Scan barcode
huntland's review against another edition
dark
emotional
medium-paced
2.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Emotional abuse, Sexual content, Confinement, Domestic abuse, Gaslighting, and Toxic relationship
peregrinwho's review against another edition
dark
emotional
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
This was so beautiful. A haunting, sublime sort that evoked velvet imagery on every page. It's so easy to get swept up in that kind of beauty, and once they were able to step out of that church, away from worship, the night began to feel like endless warm days.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Domestic abuse, Blood, and Toxic relationship
Moderate: Confinement and Sexual content
Minor: Murder and War
elskede's review against another edition
dark
emotional
sad
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.25
Content Warnings
Graphic: Gore, Gaslighting, Grief, War, Terminal illness, Murder, Emotional abuse, Sexual content, Mental illness, Physical abuse, Blood, Violence, Toxic relationship, Suicide attempt, Sexual violence, Torture, and Injury/Injury detail
Minor: Confinement, Blood, Domestic abuse, Bullying, and Death
lailybibliography's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
I made you into my private Christ, duplicated with my own dark devotions. Nothing existed beyond the range of your exacting gaze, not even me. I was simply a nonentity when you weren’t looking at me, an empty vessel waiting to be filled by the sweet water of your attention.
A woman can’t live like that, my lord. No one can. Don’t ask me why I did it.
I think this might just be my favourite retelling. The dynamic between Constanta, Magdalena and Alexi is so touching and tragic, soaked in blood yet so enticingly erotic and horrific. I’m left in awe of how S. T. Gibson weaved this masterclass in depicting the centuries-long abuse of these three lost souls by an intricate web of gaslighting, isolation, love-bombing and manipulation. Equal parts a love story and escaping a monster, I am so in love with this novel. I cannot wait to read more of this author’s works.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Violence, Misogyny, Domestic abuse, Blood, Grief, Toxic relationship, Medical content, Gaslighting, Pandemic/Epidemic, Emotional abuse, and Confinement
Moderate: Infidelity, Body horror, and War
Minor: Sexual content
rachelblair's review
dark
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Body horror, Death, Gore, Blood, Confinement, Death of parent, and Murder
caughtbetweenpages's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
I absolutely loved this story. It was sold to me as “polyamorous Dracula’s wives join together to overthrow him”, and honestly? I wish I hadn’t heard that. Not because I felt it spoiled things, but because I think it cheapens the impact of the story.
Constanza’s (I regret calling her by that name, because it was given to her by Dracula/her abuser) (who is never directly named and thus afforded power by way of adding to his mystery) journey of self discovery after her identity is stripped from her is empowering, and her reclamation of her religious/ethical convictions, sexuality, and understanding of her intelligence and power was exactly the story I needed when I read this book. The relationships between her, Aleksei, and Magdalena, as well as the hints to the original story of Dracula, are just icing on the cake. I absolutely devoured it.
We follow the point of view of Dracula's first wife, a young woman named Constanza. I regret calling her by that name, because she has forgotten her real name and Constanza is the name that Dracula gave her when he sired her after a incredibly traumatic event happened to her and her family. And she comes back to life as a vampire and takes revenge on the people who hurt her, and feels tremendous amount of debt to and love for the person who (she feels, at the time) allowed her to save herself. But as the story goes on and as her sire's selfishness and cruelty and calculation become more and more evident, Constanza finds herself in an increasingly tense and difficult situation, one in which her agency is stripped from her and she is sort of forced into a role of learned helplessness. Never before have I read something that evoked in me the tension of being in an abusive relationship, the terror of being powerless in your own home against someone you still love and are connected to deeply.
