Dracula has been on my to-read list for such a long time. I intended to get to it soon after reading Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein years ago but then as is often the case, life got in the way, and I was distracted by other books. I’m happy to say that I finally read it.
Dracula is a gothic horror masterpiece, but I think it’s a masterpiece with flaws. I have mixed feelings about the writing and the pacing. Told epistolary style in the form of letters, journal entries, articles, and telegrams, it’s engaging and atmospheric at times but then overwritten and dull at others. The first four chapters set in Transylvania really drew me in. But the story really slows down after those chapters and although things pick up again in the middle, some chapters are still filled with repetition and long-winded passages.
Flaws aside, the book is incredibly atmospheric as well as an interesting look at Victorian society. I grew to like the characters as they worked together to investigate and fight Dracula, and the finale was a page turner.
I’m glad that I read the Deluxe Edition (from Union Square & Co., formerly Sterling Publishing) with illustrations by Edward Gorey. It’s a gorgeous hardcover that includes printing in black and red ink, fore-edge painting of bats, a black ribbon bookmark, and red velvet cover. It was a pleasure to hold and read.
This edition also includes “Dracula’s Guest,” the chapter that was cut from the original printing of the novel as well as an introduction and appendices by editor Marvin Kaye. Based on what I’ve read, I’ve always thought that “Dracula’s Guest” was intended to be the first chapter of Dracula, but Kaye makes a good argument that it was supposed to be chapter two. In any case I’m glad that it’s included as an extra at the beginning of the book. It can be enjoyed on its own, but it also makes for a good prologue.
Now I’m curious about Dracula, the Rare Text of 1901, which I learned about from the appendices. It’s an author-abridged version which is about 20 percent shorter. I’d like to see if the passages that were cut help with the pacing at all.
After finishing the book, I rewatched Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992) directed by Francis Ford Coppola. The striking visuals, sets, costumes, and performances all combine to create an amazing dream-like quality. I love that Coppola kept the film set bound and used lots of practical effects like miniatures and matte paintings. Also, most of the costumes designed by Eiko Ishioka are amazing.
Gary Oldman was great as Dracula, but his ginormous white hairdo pulled me out of the story faster than Keanu Reeves’ attempt at a British accent. I like how the film follows the book closely in many ways as well as trying new things, but then it just goes off the rails and becomes a fan fiction version of the novel. I have mixed feelings about the ending as it changes aspects of some of the characters and makes a certain loss kind of meaningless. Oh well, when it comes to Dracula, mixed feelings seem to be a theme with me.
Unless it’s the author's abridged version I doubt I’ll ever re-read the novel, but I’ll definitely re-watch the film. It's fast paced, over the top, and a visual feast.
Next on my gothic novel to-read list: The Hunchback of Notre-Dame by Victor Hugo.
