Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Bug Reports / Re: Character(s) Reverted
« Last post by Zarathustra217 on Today at 05:05:10 PM »
Looks like it worked for the most part! Its not 'last reset', but Got all my items back, and looks like im level 8 and close to 9. So where i was a few days ago.

Alright, I'm sorry for the troubles. If you find something is missing anyway, shoot me a PM.
2
Ravenloft discussion / Re: Incredible Story on Vlad The Impaler
« Last post by QDS on Today at 04:20:42 PM »
  Anyway... what I want to say is many may interchange the two. Vlad Tepes is never called Vlad Dracul in Romanian history, nor Vlad the Impaler.

Actually as far as I know Tepes is Romanian for "the impaler" and while you're right, he wasn't called Vlad Dracul, he was actually known as Vlad Dracula (which means: Vlad, son of the dragon) after his father. That is a pretty neat story linked in the OP though.

Welll... Teapa means Stake... yeah... Tepes means the Impaler... but nope... he is not called Vlad Dracula. We just call him Vlad Tepes. If we would have called him the son of Dracul, we would use Adracul or Adracului. The prefix "A" meaning "Of" or "Son of". Perhaps "Dracula" comes from another language but definitely not from Romanian. Otherwise, the point with "Tepes" and "the Impaler" is neat. +1 for that and -1 for me.
3
Ravenloft discussion / Re: Incredible Story on Vlad The Impaler
« Last post by Jeebs on Today at 03:03:23 PM »
  Anyway... what I want to say is many may interchange the two. Vlad Tepes is never called Vlad Dracul in Romanian history, nor Vlad the Impaler.

Actually as far as I know Tepes is Romanian for "the impaler" and while you're right, he wasn't called Vlad Dracul, he was actually known as Vlad Dracula (which means: Vlad, son of the dragon) after his father. That is a pretty neat story linked in the OP though.
4
Announcements and Notices / Models sought!
« Last post by urathraviel on Today at 02:18:33 PM »
posters appear around Port a Lucine, Valaki, and the mist camp

5
Ravenloft discussion / Re: Incredible Story on Vlad The Impaler
« Last post by Night of Reod on Today at 01:51:40 PM »
 I completely agree that he took the name and learned about the character before the book was published, I just think that real life Vlad Tepes character fit the Dracula character Stoker created, rather than the Dracula character being crated to fit with Vlad Tepes.

 I haven't read any other work by Stoker, but I definitely have it in my long list of "stuff to read" somewhere. I feel the lack of obligatory skepticism and the amount of suspension of disbelief is one of the major differentiating factors between classic Gothic literature and what you could call "modern" Gothic literature. I am not entirely certain, but I believe Lovecraft was one of the earlier, or at least the most famous, horror writer who played with the skepticism and used it as a narrative tool even. It would be interesting to read classic Gothic literature, especially the classics and Poe's work, and Lovecraft's works back to back, and seeing how this skepticism evolves or re-emerges.
6
Completely by coincidence, I'm reading Stoker's Lair of the White Worm right now. Amazon has a 50 Gothic Masterpieces You Must Read Before You Die or something like that for Kindle download for $1.99, and although I've read several of them, at that price it's worth it to fill in the gaps.

(Another nice feature is that for many of the books there's a link to free audio versions, and since I have a long commute both in the morning and at night, I can listen to these.)

What has struck me so far about "Lair" is how quickly Stoker gets into the supernatural horror and his characters accept it. There's none of the obligatory skeptical questioning when, for example, one character tells another that a beautiful woman of mutual acquaintance likely died when she was a child and the worm took her over. Nope, it's more, "Okay. Guess we better deal with her then. I'm going to the mongoose store to buy a mongoose."

Similar to Dracula, though, it's clear Stoker enjoys atmosphere and hearkening back to more supernatural times. Here it's the druids.

The book is pretty racist, too, as the black servant is a practitioner of Voodoo, and we can safely assume he's not quite human and more devil-like because of the color of his skin. The "n" word abounds, with both narrator and the heroic characters using it in preference to any other term.

7
Quote
From the three sons he had, one was assassinated alongside himself, another later, I believe, and the only one that remained was Vlad Tepes.. now known as Vlad the Impaler.

This is why I say it's not as though Stoker was being meticulous...and she talks about this as well. Stoker took Dracula because he liked what it meant ("devil"), and there's an actual note of his saying that. But the description of the character otherwise fits Tepes. Moreover, from the text of the novel:

Quote
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,

Stoker is treating Dracula as the surname here.
8
Ravenloft discussion / Re: Incredible Story on Vlad The Impaler
« Last post by Night of Reod on Today at 12:05:56 PM »
Despite the credentials of the author, I don't find that excerpt very convincing (although she may shore up her argument better in a longer piece). For example:

Quote
Very little attention was paid to the possible connection between the fictional Count and his historical namesake until 1972 when Radu Florescu and Raymond T. McNally’s In Search of Dracula revealed to the world the story of the real Dracula – Vlad Tepes.