I keep calling him Dracula. He's never actually named within the book. There are a couple hints--like there is a passage where they're talking about some annoying English people called the Harkers in Victorian England that the family has to deal with at some point--and there's a tremendous amount of, like, vampiric lore that I feel was popularized if not created by Bram Stoker within Dracula. But regardless, he is never directly addressed by name as such. As I said, the novella is told in Constanza's point of view but it is also told with the direct address: YOU did this, YOU are a monster, with the "you" being Dracula in this case. For much of the story, while he holds the majority of the power, this distancing, this almost mythologizing of this incredibly powerful figure, not even giving him a name because that would be to make him base, gives him a tremendous amount of power. But towards the end given what happens the "you" goes from just a telling of what's happening to an accusation. It's Constanza's taking back her agency, it's her reclaiming The Narrative that was taken from her the moment that she was killed. Her journey of self discovery after her identity is stripped from her is empowering, and her reclamation of her religious/ethical convictions, sexuality, and understanding of her intelligence and power was exactly the story I needed when I read this book.
But until we get to that point of empowerment I cannot describe to you the degree of tension that this book holds. The power and balance is is so skewed as to almost not need to be mentioned, C and D, they're on such stratospherically different levels of control within this situation. It's one of the most accurate depictions that I have ever read about of an abusive relationship and it was absolutely chilling. The introduction of Dracula's other partners with Magdalena (who Constanza has a, like, very deep depth of emotion towards) and then Aleksei (who she also loves but in a slightly different way) it's that love and it's the those connections that finally empower them. But it I feel like the way that they love is so inhuman and vampire in nature; I think St Gibson did a really really good job of demonstrating that there is a monstrosity to this type of thing as well. Though the novella was quite short and it predominantly focused on the reclamation of agency for Constanza (and then also of Magdalena and Aleksei to a lesser degree), I feel like it also did an excellent job of addressing, like, classical vampire preoccupations, like the things that are at the cornerstones of most vampire stories. So we address themes of religiosity; of what it means to actually be a monster; of the unchanging and unadaptable nature of vampirism and what that means in its positives, like the sort of eternity of beauty, and what that means in its negatives, in terms of stagnation and how that can disallow you to continue existing in a modern sense.
I truly think that vampires are probably the sexiest monster and that that is an intentional thing; there's a tremendous degree of like sensuality and sexuality within this novella and I really enjoyed how St Gibson played with the themes of, like, vampiric obsession versus love, of ownership versus agency, of queerness, of stagnating beauty, about how the sort of societally prescriptive ideas of what love and romance are meant to look like don't necessarily play well with the mythos of this thing, and does the monstrosity come from the fact that you are undying and you need to consume blood and Life Force to live forever or are you a monster because people consider your way of living and your way of being monstrous? I don't think it's coincidence that many queer people attach ourselves to stories about monstrosity and I think St Gibson plays that line and sort of makes it evident as to why those connections exist in the first place. I absolutely loved A Dowry of Blood I will be reading everything St Gibson has to write from here on out.
Constanza’s (I regret calling her by that name, because it was given to her by Dracula/her abuser) (who is never directly named and thus afforded power by way of adding to his mystery) journey of self discovery after her identity is stripped from her is empowering, and her reclamation of her religious/ethical convictions, sexuality, and understanding of her intelligence and power was exactly the story I needed when I read this book. The relationships between her, Aleksei, and Magdalena, as well as the hints to the original story of Dracula, are just icing on the cake. I absolutely devoured it.
We follow the point of view of Dracula's first wife, a young woman named Constanza. I regret calling her by that name, because she has forgotten her real name and Constanza is the name that Dracula gave her when he sired her after a incredibly traumatic event happened to her and her family. And she comes back to life as a vampire and takes revenge on the people who hurt her, and feels tremendous amount of debt to and love for the person who (she feels, at the time) allowed her to save herself. But as the story goes on and as her sire's selfishness and cruelty and calculation become more and more evident, Constanza finds herself in an increasingly tense and difficult situation, one in which her agency is stripped from her and she is sort of forced into a role of learned helplessness. Never before have I read something that evoked in me the tension of being in an abusive relationship, the terror of being powerless in your own home against someone you still love and are connected to deeply.
