Take a photo of a barcode or cover
152 reviews for:
Powers of Darkness: The Lost Version of Dracula
Bram Stoker, John Edgar Browning, Dacre Stoker, Valdimar Ásmundsson
3.63 AVERAGE
152 reviews for:
Powers of Darkness: The Lost Version of Dracula
Bram Stoker, John Edgar Browning, Dacre Stoker, Valdimar Ásmundsson
3.63 AVERAGE
The full version is written in exquisite English in epistolary style, but this trimmed down version is complete squalor.
It's been years since I read Bram Stoker's Dracula. Part I of Powers of Darkness takes the form of journal entries, which are introspective and tense, set almost entirely within Dracula's castle. Part II follows Dracula to England. It reads like a synopsis of Dracula with its quick recounting of plot points, few details, and little (nil?) character exploration. I seem to recall the latter half of the original book also seemed a little rushed. Still an interesting read.
Touted as the lost true manuscript of Dracula, in reality seems to be just an early draft which was in need of revisions. Seems incomplete and jumbled.
I read part 1 of this book in real time (reading the dated passages in the day), however, unlike Dracula, this book sticks with Harker for the first part. Rarely do we see the other characters. I enjoyed this first part as it expanded on Harker’s time at the castle.
Then we come to part 2…and my liking of the telling fades. We are now with a narrator, rather than the characters telling the tale. It also seems more in the lines of “just the facts”…the build up from part 1 is quickly wrapped up. And we get a ton of new characters. Who are alluded to also be vampires, and who disappear once the count is taken care of, but even that is unclear.
This book feels like it is unfinished..maybe just a draft that needed for fleshing out. Like maybe part 2 was just an outline for a real ending?
Cool to read another version of Dracula, but Bram’s version is still my go to story.
Then we come to part 2…and my liking of the telling fades. We are now with a narrator, rather than the characters telling the tale. It also seems more in the lines of “just the facts”…the build up from part 1 is quickly wrapped up. And we get a ton of new characters. Who are alluded to also be vampires, and who disappear once the count is taken care of, but even that is unclear.
This book feels like it is unfinished..maybe just a draft that needed for fleshing out. Like maybe part 2 was just an outline for a real ending?
Cool to read another version of Dracula, but Bram’s version is still my go to story.
adventurous
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
A different version of Dracula, but somehow remarkably similar. The biggest difference being the time spent in the count's Castle, which is in Powers of Darkness 80% of the text.
I can only recommend it for those who've already read Bram Stoker's Dracula. The quality of characters and plot points lost would be greater than those they gain if the reader chooses Powers of Darkness before Dracula.
I can only recommend it for those who've already read Bram Stoker's Dracula. The quality of characters and plot points lost would be greater than those they gain if the reader chooses Powers of Darkness before Dracula.
Somehow, this escaped my notice for the past few years, but I pounced right on it when I saw it on sale a few days ago. Assumed for about a century to be nothing more than the Icelandic translation of Dracula, it was recently found to be quite different, introducing new characters and plot elements, resulting in a significantly different novel. I enjoyed reading it, but much of that pleasure came from the sheer novelty of the thing. I didn't like the book as much as I wanted to. Part one, featuring Harker's stay in Dracula's castle, is much longer than in the Stoker novel. It begins to feel rather padded, and Harker himself seems *incredibly* stupid at times. Part two, set in London after Dracula's arrival, is so short that it really feels more like a brief synopsis than an actual story. It makes for an extremely lopsided novel, and it feels as if there is virtually no payoff for the extended Transylvania section. (These are the sort of things that lend more credence to the theory that this translation was based on one of Stoker's early outlines for the novel.) On the plus side, we do get to spend far more time with Dracula himself, and he comes off as a rather more interesting character than in the Stoker novel. Interestingly, many of the changes (Dracula ingratiating himself into London society, and the elimination of a certain sequence near the story's end, for example) seem to anticipate some of the many stage and film versions that would follow. The curiosity of this book's existence, and analysis of the differences between it and the far better known version, makes it far more interesting than the actual story itself is able to. It's not bad, and I do recommend it for anyone interested, but check your expectations before reading.