On the basis of Dracula’s actions alone, can he be considered evil or immoral? I need to write a well-organized essay, explaining both how and why the full presentation of his character in the work makes us view his character more sympathetically, even though he is considered evil and immoral.
This in an interesting assignment. Although from the viewpoint of the narrator, and the human beings in the story, Dracula is seen as evil, the main action that justifies that viewpoint is that he turns humans into vampires.
In your essay, however, you could argue that Dracula is only evil from a human point of view. One could say that vampires would not consider it immoral to perpetuate their species. Moreover, humans are comparatively frail and short lived, and by turning people into vampires, Dracula offers them considerably longer and healthier lives (except for the issue of being undead, of course) than they would enjoy without becoming vampires.
The main problem with this argument is that in the few first chapters of the novel, Dracula gives his female vampires a human baby; they drink its blood and it dies. Dracula then kills the mother of the baby. Both of these acts seem evil without qualification. The only way to argue that they are not evil is to point out that many humans eat animals without remorse, and there is no reason that vampires should regard human food sources any differently than humans regard their food animals.