Sign in with Facebook
Matthew's Reviews > Dracula
Dracula
by
by
Matthew's review
bookshelves: 2017, audio, horror, classic, library, monsters, completist-book-club
Nov 15, 2017
bookshelves: 2017, audio, horror, classic, library, monsters, completist-book-club
Two things about this book:
1. It is a really great and creepy story that deserves classic status
2. Everything is repeated soooooo much without any obvious benefit.
Here is actual footage of Bram Stoker writing this novel:
If Stoker had just got to the point, this book would have been much more exciting and suspenseful. I understand the exact same mysterious thing happens night after night. I understand that Dracula has some boxes of dirt. I get that you brought Winchester rifles along for protection. Each of these things was repeated ad nauseam throughout the book. Talk about killing the pace - by the time the gruesome scares came I was very disengaged.
Also, funny thing about this book as a horror story - it must be the grandfather of heading up the stairs to hide instead of running outside or cutting through the graveyard shortly after hearing a serial killer is loose. They keep leaving people alone even though those people are repeatedly attacked when they are left alone. Then, when they finally insist on guarding someone, that person insists that they need no one but God to guard them!? Seems like so far God had not been interested in protecting, so why count on him starting now!?
So three stars because it is a classic and I like the story. I especially like Lucy's suitors - their gung ho manliness amuses me. But the repetition and the illogical behavior in the face of a bloodsucking monster are the cause of the removal of a couple of stars.
1. It is a really great and creepy story that deserves classic status
2. Everything is repeated soooooo much without any obvious benefit.
Here is actual footage of Bram Stoker writing this novel:
If Stoker had just got to the point, this book would have been much more exciting and suspenseful. I understand the exact same mysterious thing happens night after night. I understand that Dracula has some boxes of dirt. I get that you brought Winchester rifles along for protection. Each of these things was repeated ad nauseam throughout the book. Talk about killing the pace - by the time the gruesome scares came I was very disengaged.
Also, funny thing about this book as a horror story - it must be the grandfather of heading up the stairs to hide instead of running outside or cutting through the graveyard shortly after hearing a serial killer is loose. They keep leaving people alone even though those people are repeatedly attacked when they are left alone. Then, when they finally insist on guarding someone, that person insists that they need no one but God to guard them!? Seems like so far God had not been interested in protecting, so why count on him starting now!?
So three stars because it is a classic and I like the story. I especially like Lucy's suitors - their gung ho manliness amuses me. But the repetition and the illogical behavior in the face of a bloodsucking monster are the cause of the removal of a couple of stars.
1929 likes · Like
∙
flag
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Dracula.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
January 8, 2013
– Shelved
November 10, 2017
–
Started Reading
November 10, 2017
– Shelved as:
to-read
November 10, 2017
– Shelved as:
2017
November 10, 2017
– Shelved as:
audio
November 10, 2017
– Shelved as:
horror
November 10, 2017
– Shelved as:
classic
November 10, 2017
– Shelved as:
library
November 10, 2017
– Shelved as:
monsters
November 15, 2017
–
Finished Reading
February 20, 2020
– Shelved as:
completist-book-club
Comments Showing 1-50 of 168 (168 new)
message 1:
by
Grace =^_^=
(new)
Nov 15, 2017 06:57PM
"gung ho manliness" - I like that.
reply
|
flag
Great review Matthew!
Grace wrote: ""gung ho manliness" - I like that."
Helga wrote: "Great review Matthew!"Thanks, Helga!
I try and remember the novel was still a fairly new and evolving art form, and Bram Stoker was not a seasoned writer. For its time, it was considered to be an exciting adventure story, and was extremely popular. People were fine with the more ornate and repetitive style, prior to film and tv, everything needed to be described in detail. Compared to The Last of the Mohicans, an exceedingly exciting story buried beneath an almost unbearable writing style, this story moves at a decent pace. Stoker certainly captured the imaginations of more than just his immediate audience, and his influence is felt from generation to generation. Good review, Matthew!