Yet later she writes:

Quote
Investigations into possible connections between the Count and the Voivode began before the publication of In Search of Dracula. In 1958, Bacil Kirtley stated that “Unquestionably the historical past that Van Helsing¼ assigns the fictional vampire Dracula is that of Vlad Tsepesh, Voivod of Wallachia” (14). In 1962, Stoker’s first biographer, Harry Ludlam, asserted that Stoker had “discovered that the Voivode Drakula or Dracula … had earned for himself the title of ‘the Impaler,’ and that the story of his ferocity and hair-raising cruelty in defiance of the Turks was related at length in two fifteenth-century manuscripts, one of which spoke of him as ‘wampyr’” (113). In 1966, Grigore Nandris connected the vampire Dracula with the historical figure, even claiming that available portraits of Vlad were “adapted by Bram Stoker to suit his literary purposes” (375).

This all seems directly to contradict her initial assertion.

I'm not arguing that Stoker was a meticulous researcher or even that a novelist would want to make a fictional character conform exactly to a historical figure (especially not a character of gothic fantasy). But I think that it's more attention-getting to make strong claims in academic research such as "Stoker didn't base Dracula on Vlad Tepes," rather than something narrower, such as "although Vlad the Impaler was major influence on the character of Dracula, Stoker used a lot of resources and probably got a lot of things wrong. He also took a great deal of creative license."

What I gather from reading that is Stoker likely had the idea for a vampire book before he heard of Vlad the Impaler, but once he did hear of the historical figure, he realized that the folklore associated with Vlad would give him a lot of material to make his novel and character more interesting. Most critically in terms of the dispute, it is where Stoker got the name.

 She does have a lot of publications regarding Dracula and quite the recognition for it as well, I don't think the article is an attempt at getting attention by throwing around a controversial topic. I know very little regarding this subject as I just read the original book, and a translated version no less, and none of the biographies or any other research on the subject, but I believe in the first quote you linked, she refers to general public, this idea that Dracula was based on Vlad Tepes becoming part of the popular culture, while the previous ones did not lead this to be part of the popular culture.

 For my part, I found her argument regarding Stoker's encounters with Arminus Vambery and regarding his research in the British Museum archive to be fairly convincing, and it is very much true that Count Dracula is a character very much in line with the Gothic tradition he is a part of and follows most of the tropes that were already in place when he was written. I am not entirely convinced that he was or was not inspired directly by Vlad Tepes, and I admit that most of my knowledge regarding the subject comes from this article, but I am leaning towards the side of the article, and I found the article to be quite an entertaining read and quite interesting in content as well, which is the main reason I linked it.

 I would love to discuss more in detail, but this is about the extend of my knowledge regarding this topic and all I have to contribute to the discussion. My personal reading aside, I think the article is very much worth reading whether you agree with the author or not.
9
Ravenloft discussion / Re: Incredible Story on Vlad The Impaler
« Last post by QDS on Today at 10:45:27 AM »
  Well, Vlad Tepes was the son of Vlad Dracul. And here many misunderstandings can arise. Vlad II (Vlad Dracul), took the name Dracul after he was received in the order of the Dragons. In Romania, drac could also mean dragon. After refusing to help the european crusade that ended up with the defeat at Varna, that order was retracted and he was soon assassinated. From the three sons he had, one was assassinated alongside himself, another later, I believe, and the only one that remained was Vlad Tepes.. now known as Vlad the Impaler.
  Vlad Dracul was a vassal of the Hungarian king and thus perhaps Count would have been a good title.
 
  Anyway... what I want to say is many may interchange the two. Vlad Tepes is never called Vlad Dracul in Romanian history, nor Vlad the Impaler.
10
Despite the credentials of the author, I don't find that excerpt very convincing (although she may shore up her argument better in a longer piece). For example:

Quote
Very little attention was paid to the possible connection between the fictional Count and his historical namesake until 1972 when Radu Florescu and Raymond T. McNally’s In Search of Dracula revealed to the world the story of the real Dracula – Vlad Tepes.

Yet later she writes:

Quote
Investigations into possible connections between the Count and the Voivode began before the publication of In Search of Dracula. In 1958, Bacil Kirtley stated that “Unquestionably the historical past that Van Helsing¼ assigns the fictional vampire Dracula is that of Vlad Tsepesh, Voivod of Wallachia” (14). In 1962, Stoker’s first biographer, Harry Ludlam, asserted that Stoker had “discovered that the Voivode Drakula or Dracula … had earned for himself the title of ‘the Impaler,’ and that the story of his ferocity and hair-raising cruelty in defiance of the Turks was related at length in two fifteenth-century manuscripts, one of which spoke of him as ‘wampyr’” (113). In 1966, Grigore Nandris connected the vampire Dracula with the historical figure, even claiming that available portraits of Vlad were “adapted by Bram Stoker to suit his literary purposes” (375).

This all seems directly to contradict her initial assertion.

I'm not arguing that Stoker was a meticulous researcher or even that a novelist would want to make a fictional character conform exactly to a historical figure (especially not a character of gothic fantasy). But I think that it's more attention-getting to make strong claims in academic research such as "Stoker didn't base Dracula on Vlad Tepes," rather than something narrower, such as "although Vlad the Impaler was major influence on the character of Dracula, Stoker used a lot of resources and probably got a lot of things wrong. He also took a great deal of creative license."

What I gather from reading that is Stoker likely had the idea for a vampire book before he heard of Vlad the Impaler, but once he did hear of the historical figure, he realized that the folklore associated with Vlad would give him a lot of material to make his novel and character more interesting. Most critically in terms of the dispute, it is where Stoker got the name.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10