The Case of Renfield

Renfield is most assuredly one of my favorite characters in Dracula. I find his case most interesting and as a character he is rather unforgettable. There is much we as readers can learn from Renfield's case that applies throughout the rest of the novel. Most obviously, Renfield exhibits the same characteristics as Dracula in the case that he keeps many pets and has each pet feed off of the other. Renfield then takes the pet and eats it in order to absorb their life-force: "My homicidal maniac is of a  peculiar kind. I shall have to invent a new classification for him, and call him a zoophagous (life-eating) maniac; what he desires is to absorb as many lives as he can, and he has laid himself out to achieve it in a cumulative way" (Stoker 61). Renfield is the representation of Dracula which is familiar to the English culture. Where Dracula is a foreign character outside of familiarity to English tradition, Renfield grows out of this same tradition. Renfield is England's rendition of the vampire.

It is no coincidence that Renfield is in the insane asylum. This is where the socially unacceptable are condemned in this century, although in Renfield's case it is easy to see why he should be in an insane asylum. Regardless, it does bring into question the nature of insanity. Renfield is labeled and classified by Dr. Seward. He has gone beyond the "homicidial maniac" and is labeled a "zoophagous maniac." He is given a specific classification. To what effect do labels have on insanity? The captain of the ship which Dracula travels on dismisses his first mate's behavior as paranoia and insanity. But it is actually rooted from a reality. Therefore, how much so is Renfield's behavior rooted in reality and is it really insanity?