#lilac theme | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

apoloadonisandnarcissus · 28 days ago

Text

"The Plague of Nosferatu": Rats, Witchcraft and Possession in “Nosferatu” (2024)

Rats were already present in the previous adaptations of “Nosferatu”. Until recently, the Black Plague (bubonic plague) was believed to have been caused by a flea found in rats, and the consensus was the killing of cats allowed “plague rats” to multiply and lead to the demise of almost 50 million Europeans throughout the Middle Ages, and is considered as one of the most fatal pandemics in human history. However, this is no longer the consensus among historians, who have found evidence of other explanations (bacteria: gerbils; lice; etc.); And for this reason, the symbolism of cats (detachment; independence and wisdom) is not connected with the symbolism of rats in this story (which is why I left the rats out of my essay on the subject).

Rats were connected to witches and sorcerers, in European imagination during the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Modern Age. In the 16th century, in England, rats infestations were abundant, and so were accusations of witchcraft. Between 1587 and 1588, witchcraft trials were rampant in Europe, still. Both witches and vermin (rats; snakes; toads; spiders; etc) were linked in European imagination at the time. Both sorcerers and rats were to blame for plagues, disease, bad crops and misfortune in general.

Contagion theories in the 15th to 17th centuries dabbled in religious and metaphysical explanations for the plague (unlike the 19th century, which began to embrace scientific views). The two main theories were of God’s punishment or wrath on a sinful and corrupted earth, where rats were either agents of witchcraft and the Devil, or God’s direct agents in punishing the very presence of sorcerers among humanity.

"Jesus Christ in heaven! This isn’t a Satanic magician, or any other humiliating fantasy. It’s no wonder you’re a laughing stock. Out! Frau Hutter is mad and should have been locked up long ago. My Anna was bitten by vermin. Rats. No more."

In 1666, William Austin, in his poem, “Anatomy of Pestilence”, argued the plague appeared after the Great Flood as a sign of God’s indignation towards a “fallen world”. He saw plague as God’s punishment for a sinful and cursed earth, infested by witches. To him, the plague was a gendered issue, as he will draw parallels with Greek mythology, of female “furies” and Pandora opening the box; and Eve from Christian-Jewish tradition. Witches and sorcerers, and their sexualized alliances with the Devil, were the cause of God’s punishment on earth; they were the direct or indirect sources of plague contamination.

"The Devil! Our cargo is cursed!"

In theological texts throughout this time period, “plague” and “pestilence” were all connected to God’s wrath: disease, famine, bad crops, animal infestations, etc. Jean Bodin, “On the Demon Mania of Witches” (1580), argued that moral corruption, blasphemy and atheism caused plague, evil spirits, wars and famine. Witches and sorcerers were morally corrupt, associated with vermin (rats, toads, flies, spiders, etc.), and were the cause: “If one lets the vermin multiply, it engenders corruption and infects everything.”

In his treaty “Contagion” (1603), Thomas Lodge argued the plague was caused by the corruption of the four humors of the human body (Humoral theory), by the corrupted human spirit and body because of “evil vapours” from breathing air (environmental causes). Edward Topsell, “Historie of Foure-Footed Beastes” (1607), calls rats “creatures of putrefaction”, and connects them with similar vermin (considered monstrous and useless animals) rats tails are similar to poisonous serpents, associated with disease.

"I will end this plague. This devil."

In the 17th century, George Wither, “Britain’s Rembrancer”, doesn’t blame the rats, but witches for the plague. He reimagines the witch as a “feminized basilisk” who infects others with “her poison”, and the plague was a sort of “airborne venom” because of witches. To this author, “pestilence” is sorcery, and the “master of all poisons”.

Count Orlok was alive during the late 16th century (1580-1590); and the plague hit Transylvania particularly harshly during the 15th and the 16th centuries. The towns and villages in the Carpathians suffered deeply with the plague in 1553-1554, with countless deaths. Between 1552 and 1554, many aristocrats died, and some territories were even depopulated due to the plague.

