Authors: Bram Stoker (original Novel) & A—e (adaptation)
Translator: Anna Berglund
Editor: W Trimble
First Published: 1899 (serialised), 2022 (English translation)
Contains spoilers
In 2017 Hans Corneel de Roos presented a translation of Makt Myrkranna (Powers of Darkness), an adaptation of Dracula astonishing in how so different the text was from the original novel. The text primarily covered the stay in Castle Dracula by Thomas (rather than Jonathan) Harker and was wildly different, adding elements that were more like a ‘Boys Own Adventure’ as well as Satanic elements not detailed in the original text. The later sections of the novel were lacking and were more like a summary (though still wildly different from Stoker).
It quickly came to light that the Icelandic text was a translation of an earlier Swedish adaptation, entitled Mörkrets Makter (again, Powers of Darkness). The early part of the story running the same course that the Icelandic would, but the rest of the book extant and, again, very different from Dracula. This W Trimble edited version is the first published translation of this into English. It begins with three essays and I’ll address them before touching on the text itself. The essays are by Hans Corneel de Roos, Tyler R Tichelaar and Sezin Koehler. The latter two concentrating on racist elements of the text. This is important but, whilst Koehler questioned whether the novel was a free adaptation or had been based on an early (lost) Stoker draft, Tichelaar went further. Citing de Roos 2017 theory that the adaptation was based on an early draft of (or possibly the notes for) the novel, Tichelaar posited that Stoker recognised his own racism and toned it down in the final release. However, it is very unlikely (in my opinion) that this was anything other than a copyright-breaching (though the international copyright laws were not recognised in Sweden at the time) free adaptation, and Tichelaar’s position did seem strange, immediately following an essay by de Roos that distanced the scholar from his previous theory and positioning him firmly within the free adaptation camp. Following this essay, Tichelaar’s feels jarring (Koehler takes a more balanced view of the authorship allowing for both theories).
In 2017 Hans Corneel de Roos presented a translation of Makt Myrkranna (Powers of Darkness), an adaptation of Dracula astonishing in how so different the text was from the original novel. The text primarily covered the stay in Castle Dracula by Thomas (rather than Jonathan) Harker and was wildly different, adding elements that were more like a ‘Boys Own Adventure’ as well as Satanic elements not detailed in the original text. The later sections of the novel were lacking and were more like a summary (though still wildly different from Stoker).
It quickly came to light that the Icelandic text was a translation of an earlier Swedish adaptation, entitled Mörkrets Makter (again, Powers of Darkness). The early part of the story running the same course that the Icelandic would, but the rest of the book extant and, again, very different from Dracula. This W Trimble edited version is the first published translation of this into English. It begins with three essays and I’ll address them before touching on the text itself. The essays are by Hans Corneel de Roos, Tyler R Tichelaar and Sezin Koehler. The latter two concentrating on racist elements of the text. This is important but, whilst Koehler questioned whether the novel was a free adaptation or had been based on an early (lost) Stoker draft, Tichelaar went further. Citing de Roos 2017 theory that the adaptation was based on an early draft of (or possibly the notes for) the novel, Tichelaar posited that Stoker recognised his own racism and toned it down in the final release. However, it is very unlikely (in my opinion) that this was anything other than a copyright-breaching (though the international copyright laws were not recognised in Sweden at the time) free adaptation, and Tichelaar’s position did seem strange, immediately following an essay by de Roos that distanced the scholar from his previous theory and positioning him firmly within the free adaptation camp. Following this essay, Tichelaar’s feels jarring (Koehler takes a more balanced view of the authorship allowing for both theories).
One argument for the early draft theory is that the novel contains a few correlations between unused aspects in Stoker’s notes, including (in the castle section) a deaf-mute servant named Natra… except, whilst she does appear in the notes, the unnamed deaf-mute woman is listed with a second (old male) servant (not present in the Swedish text) and they are specifically called English servants. In fact, they appear in the notes together, specifically for a London section, in some of the earliest of notes for the novel. The fact that an adaptor coincidentally added a servant, in Transylvania, with disabilities which matched those of one of the servants Stoker considered for the England section is not impossible. Indeed, to isolate the Harker character in the castle, whilst adding a servant that the Stoker novel did not have, it would be a logical step to add that barrier to communication and it also feels like an obvious Gothic trope. One thing I did pick up on that struck as odd, which might be a translation issue, was Harker referring to “Mr Count” adding the honorific of Mr to a rank honorific as though it were a name.
