Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Bram Stoker: Brilliant or Psychotic?

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006

    Exclamation Bram Stoker: Brilliant or Psychotic?

    hey guys
    im doing an english assignment on stoker and was wondering wat ur opinion is on the following statement

    "Bram Stoker: Brilliant or Psychotic?"

    i would just like some ideas on wat other people think
    plz note that i wont be using anything u have said directly in this assignment
    this is just a starting point for of which i realli need!!!

    thanx heaps

  2. #2
    Boll Weevil cuppajoe_9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada
    Blog Entries
    Why does it have to be one or the other?
    What is the use of a violent kind of delightfulness if there is no pleasure in not getting tired of it.
    - Gertrude Stein

    A washerwoman with her basket; a rook; a red-hot poker; th purples and grey-greens of flowers: some common feeling which held the whole together.
    - Virginia Woolf

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Abraham Stoker was a genius for creating Dracula, because it opened the western world, and "target-edly", (if there is such a word) the Victorian World, up to the realization that something so utterly Freudian as a Vampire, could be more than merely a mooching woman. However, Genius is often mistaken for Madness, because either way, a person dares to see the world for what it isn't or what it was or what it can be.
    On the other hand, Stokersaw a fundamentally Xenophobic United Kingdom, and presented it with the ultimate villian, the terrifying outsider, someone to direct their Xenophobia against, and not against the actual foreigners who meant no harm in coming.
    This was Stoker's true stroke of Genius I suppose, he gave his country, and in fact the world the cure for the common Xenophobe.

  4. #4
    Worthless Hack Zippy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    West Coast of Scotland
    The whole premise of the paper seems a little extreme. He was neither 'brilliant' (unable to get past the success of Dracula and write other worthwhile fiction) or 'psychotic' (don't see any evidence of psychotic tendencies or mental illness). He wrote one extremely influential and entertaining book. There's not much else to tell.
    "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." Anais Nin.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    nowhere and everywhere(according to quantum physics)
    I am in agreement. Bram Stoker could neither be described as brilliant or insane, he basically just wrote a one hit wonder(that happens to be among my favorite books) that was taken by the pop culture and transmorgified(gradually over the course of the century) into the brainless abomination that is Twilight. I am afraid that I have not yet read Lair of the White Worm, but The Jewel of the Seven Stars and his various short stories leave much to be desired.

    Honestly, I don't see where one can even make an arguement about Bram Stoker being seriously mentally ill. Despite common conception, not all horror authors are disturbed or crazy, and Bram Stoker could easily be considered a "conservative" author when compared to H. P. Lovecraft or Stephen King.

    Fun fact: the majority of Bram Stoker's books are romances.

Similar Threads

  1. Paul Harvey, Bram Stoker and Dracula
    By randolphmiles in forum Stoker, Bram
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-19-2005, 03:05 PM
  2. Shakespeare is Brilliant
    By Chad in forum Othello
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2005, 06:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts