Thanks so much, Nathan! Yeah, that narrative decision mystified me for a long time. Before I read Dracula, I assumed that the whole thing was set at Whitby because so much is made of the connection (mostly by the Whitby Tourism Board). Even after I read it I remembered the Whitby section as being much larger and more important than it was, and it was only after re-reading it that I really saw how small that Whitby section is. You could imagine an editor saying, "cut Whitby so we get to the action in London faster" but I think the novel would have lost a lot in atmosphere and imagery if he had done that. It's Stoker's "Tom Bombadil." It was only by thinking about Whitby in Dracula whilst actually in Whitby that I could understand why Stoker had included it... it's too good a setting to miss out on! Another angle would be to think of Stoker as Lyceum theatre manager and the three primary settings (Transylvania, Whitby, and London) as three acts / three scene changes. Although we go back to Transylvania at the end so Stoker has more freedom in a novel than a stage play. But it may have been in his head to think, "a story needs different locations" especially considering how lavish the sets and costumes were at the Lyceum...!

Thank so much! I appreciate the support

Thanks, Brian! And thanks for watching :)