Scan barcode
ktrecs's review against another edition
dark
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? N/A
4.5
Content Warnings
Moderate: Chronic illness, Homophobia, and Blood
marigo1ds's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.25
Content Warnings
Graphic: Homophobia, Racism, Blood, and Religious bigotry
alexaliz's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
Content Warnings
Minor: Homophobia
mal_eficent's review
dark
mysterious
reflective
sad
fast-paced
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
As my first foray into the Victorian vampire (beyond watching Bram Stoker's Dracula) this was super intriguing, and it's made me really excited to sit down and read more.
I really like the Victorian style of horror shorts: the drip fed hints that nothing is as it seems, the dramatic setting, and the even more dramatic idea of someone sitting down years later to sigh and exclaim over this 'terrible' thing that happened in their past was. I fell in love with this way of writing horror reading Frankenstein in high school and I always forget how good it is until I pick up another. This was no exception to the rule: I really enjoyed it. It was creepy, the writing was really enjoyable, and the vampire lore was so interesting.
All that said, there's no escaping that the original intent behind this story is a bit homophobic. The idea of monsterhood and queerness being intrinsically tied together, and that you should be afraid of someone because of their queerness, is clearly a terrible opinion. (Using monsterhood as a metaphor so that people can explore their feeling of otherness without facing direct phobia is a different matter entirely, and I don't think this book is trying to do that.) As a modern reader it's not hard to just read this as a queer woman having been turned into a vampire, and Carmilla's predatory tendencies being only related to her vampire nature - and I think that's the way to approach it, with the writer long dead and the way the story has been embraced by queer women. There's certainly wiggle room within the original text to see it as Laura trying to come to terms with her own queerness, too, but due to society, the men in her life, and the whole vampire thing she's never allowed to. Because the story never outright says being a lesbian is bad, just the monsterhood of Carmilla, a modern reader can escape the homophobia.
I think it's one to read if you like Victorian classics and vampires, but not necessarily one to go to if you're looking for older queer books.
I really like the Victorian style of horror shorts: the drip fed hints that nothing is as it seems, the dramatic setting, and the even more dramatic idea of someone sitting down years later to sigh and exclaim over this 'terrible' thing that happened in their past was. I fell in love with this way of writing horror reading Frankenstein in high school and I always forget how good it is until I pick up another. This was no exception to the rule: I really enjoyed it. It was creepy, the writing was really enjoyable, and the vampire lore was so interesting.
All that said, there's no escaping that the original intent behind this story is a bit homophobic. The idea of monsterhood and queerness being intrinsically tied together, and that you should be afraid of someone because of their queerness, is clearly a terrible opinion. (Using monsterhood as a metaphor so that people can explore their feeling of otherness without facing direct phobia is a different matter entirely, and I don't think this book is trying to do that.) As a modern reader it's not hard to just read this as a queer woman having been turned into a vampire, and Carmilla's predatory tendencies being only related to her vampire nature - and I think that's the way to approach it, with the writer long dead and the way the story has been embraced by queer women. There's certainly wiggle room within the original text to see it as Laura trying to come to terms with her own queerness, too, but due to society, the men in her life, and the whole vampire thing she's never allowed to. Because the story never outright says being a lesbian is bad, just the monsterhood of Carmilla, a modern reader can escape the homophobia.
I think it's one to read if you like Victorian classics and vampires, but not necessarily one to go to if you're looking for older queer books.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Homophobia
Moderate: Physical abuse
Minor: Violence and Blood