free counter with statistics Bram Stokers Dracula Book Review | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

drac4.jpg
100 Books in One Year: Dracula by Bram Stoker

Cannonball Read / Robert

Book Reviews | January 8, 2009 | Comments (22)


I know the following papers may not make sense at first, but they have been arranged in a very specific order that will begin to make sense as they unfold.

1: From the journal of Robert

20 December, past midnight:

I fear I know not what to learn from Stoker’s Dracula. Am I to gain an understanding of how even mediocre literature can stand the test of time if the author manages to do one thing well? Is religious allegory worthy of this much praise in an otherwise average late-Gothic novel? That can’t be it.

I’m trapped in a web of interesting images with minimal pay off. The hoodlums across the street are eyeing up my house for another round of vandalism against excessive Christmas decorations, and I can’t say I blame them. But with the constant rapping, tapping, smacking at my front door how do I dig deeper into a century plus old narrative to find the juicy nougat of truth in its fiction? The dawn won’t break for hours yet, and this cursed white Ikea light is leaving me with a migraine. I must retire this post and pick it up later when light is on my side.

20 December, morning:

The yard made it through the night without any major destruction. The snow has left Mr. Scrooges hidden from the waist down in a blanket of pristine white, though the cracks are forming in the paint. Too bad a cross won’t stop wood from warping.

The novel really doesn’t move me all that much in the morning, either. I find it intriguing to revisit the work since it varies so much from the film adaptations with any merit at all. What director working in the Hollywood idiom would dare reveal that Count Dracula is a vampire with a seemingly endless series of lusty undead brides in the first five minutes as Stoker does in the first ten pages? It would be suicide.

Perhaps that’s the greater lesson here: don’t expose the villain too soon? But it can’t be. My favorite element of the novel is the immediate action. It drags here and there in the letters, but is mostly action, action, and more action. It’s not summary: it’s plot. How astonishing to see even a very plain prose style accomplish what most modern novelists struggle to do. A change of approach might benefit the examination.

2: Digital correspondence between Robert and his brother, Christopher

TrentSketch to BrotherofSketch, 9:45 AM, g-mail:

Dearest Brother,

I hope this e-mail finds you well. Thank you for linking me to that website with those international interpretations of fairy tales. It will be most helpful in the upcoming writing project.

My purpose for writing is not so cheerful, sadly. I remember you complaining non-stop about reading a novel called Dracula in high school. Perhaps you could help me reconcile my mediocre reaction to one of the most popular novels of the late Gothic period? I fear I’ll never quite understand the appeal.

Robert

PS: Grand Torino on Monday if the snow clears up? You know my car can’t safely travel on the road until they plow out the boonies.

Christopher to Robert, text message:

That boko is gay. Just wacth d movie :):):)

3: from Something Printed This Way Comes, a blog of Robert

20 December, post begun 10:30 pm EST:

My dearest readers,

I fear that I have learned nothing I didn’t already know from a reread of Dracula. The shifting narrative technique is novel, but means nothing if the voice never changes between characters.

Still, it is an engaging read. It’s like a popcorn flick: you don’t need you’re brain to get the message, but you’ll probably enjoy yourself regardless of its vapidity. There’s plenty of tension and haunting imagery that may be written plain but gets the job done.

Maybe there is a lesson in this. Literary fireworks are great, but who gives a damn if they don’t amount to anything? Page turning pop-lit may not be perceived as the most meritorious, yet it earns more money than serious literature for a good reason. It’s enjoyable. It’s fun. You feel good for finishing a book that isn’t that serious. Is a book that great if no one wants to read it?

Or the lesson is this: Christ. I really am a lit snob. If it’s not complex or very different, I’m probably not going to go crazy over it. That’s kind of sad. Hopefully I can force my way through some lighter books and have an easier time digesting them throughout the rest of Cannonball Read than I did here.

Pleasant dreams.

This review is part of the Cannonball Read series. Details are here and the participants and their blogs are here. And check here for more of Robert’s reviews.


The Ten Best Films of 2008 | 20,000 Leagues under the Sea Remake



Comments

8th, January morning:

Read review on Pajiba, Top Gear plays on DVR, dogs are stupid I throw flip-flop at German shepherd, pretzels are making me thirsty. I might download porn...later on.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at January 8, 2009 8:32 AM

Lost get to brother your tell and Robert book goddamn the review Just.

Posted by: Pookie at January 8, 2009 8:45 AM

You totally read the wrong gothic classic. Frankenstein next time. Really.

Posted by: Megan at January 8, 2009 8:50 AM

You know, I've never read this book and after this review I don't believe I will.

Nice review though. I like something a little different to start the morning.

Posted by: admin at January 8, 2009 9:12 AM

I think I might be a little in love with Robert. Third person this week. Curse my fickle heart!

Seriously, though, I just laughed my way all the way through this. Well written, my friend. I loved Dracula, personally. I really liked the character of Mina better than I thought I would. You are quite right about there being no change in voice, though, if I remember correctly. Still, it is an enjoyable read, especially after having seen endless filmic variations.

I also have to agree with Megan's suggestion of Frankenstein. So good.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at January 8, 2009 9:16 AM

Robert, welcome to AvB's evergrowing list of loves. It's warm and cozy here.
Thank you for making me smile with your review.

Posted by: jamiepants at January 8, 2009 9:52 AM

LOVE IT.

Posted by: Julie at January 8, 2009 10:06 AM

Frankenstein (the novel) SUCKS! Mary Shelley couldn't write worth shit. The idea of the novel was good, but the writing was longwinded and boring. It's actually amazing that they scraped a good movie out of the novel.

Dracula (the novel) on the other hand is still a good read. Written in the form of journals and letters, you feel like you're uncovering the story for yourself. I know there's a word for that sort of novel, but I can't remember it.