Here, we also find the theological explanation of plague contagion, in the midst of religious turmoil between Protestants and Catholics. The Catholics saw this outbreak as God punishment of His enemies, as divine justice against the heretics (Protestants). Protestants, on the other hand, refused the “plague” Catholic saints (like St. Sebastian) and saw hardship as a path to salvation but also as punishment for pride, greed and other sins, advising against attachment to the “riches of the world”.

Being a Count, in the face of a plague epidemic, Orlok had to work alongside religious and medical authorities to deal with the situation. However, when epidemics got out of control, physicians (doctors) could have full power of decision over the people. Several restrictions to gatherings of every kind were made during this period. Burials on churchs were forbidden. Mentions of rotten corpses and maggots were popular in religious speech to force citizens to keep the plague graveyards clean, and avoid the spread of disease. In “Nosferatu” (2024) we have allusions to all of this and even the “Death and the Maiden” motif at the end of the film.

“Plague! It’s a plague ship!”

But a Count was not all Orlok was in life, he was also a sorcerer, an enchanter, a Solomonar, a occultist warlord, worshipper of Zalmoxis, the Dacian god of life and death, and immortality. His sorcery and occult dealings were already the scapegoat for the plague in the 16th century, and he was demonized as a “Devil worshiper”. Then, he came back from the dead as a “plague carrier”, a strigoi from Balkan folklore, in the 19th century. But he did not resurrect on his own; it was an enchantress, an necromancer, Ellen, who cursed him. She’s his “affliction”, his plague, his disease. She’s the witch who infects the world with his plague.

And this is connected with another theme at play in this story, linked with the "Dracula" novel by Bram Stoker: "threat of female sexual expression", based on 1980's Feminist Literary Criticism, where the physical figure of the "sick woman" was one of the principal ways in which female sexuality manifests as a contagious disease (Lucy Westenra and her degeneration into vampirism). During the 19th century, Medicine became concerned with hygiene, pathogens and theories about disease origin from a scientific perspective. Some doctors advocated the theory of “contagionism” (disease was spread from individual to individual), while others, the “miasmatists” defended that environmental issues (polluted water, unhygienic spaces, etc.) were often crucial in disease transmission.

In the "Dracula" novel, and as a consequence in "Nosferatu" (2024), the "contagionism" and fear of contagion theories are present in vampirism and "the plague" (Count Orlok), but also on Ellen herself ("sick woman" as expression of female sexuality), as Friedrich Harding will blame her for "infecting" his wife, as he expells both her and Thomas from his household. Friedrich is “Victorian patriarch”, while Anna is the “Victorian woman ideal” (God-fearing, respectable and devoted wife and mother, living for and by her husband and children). Ellen tries to tell Friedrich: "Please, these are no troubled nerves – it is as Professor Franz described… a demon!" Ellen spend the night with his wife, and now she's sick; he blames Ellen "contagion". He represents Victorian society ostracizing Ellen, all over again, because she is a "sick woman", the embodiment of female sexuality manifesting as a contagious disease.

"I don’t know myself… I… Ellen, tell me, what is this insufferable darkness?"

This is connected to Victorian views of female sexuality: a plague and a monstrosity in need of containment (sickness, contagious, wicked, sin); women should have no sexual desire whatsoever (Ellen's shame; "I'm unclean"); married heterosexual sex was the only socially acceptable sexual expression in the Victorian era, and everything else (masturbation, homosexuality, prostitution, etc.) was considered deviant, “sinful” and “evil”; sex was a marital duty women had to go through to have children and serve their husbands (women’s sexuality owned and controlled by their husbands).

In this sense, the titular Nosferatu are both Ellen and Count Orlok, because he's a monster of her own creation, and he spreads her power (death) throughout the land. The "plague" itself is deeply connected to her, not merely metaphorically, but literally.

The "Blood Plague"

On a medical level, Dr. Sievers and Professor Von Franz enumerate the physical symptoms of the “plague” caused by Nosferatu, and identify it as a “blood plague” because of the evidence on the captain’s ship corpse: “sepsis, ophthalmic discharge – even flagrant rodent bites”, but the body is “entirely absent of blood”. This is when Professor Von Franz identifies they are dealing with “a force more powerful than evil. It is death itself”, a Nosferatu, a vampyr, a “undead plague-carrier”. The crew of the ship, on their travel to Wisburg, progressively die as victims of Orlok, and, aside from these symptoms, they are also vomiting blood (like Friedrich Harding near his own death).

