The Useless Morris Of Bram Stoker’s Dracula

Bram Stokers genus genus Dracula is to a greater extent a score of ro piece of musicce than it is of horror. What makes it very unique is that it is an emblem of the love biography affair of the soul, the bole and the heart. In the fiction, the most important love personal business ar that of myna bird and Jonathan and Dracula and mynah. Jonathan is the fist person in the novel to take care Dracula and is excessively the lover of myna bird at the same time. When Jonathan leaves for Transylvania to function Dracula purchase an estate, Dracula becomes aware of mynah bird, and short becomes obsessed with the purity and completelyegiance of this char to her would-be husband.Later, the vampire, Dracula, because of his obsession with Mina, pollutes her by alluring her to drink his blood. Dracula want Mina for himself, non as a victim, st minacious as his wife simply because of the devotion of Mina and Jonathan to each opposite, Jonathan pursues Dracula and frees h is groom-to-be from the curse of one day proper the queen of the undead. In effect, the novel illustrates the wave- affairicle duality of purity the purity of Jonathan and Minas love and the purity of Draculas love for Mina.While it is unfair to say that it is plainly Jonathan who has a pure kind of love for Mina, Draculas love for her is really pure as well, but on a darker level, consortly, at this point the novel shifts from a bizarre love tri by and byal to a battle amid tho coarsely and evil. In the novel, t present is handstion of a dowryicular font named Quincy Morris who is the third person to court Lucy, the best friend of Mina who to a fault becomes a victim of Dracula. Morris is the exalted picture of the American gentleman. He is an merchant-venturer and later gives up his own life in the battle against Dracula.Morris is in the accepted version of the novel by Bram Stoker, however, in later versions of the base, as well as in film remakes, his temper is non included. Upon reading the original version of the novel, it is exhaust that the image of Morris re of imports anchored on terce basic and very churl concepts humble paradox, accessory, and ancillary, hence his inclusion from later versions of the novel. truly simply, Morris is like the sugar moveers on the measure, and without him the cake would still have its icing, hence, his fiber in the story is one that can be easily dispensed with without touching the counsel and the maculation of the story.Initially, let us play his eccentric in being the forgivable paradox this means that Morris is not part of the major(ip) paradox of the story, and so in later remakes, especially those from Hollywood, based on the principles of a authorised Hollywood write up, Morris no longer appears for the basic reason that in a classic Hollywood narrative, solitary(prenominal)(prenominal) the major paradox or man-made lake of engagement is rattling adopted. This point di ssertation could be validated in the linguistic context of the original version of the novel itself. It ordain be noted that Morris is first mentioned in the novel in the letter of Lucy to Mina on the 24th of May.(Stoker, rapscallion 87) Morris here is introduced as one of Lucy outfitors, and she writes Mina to give notice (of) her about the suitors who came to her that day, of which Morris was one. (Stoker, page 90) Lucy, in her letter, describes the attributes of Mr. Morris, and more than importantly, very discreetly refers to a sore infatuation for the man, in the lines, Well, he did ol concomitantory perception so good humoured and so pleased that it didnt see half so hard to refuse him as it did measly Dr. Seward. (Stoker, page 91) Of course, because Lucy was in love with almostbody else, she refuses the courtship of Morris.(Stoker, page 92) So, it is clear, stock-still from this initial introduction given to the Morris character, that although he is part and parc el of an accessory conflict, he does not really figure in the major paradox. The refusal of Lucy is thus far a foreshadowing of the staidness of the percentage of this detail character. The subtle shift of Lucy of his courtship is an indication that although Morris goes on to do some pretty world-shaking things in the story, he does is not actually of whatever significant connection to any of the major characters, more so, to a second level character like Lucy.In this same chapter, Morris in any case writes a letter to a plastered Arthur Holmwood, (Stoker, page 95) who is the suitor favored by Lucy. In his letter, he simply invites Holmwood to a drinking session with Dr. Seward. (Stoker, page 96) To this invitation, Holmwood obliges. lease here that Seward is the doctor who runs the asylum right hand beside the estate purchased by Dracula, so Morris flat begins to worm his way into the story. What is to note in the invitation of Morris, however, is the concomitant that the topic of their conversations was going to be his being rejected by Lucy.There is a certain level of pain in his letter which was supposedly from Lucys rejection, hence the lines, There are more yarns to be told, and more wounds to be healed. (Stoker, 96) This particular invitation propels the utilisation of Morris to being worse, not just that he is a part of a minor conflict, but with this letter, he in like manner becomes a nuisance or a confusion in the story, as he straight off manages to enter the main stream flow of the novel through Dr. Seward and Holmwood. His role as an accessory is validate more when he is sent by Holmwood to visit the ill Lucy who was and so under the care of Dr.Seward. (Stoker, page 237) In effect, his role is not applicable to the general conflict because what he does, is he simply stands in for main character or is an accessary to the main characters. As an auxiliary character, the text offers more validations in this direction. In the chap ter where Van Helsing reveals his intention of acid off the head of the corpse of Lucy (Stoker, page 329) the solitary(prenominal) comment that Morris offers is, That is fair replete (Stoker, page 329) in agreement of the verbal proposition of Dr. Morris.It will be noted, that although this is the only line offered by Morris in this section, it would seem that he is the only one in agreement of the plans of Van Helsing, therefore, making him an auxiliary to the thoughts of the professor. Later, when they all go to do what Helsing had in mind, as revealed in the journal of Seward, Morris begins by simply seconding the doubts of the two other men that they were with, that Helsing must have removed the body of Lucy prior to the operation that they were going through, so, here again, Morris is an adversarial auxiliary to Van Helsing, but with his statement, then becomes an ally of Helsing.