Dracula

Written by Bram Stoker

Narrated by Bruce Alexander

William Collins Books and Decca Records are proud to present ARGO Classics, a historic catalogue of classic fiction read by some of the world’s most renowned voices. Originally released as vinyl records, these expertly abridged and remastered stories are now available to download for the first time.

A lawyer arrives in Transylvania to help a mysterious Count with the purchase of a house and sets in motion a chain of terrible events.

Bruce Alexander captures the dread that suffuses Stoker’s infamous horror story. Johnathan Harker’s discovery at the Gothic castle, and the series of nightmarish incidents back in England that it prompts, will continue to frighten listeners.

• Language: English
• Publisher: HarperCollins Publishers
• Release date: Oct 22, 2020
• ISBN: 9780008447557

Bram Stoker

Bram Stoker (1847-1912) was an Irish novelist. Born in Dublin, Stoker suffered from an unknown illness as a young boy before entering school at the age of seven. He would later remark that the time he spent bedridden enabled him to cultivate his imagination, contributing to his later success as a writer. He attended Trinity College, Dublin from 1864, graduating with a BA before returning to obtain an MA in 1875. After university, he worked as a theatre critic, writing a positive review of acclaimed Victorian actor Henry Irving’s production of Hamlet that would spark a lifelong friendship and working relationship between them. In 1878, Stoker married Florence Balcombe before moving to London, where he would work for the next 27 years as business manager of Irving’s influential Lyceum Theatre. Between his work in London and travels abroad with Irving, Stoker befriended such artists as Oscar Wilde, Walt Whitman, Hall Caine, James Abbott McNeill Whistler, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. In 1895, having published several works of fiction and nonfiction, Stoker began writing his masterpiece Dracula (1897) while vacationing at the Kilmarnock Arms Hotel in Cruden Bay, Scotland. Stoker continued to write fiction for the rest of his life, achieving moderate success as a novelist. Known more for his association with London theatre during his life, his reputation as an artist has grown since his death, aided in part by film and television adaptations of Dracula, the enduring popularity of the horror genre, and abundant interest in his work from readers and scholars around the world.

Reviews for Dracula

[stahl2ricco · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Pretty darn good tale! Creepy too! I'm glad I finally read the original! And, for a classic, it is very readable. Some overly flowery language in their dialogue, but a strong overall narrative. And it all wraps up on November 6th, my birthday! Super creepy!

[ranger1_1 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

Didn't really care for this one. I'm not sure if I was polluted by all the vampire movies, or if I didn't like the format.

[dionnep_3 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Have to read it again, now that I've been in Whitby and seen the abbey.

[tiffanyak_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

The writing is so vivid, it literally gave me chills, and yet it also isn't overdone. There is just enough left to the imagination to make your imagination run wild. I can certainly understand why it is considered a horror classic. Some of the writing is dated, of course, but it overall remains incredibly strong for a modern reader as well. I really do not know what else to say in a review, especially for a book that virtually everyone knows at least part of the story of, except that this is one classic that certainly shouldn't be passed up. I won't even go into the dreams I had due to the influence of reading the book, but they were certainly interesting.

[heidilove_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I have a signet classics, but it's from the mid-80's. I loved this then, though I did find Jonathon Harker a bit whimpy. Who knows what I would think of him now.

[1morechapter · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

(original review date on my website was 10-5-08)I finished Dracula on audio this week and loved it. Now my sons and husband are listening to it as well. The unabridged edition, of course. It is creepy and scary, and I normally don’t like creepy and scary, but Bram Stoker’s novel is so well done and, obviously, the beginning of it all. I’m thinking of getting this annotated edition at left that comes out on October 13. It even has an introduction by Neil Gaiman. I’ll probably use this edition for a future re-read.We started to watch the movie starring Gary Oldman, but it wasn’t appropriate for kids (my kids at least) so we quit. I still may watch it at a later date. I would love to see a modern version that was faithful to the book.Something that surprised and pleased me while reading the book was the strong Christian faith of some of the characters. I didn’t expect that at all, and I do wonder about Stoker’s own beliefs. He was rumored to have been part of a secret, magical order that included the occultist Aleister Crowley.Also, I read on Publisher’s Weekly that Bram Stoker’s great-grandnephew Dacre Stoker and Dracula documentarian and historian Ian Holt are going to be writing Dracula: the Undead. The publisher will be Dutton, and it is scheduled to be released in October, 2009.

