Bram Stoker: Resurrecting the Vampire

The myth of the vampire is as old as time itself, with many incarnations of this creature found in almost every culture. Today, one novel casts its shadow over legions of imitators—*Dracula*, the Undead. One man—a former civil servant, theater manager, and part-time writer—condensed into one single work of fiction all vampiric lore as we know it today. This is the story of Bram Stoker, what came before and after *Dracula*, and what relationships may have inspired him to resurrect the vampire.

**Life Before Dracula**

Abraham ‘Bram’ Stoker was born in Clontarf, near Dublin, Ireland, on November 8, 1847. He was the third of seven children in a Protestant family. At that time, Ireland was still part of the United Kingdom, and both his father and later his eldest brother served as loyal civil servants to the Crown. Bram was a sickly child and spent most of his time housebound or bedridden until the age of seven. His youthful imagination was influenced by real-life tales of death, disease, and misery. He was born during the terrible potato famine, and although his relatively wealthy family did not suffer directly, they undoubtedly felt its societal effects. Bram also listened to stories told by his mother Charlotte about the cholera epidemic of 1832, which claimed thousands of lives.

Eventually, Bram overcame his poor health and grew up to become a tall, athletic youth, crowned by a head of bright red hair. After secondary school, he enrolled at Trinity College in Dublin, where he made a reputation as an excellent student and athlete. He won prizes in several track and field disciplines and was also a keen rower and rugby player. Despite his size, he developed notable agility, performing on the rings and the trapeze. In 1870, he graduated with honors in science and mathematics, but he also studied oratory and history.

After graduating, he entered the Irish Civil Service, where he served for ten years as Inspector of Petty Sessions. The ‘Petty Sessions’ were magistrates’ courts scattered all over Ireland, dealing with minor penal and civil cases. Stoker’s task was to oversee that they functioned correctly, a mammoth task for sure. Despite the heavy workload, the young civil servant found time to vent his passion for writing and succeeded in publishing some short stories in the 1870s, such as “The Crystal Cup” in 1872 and his first horror tale “The Chain of Destiny” in 1875.

During the same year, Stoker also penned his first novel, *The Primrose Path*, serialized in the magazine *The Shamrock*. This work is a melodrama about an honest carpenter from Dublin who moves to London to work at a run-down theater. There are no horror or supernatural elements here—just a vivid description of how a good man can be brought down by the evils of alcohol. Stoker’s writing extended into non-fiction by the end of the decade. After years of managing the Petty Sessions, Bram felt the need to write a sort of manual for the court clerks. So in 1879, he published *The Duties of Clerks of Petty Sessions in Ireland*.

This book may sound dull to those who are not passionate about law, but there is an interesting section about the treatment of ‘dangerous lunatics’ in court. Maybe an early inspiration for some of Dracula’s characters, Renfield and Dr. Seward? During his decade in the Civil Service, the energetic Bram also indulged in a love for drama and theater, inherited from his parents. His knowledge of the stage was sufficient enough that he landed a side gig as a theater critic for the *Dublin Mail*. His writing extended to other genres, and he published an article defending Walt Whitman’s collection of poems *Leaves of Grass*, which was considered controversial at the time. Bram would later meet and befriend Whitman, one of many literary giants to form a bond with Stoker.

In 1876, Bram Stoker met for the first time the famous actor Henry Irving. The actor had read some of Stoker’s favorable reviews of him and wanted to meet the critic. The two became close friends, starting a relationship that would change Stoker’s life. Now we don’t know of any of Bram’s romantic relationships until this point, but he would soon catch up. Bram became entangled in a love triangle with a girl called Florence Balcombe. The third vertex of the triangle? Fellow Irish author Oscar Wilde. In 1878, Florence made up her mind: she chose Bram over Oscar, and the two married on December 4. But Stoker and Wilde remained good friends, with Bram being a regular in Oscar’s literary circle.

