Comments on: I Love Lucy

By: webslog

webslog — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:30:58 +0000

“Or is she kinda stupid and bitchy but just really, really hot?”

Yes. But you forgot rich. Never, ever forget rich.

By: Katya

Katya — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 03:27:57 +0000

This is my take: Lucy is beautiful, patently wealthy, and cultured (for the time, anyway–she’s been to school, and she exhibits some ditziness–perhaps only in contrast to clever Mina, who comes from a low station (she’s an orphan) but is resourceful and ambitious–but no signs of “lowness”.) She’s the catch of the century. And regardless of her own wishes, Arthur should be the only appropriate choice.

I’m not clear as to whether the text makes it explicit that Lucy is highborn as opposed to nouveau riche. Would the fact that her family home is in London proper, rather than on some country manor, indicate the latter? If she’s highborn and rich, then it’s surprising that she wasn’t betrothed in childhood. And it speaks well of her nature that she didn’t laugh Dr Seward (doctoring being a “trade”) and the uncivilised American right out of her frilly bedroom.

I think the scenario that makes the most sense is that the Westenra family is nouveau riche and Arthur is penniless aristocrat–genteel poverty was common. For an impoverished aristocrat, Lucy, even if she was a parvenue, is a dream come true–beautiful and mannered enough to pass in society, and crucially, complete with expectations (her dying mother’s only other relations are a distant branch of the family). The parents, for their part, should have been deliriously happy about the match–the Westenras had money but dreamt of status, and the Holmwoods had status but needed cash.

By: JoAnn

JoAnn — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:03:54 +0000

also: Lucy is RICH, a catch in that era, even if she had been ugly. The fact that she is beautiful and charming just makes her that much more appealing. None of the men are necessarily monied; she gets her pick. Notice that Mina worries at the beginning about Harker worrying that he doesn’t have enough money to marry her. Lucy, no worries.

By: mjdemo

mjdemo — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:29:36 +0000

Also, remember, Lucy was probably still a virgin at the time of her death / undeath. So the sense of jealousy and betrayal that often accompanies break-ups today was not so intense. It was a platonic relationship that Lucy ended with Quincy and Seward – she wasn’t sleeping around. Also this fact shows Dracula to be a kind of rapist, stealing the innocence of a young woman in her prime, making her commit unspeakable acts. See my forum posts for more…

By: Harmon

Harmon — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:40:46 +0000

Clearly you have forgotten your Horatio Alger. The men are typical heroic stereotypes in the pulp lit of the time.

By: kevinfanning

kevinfanning — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:27:13 +0000

The strangest part to me was that Arthur was the least helpful of any of the dudes. He spent most of Lucy’s convalescence somewhere offstage, but even Quincey prowls around the house at night, protecting Lucy from whatever. I think they are all secretly hoping to win her back. Except Van Helsing, who has always had a thing for Seward, but until now their love dared not speak its name on account of the teacher-student relationship, which in Victorian times was just beginning to be frowned upon.

By: victoria

victoria — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:16:39 +0000

That may be the case, but it happened…
2004’s Van Helsing staring Hugh Jackman…and it had ALL the horror standards in it, Drac, Frankenstien, wearwolves…

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0338526/

By: chswimmer

chswimmer — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:03:33 +0000

Hugh Jackman is waaaay to young to be Van Helsing. I imagine him as Sean Connery (circa The Rock) but with a Netherlander accent!