[addictedtomorphemes · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Dracula by Bram StokerSolicitor, Jonathan Harker, travels to Castle Dracula, in the wilds of Transylvania (Romania), to meet with his client, the Count, who is purchasing property in London. After being compelled to stay at the Castle, and later learning that he is actually being held prisoner there, Mr. Harker begins to see disturbing and frightening things. There is one passage of the book in particular that is my favorite as far as the suspense surrounding it. Looking out a castle window, trying to find a means to escape, and looking down at the 1000-foot drop, Harker sees Dracula exiting a lower window face-down, scaling the castle wall using his hands and feet. The way it is described gave me chills. Yes, Dracula can transform himself into a bat. He can also use mind-control over his victims. There is no reflection of his image in mirrors. And then there's that whole drinking your blood thing.After escaping the castle, Mr. Harker returns to London to recover. While he was away, a close friend of his fiancee' has an encounter with the Count. The end result of that encounter starts the ball rolling to eliminate the monster. A team is assembled. Dr. Seward--who oversees an insane asylum which houses a very interesting character, Renfield, who is diagnosed with zoophagia (he's obsessed with eating creatures to absorb their life force). Somehow Renfield's odd behavior interjects a little humor into the story as he tries to barter with the doctor to bring him creatures to eat or things that will attract them to his cell. Through most of the story, he has an affinity for flies and spiders. Seward contacts his former professor and friend, Dr. Abraham Van Helsing--who was the first to understand what the Count was. Then there is the American adventurer, Quincey Morris, a friend of Arthur Holmwood (Lord Godalming), and Mina Murray (Harker's bride).We learn about the motives behind the Count's actions along with the characters in the book, following their journal entries, conversations regarding people they have interviewed, some newspaper clippings, etc., which they are keeping a record of for posterity in case they are unsuccessful.In their efforts to track down the location of the Count, they slowly piece together every move he has made so far, how he made the journey to London considering his limitations of needing to go to ground during the day, etc., eventually following him back to his native Transylvania, in desperation of saving not only the rest of humanity, but more personally, one of their own.

[samarnold1975 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This was my first audiobook read which was an interesting experience. I chose audiobook after starting reading Dracula and the realising that I did not like the copy I had. I have to say as a fan of vampire novels I don't know why it took me so long to get the original vampire masterpiece. A masterpiece this book certainly is. I love the poetic writing of Stoker and how he can set an eerie scene whilst keeping the gore to a minimum. The characters are well written and are also fairly well know for anyone who has watched any Dracula / Van Helsing films.I urge anyone who hasn't read this classic to pick up a copy and read the original of all vampire novels.

[mariacamp · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

The first and last portions of the book are the most compelling. I felt as though the middle portion would never come to a conclusion. The format was difficult for me to become accustomed to as it is mostly compromised of journal and diary entries, newspaper clippings, and telegrams.That said, I do find it to be a worthwhile read as it is interesting to read the book that so much has been based upon since. The characters, although two-dimensional in some respects, provide interesting glimpses into the concepts and stereotypes of the time. The deep conviction shared by the main group of characters towards the accomplishment of a most important goal is compelling.Give yourself plenty of time to finish this as rushing through it will only lead to frustration due to the format used to tell the story.

