Scan barcode
A review by nataliestorozhenko
A Dowry of Blood by S.T. Gibson
3.0
«“It would be easier if he hated us,” she said. “But he loves us all terribly. And if we go on letting him love us, that love is going to kill us. That’s what makes him so dangerous.»
I understand why people enjoy this book. It's often praised for its lyrical style, which I can see. However, in my opinion, the author seems to have aimed for a period feel with the writing, but it's actually quite simple. It's not a problem, just an observation contrasting with the book's glowing reviews.
The concept is intriguing, but it lacks depth in some areas. The significant historical moments are glossed over with a few sentences. The plot follows the fmc as she becomes a wife, moves, Dracula finds a new partner for them, more moving, and then another partner found by Dracula. They all become insane due to immortality, boredom, and Dracula's oppressive reign. The book is about an abusive relationship and how the fmc, along with Dracula's other partners, tries to break free. However, it takes hundreds of years for her to find the courage to do so, which is not very inspiring if it's the main theme of the book.
«I was simply a non-entity when you weren’t looking at me, an empty vessel waiting to be filled by the sweet water of your attention.»
Another reason why would you like to read this book - a lot of group activities. Like a loooot. This book is quite short, so basically, that's where half of the book went. And some of the feelings of the main character just did not make sense - Constance felt that Alexi was like her son and wanted to protect him, but then slept with him? What in a sweet home Alabama was that? Yes, all of the passion was described well and suitable for the gothic aesthetic, vampires, blood, and sin. But when the book is trying to preach about the abusive relationship, it kind of contradicts itself. I understand that Constance lived in continuous fear, but at the same time, even when she tried to stick to her morals, she often chose her desire first. So for me, she was quite similar to Dracula, the difference being that she did not want to lock her loved ones in a cage. But the ending was good and he finally got what he deserved, so I was happy with that.
«I saw every soft moment we had shared flicker over your face, and you were so beautiful. Desperate, vulnerable. Fear for your life made you look like a man who could really love and be loved, like you might hand over your heart and all its secrets without my having to crack your ribs open to get to them.»
Overall, it was quite an interesting read because of its gothic aesthetic, vampires, and eerie feel about it. And the idea of this Dracula meets Blue Beard story was quite intriguing. But was it some breakthrough as it's often presented? Not really.
I understand why people enjoy this book. It's often praised for its lyrical style, which I can see. However, in my opinion, the author seems to have aimed for a period feel with the writing, but it's actually quite simple. It's not a problem, just an observation contrasting with the book's glowing reviews.
The concept is intriguing, but it lacks depth in some areas. The significant historical moments are glossed over with a few sentences. The plot follows the fmc as she becomes a wife, moves, Dracula finds a new partner for them, more moving, and then another partner found by Dracula. They all become insane due to immortality, boredom, and Dracula's oppressive reign. The book is about an abusive relationship and how the fmc, along with Dracula's other partners, tries to break free. However, it takes hundreds of years for her to find the courage to do so, which is not very inspiring if it's the main theme of the book.
«I was simply a non-entity when you weren’t looking at me, an empty vessel waiting to be filled by the sweet water of your attention.»
Another reason why would you like to read this book - a lot of group activities. Like a loooot. This book is quite short, so basically, that's where half of the book went. And some of the feelings of the main character just did not make sense - Constance felt that Alexi was like her son and wanted to protect him, but then slept with him? What in a sweet home Alabama was that? Yes, all of the passion was described well and suitable for the gothic aesthetic, vampires, blood, and sin. But when the book is trying to preach about the abusive relationship, it kind of contradicts itself. I understand that Constance lived in continuous fear, but at the same time, even when she tried to stick to her morals, she often chose her desire first. So for me, she was quite similar to Dracula, the difference being that she did not want to lock her loved ones in a cage. But the ending was good and he finally got what he deserved, so I was happy with that.
«I saw every soft moment we had shared flicker over your face, and you were so beautiful. Desperate, vulnerable. Fear for your life made you look like a man who could really love and be loved, like you might hand over your heart and all its secrets without my having to crack your ribs open to get to them.»
Overall, it was quite an interesting read because of its gothic aesthetic, vampires, and eerie feel about it. And the idea of this Dracula meets Blue Beard story was quite intriguing. But was it some breakthrough as it's often presented? Not really.