

There is an interesting thought behind the documentary. Many of Stoker’s friends, as is pointed out, were freemasons – though there is no evidence that he, himself, was. It is also rumoured that he had contact with members of the occult society the Golden Dawn. However I am unconvinced of the argument that he was giving an underlying warning about the encroachment of the theosophists and less so when the evidence used is inaccurate. So, all in all, lovely to watch and nice (aesthetically) to listen to but the substance, whilst interesting as an argument, is flawed by poor research. 3 out of 10.

In Search of Dracula – review (documentary)

Directed by: Calvin Floyd

First Released: 1974

Contains spoilers

There are several documentaries floating around about vampires and/or Dracula (specifically). This early documentary has an edge because it is narrated by Christopher Lee and includes Lee in the dramatisation sections playing both Dracula and the historic Prince Vlad. That said, there is something off kilter about the documentary’s focus.

The documentary goes, mainly, through the usual suspects but starts with a resurrection scene. This is taken directly from Hammer - unfortunately they use the poor reanimation sequence from Scars of Dracula.

The documentary looks into the Novel and Stoker’s life (briefly) but spends a lot of time looking into the folklore of Transylvania. This is by far some of the most interesting information offered to the viewer and includes such gems as naked vampire detecting on horseback. Unfortunately a documentary could be dedicated solely to this and one feels that it is still rushed through.

The documentary briefly mentions the Countess Báthory, and actually gives some inaccurate information (such as the length of her incarceration). It looks at the vampire bat (with some fascinating footage) and flirts with the concept of eroticism in the vampire genre. Unusually it also mentions the similarities between the Christian mysteries, specifically communion, and the vampire myth.

One interesting section was that concerning real vampires – as in serial killers and those with vampiric psychological persuasions – and one particular case. It tells the story of the case study of Bill – as originally presented by Robert McCully – a young man who displayed many vampiric traits psychologically but had never, allegedly, encountered the myth. McCully concluded that the vampire was a Jungian archetype. This could have been a full documentary film itself. As a follow up I tried to find some information on McCully’s paper and drew a blank and I must state that I find it very difficult to believe that Bill had received no exposure to the vampire myth but I would have liked to discover more.

There is, of course, a full discourse on Vlad Tepes – as one would expect, before looking at the vampire in popular culture. The documentary first looks at the party at Villa Diodati, which spawned Polidori’s The Vampyre and Frankenstein. In a strange choice the documentary looks in depth at Mary Shelly and Frankenstein and one wonders why – especially as The Vampyre and then both Varney the Vampire and Carmilla are only very briefly touched upon.

The same imbalance is there with films. Hammer is looked at a little as are Nosferatu and Dracula 1931, whilst more in depth footage is presented in respect of non-vampiric films.

A strange mix but worth watching if only for the folklore section. 5 out of 10.

The imdb page is here.

Vampires: the Complete Guide to the World of the Undead – documentary – review

Directed by: J Charles Sterin & Lars Ullberg

First Aired: 1994

This documentary, narrated by Stanley Anderson, was part of “Ancient Mysteries” and is now available on a low priced dvd that runs at some 48 minutes. It is a brief look at, primarily, the folklore of the vampire and aims mostly at the seventeenth century.

Certainly it relates, briefly, the tale of Arnold Paole and has plenty of recitals from journals during the European vampire hysteria. It also briefly touches upon some of the US vampire cases, such as that of Mercy Brown (though in that case the word vampire was not used at the time).

Inevitably it touches on Dracula and Vlad Tepes as well as Erzsébet Báthory. Finally it does touch upon the works of 19th century fiction (curiously bypassing Carmilla) and film vampires.

There are several experts featured, most notably Paul Barber who wrote the astounding “Vampires, burial and death” and, unsurprisingly, Anne Rice makes an appearance.

Narration wise, I found it a little melodramatic and cheesy – but that’s my personal opinion. The detail is not in-depth, given the length, and herein lies the problem. This sort of DVD is only likely to be purchased, even at the very low price I picked it up for, by a hardcore genre fan and there is nothing really new relayed within. The casual watcher might have put this on when aired on TV but is unlikely to purchase the DVD. That said, kudos for looking mainly at the early folklore vampire.

I mentioned the narration and this was not helped by the fact that the sound quality of the DVD is fairly muffled. Even so, there are some very nice images flying around in the documentary, using early illustrations. There are the inevitable movie images, Dracula and Nosferatu making the obvious appearance but the clips of Paul Naschy were unexpected and welcome.

Over all an average documentary but worth picking up if you are a completist, especially when you see it for £1 as I did. As a documentary and for the price 4.5 out of 10.

I can find no corresponding imdb page.