[polilla5lynn · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

For some time I had considered reading Dracula, but not being interested in the modern vampire and zombie movies and television programs I avoided it until a year ago. I decided to read some of the classics and chose this one because I had seen the Dracula movie long ago and wanted to be able to say I had read the book. I found it on YouTube and began by listening to it, but then found it for free on Kindle so finished it that way – which was better for me.This story so captivated me I had to keep reading. Bram Stoker’s writing style and beautiful use of language is thrilling to read, and the characters he created made for such a good story. The only problem was that I had to put the book down when it got late into the evening. It freaked me out a little! Not that I believe Dracula to be real but Stoker’s brilliant writing and settings really spooked me! I couldn’t read it after dark. Now that is good writing. I am so glad I read this book.The story is written like a diary but with each person writing from their own perspective. If that sounds boring or as if it would be hard to follow, it isn’t at all. It makes it very interesting. The reader wants to keep reading to know what is going on since last hearing from each character, where is Dracula in his plotting, who else is going to meet with trouble at his design, how are they going to defeat him.Points of interest: Other titles Stoker had for this book were The Dead Un-Dead, and The Un-dead, before deciding on Dracula His main character was called Count Wampyr until Stoker came across the name Dracula while researching for the book Dracula is an old story, but not quite the original vampire story since Stoker borrowed some details from a couple of previous authors, but he built on that and made it better.Vampire stories told now could not be what they are without Bram Stoker’s Dracula. If you think you know about vampires from what is currently written, do yourself a favour and read Dracula for the ‘real’ story, even though it’s fiction. :) I don’t believe you will be disappointed.

[citizenjoyce · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

This book is not only tedious it is also nauseatingly Christian to the point of anti-semitism. It also adheres blindly to sexual stereotypes. I can see why people in the Victorian era would have found it exciting, but I can't understand why anyone now shares that opinion. Granted, it is a delight not to be awash in sparking, sexy vampires, but the ultra pure, self sacrificing female characters remain the same.

[ntenenbaum_2 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

As I wrote on my blog, Dracula is the classic, and therefore, I think that everyone should read it. However, I need to admit that this book doesn’t surprise me as much as Frankenstein did. I didn’t find any characters that were fascinating me, except maybe Van Helsing, but I had already heard of him and it’s the role he’s supposed to have in the novel. Unfortunately, nowadays, people know a lot about vampires, so a major part of the suspense of the book is already revealed. The whole second third of the book made me lose interest because it was mainly about this strange and powerful creature that we’re not supposed to know. When the book was first published, I’m sure that these chapters were very intense to the readers. I can nonetheless not say that this book was bad. The beginning captivated my attention. Jonathan Harker going to Dracula’s count and the problems he encountered there. If was pretty sure he’d be Dracula’s first victim! But no, I was wrong. Also, I liked how Bram Stoker described the places and the atmosphere. It was very realistic. She totally managed in one of the two goals of a novel: verisimilitude. Finally, I also liked when the group of men (supposed to work for the survival of the humankind) begin to chase Dracula. I think it’s an ironical situation after everything that Dracula did and it added much action to the book.

[Tiana Warner · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

Extremely boring. If he would have condensed it to 1/3 of its current length and taken out needless description, it probably would have been a lot better. I suppose in its time the vampire plot was good, but now we've got such a variety of vampire plots out there that they leave this one in the dust.

[virginiagill · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

For a sure dose of creepiness on a stormy night this book is perfection. One of the things I love is that the author leaves so much room for your own imagination. Makes it far more scary than a book with everything spelled out in graphic detail.

[imjustmea · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I read and loved Elizabeth Kostova's The Historian and with the modern fascination with vampires (Twilight saga, True Blood, etc) I wanted to go back to see where it all began. I loved the book. The way Bram Stoker tells the story from different points of view builds up the tension and keeps you wanting to read more. More than a horror story, this book is about how friendship, love, perseverance and ingenuity triumphs over evil.

