QUESTION: "Dracula" is considered by many the touchstone
for vampire literature. What impact did Bram Stoker have on the
horror genre with the creation of "Dracula"? And how
well did he understand that impact?
MILLER: To answer the second part first, Stoker had no
idea of the impact his novel would make. To begin with, it was only
fairly popular in his own day (and with non-intellectual
readers), and was seen by reviewers as just a story of horror and the
supernatural. What brought "Dracula" to the foreground
was the movie industry. Stoker did not live long enough to enjoy the
fruits of that popularity.
"Dracula" is indeed the touchstone of vampire literature
and has become the yardstick by which every vampire story is
measured. Part of this is because it came at the "right"
time. There had been other vampire stories before Stoker's (starting with
John Polidori's "The Vampyre" in 1819 and throughout
the 19th century) and Stoker drew the various threads together.
Another factor is the time at which it was written -
late Victorian England, end-of-century anxiety, latent sexuality, etc.
One of
the reasons the novel has received so much attention
from late 20th century literary critics is that it opens a window on to
the
world of late Victorian England. This is no doubt something
we can note in retrospect rather than something Stoker himself
would have been aware of.
As for the impact, it is difficult to measure it. The
novel is the most enduring of all classic Gothic fiction (with "Frankenstein"
probably ranking second). The fact that it has never
gone out of print, has been brought out in endless editions, has been
translated into dozens of foreign languages (including
Romanian), has been the subject of revisionist writings, prequels and
sequels, of movies, drama, ballets, musicals, children's
books, etc. attests to its endurance. Stoker would be amazed to know
that he created a modern myth and that just about every
single person in the Western world knows something about "Dracula".
How many other fictional characters can make such a claim?
QUESTION: How would "Dracula" be different if Stoker were writing it in 1997 instead of 1897?
MILLER: Of course, any answer would be speculative. One
thing that strikes me about the 1897 novel is the method of
narration: Stoker uses what would have been contemporary
technologies of communication - shorthand, phonograph
recordings, typewriting and duplicating. Were he writing
it in 1997, the format might have been faxes, email, web sites and
answering machines! But the anxieties might have been
different - or more explicitly expressed. One enduring quality of the
book is that it actually does speak to our anxieties.
Vampirism can be read today as a metaphor for AIDS, for example.
QUESTION: Why are we, as readers, so fascinated with the vampire? Why is he successful has a literary character?
MILLER: Much of the answer lies in the vampire itself.
No other monster has the same enduring (endearing?) qualitites. Look
at all it can represent - power, immortality, dabbling
with taboo, defiance of authority, sensuality, seductiveness, ability to
defy
natural law. All in one creature. Wow!
QUESTION: Prior to the 1970s, I believe, most vampire
stories and novels were simply retellings of Stoker's work. In the last
20 years, there has been a proliferation of vampire fiction.
Why do you think this is?
MILLER: True. I think writers began to see the immense
possibilities. The social revolution of the 60s opened up new
possibilities. The blurring of traditional boundaries
between good and evil lent a new ambivalence to the vampire who starts
to
show up as a misunderstood and even romantic figure.
While Rice is often credited as the one who changed the direction,
equally significant are Fred Saberhagen (whose "Dracula
Tape" retold Stoker's novel from Dracula's point of view) and
Chelsea Quinn Yarbro whose vampire is heroic rather than
villainous. Some have opted to stay with the Stokerian vampire
concept, however. Stephen King's "Salem's Lot" is a case
in point.
QUESTION: Many authors have been content to continue in
the tradition carved out by Stoker. Others have chosen to extend
vampire mythology. Which authors, in your opinion, have
done the most to extend the vampire genre? And how have they
accomplished this?
MILLER: Partially answered above. As for extending the
genre, there is of course Anne Rice. Also Yarbro, Suzy McKee
Charnas, Poppy Z. Brite, and many more.
QUESTION: What role does the historical Dracula play in
this growing fascination with vampires? How strong is his presence
in modern works?
MILLER: I think the revelation that there was a real Dracula
(1972) increased scholarly interest in the whole subject. (It
certainly did that for me). And it has had some impact
on fiction. A number of writers have written a pre-history for Count
Dracula based on the historical Vlad Tepes - best of
these is a trilogy by Jeanne Kalogridis. I have strong views about the
actual connection between the two Draculas which I spell
out in my Foreword to Kalogridis' latest novel "Lord of the
Vampires" (1996).
But I don't think the history has affected the contemporary
interest in vampires in general all that much. That is much more a
product of vampire novels and movies, as well as the
Goth scene (about which I do not know too much).
Back to main page