kayu99's review against another edition
3.0
The beginning was promising, but it quickly devolved into a boring, meandering mess that seemed more focused on pilgrim routes than vampires. The big reveal at the end was underwhelming and not worth the effort, and one character was completely different by the end of the book compared with her introduction. One of the plotlines also felt pointless and I wasn't entirely sure what the daughter was meant to do that couldn't be accomplished by another character.
longaneyes_'s review against another edition
I'm very sorry Carolyn. This book was actually good but I just didn't read it. I don't even know why. I didn't really read much anyway. Our poor buddy read was left at 6% and 11% all summer D:. We'll come back to this eventually o7
rebel_elleiance_reads's review against another edition
4.0
I read this years and years ago and plowed through it in a day. I couldn't put it down. I was also in my early 20s, so will need to re-read it soon to see if I still enjoy it. I unfortunately, have not cared for other books by this author, so maybe I read it at the perfect time in my life to adore it, or maybe this was her most exciting effort.
nrphoto's review against another edition
2.0
I tried. O man I really tried. But at some point, something needed to actually happen. Nothing did. I gave up.
acarman1's review against another edition
3.0
For the most part an exciting, compelling tale although it jumped around a lot and didn't balance the two storylines very well.
tamzy6's review against another edition
2.0
Don't be fooled by the marketing and promotion of this title. It is neither thrilling nor horrific. At best, it is a monotonous retelling of Dracula. The convoluted plot got very repetitive somewhere in the middle.
A constant thought I've had during this arduous 800+ page journey was that this novel could have been completed in half the page count and still reach the same conclusion.
A constant thought I've had during this arduous 800+ page journey was that this novel could have been completed in half the page count and still reach the same conclusion.
nonabgo's review against another edition
2.0
Huh. Where to start? This review is going to be a long one.
Just like the book. Sooo long. And I'm not necessarily talking about the actual length (although 700+ pages is definitely not short); I've read longer books that didn't take me as much time to complete. But this one - it just feels drab. The story just goes on and on and on until the point where you feel you either have to finish it as a personal challenge (which I did) or set it on fire (which I obviously did not, as I love my Kindle). Things go back and forth without any apparent logic to the point where you don't understand where it all started and why it was so important to find Dracula's tomb.
Oh, didn't I mention that? That's what the book is about. A historian (duh!) - or, actually, a lot of historians (everyone seems to be one in this story) - is looking for Dracula's tomb. Why? Because he received a mysterious book, in a mysterious way. This is the entire premise. Then it just continues in an endless series of letters, written by different characters, that are supposed to slowly (soooo slowly) unravel the story.
Everyone writes letters. But this, in itself, is not a problem. There are other novels written in this style, so nothing new. What is bad, though, is that every character has the same voice; whether it's the old professor, the desperate father or the high-school girl, they all sound the same, there's no difference in tone or vocabulary. There were moments when I had to go back a few pages to make sense of "who's talking", as they all blended together.
Speaking of characters, something I did not see was character development. There's absolutely no growth, no lessons learned, no attitude change. They all move around like sheep and everyone makes the same mistakes over and over again. And to this point, I have no idea what the main character's name is without looking it over; that's how memorable they are.
There were parts I liked, though, which is why I gave this novel 2 stars instead of 1. Paul and Helen's travels through Europe were scenic and, in part, entertaining. The descriptions of the cities were actually nice, though sometimes too long. The action is, in parts, engaging, but unfortunately, these passages go by fast and you are left with endless digressions that bring no new information. There's just too many coincidences for the story to be remotely believable and people are just thrown together without any buildup. And if you donțt figure out who the girl's mother is from the very beginning, you probably lack a brain.
And it all moves towards an ending that's... idiotic? Unexpected in its pointlessness? And located about 100 pages before the actual ending of the book (which also has a completely useless epilogue). Such a bore.
For a book called "The Historian", I expected more historical facts. The way this book was presented to me was that it is historically accurate in terms of Vlad Țepeș's life, but other than a few dates and well-known events, this is nothing new, nor does it bring enough information that would actually make someone not familiar with Romania/Wallachia's history want to research this period further. There are also some geographical inaccuracies that made me cringe - Poenari (Arefu) castle is not in Transylvania, but rather in Wallachia, Snagov is nowhere near the western part of Romania. And so on.
Knowing the author's name, these inaccuracies seemed weird, but after finding out she's not of Bulgarian descent, but rather married to one, I wrote it off as laziness, since these things are really not that difficult to research. But that's not an excuse.
Something else that bothered me - and at this point I have to mention that I'm Romanian and quite proud of my country's history - is the fact that the story never really goes into Romania. It's all told from the point of view of Hungarians and Turks (for those who don't know, both peoples - Huns and Ottomans - came into a region already populated by Romanians for centuries, and both tried or managed, for short periods of time, to conquer part of the territories now known as Romania). It's disturbing that they are so praised and that the history is told from their point of view, with little to no mention to the people who actually lived in these parts. And calling Vlad Țepeș a tyrant is downright disturbing since all he did was to defend his people from foreign invaders who had no right to this land. He's a national hero and calling him anything other than that is not only unjust but also offensive.