This is a septicemic plague, in the sense the infection spreads throughout the body via bloodstream, leading to death. Hence the blood coughing and shortness of breath (lung infection). However, there’s no gangrene limbs nor black sores on Orlok’s victims, so this “plague” isn’t bubonic plague (hence the name “Black Plague”), it’s something else.

This “plague” is probably Necrotizing fasciitis, flesh-eating bacteria, which enters the body through a wound and targets the soft tissues, progresses very rapidly, leading to septic shock, multi-organ failure and loss of limbs. If left untreated, death is certain. This bacteria is found in corpses: Orlok, being undead and rotting, transmits it to his victims while he feeds on their blood.

But this plague isn’t merely physical, it’s mostly supernatural, spiritual. And, as shown with Thomas Hutter and the Orthodox Nuns, it can be cured with exorcism. Because Orlok, being a strigoi from Balkan folklore (with roots in Dacian mythology), it’s not blood he feeds on specifically; its his victims life energy, their souls: "The good sisters sought to nurse me back to health with their prayer."

As Orlok is feeding on his victims, he’s gradually trapping their souls inside of Nosferatu (the rotten corpse), alongside his own. This is a sort of reversed “possession”; where the victim becomes part of Nosferatu, taking residence there until Nosferatu is destroyed and the souls are set free (including Orlok’s); because strigoi are sustain by the souls of others ("I will drink upon thy soul"; "I relinquished him my soul").

And this is foreshadowed by Clara and Louise Harding (the foreshadowing devices in this narrative), who will become victims of Orlok, too: "Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord my soul to keep." The "Lord" being Orlok, "Your Lordship"; "Your Lord. I will be addressed as the honour of my blood demands it”; “My Lord.”

Besides the physical symptoms, there’s a notorious change of behavior on Orlok’s victims, as they experience nightmares and seem taken by madness and delirium. This is interpreted as “fever”, but it’s them having access to Orlok’s soul inside of Nosferatu, and vice-versa. He's dragging these characters into darkness (Nosferatu) alongside him, forcing his own pain and torment upon their souls.

Even after his exorcism, Thomas is weak, and drained of his life force, and seems taken by a delirium every now and again. He’s absolutely sure Orlok wants Ellen after being exorcised, because he had access to Orlok’s soul. But, as he says so himself, he’s not fully free of Orlok’ spell, because a part of his soul is still inside Nosferatu. He acts out of character during the “possession scene”, as he, quite literally, possesses her, until he becomes terrified by it, both by her and by his own action (which is the opposite to the restrained, chaste and modest Victorian love he represents in this story). Orlok cannot spiritually possess Ellen (he has no control over her soul), but he does have a degree of spiritual influence over Thomas and his behavior (Orlok shadow compelled Thomas to kick Ellen out of their bed). And so the “visit from a vampire” and the “possession” isn’t Ellen’s. It’s Thomas who gets possessed by Orlok in this scene, as he passionately has sex with Ellen.

"No! Orlok!" / "Let him see. Let him see our love!"

Thomas believes he was the one who unleashed Orlok into the world (because he sold him a house in Wisburg) and vows to destroy him. His delirium is about unbearable guilt (because he blames himself for everything that has happened), and seeks both Ellen and Friedrich Hardings’ forgiveness. He’s now on a vendetta against Orlok, driven by desire to avenge Ellen, the Hardings and himself. He wants to drive a spike of cold iron through Orlok (like he saw it done in Transylvania, bringing this story full circle) as revenge.

“He shall never harm you again!”

Anna Harding’s delirium is about motherhood; her daughters (she asks to see the girls to reassure them) and her pregnancy (it’s eating her away), but also her sexuality (as she has similar convulsions to Ellen). She laughs and cries at the same time, touching her husband’s face. It’s the burden of reproduction, a consequence of sexual activity. She says she doesn’t known herself anymore, and talks about insufferable darkness. And relates this to Ellen, asking her what is this she’s experiencing.

"I fear little Friedrich is so strong and hungry, he’s eating me weary."