I keep calling him Dracula. He's never actually named within the book. There are a couple hints--like there is a passage where they're talking about some annoying English people called the Harkers in Victorian England that the family has to deal with at some point--and there's a tremendous amount of, like, vampiric lore that I feel was popularized if not created by Bram Stoker within Dracula. But regardless, he is never directly addressed by name as such. As I said, the novella is told in Constanza's point of view but it is also told with the direct address: YOU did this, YOU are a monster, with the "you" being Dracula in this case. For much of the story, while he holds the majority of the power, this distancing, this almost mythologizing of this incredibly powerful figure, not even giving him a name because that would be to make him base, gives him a tremendous amount of power. But towards the end given what happens the "you" goes from just a telling of what's happening to an accusation. It's Constanza's taking back her agency, it's her reclaiming The Narrative that was taken from her the moment that she was killed. Her journey of self discovery after her identity is stripped from her is empowering, and her reclamation of her religious/ethical convictions, sexuality, and understanding of her intelligence and power was exactly the story I needed when I read this book.
But until we get to that point of empowerment I cannot describe to you the degree of tension that this book holds. The power and balance is is so skewed as to almost not need to be mentioned, C and D, they're on such stratospherically different levels of control within this situation. It's one of the most accurate depictions that I have ever read about of an abusive relationship and it was absolutely chilling. The introduction of Dracula's other partners with Magdalena (who Constanza has a, like, very deep depth of emotion towards) and then Aleksei (who she also loves but in a slightly different way) it's that love and it's the those connections that finally empower them. But it I feel like the way that they love is so inhuman and vampire in nature; I think St Gibson did a really really good job of demonstrating that there is a monstrosity to this type of thing as well. Though the novella was quite short and it predominantly focused on the reclamation of agency for Constanza (and then also of Magdalena and Aleksei to a lesser degree), I feel like it also did an excellent job of addressing, like, classical vampire preoccupations, like the things that are at the cornerstones of most vampire stories. So we address themes of religiosity; of what it means to actually be a monster; of the unchanging and unadaptable nature of vampirism and what that means in its positives, like the sort of eternity of beauty, and what that means in its negatives, in terms of stagnation and how that can disallow you to continue existing in a modern sense.
I truly think that vampires are probably the sexiest monster and that that is an intentional thing; there's a tremendous degree of like sensuality and sexuality within this novella and I really enjoyed how St Gibson played with the themes of, like, vampiric obsession versus love, of ownership versus agency, of queerness, of stagnating beauty, about how the sort of societally prescriptive ideas of what love and romance are meant to look like don't necessarily play well with the mythos of this thing, and does the monstrosity come from the fact that you are undying and you need to consume blood and Life Force to live forever or are you a monster because people consider your way of living and your way of being monstrous? I don't think it's coincidence that many queer people attach ourselves to stories about monstrosity and I think St Gibson plays that line and sort of makes it evident as to why those connections exist in the first place. I absolutely loved A Dowry of Blood I will be reading everything St Gibson has to write from here on out.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Confinement, Violence, Murder, Sexism, Toxic relationship, and Sexual violence
Moderate: Gaslighting, Death, Domestic abuse, and Pandemic/Epidemic
scam_lark's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Grief, Abandonment, Gore, Emotional abuse, Gaslighting, Murder, Addiction, Death, Toxic relationship, Violence, Sexual content, Blood, Confinement, and Domestic abuse
errie's review against another edition
dark
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Mental illness, Toxic relationship, Blood, Death, Confinement, Emotional abuse, Gaslighting, Sexual content, Injury/Injury detail, Murder, Domestic abuse, Self harm, and Violence
Moderate: Infidelity, War, and Physical abuse
earofthedog's review against another edition
challenging
dark
inspiring
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder, Sexual content, Blood, Confinement, and Toxic relationship
Moderate: Death, Injury/Injury detail, Gore, and Emotional abuse
Minor: Pandemic/Epidemic
judassilver's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.5