(Stoker, 333) Of course, later, when the actual act of re-killing Lucy is completed, Seward, Hol mwood, and Morris, all become allies of Van Helsing in his advocacy against the undead, thus, confirming the auxiliary role of Morris in this particular novel. What is ironic though, is that these tierce men all had intimate encounters with Lucy, what preparednesss Morris apart from the three of them is the fact that during the time when Helsing was proposing to re-kill Lucy, he was the one who offered the to the lowest degree resistance.(Stoker, page 329) He was also in the theme not because he love Lucy like the other two chaps in the group, but because of his sense of adventure sort of a superficial reason, if perused properly. Finally, to further settle the argument that later versions of the novel would not have been any different even in the absence seizure of Morris, it would help to consider his accessory role one which, according to the definitions of literature, is simply a role that makes it easier for the major characters to move towards the plot and the climax of the story.A role which also, all the more becomes very spare in the classic Hollywood narrative because the struggles of the main characters towards the resolution of the plot are actually given more evaluate than the act of making these struggles easier, defeating the steady escalation of conflict in the story. Morris does just this in the story, he hitches the escalation of the conflict, and offers periods of respite for the major characters a role that should not exist if reader or viewer excitement was to be the main issue of consideration.Morris remains faithful to this unessential role again when he offers to go on with the vampire hunting group to visit the madman, Renfield, who is a henchman of Dracula, in Sewards asylum. (Stoker, page 387) Here, he poses no threat or favor, but earlier is a mere observer however, this particular scene moves Morris closer to meeting Dracula and, consequently, his demise. In this particular section of the story, Morris also witnesse s the madman along with Jonathan Harker, the fiancee of Mina, hence, bringing him into the inner boundaries of the story.Later, in Harkers journal, he reveals another pivotal comment of Morris, when he narrates how Morris makes a comment about Renfield, Say, Jack, if that man wasnt attempting a bluff, he is about the sanest insane I ever saw. Im not sure, but I believe that he had some serious purpose, and if he had, it was pretty rough on him not to get a chance. (Stoker, page 394) Here, Morris becomes accessory to Helsing and Harkers plot to pursue Dracula by actually fanning the flame of the supposed connection between Dracula and the madman.However, this could have easily been make by Seward which all the more makes Morris averment quite useless, and besides, even in the absence of this assertion, Harker and Helsing would have pursued their stance anyway. Later, with the disaster of Renfield, Van Helsing is called upon to visit the asylum to help then, by some turn of cir cumstance, Morris follows suit along with Holmwood. (Stoker, page 439) This sets the stage for other events that further validates the accessorial role of Morris.In the later parts of the novel, Morris correctly offers to use horses instead of the more elaborate carriages that might depict attention (Stoker, page 467) he also, along with Holmwood, performed accessory operations like burn mark vampire nests accessory to the operations of the major vampire hunter, Van Helsing (Stoker, page 478) Morris also ordered to talk to nobility to fix the smoothness of their boots (Stoker, page 538), he also helped to defeat the gypsies with his bowie knife, (Stoker, page 597) and finally, he also validated the minority of his role by being the one to herd the horses during their mission to save Mina.(Stoker, page 562) In the end, afterwards all these laborious enfoldings in the story, Morris is killed, and the only apparent payment for his death is the fact that the birthday of Minas and Jonathans first child falls on the date of the death of Morris. This is such a pathetic way to go for a character in the story who had through so much to assist the major characters, however, because his role was merely to complicate paradox, to auxiliarize, and to accessorize the major characters in the story, his role was very dispensable.In the classic Hollywood narrative, the role of Morris would translate into added expense, added complication, and added actors for the producers. In later versions of the novel, his role served to take external focus from the main characters of the story. In effect, Morris was not only a useless character in the story, because although he assisted in the fulfillment of many pivotal circumstances, his participation could have been easily taken on by one of the major characters.Another significant effect of the presence of Morris in the story is his diminutization of the role of Van Helsing instead of fortifying the capacities of Helsing, he serv ed to show that Helsing was bossy and was unable to do things on his own, therefore, staining the reputation of this particular major character.In conclusion, the exclusion of Morris from other more recent versions of the novel, whether in written or movie form, could only have worked for the better. His absence has made the story clearer and aimed at a more distinct direction. After all, his role in the story is simply to leave minor paradox, be an accessory, and be an auxiliary to the major characters, not directly affecting or influencing the outcome of the plot or the turn of major events.His affiliation with Lucy does not even count, and neither does his accidental kinship to Jonathan and Mina Morris was there as a part of a team that already existed, that may have well do just as good even in his absence. Works Cited Stoker, Bram. Dracula. New York pellucid Label Books, 2001. 90-595. 26 Apr. 2009 .