Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.63 AVERAGE
3.63 AVERAGE
adventurous
dark
emotional
funny
informative
lighthearted
mysterious
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
funny
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
I've always liked this take on the Count. I think it's an interesting version of the Dracula story and I recommend it to anyone who likes the Coppola version, especially. (Quick reminder that this was released in 1975, which means that it wasn't based on the costume drama version of the story but if you like this one, the author then went on to do the novelization of the 1992 film.)
The Dracula Tapes tells the story of Bram Stoker's Dracula but from the point of view of Vlad Dracula himself.
Although I did like this book it's hard to explain why I just liked it and why I didn't love it. It's well written and everything "fits" with Dracula. The only thing I didn't like so much was that Vlad often refers to one of his habits, only to tell the reader that he will explain fully later on in the book. When he does come back to it it is often explained very shortly.
What I do like is that Saberhagen didn't try to redeem Dracula. Many vampires in books now are nice and misunderstood. In this book Vlad is what he is, he drinks blood and occasionally kills somebody. He is less of a monster Van Helsing makes him out to be (he doesn't murder everybody and he usually drinks animal blood instead of human blood) but he isn't that much of a likeable character. The lack of really likeable character in this book might be why I liked instead of loved it.
The Dracula Tapes is the first part of a series and I want to read the other books, but I'm not rushing out to get them immediately.
I like books that give a different point of view of another, wellknown, book. Another good example is Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea, which tells the story of mr. Rochester's crazy wife in the attic in Jane Eyre.
Although I did like this book it's hard to explain why I just liked it and why I didn't love it. It's well written and everything "fits" with Dracula. The only thing I didn't like so much was that Vlad often refers to one of his habits, only to tell the reader that he will explain fully later on in the book. When he does come back to it it is often explained very shortly.
What I do like is that Saberhagen didn't try to redeem Dracula. Many vampires in books now are nice and misunderstood. In this book Vlad is what he is, he drinks blood and occasionally kills somebody. He is less of a monster Van Helsing makes him out to be (he doesn't murder everybody and he usually drinks animal blood instead of human blood) but he isn't that much of a likeable character. The lack of really likeable character in this book might be why I liked instead of loved it.
The Dracula Tapes is the first part of a series and I want to read the other books, but I'm not rushing out to get them immediately.
I like books that give a different point of view of another, wellknown, book. Another good example is Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea, which tells the story of mr. Rochester's crazy wife in the attic in Jane Eyre.
I can't remember what year it was when I read this the first time-- definitely not the year it was published, but I'd guess it was not later than 1980. I'm glad I reread it. While I haven't read Stoker's Dracula in quite a while, I still marveled at how cleverly Saberhagen wove his tale into the pages of the older book, altering its meaning entirely.
What struck me most on the second read was how the Count was certain he was God's gift to women. He denied using any of his influencing powers to lure lovely young ladies to him. No, they flocked to him because he was just that magnificent. There was a lot of that attitude going around in 1975, for sure. I'm relieved the book focused on the count recalling 19th century events, or we may have found him in a skin tight shirt open to the waist, the better to display his gold chains.
To my delight, I was able to locate the entire series in audio, so they are lined up and ready to be sprinkled throughout the next year or two.
What struck me most on the second read was how the Count was certain he was God's gift to women. He denied using any of his influencing powers to lure lovely young ladies to him. No, they flocked to him because he was just that magnificent. There was a lot of that attitude going around in 1975, for sure. I'm relieved the book focused on the count recalling 19th century events, or we may have found him in a skin tight shirt open to the waist, the better to display his gold chains.
To my delight, I was able to locate the entire series in audio, so they are lined up and ready to be sprinkled throughout the next year or two.
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
I came into this book having heard of it before. I know the story of Dracula well and as a fan of the A* 90s Romp, Bram Stoker's Dracula.
That being said, I hated this book. Not only did it's setting make no sense (you can tell it was written by an American with no understanding of England), but the whole thing was beyond ridiculous. Dracula talking to his "lovers" descendents, in a car, over a tape recorder, in a snow storm, in Devon was just too unbelievable for me.