I am the outlier in this. I wanted to like this book so badly, the premise and glowing recommendations were so promising, but I just really didn't like it. At no point did I enjoy myself while reading it, and the greatest compliment I can give it is that it was over quickly. It just struck me as shallow all around: shallow characters operating in a shallow, recycled setting, within shallow relationships with each other, to reach shallow, already-established conclusions. I was also disappointed at the superficially researched historical details, which I would normally be more forgiving toward if they weren't the crux of the only dimension this book had. The inaccuracies, the anachronisms, and the thin characters make it hard to maintain a suspension of disbelief necessary for enjoying this book. At no point did I believe this story. I didn't buy the insta-lust/love between any of the characters, I didn't buy that they actually existed in the historical setting provided (flavorful background that never had any consequence or lasting impact btw), and most importantly I never bought that "You" was Dracula. Before reading this book all I saw was people describing this as a re-telling or re-imagining of Dracula, but I fail to see how this book is at all related to Stoker (aside from the blurb and one off-handed mention of the Harkers that came off as more of an almost insulting cameo than an homage). Where are the Gothic elements, the seductive yet toxic lure of blood-soaked immortality, the tension, where is the powerful, inhuman monster that is Dracula? It's all just set dressing on a barely sketched-out plot about domestic abuse, which would be compelling in its own right if it allowed the reader to reach their own conclusions without constant interruptions from the narrator. The retrospective distance of the letter format really hurts any emotional impact this book could have had, and it left me feeling very detached. There were very few actual scenes in this book-- very few instances where characters actually did and said things in a described setting. I felt like I was reading a collection of summaries filled out with metaphors and repetitive descriptions that occasionally made for a good quote pull that would look nice on a blog. It's a vampire story that wants to be profound but seems scared of development, ambiguity, and actually being a vampire story. It's simultaneously so overwrought yet so hollow, and ultimately it's just so very boring. A Dowry of Blood is the very definition of style over substance, unfortunately.
Specific spoilers:
Constanta only ever targets people who "deserved it" so she has the moral high ground on big bad Dracula makes me roll my eyes. Feels hypocritical when she goes on to create more immortal bloodsuckers of her own with no introspection.
The sex scenes were fine, I do feel like they were to the detriment of any possible emotional development though. This could be commentary on sex as a coping mechanism but the epilogue kinda killed that for me.
The sexual relationship between Alexi and Constanta: Ew, ew, ew, ew. I liked the setup of the implication Dracula groomed his brides, even while underage, and swooped in on their most vulnerable. That felt very real to an abuser and was a rare moment of subtlety. I could have done without Constanta getting the hots for Alexi while reiterating how young he was and how much she felt like his mom, and then having sex with him. Which again almost felt like a commentary on emotional incest and how entangled sexual and emotional relationships can get under an oppressive abuser who controls every aspect of your freedom of expression. Their splitting up at the end almost sealed this for me... and then the epilogue killed my appreciation.
"a modern Machiavelli"... 5 seconds with Google, I beg you.
Specific spoilers:
The sex scenes were fine, I do feel like they were to the detriment of any possible emotional development though. This could be commentary on sex as a coping mechanism but the epilogue kinda killed that for me.
The sexual relationship between Alexi and Constanta: Ew, ew, ew, ew. I liked the setup of the implication Dracula groomed his brides, even while underage, and swooped in on their most vulnerable. That felt very real to an abuser and was a rare moment of subtlety. I could have done without Constanta getting the hots for Alexi while reiterating how young he was and how much she felt like his mom, and then having sex with him. Which again almost felt like a commentary on emotional incest and how entangled sexual and emotional relationships can get under an oppressive abuser who controls every aspect of your freedom of expression. Their splitting up at the end almost sealed this for me... and then the epilogue killed my appreciation.
"a modern Machiavelli"... 5 seconds with Google, I beg you.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Domestic abuse, Confinement, Blood, Murder, Violence, Death, Sexual content, and Toxic relationship
Moderate: War and Religious bigotry
Minor: Mental illness