almaylu's review against another edition
3.0
A bit underwhelmed by this ”most famous vampire of all time“.
rngilmer's review against another edition
3.0
I'm glad I finally read it, but the beginning is slow, nothing happens in the middle, and the ending is only two paragraphs...
pro_escapism's review against another edition
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
rtudes's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
clairebear23's review against another edition
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
laurenalice4's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
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
3.75
lilaclisa's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
hopeful
mysterious
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
themodvictorian's review against another edition
4.0
I’ve read this novel three times. Twice as a teenager, and now at twenty-seven. I have fond recollections of it. I made a Dracula-themed scrapbook for my Honors English class! I played Mina Harker onstage!
Most of this book held up firmly through my nostalgia. There are some slight pacing issues, I think; for example, some of Seward’s diary entries could have been condensed (I wanted him to just get to the point!) and Van Helsing could have (and, perhaps, should have) been more direct with everybody else outright. Then there’s the occasional statement about “womanly virtues,” and “manly strength.” Despite its weak spots, however, I still consider this book is still a great, timeless tale. I think it would be fun to read it aloud at a book club. So much melodrama!
While I believe (and this is simply personal opinion) other Gothic novels of the time period surpass Dracula in artistry and merit (i.e., The Picture of Dorian Gray and Jane Eyre—it remains one of the premier Victorian Gothics, and I hope it will continue to inspire new generations of dramatic and morbid young adults.
Most of this book held up firmly through my nostalgia. There are some slight pacing issues, I think; for example, some of Seward’s diary entries could have been condensed (I wanted him to just get to the point!) and Van Helsing could have (and, perhaps, should have) been more direct with everybody else outright. Then there’s the occasional statement about “womanly virtues,” and “manly strength.” Despite its weak spots, however, I still consider this book is still a great, timeless tale. I think it would be fun to read it aloud at a book club. So much melodrama!
While I believe (and this is simply personal opinion) other Gothic novels of the time period surpass Dracula in artistry and merit (i.e., The Picture of Dorian Gray and Jane Eyre—it remains one of the premier Victorian Gothics, and I hope it will continue to inspire new generations of dramatic and morbid young adults.
misskitty14's review against another edition
2.0
While I enjoyed reading most of the book, by the time I reached the final 20 pages I started to realize how little development occurred in the previous 380 pages. The book is very slow, which I don't necessarily mind, but it doesn't seem to pay-off. As a reader, especially one living in a post-Dracula world, the twists and turns are expected and lack any significant punch of excitement.
I suppose the true talent of Stocker is his ability to convey the distinct voices of his characters (the book is a collection of all their different journals and writings). Mina's and Dr. Seward's journals are especially distinct in the emotions they evoke. But I do have one qualm: Van Helsing's broken English is not consistent. Sometimes he speaks perfectly fine, other times it is a struggle to understand anything he is saying and there doesn't appear to be an explanation as to why.
Finally, the book's villain and end are lackluster, to say the least. We never really get much in the way of Dracula's background or motivation aside from general conclusions that the characters make about his character. I'm not a fan of the "Super Villain Monologue" but Stocker settled for a plot device rather than a complex, layered antagonist. And this is perhaps most evident in the conclusion:
One could argue that Dracula is not really about the titular character as much as how this band morally righteous, modern, enlightened Westerners defeat the old mysticisms of Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, no one really grows or learns anything besides the existence of such evil.
I suppose the true talent of Stocker is his ability to convey the distinct voices of his characters (the book is a collection of all their different journals and writings). Mina's and Dr. Seward's journals are especially distinct in the emotions they evoke. But I do have one qualm: Van Helsing's broken English is not consistent. Sometimes he speaks perfectly fine, other times it is a struggle to understand anything he is saying and there doesn't appear to be an explanation as to why.
Finally, the book's villain and end are lackluster, to say the least. We never really get much in the way of Dracula's background or motivation aside from general conclusions that the characters make about his character. I'm not a fan of the "Super Villain Monologue" but Stocker settled for a plot device rather than a complex, layered antagonist. And this is perhaps most evident in the conclusion:
Spoiler
The group rips open his coffin just before sunset, just outside his castle, and kills him just as he opens his eyesSpoiler
One could argue that Dracula is not really about the titular character as much as how this band morally righteous, modern, enlightened Westerners defeat the old mysticisms of Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, no one really grows or learns anything besides the existence of such evil.