[eleanor_eader · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I wish I could review this book in two parts. On starting, I quickly felt that wonderful tingle of delight from realising why a classic is a classic… Dracula, I decided early on, has become a classic because Bram Stoker knew how to mix a recipe of character anxiety, gruesome detailing and small waves of disturbing events into a well-written and reasonably well-paced story that gets under the reader’s skin. Jonathan Harker’s opening journal, wherein he finds himself prisoner of the terrible Count, a demonic fury behind a mask of polite civility, incites the reader to delicious chills. [Small digression: that horror convention of human figures crawling down walls forwards is one that, in films, never fails to make me shudder. Even had it occurred to me that it would work in written horror fiction, I had no idea it hailed from as far back as Dracula!]There was a touch of overwriting in the first half, but this seemed more than redeemed by the way that the story is layered; letters, journal and diary excerpts and articles, and so is always shifting point of view, keeping the reader absorbed and giving everything a very satisfying depth. First we watch the decline of Lucy, lamented by no less than three devoted men. Later, the predicament of Mina Harker becomes a sudden mid-book re-energiser and I was positively thrumming with excitement. Renfield, Dr. Seward’s psychiatric patient had me chuckling and aghast; everything was shaping up very nicely.Then things began to drag. It was disappointing, realising the reader wasn’t going to properly meet the Count again, except in the guise of a big bat (which imagery, admittedly, I enjoyed). The last third of the book involves the interminable ‘chase’ in which our principal characters (who had, largely, devolved into ‘manly men, how wonderful they are’, with the exception of Van Helsing, who was so wonderfully, amusingly, reassuring that all the tension disappeared!) waited for Mina Harker (so brave! So clever! So like a man!) to tell them whether or not Dracula was being moved from the ship. Three pages from the end, they had their little adventure, wrapped everything up, and went home. Mr. Stoker, were you still alive, I’d point out that this isn’t how one paces a novel. Actually, were you still alive, I’d drive a stake through your chest and cut off your head, but not before asking why it was necessary to include so many diarists’ variations on ‘we waited, it was horrible’.It says a lot about the first two thirds of the story that I’m not sorry that I read it. It really balances out at ‘enjoyable and interesting’, with some good scary bits, sympathetic characters – despite the later lack of attention to their individuality – and a fund of supernatural imagery… I just don’t think the tension could survive the lack of momentum.

[olivia_atlet_writer · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

- Too Sensual to Ignore -“Dracula” by Bram Stoker relays the tales of an up-and-coming realtor, Jonathan Harker, who travels from England to Transylvania to meet a client; Count Dracula. In the classic interpretation of good versus evil, Jonathan and several of his acquaintances seek out the monster that killed one of their beloved companions. Their journey is filled with superstition, which is seen within the very first chapter of Jonathan’s diary during his journey to the Count’s home; many community members warn him of the dangers that awaits, and some even beg that he returns to his home. The book fashioned a new era within the literary field alongside such works as “Frankenstein” by Mary Shelley and “The strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Hyde” by Robert Louis Stevenson. It is a collection of reminiscences, transposed in diary entries, victrola recordings, and recounts of events throughout the time period. It dives into the parasitic indulgence so deftly hidden within Victorian London. There is a certain theme found in each of the novels I mentioned; the human form, when molested, may unleash a creature reeking with God’s defamation. I would recommend this book to readers with an interest in folklore/urban legends, gothic fiction, classics, horror novels, and the victorian perception of evil. It is definitely worth picking up if you are curious about the beginnings of these kinds of books, as well. It is an excellent subject to use for a case study of the genre.

[wvlibrarydude · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

At times this book did grab my attention, but the years were not kind overall. I first read as a senior, 24 years ago. It left a memory of real horror, but on returning the beginning and end were the only sections that really drew me in. Van Helsing's character is laughable, and the chauvinistic attitude of saving the women just left me with a bad taste in my mouth.If you pick this up, just skim past any sections where Van Helsing speaks.

[amschroe · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I read this book when I was quite young...around 13 or so, due to my strange love of vampires and all creatures of the night. I read the book quickly and remember really enjoying it. I plan on reading it again some time soon, and I recommend it to everyone who enjoys classical literature, as well as to younger people who are keen on reading and are exploring, trying to discover what kinds of books they really enjoy.

