Literature A Dated Classic
Dracula is very much a product of the literary conventions of its time. The pacing lags a little and the action is sparse, and some of the things that would be considered utterly horrifying in Stoker's day fall a little flat for modern readers—Seinfeld Is Unfunny and all that. Oh, and be prepared for a lot of passages where the main characters fawn over each other and tell each other what wonderful people they are, just to make sure we remember that we're supposed to be rooting for the heroes. That being said, Dracula remains entirely readable and if you're interested in the history of vampires in pop culture then it's a must-read.
Literature Dracula, Bram Stoker - Important but not good
Epostolary novel told from multiple perspectives about the vampire, Count Dracula, who is trying to invade London and turn everyone else into vampires. A bunch of rich guys and a chick decide to stop him. I read the somewhat recently-discovered unabridged version.
No matter how many times Stoker says he is clever, Dracula is dumb as a brick. Not a single thing he does makes sense. Every action he takes brings him closer to defeat. Not only did the great vampire not kill his enemies when he had the chance - several times! - he decided to prey on their women and leave his tombs where anyone could get to them.
Because of Dracula's stupidity, Dracula fails as suspense, horror, mythology, and adventure. It fails completely.
At least there were the lovely
◊ illustrations
◊ by Becky Cloonan in the new Harper Collins edition.
-Himeko Inaba
Literature A successfully creepy book preying on unsympathetic fears.
Of all the Victorian literature I've read, I think Dracula has been the most legitimately gripping. While it's full of themes and proposes philosophical discussions, it's still an engaging story first and foremost with some good scenes of horror and dread to keep you reading.
The book is divided into arcs of sorts. First, Jonathan Harker slowly learns on a trip to Castle Dracula that the aristocrat he's selling a house to is an undead evil monster. Then, Dracula comes to Harker's home in England and begins preying on his fiancee's friend Lucy, whereupon Dutch scientist Van Helsing comes in for a vigilant battle to save Lucy's life. Simultaneously, a mental patient named Renfield is studied as he seems to be beholden to Dracula's will, and then the party begins to plan against the Count once the pieces are all put together.
It could be argued that the massive pop culture awareness of vampire lore that this book codified and popularized has dampened the surprise, but I think it's just transformed the horror into another type—knowing exactly what the characters are facing while they are still clueless. Dramatic irony has changed the reading of the horror mystery into just "no, please, don't you know what you're up against?"...but that's still effective. The relatively obscure nature of the actual book's narrative also makes the story fairly surprising and some scares work really well for it.
The book is also very very dated. Ethnic groups are stereotyped and patronized and misogyny is prominent. Vampirism is used as an allegory for the supposed evils of sexuality and that's not fun, particularly in the way vampirism has women brutalized and "fallen" afterward in a mishandled way of evoking sexual assault as trauma. The fears of sexual deviancy awakening in "pure" women make the horror of mindless monsters less fun when those are unpeeled. Religious themes are also heavy. Still, the female lead is harmed by not being included in the men's work and does a lot to further the investigation and planning, so who knows. Vampires are fun and scary and the surface reading of the book works, but their metaphorical application here speaks to values that don't age well.
This is a good horror book with questionable values. Fun for a scare, but certainly of its time.