INTRODUCTION
by Sehnaz Tahir Gürçaglar
Bram Stoker’s Dracula is a text that has had many resurrections and reincarnations around the world, in many languages, through various print and visual media. The novel has endured the eroding effects of time and continues to appeal to radically different readerships than it was initially intended for. Now, in the 21st century, it is stronger than ever, and Count Dracula is a figure recognized by all—even those who have not read the novel or seen the screen versions. It is funny how the book seems to have come closer to what Count Dracula has lost forever: an immortal life—at least for over a century. To me, Dracula’s resilience owes to the way it has let itself be ingested and cannibalized in various translations, adaptations, and rewrites—only to emerge stronger from each ordeal. The Turkish adaptation you are about to read in English translation is only one aspect of the larger Dracula picture, but it is one that perfectly illustrates the transformative power of translation in multiplying the lives of a literary work in different cultures.
Ali Riza Seyfioglu’s Kazikli Voyvoda, the source text of Dracula in Istanbul: The Unauthorized Version of the Gothic Classic, was published in Istanbul for the first time in Ottoman script in 1928, shortly before the alphabet reform that led to the adoption of Latin letters and irrevocably transformed the cultural landscape in the newly-founded Republic of Turkey. Although a close comparison reveals that the book is indeed a translation of Dracula, it was presented as an original Turkish novel, and Ali Riza Seyfi (as he was sometimes known) was indicated on the cover as the author. In 1946, the novel was reprinted in the Latin alphabet. The second edition preserved the content and structure of the first edition, while the Ottoman vocabulary was modified to reflect the changes the Turkish language had undergone in the eighteen years that had elapsed. There is no clear information as to why Ali Riza Seyfi claimed to be the author of the book and why he did not introduce it as a translation. I assume that he considered the text as a fruitful ground upon which he could build a historical novel drawing on Ottoman sources and readily appropriated the structure, plot, and characters of Dracula to further his own literary and ideological aspirations. Moreover, the changes he made to the text were too comprehensive to present it as a conventional translation.
Kazikli Voyvoda was not only produced and received as an indigenous novel; it was also adapted to the screen. Ümit Deniz, a popular writer of detective fiction, wrote a script based on Kazikli Voyvoda, and the film Dracula Istanbul’da (Dracula in Istanbul) was released in 1953. The credit titles of the film explicitly acknowledged Ali Riza Seyfi as the author of the book. You can read more about the film in the afterword to this book. Kazikli Voyvoda was reprinted in 1997 under the title Dracula Istanbul’da, this time accompanied by a preface by late Giovanni Scognamillo, who formally identified the translation status of the novel for the first time. Nevertheless, the readers were clearly already aware of this, as the title of the film alluded to Dracula rather than Kazikli Voyvoda.
In his translation, Ali Riza Seyfi renamed the novel Kazikli Voyvoda and associated it right from the start with an evil figure from Ottoman history.[1] This is a feature that created some auth
enticity and built a historical context for the novel. This context enabled the author to use his translation as a platform through which he relayed his version of Ottoman-Turkish history and addressed a strong nationalist sentiment.
In Kazikli Voyvoda, Ali Riza Seyfi retained the narrative structure of Dracula by keeping the epistolary style and using diary entries as the main narrative tool. The plot is also quite similar to that of Dracula, with the exception of a number of omissions and additions.[2] Ali Riza Seyfi domesticated the setting and moved the story to Istanbul, while he also gave the characters Turkish names and equipped them with a number of new traits associated with heroism and patriotism. The additions Ali Riza Seyfi made to the novel mainly served to evoke nationalist feelings in the readership. These additions create a sense of shared history and continuity between the heroic deeds of the former Ottoman army and the Turkish population of the 1920s. The fight against Count Dracula in Stoker’s original novel has often been read as a fight between the good and evil forces of human nature. Ali Riza Seyfi turns this fight into a national one and has his characters finish off the battles raged against Vlad the Impaler by Ottoman forces centuries ago. In return, these historical references stand as a metaphor for a more recent national struggle—that of the Turkish War of Independence, which had only been over for five years when the novel was first published in Turkey. This subtext can only be understood, and Ali Riza Seyfi’s adaptation properly appreciated, in the light of these historical facts.
Ali Riza Seyfi’s Kazikli Voyvoda is more than a historical curiosity—it demonstrates the manipulative power of a translator and a translation in its most acute form. Yet, it also recreates Dracula in a new historical and cultural context and by doing so, joins the giant vortex of Dracula representations that breathe new life into the work. We know that Ali Riza Seyfi was not unique in his attempts at radically rewriting Dracula for a local readership. Among over thirty translations of Dracula (see http://www.cesnur.org/2003/dracula/ for an incomplete list), Kazikli Voyvoda was not the only version that reigned free and broke the chains of servitude. A recent book[3] tells the story of the first translation of Dracula into any language, the Icelandic Makt Myrkanna (Power of Darkness) by Valdimar Ásmundsson. This translation also features extensive omissions, changes and new elements, as well as new characters inserted into the story. Although there are attempts to explain the changes in this particular translation by the fact that Stoker collaborated with Ásmundsson, the degree of involvement by Stoker is unclear, and the line between the authorial interventions of Stoker and Ásmundsson is blurred. It would not be a surprise to discover similar cases in different languages, since Dracula seems to tease creative imagination and invites its translation through its polyphonic structure and universal motifs.
The translation you are about to read is a genuine endeavor to reflect Kazikli Voyvoda in its authentic context. Through the use of explanatory footnotes, and the decision to retain some culturally-loaded words untranslated, the translator and editor invite the readers into the world of Turkish culture and history, and make their reading experience all the more enriching. As the translation of a translation, Dracula in Istanbul: The Unauthorized Version of the Gothic Classic is a playful text, destabilizing the conventional concepts of “original” and “translation.” Which is the original text of the present translation? Is it Kazikli Voyvoda, or should the origins be searched in Dracula? This is a wonderful and unsettling example of intertextuality that reverses the direction of textual lineages.
Ali Riza Seyfi’s Dracula adaptation is becoming available to an English language readership for the first time thanks to Ed Glaser’s personal and painstaking efforts. I hope that it will be the point of departure for many a Dracula adventure in the future.
A NOTE ON THE TRANSLATION
Kazikli Voyvoda mysteriously stops separating its story into chapters at 6, only about halfway through the book. For easier reading, chapter breaks 7 through 14 have been added. Their placement is suggested by chapter breaks in the original Stoker text.
In Turkish, the suffixes “Bey” and “Hanim” are conventional modes of address for men and women, respectively. They serve much the same purpose as “Mr.” and “Ms.,” but are used after a person’s given name—for example “Azmi Bey” and “Güzin Hanim.” Surnames are not normally used in conversation. Hereditary, fixed surnames were also not officially implemented in Turkey until 1934, six years after the first publication of Kazikli Voyvoda.
A Selected Pronunciation Guide
A, a
o as in hot
, â
faint “y” sound following preceding consonant, or lengthening of “a” sound
C, c
j as in jump
Ç, ç
ch as in change
G, g
g as in get
G, g
has no sound, but lengthens preceding vowel slightly
I, i
u as in jump
I, i
ee as in keep
Î, î
extended “i”
O, o
o as in off
Ö, ö
u as in urge
S, s
sh as in shape
U, u