[avidmom · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Leviticus 17:14 “ For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.”Dracula has been on my TBR pile for a while but when my son rented the movie, “Bram Stoker’s Dracula,” I was so unimpressed by it that I had to know if what was presented in the film version matched the novel. So Dracula moved up a few notches. Everybody knows who Dracula is, the Un-Dead, King of the Vampires. I thought I knew what to expect here – vampires chasing people, people chasing vampires around tombs, ancient castles and cemeteries. (Maybe I watched too many Scooby Doo cartoons as a kid.) That does happen here but it makes up a surprisingly small part of the story. There was much more to the story than I expected. Dracula is at first a psychological mystery, then a medical mystery which then slowly evolves into a creepy cat and mouse game. The book opens with Jonathan Harker traveling to Transylvania to handle some real estate transactions with Count Dracula. Once there, Harker witnesses some strange goings-on and eventually finds himself imprisoned in Dracula’s castle. He manages to escape, but not unscathed, as he becomes physically ill with “brain fever” and begins to wonder if what he witnessed at the castle was a result of his illness. Or is it the other way round? Jonathan had kept a journal during his stay at the castle but wants so badly to hide the horror from himself that he entrusts the journal to his fiancé, Mina. She is not to read it unless circumstances make it absolutely necessary. While Mina is away tending to her fiancé, her best friend Lucy falls ill. Young, vibrant and happily engaged Lucy is becoming increasingly weaker and pale. No one can understand why. Dr. Seward, Lucy’s jilted suitor, runs a lunatic asylum next door and is baffled by Lucy’s condition. He asks for the help of his old medical school professor, Professor Van Helsing. Although Van Helsing is a medical doctor and a lawyer, it is not his knowledge of medical science that sheds light on Lucy’s situation but rather his knowledge of folk lore, superstition and his faith in the supernatural that is key to unlocking the mystery.One of the things that caught my attention, mostly because I didn’t expect it, is all the references to Christianity. It seems as though Stoker took the basic tenets of the Christian faith and put them in front of a mirror. Like the reflection of letters in a mirror, things are the same, just reversed. Christianity, at its most basic level, is about death, resurrection and blood. It doesn’t take too much to see that Dracula is Stoker’s picture of the opposite Christ. In the New Testament, Jesus gives His blood freely so that others may have life; Dracula selfishly takes it so that he himself may live. To partake in the blood of Christ is to reconcile the believer with God; here to partake in the blood of the vampire is to be separated from Him. Sometimes the allusions to the New Testament are quite apparent, at other times they are more subtle. “Alas! how can I disbelieve! In the midst of my thought my eye fell on the red scar on my poor darling’s white forehead. Whilst that lasts, there can be no disbelief” It is hard to read that and not have the story of doubting Thomas come to mind.The idea of a synergy between faith in the unseen and what is tangible is another theme here. Everyone has a part in defeating the Monster but the characters in the story who are key to defeating the Count are Professor Van Helsing and Mina. The Professor holds science, superstiton, and faith in equal esteem, all of which he uses to great effect. Mina is praised by one of the men in the story for having “the heart of a woman and the brain of a man.” It is easy to glean from the story the idea of logic as a masculine trait and faith as a feminine one. Just as the men and women in this story work together here to defeat evil, faith and logic work together as well. “… we each held ready to use our various armaments – the spiritual in the left hand, the mortal in the right.”Dracula was so much better than I had expected. The characters here, male and female, are all very intelligent and strong. There is a deep love and respect between all of them. Considering the novel bears his name, Dracula has very little to say in it. He is an elusive foe whose presence is more implied and felt more frequently than seen. It certainly makes for a suspenseful story. If I have one criticism it is that the ending was a bit drawn out and anti-climatic as I expected a more fiery confrontation between the heroes and Dracula. Once again, however, the fault probably lies more with my preconceived expectations than with the novel itself. I haven’t read too many Gothic horror novels but one of the things I like about them is there is always such a deeper level of meaning than what is on the surface. Dracula is one of those novels that could be dissected and picked apart ad infinitum to find all the different levels of meaning it contains.And, did the movie match the novel? Not even close!

