I know it's blasphemy, but hear me out! Did I enjoy this book? Yes. Do I recommend it? Yes. However readers need to be warned about the Van Helsing diatribes. Even those who are fans of flowery victorian prose will find this trying. It's this alone that hinders the pace of this book and had I been warned ahead of time, I think I would have enjoyed Dracula more than I did. That aside, let's get to the good points.
The journal entries as a form of telling the story are unique and work for the story. Stoker is quite capable of providing each character a distinctive voice making them personable and the reader that much more involved. Especially with Harker and Mina. But it can lag due to the reasons stated above.
Some of the scenes are downright scary! When the pace picks up, the descriptive writing combined with years of media perception surprisingly adds to the enjoyment of reading this. Not to mention Renfield is a force to be reckoned with in the book wheras he is parodied in most movies. I found myself getting goosebumps and that's saying something for a book written about a century ago.
And lastly the major theme of the book is a sheer delight. Science over mysticism. The 1800's must have been an interesting time. It's the century that invented psychology and yet people were still being arrested for witchcraft. This is Stoker's master stroke. He captures the excitment and conflict of these elements perfectly. More so than Frankenstein, which is more of a scientific morality tale. Here they embrace it and save for Coppola's half-hearted attempt, none of the movies have bothered to touch on it.
Dracula is a good book, but I just couldn't get into Van Helsing. Highly recommended though. A classic that captures it's time and doesent wane with it.
I know it's blasphemy, but hear me out! Did I enjoy this book? Yes. Do I recommend it? Yes. However readers need to be warned about the Van Helsing diatribes. Even those who are fans of flowery victorian prose will find this trying. It's this alone that hinders the pace of this book and had I been warned ahead of time, I think I would have enjoyed Dracula more than I did. That aside, let's get to the good points. The journal entries as a form of telling the story are unique and work for the story. Stoker is quite capable of providing each character a distinctive voice making them personable and the reader that much more involved. Especially with Harker and Mina. But it can lag due to the reasons stated above. Some of the scenes are downright scary! When the pace picks up, the descriptive writing combined with years of media perception surprisingly adds to the enjoyment of reading this. Not to mention Renfield is a force to be reckoned with in the book wheras he is parodied in most movies. I found myself getting goosebumps and that's saying something for a book written about a century ago. And lastly the major theme of the book is a sheer delight. Science over mysticism. The 1800's must have been an interesting time. It's the century that invented psychology and yet people were still being arrested for witchcraft. This is Stoker's master stroke. He captures the excitment and conflict of these elements perfectly. More so than Frankenstein, which is more of a scientific morality tale. Here they embrace it and save for Coppola's half-hearted attempt, none of the movies have bothered to touch on it. Dracula is a good book, but I just couldn't get into Van Helsing. Highly recommended though. A classic that captures it's time and doesent wane with it.