1983. From a novel or play of literary merit, select an important character who is a villain. Then, in a well-organized essay, analyze the nature of the character's villainy and show how it enhances meaning in the work. Do not merely summarize the plot.
Was it Batman's goodness or the joker's evil that made Batman Gotham's dark knight? Bram Stoker, author of Dracula, would probably argue that the Joker made Batman a hero, not the other way around. Similarly, in Bram Stoker's Dracula, it was the evil character Dracula who not only sends the plot rolling and enhances character development, but also allows the text to surpass a fictional novel and be readily applicable to early 20th century Europe.
Count Dracula bears all that is evil and often said to be the devil. However, Dracula's greatest evil is far more symbolic than physical. It is his general persona. He is the destroyer of innocence, particularly in females. Had Stoker created a villain that tormented men, the evilness of Dracula would be lost. Though Stoker creates this pure evil villain, there is a certain fondness he conveys with Dracula. Towards the beginning of the novel, Dracula slowly kills Lucy and then turns her into a vampire. The conversion of Lucy by blood is far more symbolic. The loss of innocence through blood transfusion alludes to sex and loss of virginity (often a parallel to innocence). Again, Dracula doesn't just kill Lucy in the physical world, but also the spiritual and religious world. Dracula is the complete villain: he is foreign (from Transylvania), he attacks females (pure and innocent ones) and he not only kills their bodies, but ruins their souls so they can no longer go to heaven.
Why create an absolutely evil entity? The idea of an absolutely evil entity is contrary to most ideologies that stress balance or Yin and Yang. However, Dracula is a very symbolic character so making him an absolutely evil entity is a very bold statement. The first conclusion that arises when looking at Dracula is that he is the manifestation of all things foreign in Britain during the early 20th century. Dracula is not only from Transylvania, but he is also anti-christian in the sense that any holy relic will burn him. Alone, this piece of evidence is insignificant, but in the grand scheme of early 20th Britain, Xenophobia was as big of a topic as it is in the sunbelt states in present-day United States. The greater implications that associate Dracula and the whole Anglo-Saxon superiority novel in general is what makes Dracula a must-read when studying British history.
Dracula in Stoker's famous novel is not just any villain used to create a conflict, he is the central key to the novel. His pure evil essence makes him a unique villain whose implications stem far past the details of the plot.
Good job with this essay. You addressed the prompt really well and used evidence in a subtle but extremely convincing manner. I feel a lot of times people just throw stuff - quotes or summaries - and call it evidence but you did a great job integrating it all. I would be wary of using a question as a topic sentence in your second body paragraph. I like how it works within the essay and I think it actually flows pretty well, but I don't know how the AP would like such a deviation from the formula Holmes gave us. You use really good plain style that's easy to read and does not distract from your purpose at all. One little writing comment..the introduction has a "similarly" that you don't need. Otherwise, nice nice job.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very good open prompt. The only suggestion I have is be wary of your topic sentences, rather more specifically the third paragraph's topic sentence. I think you can find a better way to transition into this paragraph. Also, maybe add in a little bit more of the "effects" part of the prompt (how does the nature effect the novel which leads to meaning), though one can still pick out some. I really don't have much else to say. Nicely done.
ReplyDelete