sponsor of your nostalgia

Throughout the entire novel Stocker denies Dracula in every possible sense, deliberately reducing him to some sort of country bogeyman. Dracula brags about his Boyar status, while “his peasants” curse him all they want and even try to prevent him on multiple occasions. His own beasts at hand dare question his command, thus he must resort to threats and violence for wolves’ and vampire sisters’ obedience. He carries himself as an ancient lord of dignified lineage, yet has to see to menial offices himself. He wishes to appear welcoming and charming for Jonathan, instead he proves to be ominous and uncomfortable. He expects to be respected and awed for his power and noble status, instead he’s taken as a child-brained fool. He attacks Mina to revenge his pursuers in most devastating way, yet gets his mental connection with her played against him. He strives to impose dread upon men’s hearts, but he’s chased back to his lair no better than a terror-taken fox.

Actually... there is a theory that Count Dracula represented Stoker's own internalized homophobia and general fear of blood-transmissible diseases (he had one, I think). You can see this through the whole blood-sucking thing and Lucy's "mysterious disease", and the homophobia is rather clear when you notice Dracula's weird thing with Jonathan (think "I too can love" and his hatred towards Mina.) (Also that very ambiguous time lapse between the harem scene and the present quote, and Jonathan waking up in his bed, pyjamas on, with no memory of how he got there).

I personally see this going a bit more complex than that. With such a warm and loving portrayal of same-sex friendly relationships to the point when they start giving vibe of not being entirely friendly, it seems more like Stocker was mostly preoccupied with his sex prejudices when writing Dracula.