That same year, Henry Irving invited Stoker to London with a job offer: becoming his manager. Bram eagerly accepted, running the affairs of both Irving and his theater, the Lyceum. Their working relationship continued until Irving’s death in 1905. For the moment, let’s stick to the Stokers. In 1879, they welcomed their only child, Irving Noel, named after his godfather, Henry Irving! The boy’s birth must have inspired Stoker, as three years later he published *Under the Sunset*, a collection of tales for children.

In 1890, Stoker published his second full-length novel, entitled *The Snake’s Pass*. This is the only of Stoker’s works to be set in his native Ireland, and one can see the shadow of supernatural elements beginning to creep in, as we follow a young English gentleman in his quest for a treasure supposedly hidden by Saint Patrick after his battle with the King of Snakes. The novel also delivers subtle hints rebuking English intrusion in Irish society; even as a former loyal civil servant, Stoker did not hide his support for Irish Home Rule and eventual independence from the United Kingdom.

It was only after *The Snake’s Pass* was published that Bram Stoker began working on his immortal masterpiece, *Dracula*. I already hinted at a couple of possible real-life inspirations for the novel, but it’s time now to look at the man who may have possibly inspired the Count himself: Stoker’s employer and friend, Henry Irving.

**True Bromance**

Stoker first met Henry Irving in 1876, but his first written review of the thespian dates back to 1871. After seeing him perform in the play *The Two Roses*, Stoker wrote a sharp critique of the performance that he would eventually deny penning in later writings. By ‘76, Irving was Britain’s top actor, working as the leading star of English drama. After a performance of *Hamlet* in Dublin, Irving was flattered by Stoker’s review and invited him to supper. Bram and Henry clicked immediately and made plans to dine together again. During this second dinner, Irving performed his piece de resistance, Thomas Hood’s poem ‘Dream of Eugene Aram’. The delivery was so electrifying that apparently Bram exploded into violent hysterics. The writer was now enthralled by the performer. Bram later wrote: “Then began the close friendship between us, which only terminated with his life—if indeed friendship, like any other form of love, can ever terminate… From that hour began a friendship as profound, as close, as lasting as can be between two men.”

Their professional relationship, though, started two years later, in 1878, when Irving took ownership of the Lyceum Theatre in London and invited Stoker to join him. He would manage both the theater and Henry’s career. On December 14, ten days after marrying Florence, Bram eagerly accepted the invitation and moved to London. This move suited both newlyweds: Bram was eager to establish fruitful connections for his literary career, while Florence was looking forward to leaving a mark on London’s social scene.

Bram threw himself with such energy and dedication into the new managerial work that it’s a wonder that he could do some creative writing on the side. In fact, he spent most of his time writing letters on Irving’s behalf, even up to sixty a day, sorting out the daily admin tasks required by the theater, or, less often, acting as tour manager for Irving himself. Stoker’s passion and skills did not go unnoticed: even newspapers of the time, usually more focused on the star actors rather than their entourage, celebrated Bram. The *Chicago Daily News* in 1888 wrote, “Mr. Irving’s great success in this country has been due to a very considerable extent to the shrewd management of Bram Stoker. We know of no manager more vigilant, more indefatigable, more audacious than he… Irving is fortunate in having so able and so loyal an associate.”

While the English newspaper *Northern Echo* wondered, “What Sir Henry would do without this Trojan whose ubiquity is astounding.” But how about the other side of this relationship? Did Irving appreciate Bram’s friendship and hard work? We know that two months before Bram had started working for Irving, the actor had sent a letter signed “With love, in great haste, Henry.” The following week, Irving signed again “With love.” But by August 1879, eight months after Irving had hired Stoker, his letters were plainly signed with “Yours sincerely.” This downgrade may reflect more formal relations between the two, now regulated by a boss-employee dynamic.

