Throughout the novel the editor comments on how the book Dracula differs from the film. The first such instance described Dracula’s hairiness, “film adaptations avoid Dracula’s hairiness; different as they are from each other most cinematic Dracula’s are clean shaven…these hairy palms are one of Dracula’s few affinities with the werewolf (and in the opinion of some commentators, with the Victorian masturbator as well.”(24) While I don’t think that Dracula’s pleasure is ever autoerotic, the very idea of the vampire is one who feeds of others to survive, I did find Dracula’s werewolf qualities interesting. In addition Dracula is described as having a uni-brow and a large white moustache, drastically different from any vampire I have ever seen.
Although it makes sense for a vampire to grow a moustache if he could, it helps hiding big fangs. Another strange example of how novel Dracula differs from film adaptations is when Jonathan Harker witnesses Dracula leaving, crawling down the sheer face of his castle walls face down. The related footnote seemed odd to me, “Jonathan’s repeated association of the crawling Dracula with a lizard aligns the vampire with those monstrous proofs of Darwinian evolution, dinosaurs-which Victorian scientists classified as reptiles-rather than with the mammalian bat.”(39) This was the first instance I had heard of with Dracula crawling around rather then flying, but I did not compare Dracula to a dinosaur in my mind or see how evolution tied into the equation at all. Later on in the story Dracula transforms into a large black dog, a mammal. And Dracula’s vampire brides transform into moonbeams while harassing Jonathan in the castle. My point being vampires abilities are much more likely to be tied with the supernatural then with Darwinian evolution.
All-in-all I found the barrage of footnotes helpful. The majority of notes deal with the names of nationalities and geography in the start of the novel. The editors call continuity on Bram Stoker a few times, though I worry they might be jumping the gun. The footnotes draw constant correlations with the Bible and Shakespeare, and without the notes I would miss most of the references entirely. But a select few notes seem unnecessary, “The first of many tributes to Dracula’s mastery of languages.” Is footnote number 9 on page 18. While I in no way disagree, I don’t think the editors need to add in the patterns they see.
The novel’s footnotes also play up the aspects of technology in the novel, giving the introduction every piece of gadgetry an aside. I only wish that the same were done for each mention of religion. While many of the superstitions are described to us, and there are a good number of footnotes concerning Biblical references, the technology in the novel is examined closely under a microscope, the subverted purpose of specific characters and their relation to the equipment pondered, while I am left scratching my head over the meaning of old men giving monologues on the dead and the grim reaper.
“There is legend that a white lady is seen in one of the windows.”(63) This brief aside reminded me deeply of the novel “The Monk”. The ghost is a part of local legend and there is speculation as to her true identity as well as why she walks the ruins of Whitby Abbey. I also had strong vibes of the Monk when the gypsy woman comes to the castle after her child is taken from her by Dracula and eaten. She pounds on her chest and has a fit outside the main door. But instead of the character falling sick from her outburst, she is eaten by an army of wolves sent by Dracula almost immediately.

Out of all the characters in the novel Nelly is by far my favorite, mainly because she is reasonable and well meaning. After Heathcliff makes a move on Isabella, and Edgar and Cathy both become depressed and self-obsessed, Nelly thinks, “that the Grange had but one sensible soul in its walls, and that lodged in my body”(94) I was sorely disappointed how her treatment of the hysterical Catherine backfired. Cathy planned to act crazy to garner sympathy and attention from her husband but Nelly announces her plan almost immediately. Everyone then acts self absorbed and childish by going off into their own sulkily and hoping that the other will come to them. Kenneth, the doctor practiced blood letting on Cathy but was able to predict how she was in danger of becoming so upset it damages her health. She couldn’t be contradicted, is that a disease? I am reminded of how emotions can quickly put characters on the verge of death, much like in “The Monk”. Story told almost entirely from her perspective.

The character of Joseph is a religious man, but also an evil one. He has memorized scriptures and often speaks of God. Even though he is truthful and shows a sense of duty few others do, he is clearly an unlikeable character. While I was reading I couldn’t help but wonder what the book was saying about religion through Joseph. I don’t think it’s anything good but besides being generally overbearing and strict Joseph hasn’t done much of his own volition. I’m glad that the revised copy has translations of Joseph’s dialogue because without it I would have little to no idea what he was saying.

Nature in the story, is harsh and unforgiving. The landscape is made up of swamps and bogs as well as high rocky hills. Although Mr. Lockwood finds the surroundings beautiful when he first arrives, and Catherine grows to love the hills and outdoors more after her sickness, the natural elements act as antagonist repeatedly. When Heathcliff hears of Catherine’s designs to marry Edgar Linton and steals off, a storm soaks Cathy to the bone while she remains outside on the lookout for Heathcliff. The gales knock a tree into the house and “Joseph swung onto his knees, beseeching the Lord to remember the Patriarchs Noah and Lot”(67). The second act of nature in the novel chronologically, or first in the novel, is when Mr.Lockwood is trapped in Wuthering Heights by a great snowstorm and when walking home he falls up to his neck in a snowdrift, weakening him so much he is bed-ridden for days, allowing Nelly a chance to provide back story on the characters we have had the pleasure to be introduced to.

I found the cursing in the novel is a bit strange, partly because of the dialect of the time and partly because of how they were occasionally omitted. On the very first page of the novel Mr. Lockwood describes Heathcliff’s mannerisms thusly; “The ‘walk in,’ was uttered with closed teeth and expressed the sentiment, ‘Go to the Deuce!’”. After I read this I had to go back and try to glean the meaning of the insult, which has evaded me expertly. Hareton swears like a sailor at Nelly when she visits Wuthering Heights. Again it was difficult for me to use context clues to find the meaning behind Hareton’s insults, but found it odd that Hareton thought his swearing somehow protected.
The second contributor to my confusion was the practice of some characters, Nelly for the most part, to use dashes instead of curse words. I read briefly about how dashes were used in the preface, but had forgotten about it by the time I was given an example. I think what threw me off most was how up until that point Nelly had always omitted swearing by casually mentioning it was too horrible to repeat or remember. The sudden switch in styles made me reread the sentence to realize that the dashes were meant to cover up swearing. I can understand how an editor could have made punctuation like that more confusing.

Although I still don’t understand Cathy’s reasoning behind turning civilized and then marrying Edgar Linton.