This book was a waste of time, I believe it's the worst book on vampire lore that I've read. I much rather prefer the historically-inaccurate fantasy books than this huge jumble of non-existent characters, stupid storyline and poor writing.
Just like the book. Sooo long. And I'm not necessarily talking about the actual length (although 700+ pages is definitely not short); I've read longer books that didn't take me as much time to complete. But this one - it just feels drab. The story just goes on and on and on until the point where you feel you either have to finish it as a personal challenge (which I did) or set it on fire (which I obviously did not, as I love my Kindle). Things go back and forth without any apparent logic to the point where you don't understand where it all started and why it was so important to find Dracula's tomb.
Oh, didn't I mention that? That's what the book is about. A historian (duh!) - or, actually, a lot of historians (everyone seems to be one in this story) - is looking for Dracula's tomb. Why? Because he received a mysterious book, in a mysterious way. This is the entire premise. Then it just continues in an endless series of letters, written by different characters, that are supposed to slowly (soooo slowly) unravel the story.
Everyone writes letters. But this, in itself, is not a problem. There are other novels written in this style, so nothing new. What is bad, though, is that every character has the same voice; whether it's the old professor, the desperate father or the high-school girl, they all sound the same, there's no difference in tone or vocabulary. There were moments when I had to go back a few pages to make sense of "who's talking", as they all blended together.
Speaking of characters, something I did not see was character development. There's absolutely no growth, no lessons learned, no attitude change. They all move around like sheep and everyone makes the same mistakes over and over again. And to this point, I have no idea what the main character's name is without looking it over; that's how memorable they are.
There were parts I liked, though, which is why I gave this novel 2 stars instead of 1. Paul and Helen's travels through Europe were scenic and, in part, entertaining. The descriptions of the cities were actually nice, though sometimes too long. The action is, in parts, engaging, but unfortunately, these passages go by fast and you are left with endless digressions that bring no new information. There's just too many coincidences for the story to be remotely believable and people are just thrown together without any buildup. And if you donțt figure out who the girl's mother is from the very beginning, you probably lack a brain.
And it all moves towards an ending that's... idiotic? Unexpected in its pointlessness? And located about 100 pages before the actual ending of the book (which also has a completely useless epilogue). Such a bore.
For a book called "The Historian", I expected more historical facts. The way this book was presented to me was that it is historically accurate in terms of Vlad Țepeș's life, but other than a few dates and well-known events, this is nothing new, nor does it bring enough information that would actually make someone not familiar with Romania/Wallachia's history want to research this period further. There are also some geographical inaccuracies that made me cringe - Poenari (Arefu) castle is not in Transylvania, but rather in Wallachia, Snagov is nowhere near the western part of Romania. And so on.
Knowing the author's name, these inaccuracies seemed weird, but after finding out she's not of Bulgarian descent, but rather married to one, I wrote it off as laziness, since these things are really not that difficult to research. But that's not an excuse.
Something else that bothered me - and at this point I have to mention that I'm Romanian and quite proud of my country's history - is the fact that the story never really goes into Romania. It's all told from the point of view of Hungarians and Turks (for those who don't know, both peoples - Huns and Ottomans - came into a region already populated by Romanians for centuries, and both tried or managed, for short periods of time, to conquer part of the territories now known as Romania). It's disturbing that they are so praised and that the history is told from their point of view, with little to no mention to the people who actually lived in these parts. And calling Vlad Țepeș a tyrant is downright disturbing since all he did was to defend his people from foreign invaders who had no right to this land. He's a national hero and calling him anything other than that is not only unjust but also offensive.
This book was a waste of time, I believe it's the worst book on vampire lore that I've read. I much rather prefer the historically-inaccurate fantasy books than this huge jumble of non-existent characters, stupid storyline and poor writing.
jackimurphy's review against another edition
4.0
I really enjoyed it, but I misread the narrator's note in the beginning as an author's note, and so I was REALLY, REALLY confused when a few certain plot points tried to get passed off as fact. That said, it was a a great read and I would recommend it!
amelie_s's review against another edition
adventurous
informative
inspiring
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.75
sarful's review against another edition
3.0
More like 3.5. I loved the history she weaves throughout her intriguing take on Dracula. The descriptions of the old monasteries, architecture and villages were fascinating. Her added lore of vampires was interesting. Her characters' stories of their search was fun. There was always a creepy factor of not knowing when either Dracula or one of his minions would attack and in what form. However, the end was a slight disappointment and meeting Dracula was disappointing too. Weird that she displays Dracula as the only vampire throughout history with him making minions. It's her lore I just didn't love that bit, there had to have been others around not made from Dracula. But a good read from start to finish.