But it’s sad to note that even in the workplace, Irving seemed to have little consideration for Stoker. While newspapers attributed much of the actor’s success to Stoker’s management, the Lyceum Theatre programs would list Bram only on page four, well below other employees such as the stage manager or the musical director. This lack of appreciation may have been in line with Irving’s personality, as described by Stoker’s biographer Barbara Belford. By all accounts, Henry Irving had a charming, even mesmerizing personality. Most of all, he had a huge ego—this not only made him a demanding employer but also someone who in general depleted the positive energy of those around him.

Today we would describe him as having a ‘toxic personality,’ probably with a narcissistic personality disorder. And yet Bram never said or wrote anything negative about Irving. In his later *Reminiscences*, he even praised at great length the mind and body of the actor, writing that up to the age of sixty he was “compact of steel and whipcord. His energy and nervous power were such as only came from a great brain; and the muscular force of that lean, lithe body must have been extraordinary.” Excerpts such as this one have led to speculations on whether Bram Stoker was a closeted gay man, in a marriage of convenience with Florence, but actually desperately in love with his actor friend and employer.

The questions will remain unanswered, as there is no certain proof of Stoker’s true sexual preferences. However, prior to the Irving years, one particular piece of writing could be seen as proof of Stoker’s homosexuality or bisexuality. On Valentine’s Day 1876, Bram wrote a letter to American poet Walt Whitman, himself rumored to be homosexual or bisexual. Stoker’s letter was to express his ecstatic admiration for the collection of poems *Leaves of Grass*. The last paragraph reads: “How sweet a thing it is for a strong healthy man with a woman’s eye and a child’s wishes to feel that he can speak to a man who can be, if he wishes, father, and brother and wife to his soul. I don’t think you will laugh, Walt Whitman, nor despise me, but at all events I thank you for all the love and sympathy you have given me in common with my kind.”

The phrase ‘a woman’s eye’ may be a clue, but again there is no concrete evidence. If Stoker was a closeted homosexual, this would only add to his anxiety and sense of inadequacy. Let’s not forget that homosexuality was still considered a crime in Victorian Britain. These feelings, at least according to one critic, may have crept into Bram’s most famous novel.

**Dracula: Origins**

By the early 1890s, Bram was still working at the Lyceum Theatre. His financial position should have been stable, in theory. In practice, we know that he had lost much of his savings in two failed investments, one of them promoted by American novelist Mark Twain. In those same years, he had started working on the novel that would sort out his financial woes, but more importantly, make him an immortal author. *Dracula*, which was first published by Archibald Constable in 1897, is so well-known that I probably don’t need to recap the story. If you haven’t read it yet, it’s available for free at the link in the caption below.

What inspired the characters, plot, and themes of *Dracula*? On a literary level, the 19th Century had already offered some examples of vampire fiction. 1819’s *The Vampyre* by John Polidori first introduces the trope of the vampire as a mysterious and charming aristocrat, with a mesmerizing personality, whose victims find difficult to resist. On a more graphic level, it was the 1845 gothic serial *Varney the Vampire* that popularized the idea of vampires having fangs and leaving bite marks on their victims’ necks. Finally, *Carmilla*, by fellow Irish author Sheridan Le Fanu, attributed to vampires the power to metamorphose into animals and popularized the concept of a ‘vampire expert’ who knows the secrets to slay the undead.

More subtly, Le Fanu introduced the concept of vampirism as a metaphor for seduction, or even just for intercourse. One of many interpretations of *Dracula* envisions this character as a sexual predator who fixates on female victims. Stoker combined all these elements with other aspects of vampire lore, establishing the definitive collection of vampiric clichés, perpetuated by horror literature: the aversion to garlic, crucifixes, mirrors and roses; vulnerability to sunlight and wooden stakes; power over wolves, bats, and even storms; the need to rest in a coffin filled with dirt from the motherland. Everything that we know about vampires today, we owe to *Dracula*.