I continued, as I wasn't sure if the book could be redeemed. It could not. The focus on Lucy and Mina's "relationships" wih Dracula, that were in no-way coerced, pleads our vampire protagonist, made me feel sick. The whole feeding off of Mina scene is about r--e, so for it to be brushed off made me angry. I really dislike retellings of this story that forget that Mina loves Jonathan more than anything, and vice versa. To paint her as having an emotional and aecual affair with Dracula, when she knew at the point in the novel where he meets her, that he nearly killed her husband was the point I gave up with this book.
I forced myself to finish it, but I do not recommend it. The writing is lazy, mostly lifted from the novel itself, rather than an actual retelling. Dracula is boring to read, there's none of the flare of the original Count in him.
That being said, I hated this book. Not only did it's setting make no sense (you can tell it was written by an American with no understanding of England), but the whole thing was beyond ridiculous. Dracula talking to his "lovers" descendents, in a car, over a tape recorder, in a snow storm, in Devon was just too unbelievable for me.
I continued, as I wasn't sure if the book could be redeemed. It could not. The focus on Lucy and Mina's "relationships" wih Dracula, that were in no-way coerced, pleads our vampire protagonist, made me feel sick. The whole feeding off of Mina scene is about r--e, so for it to be brushed off made me angry. I really dislike retellings of this story that forget that Mina loves Jonathan more than anything, and vice versa. To paint her as having an emotional and aecual affair with Dracula, when she knew at the point in the novel where he meets her, that he nearly killed her husband was the point I gave up with this book.
I forced myself to finish it, but I do not recommend it. The writing is lazy, mostly lifted from the novel itself, rather than an actual retelling. Dracula is boring to read, there's none of the flare of the original Count in him.
Vlad Dracula wanted to join the ‘modern’ society of Victorian England, specifically London. He records five tracks recounting his efforts to blend in and the disastrous results of his experiment. Dracula told from the viewpoint of the vampire. The story reads with much action that parallels Bram Stoker’s novel and pre-dates Anne Rice’s Interview.
I'm wavering between 3 & 4 stars on this one....
As I'm a Dracula fan, I quite enjoyed this twist on Stoker's Dracula tale, told from the viewpoint of Dracula himself. There are fairly big portions that are quotes from Stoker's work, followed by a differing response in Dracula's voice. Any weak points in Stoker's work have been fully exploited here in presenting Dracula's view. Of course, Dracula saves a special dislike for Van Helsing; Dracula considers him both a quack & a religious nut. Some of Dracula's descriptions of Van Helsing had me rofl, such as...
and
This is a fun October read, especially if you are team Dracula.
As I'm a Dracula fan, I quite enjoyed this twist on Stoker's Dracula tale, told from the viewpoint of Dracula himself. There are fairly big portions that are quotes from Stoker's work, followed by a differing response in Dracula's voice. Any weak points in Stoker's work have been fully exploited here in presenting Dracula's view. Of course, Dracula saves a special dislike for Van Helsing; Dracula considers him both a quack & a religious nut. Some of Dracula's descriptions of Van Helsing had me rofl, such as...
"...the old maestro of obfuscation..."
and
"The vision of Van Helsing as a vampire is one before which my imagination balks; this is doubtless only a shortcoming on my part; he may have been well fitted for the role, since as we have seen he had already the power, by means of speech, to cast his victims into a stupor."
This is a fun October read, especially if you are team Dracula.
Oh my god, this was a slog. I started this audio book in July and I only just finished it.
If you've read Dracula, you already know the story. The only difference is that this is told from Drac's point of view in an attempt to... make him more sympathetic, I guess? I honestly can't tell you. The concept is Drac finding Mina and Jonathan Harker's descendants to tell his side of the story, which is recorded on tape, and... Basically just retells Dracula.
The audio book narrator was fabulous, though, and the only reason this miserable slog got two stars.
If you've read Dracula, you already know the story. The only difference is that this is told from Drac's point of view in an attempt to... make him more sympathetic, I guess? I honestly can't tell you. The concept is Drac finding Mina and Jonathan Harker's descendants to tell his side of the story, which is recorded on tape, and... Basically just retells Dracula.
The audio book narrator was fabulous, though, and the only reason this miserable slog got two stars.