Friedrich Harding delirium is about maddening grief. He’s a wealthy ship merchant, but nothing of that matters anymore. He lost his greatest treasures; Anna and their children. He blames Professor Von Franz and Ellen; and then he’ll go on to blame himself when Thomas shows him Nosferatu is real: "Anna, my love. Our son… our little son… forgive me." But, unlike Thomas, Friedrich doesn’t care about revenge. He’s already dying from the “blood plague”, and instead of using his last strength to avenge his wife and children’s killings, he goes to them, to die alongside them, and he defiles his wife’s corpse.

“Your diseased mind has brought all of this outrage– your very presence does me wrong!”

Herr Knock delirium is about wanting to die as fast as possible, seeking an violent execution, instead of being killed by the “blood plague”. Orlok fed on him (“I relinquished him my soul"), and he found out the master he has been serving has to interest in fulfilling their covenant (share the secrets of immortality with him) because he only cares about is Ellen (“his pretty bride”).

"Strike again. I am blasphemy!"

What all of these “blood plague” deliriums have in common is Ellen herself:

Unbearable guilt: Thomas blames himself for what happened to Ellen and wants to be forgiven ("Please, it is my fault! Forgive me my dear, sweet friend!” as he’ll say to Friedrich), and make amends (“I’ll kill him!”);

Burden of reproduction: Anna feels her pregnancy is eating her away, because her unborn child is hungry like their father, and asks Ellen for explanations;

Maddening grief: Friedrich Harding blames Ellen’s diseased mind for his grief.

Death wish: Herr Knock wants to be executed because Orlok broke their covenant in favor of Ellen.

All of these characters’ souls are connected to Orlok’s, because they are all trapped inside of Nosferatu alongside his. And this is no coincidence because what Orlok wants is Ellen’s soul, to be “one with [me], ever-eternally”. This is his whole motivation in this story, as Robert Eggers confirms. He doesn’t care about world domination, nor spreading his plague, not collecting random souls. He wants Ellen’s soul.

Robert Eggers says the love triangle inspired by “Wuthering Heights” by Emily Brontë, and the “demon lover story” is what interested him the most in re-interpreting “Nosferatu”, and he’s doing a subversion of every theme of the “Dracula” novel. One of the main themes in “Wuthering Heights” is the destructive power of love.

In his own essay to “The Guardian” about his “Nosferatu”, Robert Eggers writes: “what are we to make of stories like this? What kind of trauma, pain and violence is so great that even death cannot stop it? It’s a heartbreaking notion. The folk vampire embodies disease, death, and sex in a base, brutal and unforgiving way.”

And so, Orlok forcing all of these characters to relive his own trauma fits this “demon lover story” in a, indeed, brutal and unforgiving way, as he forces Ellen to confront her own power (death), destroy her Victorian self-deception (“You deceive yourself”) and for her to remember their own shared trauma, at the same time. And this fits the “Wuthering Heights” inspiration, as Heathcliff will also torment everyone around him because of Catherine’s death.

“O’er centuries, a loathsome beast I lay within the darkest pit."

Before Ellen resurrected him and cursed at the prologue, Orlok was in “darkest pit”; if we follow Romanian folklore, this is a place between life and death for tormented souls, who can’t move on to the Afterlife, due to different reasons. He calls himself a “loathsome beast”. In 16th century English “loathsome” is connected to “sorrowful”, “grievous” (grief); and “beast” to “brutish or stupid man”, “fool” or “idiot” (a “brute”).

We are dealing with reincarnation themes in this story (Orlok was no more than a shadow at Ellen’s window during her teenage years, most likely inspired by “Wuthering Heights”, with Catherine’s ghost at Heathcliff’s window). The clues to this theme are in the story itself; as Orlok says he “cannot be sated” without Ellen; “sated” in 16th century English is related to the verb “sit” as in “rest”: “I cannot rest without you”, he can’t find peace in death without her soul by his side.

And he’ll elaborate next: “Remember how once we were? A moment. Remember?” This “once” was centuries ago, because the narrative established it’s impossible for him to be talking about the 19th century. Interesting enough, “impossible” is Thomas answer to Ellen saying “he took me as his lover then” because he had access to Orlok’s soul, he knows what she’s talking about can’t possibly be about her current life/incarnation.