Besides pre-existing vampire fiction, Stoker acknowledged other sources of inspiration: the essay ‘Transylvanian Superstitions’ by Emily Gerard, and the ‘Book of Werewolves’ by Reverend Sabine Baring-Gould. Gerard’s book in particular may have inspired Stoker to settle on Transylvania as the home of his Count. Finally, Irish folklore may have had a part in stirring Stoker’s tastes toward the supernatural. Bram himself reported growing up on traditional tales told by his mother, of banshees, changelings, malicious pixies, and shape-shifters who trick humans into giving them their souls.

In addition to literary predecessors, Stoker conjured plot points and character features from real life, and I have already mentioned a couple of events which may have ended up in his masterpiece. As per the protagonist, it is certain that Vlad Tepes Dracul, the military leader, was a key influence on the sanguinary nature of Dracula, the vampire. This is even acknowledged in the novel when Dracula mentions his wars against the Ottoman invaders and the betrayal of his brother Radu. But a big stamp on Dracula’s appearance and personality almost certainly came from Henry Irving.

What did Henry look like? Here is Bram’s description: “His face was a strong—a very strong—aquiline, with high bridge of the thin nose and peculiarly arched nostrils; with lofty domed forehead, and hair growing scantily round the temples but profusely elsewhere. His eyebrows were very massive, almost meeting over the nose, and with bushy hair that seemed to curl in its own profusion.”

[Editing suggestion: show on screen this portrait of Irving]

Matches the portrait, right? Well, I must confess I just tricked you. What I read is a description of Dracula, straight from the novel. Barbara Belford again supports the idea that Irving is Count Dracula: “Somewhere in the creative process, Dracula became a sinister caricature of Irving as mesmerist and depleter, an artist draining those about him to feed his ego. It was a stunning but avenging tribute.”

**Decoding Dracula**

Stoker’s novel is a keystone of the horror genre not only because of its subject matter but also because of its style. The novel is written in an epistolary style, as a collection of letters, telegrams, journal entries, even transcripts of wax cylinder recordings. A predecessor to today’s ‘found footage’ horror flicks, if you like. This style wasn’t entirely new, as *Frankenstein* by Mary Shelley also relied on journal entries. But Stoker’s innovation was his ability to multiply the perspectives on the supernatural events of the story, as well as to make the written records part of the story itself.

As one piece of plot development, the undead Lord tries to destroy the very archived records that are driving the plot of the actual novel, as they could reveal too much about him. It’s a blend of storytelling and plot devices that was extremely ahead of its time. The other factor that ensured the novel’s popularity and longevity is the variety of interpretations to which it lends itself.

According to John Sutherland of *The Irish Times*, Stoker was influenced by the “moral panic about immigration” that was experienced by Victorian society at the end of the 19th Century. After all, a Brexiteer could summarize the plot as ‘an illegal immigrant from Eastern Europe occupies several squats in London, hoping to prey on local women.’ That probably wouldn’t do much for urban property values. Critic Paul Murray, from Oxford University, sees the plot of *Dracula* as an allegory of male insecurity and the dangers of subservience to another person. Could this be Irving, too?

Murray also points out how modern commentators see in the novel “deviant and taboo forms of sexuality, including rape, incest, adultery, oral sex, group sex, sex during menstruation, bestiality, paedophilia, venereal disease, and voyeurism, among other things.” Among other things? What other things? You haven’t left anything out! This makes it sound as though Stoker used vampirism as a thinly disguised portrayal of his sexual proclivities.

Now, Professor Pektas of Soderton University College has a compelling opposing view. Stoker wrote *Dracula* shortly after his friend Oscar Wilde had been tried and sentenced for homosexual acts, and this may have led the author to view sexuality as a painful source of evil: “*Dracula* shows Stoker’s suspicions and anxiety towards all forms of sexuality, especially towards those considered to be ‘perverse’…(the) sinful attractions of the Count suggest Stoker’s fears about his own sexuality.”

Stepping away from sex for once, you can also find a Marxist allegory in this vampire tale, at least according to Franco Moretti of Stanford University. He argues that the novel was about the crisis of liberal capitalism taking place within the 1890s, put in jeopardy by the rise of monopolies.