[jontseng · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Iconic but a little too late to be a work of true "Gothic". Fantastic and enjoyable nonetheless.

[sean_rmit · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Frankly I don't like Stokers style of writing, its high brow and flowery. Having said this his originality and the overall composition of this story are excellent. If you can see past its obvious shortcomings its a good read.

[ngabriel_52 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Still scary.

[sullywriter_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Read this for a college course called The Literature of Evil.

[midkid88 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I read this in about 1.5 hours while subbing and I found that it was a very simple story introducing Dracula and then finishing him off. It starts out following Jonathon where you are first introduced to Dracula. He is a very smart and cunning person who traps Jonathon and then leaves for London to try his hand there. I found it was an interesting read that compelled me to the end to know exactly what happens.

[drled_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Review: This is the original story and it is quite different from what is commonly shown in movies. I think it is much more interesting and a great deal scarier.

[bookson23rd · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I LOVE this book! Bram Stoker wrote the most perfect horror story ever. I know I read this book many years ago and that I liked it, and it sure kept me turning the pages this time! Written in the Victorian era, when many people began seeing ‘mediums’ and ‘spiritualists’ to seek messages from the dead, Stoker places us in amongst a dark, chilling story of the Undead.

In a way, this book is about superstitions. There are many incidents of superstitious people crossing themselves and pointing two fingers at Jonathan Harker in Transylvania, as a “charm or guard against the evil eye”. The landlord of the hotel where he stays begs him not to leave because, “tonight, when the clock strikes midnight, all the evil things in the world will have full sway.”

The story is told as passages of journals and letters of the main characters. We of course have Jonathan Harker, the young lawyer’s clerk sent to Transylvania to settle some paperwork with Count Dracula. Then we have his fiancé Mina Murray, her friend Lucy Westenia, Dr. John Seward, the head of a lunatic asylum, and his friend Professor Van Helsing of Amsterdam. Van Helsing, above all others, believes they need to have faith instead of superstition in dealing with the vampires.

From Jonathan Harker’s travels to the eerie castle of Count Dracula, then back to England and encounters with the Undead, and once again to Transylvania for the final bloody encounter, the atmosphere rarely lightens. Everywhere along the journey we are wrapped in a sense of foreboding and around every corner is an unknown fright.

There is nothing in this book that I didn’t like. Its strengths are its haunting descriptions and the real horror that’s felt as you follow the story.

This is to me the most classic of all horror stories.

[beholderess · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

This book is of the kind that must be read for cultural reference, but by it's own merit, it is not all that enjoyable to read.The prose is dull and uninspired, and protagonists tend to suffer from extremely poor decisions.That being said, it is probably not fair to judge them by the standards of modern reader familiar with vampire fiction. Every time I want to scream "Don't you know what a vampire is?!" I have to remind myself that they probably don't. Can't expect protagonists to be genre-savvy before the birth of the genre.As I've mentioned above, Dracula is a must-read for cultural reference - both to see what clishes of modern vampires it gave rise to and, perhaps more interestingly, the ones it definitely did not inspire.

