Scan barcode
v_____'s review against another edition
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-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
5.0
Auf ein Blatt Papier, welches dem folgenden Bericht beigegeben war, hat Dr. Hesselius eine ziemlich ausführliche Anmerkung geschrieben und ihr einen Hinweis auf seine Abhandlung über das merkwürdige Problem, das im Manuskript beleuchtet wird, hinzugefügt...
Yes, this was good!
Ich bin tatsächlich während des Lesens in die deutsche Fassung gewechselt, da für mich einfach zu viele unkannte Wörter drinnen war und ich zu faul war diese nachzuschlagen 😃
Zu sagen das Buch war vorhersehbar ist nicht fair, da die Geschichte einfach so bekannt ist, dass man nicht mehr überrascht wird. 🤷♀️
Es war trotzdem ein wirklich spannendes Buch und super geschrieben.
Ich hätte gerne noch mehr über Carmillas Story erfahren, über ihre 'Mutter', wie sie ein Vampir wurde etc, aber es es aus Sicht von Laura geschrieben war ist dies natürlich nicht vorgekommen.
Ein bisschen ist die Familie auch selbst Schuld, denn welche Mutter verlässt ihre verletzte Tochter direkt von der Unfallstelle weg, um sie komplett Fremden aufs Auge zu drücken? Das stinkt von vornherein zum Himmel 😃 Nothing could be that important!
Content Warnings
Graphic: Body horror, Death, Physical abuse, and Pandemic/Epidemic
_n_m_'s review
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
Content Warnings
Minor: Misogyny, Physical abuse, Sexual assault, Toxic relationship, Stalking, and Lesbophobia
maeverose's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
3.0
Edit: upon re read, I’ve lowered my rating to a 3 (was a 4). I think I was mostly excited about the vibes the first time I read it. Still liked it though.
I guess I’m eating my words about not liking the writing style of classics, huh?
I loved the writing style of this book. It was atmospheric and gothic, I loved the setting of the castle and the grassy hills and the ruins of the old town. I pictured fog over everything anytime they were outside. Now I wanna have a picnic at old castle ruins in the fog with a pretty vampire. (Sadly that doesn’t happen in this book but it could’ve). This might be my favorite classic I’ve read so far… it’s at least tied with Dracula, but I think it tops it. It actually got pretty creepy at times.
Was also a little surprised how explicitly sapphic it was, given when it was written. I was expecting it to just be homoerotic in the way that classics sometimes are, or overtly homophobic. I think it’s safe to assume that the combination of sapphic elements and vampirism was very intentional.. automatically villainizing lesbianism by portraying it as a ‘virus’ that you can ‘catch’, something that’s evil and scary… But reading it it isn’t actually explicitly homophobic. It’s all subtext. It could easily be read through a more modern lens, removing that subtext.
I guess I’m eating my words about not liking the writing style of classics, huh?
I loved the writing style of this book. It was atmospheric and gothic, I loved the setting of the castle and the grassy hills and the ruins of the old town. I pictured fog over everything anytime they were outside. Now I wanna have a picnic at old castle ruins in the fog with a pretty vampire. (Sadly that doesn’t happen in this book but it could’ve). This might be my favorite classic I’ve read so far… it’s at least tied with Dracula, but I think it tops it. It actually got pretty creepy at times.
Was also a little surprised how explicitly sapphic it was, given when it was written. I was expecting it to just be homoerotic in the way that classics sometimes are, or overtly homophobic. I think it’s safe to assume that the combination of sapphic elements and vampirism was very intentional.. automatically villainizing lesbianism by portraying it as a ‘virus’ that you can ‘catch’, something that’s evil and scary… But reading it it isn’t actually explicitly homophobic. It’s all subtext. It could easily be read through a more modern lens, removing that subtext.
My only complaints:
•The racism. It’s only in one or two scenes, but it’s pretty bad in one scene especially.
•How naive Laura was, especially at the very end. She was supposed to be 19, right? How did she not connect the dots after the general’s story??? 😆
•It ended a bit abruptly
•And lastly, I just wish we got more pretty atmospheric descriptions of the ruins. I was waiting the whole book for them to go there and when they did we didn’t get much :/ I would’ve liked more atmospheric descriptions in general, but at least we got some.
Overall, I’m really happy I liked this! I was starting to worry that classics just weren’t for me. Hopefully there are still more out there that I’ll love.
“Thus fortified I might take my rest in peace. But dreams come through stone walls, light up dark rooms, or darken light ones, and their persons make their exits and their entrances as they please, and laugh at locksmiths.”
“Thus fortified I might take my rest in peace. But dreams come through stone walls, light up dark rooms, or darken light ones, and their persons make their exits and their entrances as they please, and laugh at locksmiths.”
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Violence, and Blood
Moderate: Child death, Emotional abuse, Misogyny, Physical abuse, Racism, Terminal illness, Toxic relationship, Lesbophobia, Gaslighting, and Toxic friendship
Minor: Ableism, Sexual content, Suicide, and Death of parent
Religious themes, beheading, cremation, sleep paralysis (not really but the descriptions are similar)shrutislibrary's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-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? It's complicated
3.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Confinement, Deadnaming, Death, Emotional abuse, Physical abuse, Toxic relationship, Cannibalism, Murder, Gaslighting, and Toxic friendship
chloebethx_'s review
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
This book was everything I expected it to be before reading, a classic tale of the supernatural but with a feminine twist! This book drew me in and I finished it all in one sitting… truly a mesmerising piece of art!
Content Warnings
Moderate: Confinement, Death, Emotional abuse, Physical abuse, Blood, Death of parent, Murder, Colonisation, Injury/Injury detail, and Classism
mal_eficent's review against another edition
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