Reviews

The Vampire: A New History is little more than a string of anecdotes which become increasingly disorganised as the book progresses. Some of these anecdotes are fascinating – vampires’ deadly gaze mirroring that of the basilisk, Arthur Coga’s interspecies blood transfusion, the Catholic Church’s efforts to build an all-encompassing mythos – but the way the text flits from one assertion to another without rhyme or reason, then folds back on itself to repeat points already made, then delves into a subject only tangentially relevant to vampirism can be a little frustrating. Groom talks at length about Frankenstein because of the recurring blood motif, yet he barely skims The Vampyre. He discusses Dracula in the final chapter but his analysis isn’t particularly thorough. I’m curious as to why, after establishing the link between vampire myths and blood libel, as well as noting Count Dracula’s hooked nose and association with money, he’s so eager to dismiss any antisemitic tropes in Dracula as pure coincidence.

The “Conclusion” wasn’t a conclusion at all; rather, a rushed survey of post-Dracula vampire fiction. This ought to have been expanded. Groom already notes Dracula’s significance in the field of vampirology, with distinct pre- and post-Dracula eras of vampire tales. Why not lean into this? It seems natural to (quite literally) centre Dracula, to have the first half of the book detailing what inspired the novel and the second half exploring works that were, in turn, inspired by it.

The Vampire: A New History is not without merit, but it feels like the first draft of what could have been a much stronger book. I can’t decide whether or not I’d recommend it so I’m giving it a middle-of-the-road three star rating.

CONTENT WARNINGS: all the typical vampire stuff (death/undeath, murder, blood), as well as execution, disease, medical experiments, animal cruelty, body horror, racism, antisemitism, and misogyny

isobelthewizard's review against another edition

Go to review page

this book was really neat! and i feel like i learned a lot and made some new connections irt vampiric themes and the evolution of science philosophy and medicine !! a valuable research tool, to be sure. mr. groom (what a killer name for a vampire historian. god) has some really eloquent phrasing and has clearly done really meticulous research. he paints a really vibrant portrait.

one major critique (perhaps shaded by some serious personal bias): where are the gay people nicholas

i just don't understand how a book about vampire fiction can just ... lump "sexual anxiety" (a CORE theme to every vampire text i've ever read) into one big overarching idea, and then not ever really dig into it. i would have loved for fifty less pages on slavic epidemiology and catholic corpse theory if the clear and pressing theme of sexual panic could have been addressed in a more ..... direct ... manner

ahem dracula gay ahem

jensteerswell's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

Turns out pretty much everything we now think about vampires: they don't show up in mirrors, they're afraid of garlic and crosses, fangs, is out of Dracula. Before that, they were much weirder and non-sexy beings, which I guess is why you hardly see them depicted that way in the media: much more fun to have an attractive, dangerous character corrupting the innocents.

strabbyfieldz's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging funny informative reflective medium-paced

4.25

so well-researched and broad that it hit on something from every part of my a level course 😳 slightly spooky! if it was a little less repetitive, info-overload-y and better organised in terms of chapters this would be a 5/5 for sure but as it is I recommend any humanities student, let alone literature need read it!! there really is something for everyone here.

Content Warnings

More...