Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by geothedude
Dracula by Bram Stoker
2.0
This was a solid 4 stars through the first two acts. And then the purple prose that I found charming through 300-ish pages started to REALLY bog down the narrative. On reflection I suppose it was because the first two acts of the novel are actually incredibly slow paced and uneventful. Most of it is having conversations and writing down thoughts about some small event. For having conversations and thinking about the two things that have happened in 50 pages, the ostentatious style of writing is very fitting and lends a certain gravitas to the limited proceedings.
But for what boils down to an extended chase scene, the ornate style of writing is ABSOLUTELY MISERABLE. This is the LEAST fun I've ever had with a novel in several months at least and it was only my grim determination to finish this classic of horror that I'd DNF'ed several times before in my life that got me through it. Several times through the third act I threw my hands up in exasperation and shouted at the book "WHAT ARE WE DOING? LET'S GO! THERE'S A MONSTER ON THE LOOSE!" But we have to hear all about the train and boat schedules - nothing makes a chase scene more exciting than travel logistics and itineraries - and we have to take several long extended pauses to rehash conversations about our feelings and the Nth explanation that you must trust me about the horrible thing we must do and on and on and on. It was, in a word, exhausting.
Still, it was interesting to read this having watched a million different incredibly loose adaptations of the narrative. These narratives NEVER include the Texan and ultimate vampire-slayer Quincy Morris, and play fast and loose with the other main characters of the narrative: of course, Van Helsing is the indispensable figure, but Seward, Harker, Lord Godalming, Renfield are rarely appear altogether with adaptations frequently combining the characters or simply omitting them entirely. This produced an odd effect in that despite being familiar with the overall narrative, I genuinely never knew what was going to happen to any individual character.
I won't dissuade anyone from reading this book; it is a classic of literary canon and the basis of so much gothic horror going forward, but I also won't judge anyone who taps out before we actually slay the sucker.
But for what boils down to an extended chase scene, the ornate style of writing is ABSOLUTELY MISERABLE. This is the LEAST fun I've ever had with a novel in several months at least and it was only my grim determination to finish this classic of horror that I'd DNF'ed several times before in my life that got me through it. Several times through the third act I threw my hands up in exasperation and shouted at the book "WHAT ARE WE DOING? LET'S GO! THERE'S A MONSTER ON THE LOOSE!" But we have to hear all about the train and boat schedules - nothing makes a chase scene more exciting than travel logistics and itineraries - and we have to take several long extended pauses to rehash conversations about our feelings and the Nth explanation that you must trust me about the horrible thing we must do and on and on and on. It was, in a word, exhausting.
Still, it was interesting to read this having watched a million different incredibly loose adaptations of the narrative. These narratives NEVER include the Texan and ultimate vampire-slayer Quincy Morris, and play fast and loose with the other main characters of the narrative: of course, Van Helsing is the indispensable figure, but Seward, Harker, Lord Godalming, Renfield are rarely appear altogether with adaptations frequently combining the characters or simply omitting them entirely. This produced an odd effect in that despite being familiar with the overall narrative, I genuinely never knew what was going to happen to any individual character.
I won't dissuade anyone from reading this book; it is a classic of literary canon and the basis of so much gothic horror going forward, but I also won't judge anyone who taps out before we actually slay the sucker.