Why does he chide the mourners for wanting to stake the corpse clearing displaying vampire bites? He calls them "barbarians," and superstitious, yet he later professes his belief that Dracula is a vampire ("he can be destroyed, but not killed"). Is there an inconsistency in his character's beliefs?
shareI think the point was that the corpse was definitely NOT a victim of a vampire. She didn't appear to have any marks or was displaying any other signs of a vampire attack. That's why Sandor was angry with them. They were about to desecrate a corpse for no reason. As he said to the local priest the girl had died...Nothing more, she died. The priest and the mob felt that they had to drive a stake into the body just to be sure, even without any real evidence.
I think that Sandor's anger came from the fact that the priest was giving into a mob mentality rather than trying to stand up and be a leader. There were no signs of vampirism, but the priest was so scared that he was willing to desecrate the corpse on the off chance that it was a vampire. That's why Father Sandor called him a superstitious, frightened idiot. I mean, Sandor knew vampires were real. But, he also knew that there were definite signs and evidence to look for. The priest simply gave into the superstitious mob after someone had died.
You clearly were not paying attention when Father Sandor chastised the locals that were getting ready to stake the girl. He parted her lips, saw no fangs, and turned her head sideways to get glimpse of her neck. Having confirmed that the girl apparently died a natural death, he called them superstitious idtiots.
shareI think it was more strange that Father Sandor berates the townsfolk for being superstitious fools......................then he goes and tells the English couples to stay away from Dracula's area in the very same superstitious manner that he has berated the townsfolk for displaying.
shareThere is a difference in trying to calm the local populace who are likely in situ for the rest of their lives and steering travellers toward safer more rewarding areas on their way though. The area was beset by an evil, Dracula's castle was its heart and even if the Count himself was dead, thats not to say his legacy wouldnt inspire the locals to do something stupid and dagerous. Overall I don't see it as a great contradiction, and in both cases the good father is proven quite justified.
share[deleted]