[girlunderglass · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

If we're going to thoroughly analyze this, we have to mention that, though it doesn't matter much in the end, yes, there are many flaws with Dracula. My personal pet peeve is the underdeveloped characters. First, there is no difference between the voices of the male characters - five different persons sound, feel, think, act as one and the same, to the degree that you have to keep checking whose narrative you are following. Stoker tries to differentiate his characters through superficial features such as nationality: Van Helsing speaks with what is supposedly a Dutch accent - though this is not consistently sustained throughout the whole book - and the American always speaks "laconically". That dreadful word was used so much in relation to Quincey it was getting ridiculous. "Count me in, Professor", said Quincey Morris laconically. "Me too", said Quincey Morris laconically. "What shall we do exactly?" asked Quincey Morris laconically. You can see the very beginning of a character sketch (Quincey: doesn't speak much, always ready for action; Van Helsing: the leader, has all the answers etc.) but then the author just stops, seemingly content with those very basic descriptions. He makes no effort to give depth to his characters and provide them with individual personalities. They were all "gentle, noble, true, kind, brave, manly" etc. Next, when it comes to Mina, the female protagonist, Stoker starts out well enough: he bestows on her a degree of intelligence, independence and resourcefulness unusual for the era he was living in and quite daring. (though, of course, he acknowledges this is not typical of the weaker sex: "her great brain which is trained like man's brain but is of sweet woman".) As the story progresses, however, she too ends up as a stereotype. Soon enough she assumes the typical role of the Angel - the embodiment of goodness, with no character flaws allowed in her. She represents for each and every one of the five men the Ideal Woman that they must protect at any cost: pure, honest, bashful, gentle, loving, vulnerable. The only character exempt from the boredom of being completely good or completely evil - and more interesting for that reason - was Renfield, who kept switching from barking mad, to extremely intelligent and "cured", to an evil man with a plan, to a mere victim of circumstances. But let's forget about the characters for a second. The bad guys/good guys format is kept throughout the novel, and though it leaves no room for ambiguity, the truth is it enhances the action just fine. The greatest thing about Dracula is that, even knowing as you do what is going to happen - from countless movies and parodies - the sense of suspense is surprisingly maintained until the very end. Stoker never has to resort to gory details, which today's audience supposedly "needs", to make his story interesting. The format and writing style are great aids in this accomplishment, of course, but the author also had other ways of jolting his readers. Let's not forget that this is the Victorian era we're talking about, which means that the mere fact that women were presented as lustful, cruel and sexual (when under the influence of vampires) was shocking to many readers of the time. ("Lucy Westerna, but yet how changed. The sweetness was turned to adamantine, heartless cruelty, and the purity to voluptuous wantonness.") The writing flows very well and, excluding some less than fascinating moments in the middle of the book (letters between Lucy and Mina) the reader is kept happily in suspense for the whole duration of the story. Another plus: there's a contemporary feel to Dracula which could be attributed I think to the format it employs (it is written in diary and letter form) and the often mention and use of the technological advances of the time. (phonographs, telegrams) The protagonists keep mentioning how "in this scientific era" it is very hard to believe in supernatural things - a statement the modern reader can easily identify with. I don't think I'm exaggerating in saying this is the ultimate Gothic novel. At least not since Wuthering Heights have I read a book so exemplary of Gothic literature, with its typical blend of romance and horror elements. And while the repeated compliments, declarations of love and vows of loyalty between the six characters did get a bit tiring, the horror parts on the other hand were done to perfection. This might be because they weren't so much horrifying or scary as extremely suspenseful and exciting: the book felt a lot like a very atmospheric detective story. The biggest compliment I think I can give the book is this: horror is possibly my least favourite genre, when it comes to both books and movies, closely followed by romance. Considering that this book combines my two least favourite genres, it's a testament to the novel's power and timelessness that I enjoyed it as I did.

[adpaton · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I remember my utter delight at finding this classic in the public library over 40 years ago: battered and ancient, it was the first Golden Age horror story I read and although Stoker has plenty of detractors, it was the ideal read for a tween [I was not permitted horror until I reached double digits] with a fascination with fear. Dracula is very tame by today's standards of course, even if you belong to the school that insists on reading sex into every lick, suck and bite: still, the sensitive reader will experience chills as the hapless Jonathan Harker finds himself in an isolated castle with a very dodgy host. The crewless ship sailing into the Whitby harbour in sight of the lunatic asylum, and the searching of the ruined Whitby Abbey are also edge-of-your seat scenes. True Blood, Vampire Diaries, Twilight - writers of the multitudinous vampire books, films and series should go back to the original periodically to find something about how to scare an audience without gallon of gore and eroticism.