If you liked Dracular, Wilkie Collins' The Moonstone is a similar novel, and the first detective novel ever written. SPOILER The detective doesn't solve the crime, but the reader does. END SPOILER.

Posted by: BWeaves at January 8, 2009 10:07 AM

Great review Robert. It is nice to get some of the clever in a review. A good treat. I personally enjoyed Dracula, but that isn't saying much. I love to read everything, even instructions and labels. (I know, issues) I just love to read and consume all.

Posted by: SilverDeb at January 8, 2009 10:17 AM

epistolary

Posted by: lateformyfuneral at January 8, 2009 10:17 AM

Frankenstein is a personal favorite of mine. I really love everything about it. The writing is not the greatest at times, admittedly, but I find the whole thing incredibly engaging.

I appreciate the epistolary (BWeaves) execution of Dracula, I just think the plotting and character development is poorly done. There are some exceptional moments (the one that always comes to mind is Jonathan witnessing Dracula climb down the tower like an animal) that actually work against the overall narrative. It heightens the tension, but makes so much of the rest seem dry and unimaginative by proximity. I find myself, whenever I revisit it, blazing through the exposition to get to those magical moments. And I'm a huge reader of Gothic literature. There were a few heated discussions in one of my lit classes where I kept insisting that Northanger Abbey was a far greater novel than Persuasion.

Posted by: Robert at January 8, 2009 10:27 AM

Robert, better than Persuasion, really? I'll grant that it's better than Mansfield Park, but certainly not Persuasion.

Posted by: Alice at January 8, 2009 11:02 AM

Both Frankenstein and Dracula were my Gothic horror examination texts in Sixth Form. They were ruined forever by my English teacher shouting "PENETRATION!" every five minutes. There was nothing that woman couldn't link to sex. (Although it did liven up Frankenstein - I hated that book with a passion. Frankey baby, STOP WHINING or I will STAB YOU).

Oh God I've just remembered when she made us do Atonement by Ian McEwan and kept yelling "cunt" to a room full of sixteen year olds. *shudder*

Good review though, Robert.

Posted by: Squeeziee at January 8, 2009 11:52 AM

"Christ. I really am a lit snob. If it's not complex or very different, I'm probably not going to go crazy over it. That's kind of sad."

That's super sad. It's making you miss out on scads of literary pleasure. I almost feel bad or you.

Posted by: Az at January 8, 2009 11:57 AM

Alice, I really did not like Persuasion at all. The letter scene is spectacular, but otherwise I was underwhelmed. I really didn't like the characters though I can appreciate the skill in the writing. It didn't help that I was one of three people, counting the professor, who actually read the book and continually had to spoonfeed basic plot elements to the class to get some kind of discussion going.

Az, I cycle, really I do. I enjoy a challeging read and copying down favorite passages for inspiration. But I grow tired of it and jump to something else. About the only constant in my reading pattern is horror short fiction. I can't get enough of it. I love writing it, reading it, analyzing it, discussing it - you name it, I do it. I think I'm starting to move towards thrillers/mystery texts at the moment, which opens up more possibilities.

Don't get me wrong: I enjoy books like Kill Me by Stephen White or Soon I Will Be Invicible by Austin Grossman. I'll skim through the latest David Sedaris collection or fantasy craze (though I didn't get far into Meyer's books). What I really need is a character or device to latch onto and solid writing. I just don't find that too often in modern lit.

Posted by: Robert at January 8, 2009 12:37 PM

Robert, fair enough on not liking the characters. Anne and Frederick aren't exactly the most loveable of Austen's creations.

And your class sounds like my Austen class in college. One girl ended a discussion of the book with "You know, none of this would've happened if she'd just married him in the first place. She probably should've thought of that."
Class ended early that day, I think so that nobody would see the professor cry.

Posted by: Alice at January 8, 2009 1:16 PM

Ah yes, epistolary. Thanks.

I kept thinking episcopalian, but that didn't seem right.

Posted by: BWeaves at January 8, 2009 1:24 PM

Wow, I mega-ultron love Dracula. I think it's one of the best examples of the Gothic novel. Of course, I did also write one of my senior theses (I graduated in the fall, so I had to write two, it was weird) on Dracula. I did a gender studies-based interpretation of the novel utilizing Stoker's obvious objectification of the female in the novel as virgin/whore and the staking scene as a rape. Hey, I got an A.

But whatevs, it's a great book.

Posted by: Nicole at January 8, 2009 1:44 PM

Alice, let me tell you. That comment you mentioned is what everyone else in the class kept saying. Everyone.

And the professor started the fight. She said Northanger Abbey was the worst of Austen's novels, including the unfinished work. I had just re-read it and had to push her buttons. So it escalated from "You're joking, right?" to "At least it's better than Persuasion." Low blow, I know. But she started it. Thankfully, I had the option of writing about The Aspern Papers (James) and avoided any potential death strike with grading.

Nicole, interesting approach to the novel. I know there's a lot there. I just don't think all the separate elements add up to a really great whole.

Posted by: Robert at January 8, 2009 4:56 PM

Nicole, I kind of would love to read that paper. Even though I'm all happy with my grad school and career choices and shit, I'm still an English major inside

Posted by: CurlieQt at January 8, 2009 6:16 PM

Persuasion is my favourite. Why? Because it is my damned life, set almost 200 years ago. Ya, she should have married him the first time. But people make mistakes. Ya know? I am going to go cry now... Or, whatever, read Dracula and fantasize about ravishing foreigners...

Posted by: Bah at January 8, 2009 10:33 PM

I like it, I saw many info. on ***seekingsugarmomma. c om***. Very funny site. Like it so much!!!

Posted by: nina at January 9, 2009 1:39 AM