However, looking most specifically at the sections after the castle, listed as Parts 2-4 and taking up roughly 2/3rds of the novel, we see some striking differences from the source. Whilst there are definitely interesting ideas here, truthfully this can be a chore at times and is certainly in no-way a competition for the Stoker novel it adds to and changes. Some of the changes are fascinating – Lucy’s sleepwalking is correlated with loose morals and likened to that of her father (who is accused of having been a libertine) and the adaptor clearly read the original text as Lucy being blonde (in Stoker this can be insinuated through the phrase ‘sunny ripples’ and then, interestingly, as a vampire her hair becomes dark). The attack on her has purpose as Dracula (or Draculitz as he is called in this) sees innate psychic power within her that he can exploit (and uses Gypsy minions to awaken that innate power). It is also interesting that Seward contemplates whether the blood transfusions killed her, “Lucy did die, but who knows if she needed to die, if we, her caretakers and doctors, had fully mastered the area which we then only hesitantly and fumbling dared to enter?” However, after her death, despite realising she is a vampire and attacking (and killing) children, Van Helsing leaves her be (until the very end of the novel some time later) and this (we can extrapolate) allows her to kill, over time, Holmwood who vanishes from the novel after her death and is only referred to by other characters.
As well as the Lucy story we get detailed sections like Mina telling us how she travelled to try and locate Harker (and accidentally found the man who was suffering from Amnesia). We get Seward being drawn into the Count’s snare (via a female energy vampire) and the lunatics literally taking over the asylum, and we also get (through Harker’s eyes) the investigative work of detective Barrington Jones and his lightly sketched sidekick Tellet. Van Helsing provides the investigators (a better description for the protagonists in this than naming them the Crew of Light, I feel) “Six silver bullets marked with the sign of the holy cross and the sacred name of Our Savior”. This replaces the vaguely named holy bullets mentioned in Dracula. I mentioned the alternative Draculitz name and he also takes other pseudonyms though never De Ville, which was the pseudonym Stoker gave him. I did note that Dracula smokes a cigar in this – interestingly, in Stoker, Dracula explicitly doesn’t partake of any form of smoking material and this is shown when Harker says that he smoked “a cigar which he offered me, at the same time excusing himself that he did not smoke.” In fact, the Crew of Light sees both Van Helsing and Holmwood smoking cigars also, Seward smoking a cigarette and Morris chewing tobacco. Stoker himself was a smoker (according to Personal Reminiscences of Henry Irving).
This is a worthwhile adaptation – despite being a chore in places, it is also rip-roaring in other parts – as it seems to be the first variance from the novel that saw Dracula morph from Stoker’s creation to a megatext in its own right (though it may be that researchers discover something even earlier or concurrent with this). I note how things that would be later added to the megatext first appear here (there is a feel, for instance, that Dracula is much more the antichrist that later texts would liken him to). Authorship will keep speculative researchers going – with only the enigmatic A—e to go on – as well as comparative studies. The collector in me looks forward to a physical copy of this and this edition looks set to get such a release as well as another translation that is due.
kindle @ Amazon US
Kindle @ Amazon UK
However, looking most specifically at the sections after the castle, listed as Parts 2-4 and taking up roughly 2/3rds of the novel, we see some striking differences from the source. Whilst there are definitely interesting ideas here, truthfully this can be a chore at times and is certainly in no-way a competition for the Stoker novel it adds to and changes. Some of the changes are fascinating – Lucy’s sleepwalking is correlated with loose morals and likened to that of her father (who is accused of having been a libertine) and the adaptor clearly read the original text as Lucy being blonde (in Stoker this can be insinuated through the phrase ‘sunny ripples’ and then, interestingly, as a vampire her hair becomes dark). The attack on her has purpose as Dracula (or Draculitz as he is called in this) sees innate psychic power within her that he can exploit (and uses Gypsy minions to awaken that innate power). It is also interesting that Seward contemplates whether the blood transfusions killed her, “Lucy did die, but who knows if she needed to die, if we, her caretakers and doctors, had fully mastered the area which we then only hesitantly and fumbling dared to enter?” However, after her death, despite realising she is a vampire and attacking (and killing) children, Van Helsing leaves her be (until the very end of the novel some time later) and this (we can extrapolate) allows her to kill, over time, Holmwood who vanishes from the novel after her death and is only referred to by other characters.