I’ve been brainstorming some hypothesis when the answer has been in the story itself all along, because, of course it is.

Friedrich and Anna Harding are the mirror pair to Ellen and Orlok in “Nosferatu”; and even though, symbolically, they have different meanings (society vs. nature), the “blood plague” provides answers to Ellen and Orlok in the late 16th century, and gives more meaning on why Orlok targets them, as characters (and not merely as archetypes of Victorian patriarch and Victorian woman ideal). The themes of disease, sex and death connect these characters, too. Ellen’s first words to Professor Von Franz at Anna’s funeral are also very cryptic, as he says “more will be taken”, and she answers “I know. She was with child.” Which is a odd, random thing to say in response to Von Franz observation. Unless, Ellen is starting to remember.

“I shall never sleep again. Never. Let this your tender embrace keep me now in bliss, away from everlasting sleep.”

So, indeed, what is Orlok’s dark trauma, connected to Ellen, that death cannot stop it? And the answer is on the story itself: because even though Robert Eggers won’t reveal the full backstory on his Orlok, we know he was married and had a family once, not only because Bill Skarsgård said so in an interview, but we see this in the film itself: the bedroom where Orlok attacks Thomas has a double bed (with two pillows; meant for a couple; his and his wife’s bedroom) and the multiple sarcophagi in the castle crypt.

Ellen is the reincarnation of Orlok’s wife (not only his lover or bride; like I suggested before). Which is probably why Robert Eggers wanted the marriage (wedding dress; bride and groom) at the end, between their characters.

And if the “blood plague” victims are mimicking Orlok’s dark trauma, this means 16th century Ellen had a pregnancy-related death (preeclampsia; or other health condition); which embodies disease, sex and death. Which will find parallel in Thomas, but mostly in Friedrich Harding blaming himself because of his wife’s death. Which is also expressed in Anna Harding saying their son is so strong and hungry (like his father) and it’s eating her away. Orlok’s appetite is the culprit of his wife’s death. He kills the two children as revenge for the burdens of reproduction. Like Friedrich Harding, Orlok was also an extremely wealthy man (count; ancient line of nobility; etc.) but his greatest treasure was his wife. Without her, he didn’t want to live anymore, and this will resonate in Herr Knock seeking a violent execution to punish himself. Which is probably the reason why there are legends about him in Transylvania, even thought he was dead since the late 16th century, and was resurrected by Ellen a few years before Thomas arrives there. He isn’t remembered because of his military accomplishments, but because of his sorcery, because he was a Solomonar.

And this also makes sense with the strigoi myth where “bad death”, violent, like execution (or suicide) is believed to be one of the reasons why a person becomes a strigoi after death. And this would already be related to Ellen. If Orlok was, indeed, executed, the why is related to the rats, scapegoats to the plague and connected to witchcraft. The rats are, too, a living expression of his own trauma.

The 16th century saw the birth, the imprisonment and the execution of several figures who defied the supremacy of the Church, from scientists, physicians, philosophers, occultists: Galileo Galilei; Dr. John Dee, Nostradamus, Giordano Bruno, Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa; Michael Servetus; William Tyndale; etc.

Transylvania wasn’t left out of the intense witch-hunting and trials that swept across Europe in the late Medieval ages. The fear and paranoia surrounding witchcraft and “dealings with the Devil” resulted in widespread accusations, arrests and trials of individuals accused of practicing witchcraft. Many of these trials were often motivated by political and social factors, and helped reinforce the idea of witchcraft as something evil and demonic. Both women and men were accused and executed because of witchcraft, although women were, by far, the majority of the victims.

In 1550, the “pillar of infamy” was installed in the Great Square of Sibiu (one of the most historical cities in Transylvania), and would stand there until the 18th century, as a symbol of Sibiu’s legislative authority. Here, the accused of witchcraft and other criminals were brought before the public and executed. In 1577, Transylvanian Lutheran synod threatened with execution anyone practicing magical arts. In 1578, Lutheran preacher Péter Bornemisza published one of the earliest Hungarian treatises on witchcraft and the devil’s work, “About the Temptations of the Devil”. The city of Kolozsvár (Transylvania) saw, at least, 21 witch trials between 1565 and 1593, with 15 resulting in burnings. The first known sentence for witchcraft in Transylvania dates from 1565, when a midwife called Clara Botzi was condemned to burn at the stake. In the 1580s, witch hunts and trials intensified (which is the date we have for human Orlok).