As well as the Lucy story we get detailed sections like Mina telling us how she travelled to try and locate Harker (and accidentally found the man who was suffering from Amnesia). We get Seward being drawn into the Count’s snare (via a female energy vampire) and the lunatics literally taking over the asylum, and we also get (through Harker’s eyes) the investigative work of detective Barrington Jones and his lightly sketched sidekick Tellet. Van Helsing provides the investigators (a better description for the protagonists in this than naming them the Crew of Light, I feel) “Six silver bullets marked with the sign of the holy cross and the sacred name of Our Savior”. This replaces the vaguely named holy bullets mentioned in Dracula. I mentioned the alternative Draculitz name and he also takes other pseudonyms though never De Ville, which was the pseudonym Stoker gave him. I did note that Dracula smokes a cigar in this – interestingly, in Stoker, Dracula explicitly doesn’t partake of any form of smoking material and this is shown when Harker says that he smoked “a cigar which he offered me, at the same time excusing himself that he did not smoke.” In fact, the Crew of Light sees both Van Helsing and Holmwood smoking cigars also, Seward smoking a cigarette and Morris chewing tobacco. Stoker himself was a smoker (according to Personal Reminiscences of Henry Irving).
This is a worthwhile adaptation – despite being a chore in places, it is also rip-roaring in other parts – as it seems to be the first variance from the novel that saw Dracula morph from Stoker’s creation to a megatext in its own right (though it may be that researchers discover something even earlier or concurrent with this). I note how things that would be later added to the megatext first appear here (there is a feel, for instance, that Dracula is much more the antichrist that later texts would liken him to). Authorship will keep speculative researchers going – with only the enigmatic A—e to go on – as well as comparative studies. The collector in me looks forward to a physical copy of this and this edition looks set to get such a release as well as another translation that is due.
kindle @ Amazon US
Kindle @ Amazon UK
6 comments:
The publishers also intend to publish a video game; levels (with bosses?) have been published on their website.
Personally, I haven't heard anything about Makt Myrkranna that sounds like it's worth a readthrough. My Icelandic friend Tinna said it was basically fan-fic. I doubt if Stoker had anything to do with the project, beyond selling the translation rights.
Khaia, thanks for that. I'll have to check the website out.
The Icelandic version is identical to the first part of the Swedish version (baring translation changes) and in todays parlance we might call it fan fic. Stealing a copyrighted book and releasing it with changes (and a different, often close title) was common in the 19th C and Dickens was a major victim of this. By Dracula this had been more or less addressed in the UK but Sweden didn't subscribe to the international copyright laws and I would suspect (though I have no proof) that Stoker didn't get translation rights either.
I enjoyed Icelandic version, so now it's time for this one!
One thing about Mr Count (herr greve or something in Swedish?) That would translate perfectly in Finnish as herra kreivi. In English.. Well..
Hi Kirsi, in English, certainly, they are both honorifics so you would be Mr or Count but not both (and both are masculine honorifics). It just reads odd, to me at least, and stood out.
Hope you enjoy :)
I was wondering if you've also read the translation by Rickard Berghorn and how it compares to Anna Berglund's translation? I read Berghorn's translation and felt it was a slog to read through. I did feel De Roo's 'Makt Myrkranna' was a great read and I have De Roo's 'Mörkrets Makter' on my Amazon wishlist, but I'm not sure if I want to invest the time to read this again.
Also, does De Roo's 'Mörkrets Makter' include all the illustrations in the text? In Berghorn's version, all the illustrations are in the back of the book so it's hard to know what part of the text the illustrations match to.
The only reason why I kept my copy of Berghorn's 'Mörkrets Makter' is because of the illustrations and the introduction he wrote. He says there is no hard proof that A-e had access to the manuscript or Stoker's original version of the novel. For example, there's both a detective in the manuscript and in 'Mörkrets Makter', but the later doesn't have a Detective Cotford. If it had a Detective Cotford, the debate if Stoker collaborated with A-e would be over.
I also felt Rickard Berghorn was unecessarily and unprofessionally harsh to Hans De Roos in his introduction. There's a way to respectively disagree with someone academically.
I haven't read the Berghorn translation but I do have the hardback edition. It is in my to read pile but there is so much to read I thought an airgap on it would be useful and that has stretched a tad. I do want to read it at some (not too distant) point however.
De Roo's Mörkrets Makter from memory had illustrations but I can't remember if they were in text (and I loaned my copy out so can't immediately check). He also released a crowdfunded, colourised book of the Swedish illustrations on their own). His book is the Icelandic version translated and, as such, really only covers the Transylvania section - the English section is little more than a synopsis.
I agree that there does seem to be some level of harshness flying around. Personally, I do not think there was an earlier Stoker manuscript this is based on, nor do I think they had his notes. There is a detective Cotford mentioned I think twice in the notes, but his function was subsumed into Van Helsing. However, as you mention, whilst there is a detective there is no Cotford in the Swedish version. Similarities, I think, are coincidental - any correlation there has been does not equal causation. That said, we can all be polite re our views.
Thanks for stopping by Matthew
Post a Comment