The “Ordeal by Water” (also known as “swimming of witches”) was widely used throughout Europe, including in Transylvania, in several lakes or ponds throughout the region. This test was meant to determine if the accused was indeed a witch or a warlock. These ordeals were usually based on the belief that God would protect innocents from harm, but here it’s the contrary. The belief is water rejects servants of the Devil (connection to Baptism), and so, so sorcerers were thrown into rushing rivers with a rope around their waist. If the accused floated or refused to skin, it was a confirmation of guilt (and this would be followed by burning at the stake). If the accused sunk, it was a declaration of innocence. The accused were supposed to be pulled out using the rope, but accidental deaths by drowning were common.

Orlok being declared innocent while being an actual sorcerer and his reputation as such enduring centuries after his death, might sound strange (and even ironic). But him surviving this scenario, would mean he was to be burned at the stake and his ashes put on display for the mocking public, which, obviously, didn’t happen. He was also buried in his castle crypt, in a prestigious location (someone respected his noble title), and in a very elaborate sarcophagus, filled with occult meaning (although this could have been commissioned by himself, before his death). Which is why I’m inclined to believe this is the answer (instead of him being hanged, for instance). If he had surviving family (like children), him being executed because of witchcraft would also mean the execution of his family; which isn’t far off the realm of possibility, because this would fit his killing of the Harding children, too. Drowing or hanging in an execution scenario, because of witchcraft, are most likely how human Orlok died. And the rats are a representation of this.

Death by drowning would also fit Orlok’s character and his infamous “asthmatic” speech, indicating both his airways and lungs are damaged by more than just decomposition. This would also provide a new layer of meaning to the “blood plague” symptoms of lung infection (coughing blood) and shortness of breath. Anna Harding also mentions “sinking”. Drowning is death by suffocation, which would provide an explanation for Orlok grabbing Ellen’s neck at the prologue, and why the victims of the “blood plague” slowly suffocate to death, and can’t breathe (“I can’t breathe!”; “my body sinking… sinking… The smell of rancid meat… Suffocating").

Reincarnation was one of the main beliefs in Zalmoxis worship. Death as a pathway to rebirth, reincarnation as true immortality (instead of vampirism). As a consequence, Orlok died believing he would reincarnate and find his wife in another live. Except he didn’t. His soul was deemed unworthy of entering Zalmoxis kingdom, and got stuck in the “darkest pit”, unable to move on to his next reincarnation. 16th century Ellen’s soul moved on and reincarnated in the 19th century. Their souls were separated by death, disease and sex. Which is why he calls himself a “loathsome beast”.

At the end, Ellen accepts Orlok’s covenant and allows him to feed on her soul. Their souls reunite because of death, disease and sex. Her delirium from the “blood plague” is about love, as she’s fully possessed by Orlok, and her soul trapped inside of Nosferatu alongside his. She embraces him as they die, wants to see his face as the dawn begins to remove the decay (symbolizing the curse of Nosferatu is being removed from him). She remembers how they once were, because she sees into Orlok’s soul. And that last look of love isn’t about Thomas, is about Ellen and Orlok, like Robert Eggers says the ending is “much more about Orlok and Ellen’s relationship”, because her soul is inside of Nosferatu, alongside his. At the end, by the breaking of the curse, they are both, finally, free from Nosferatu, and ascend to the Afterlife, forever united.

#I finally broke the code on possession #and on the reincarnation theme #Nosferatu 2024 #Nosferatu #Robert Eggers #Ellen Hutter 2024 #count Orlok 2024 #Thomas Hutter 2024 #friedrich harding #Anna Harding #Herr knock 2024 #Nosferatu rats #witchcraft history #romanian folklore #Romanian history #Ellen x Orlok #orlok x Ellen #lilac fang

27 notes · View notes