Kim wrote: "I try and remember the novel was still a fairly new and evolving art form, and Bram Stoker was not a seasoned writer. For its time, it was considered to be an exciting adventure story, and was extr..."Thanks! Yeah, it is tough to remember those sort of things. However, I have read other books from this time period that flowed better. I guess it might be just Stoker not being a seasoned writer.
Whew that gif was funny! Good laugh and nice review Matthew.
Ron wrote: "Whew that gif was funny! Good laugh and nice review Matthew."Ha! Thanks! I Googled "Beat a dead horse gif" and that was the first thing that came up. May be the most perfect Google search ever!
Enjoyed your review, Matthew! That gif made me laugh, but so did the whole review!
Sarah wrote: "Enjoyed your review, Matthew! That gif made me laugh, but so did the whole review!"Aw, thanks! Glad I could entertain!
Great review and yup...that dead horse!And...for the "novel was a new thing in 1897" crowd...Don Quixote was written 292 years earlier and it's a ripping good yarn!
Cheri wrote: "Love your review, Matthew!"Thanks, Cheri!
Norman wrote: "Great review and yup...that dead horse!And...for the "novel was a new thing in 1897" crowd...Don Quixote was written 292 years earlier and it's a ripping good yarn!"
Thanks! 😃 And, good point - I still need to read Don Quixote.
If you really want to tear your hair out, read it again and count the number of times Stoker uses the word "voluptuous". ^__^
Christopher wrote: "If you really want to tear your hair out, read it again and count the number of times Stoker uses the word "voluptuous". ^__^"Ha! Tempting . . . 😂
great review! I got about 32% in and had to stop. I also didn't think it was creepy. It was taking waaayyy too long to get to the horror. Eventually I want to try again.
Meagan wrote: "great review! I got about 32% in and had to stop. I also didn't think it was creepy. It was taking waaayyy too long to get to the horror. Eventually I want to try again."Thanks! I am glad I finished it to check off another classic, but that is about it!
Matthew wrote: "Christopher wrote: "If you really want to tear your hair out, read it again and count the number of times Stoker uses the word "voluptuous". ^__^"Ha! Tempting . . . 😂"
Fred Saberhagen wrote a book called The Dracula Tapes where he extensively makes fun of that propensity via using Dracula himself as the narrator.
Christopher wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Christopher wrote: "If you really want to tear your hair out, read it again and count the number of times Stoker uses the word "voluptuous". ^__^"Ha! Tempting . . . 😂"
Fred Saber..."
That's awesome - sounds like something worth checking out!
Fantastic review, Matthew. I felt the same about this book.
Jennifer (Jen/The Tolkien Gal) wrote: "Fantastic review, Matthew. I felt the same about this book."Thanks, Jennifer! :)
I completely agree, it's a great book and is a worthy classic, but many details are not needed, mainly the first couple chapters when talking about random things that don't really benefit the book. I understand that it's about the culture of Romania but it keeps people unengaged. My favorite part of the book was by far when Van Helsing showed up and attempted to save Lucy, whereas the worst part was by far the first couple of chapters.
Ashton wrote: "I completely agree, it's a great book and is a worthy classic, but many details are not needed, mainly the first couple chapters when talking about random things that don't really benefit the book...."A classic that might perhaps benefit by being abridged?
I agree that a large portion of the book is a lot of build up, and at times can seem useless or boring. However for me the end of the book was well worth all the build up from the beginning. Some of the worst parts of the book is when something is happening and you think its about to go somewhere interesting, but then nothing happens. But in order to be able to get through this book a lot patience is need because it is well worth the reward.
Alex wrote: "I agree that a large portion of the book is a lot of build up, and at times can seem useless or boring. However for me the end of the book was well worth all the build up from the beginning. Some o..."Definitely! It has a great ending!
Just your opinion mate
Svenska wrote: "Just your opinion mate"Indeed . . . this is is true . . . as are all my reviews!😁 Looks like you enjoyed it a bit more - great!🙂
Great review, and love that gif! 😆 I'm currently listening to an abridged version. Eventually I want to read the whole thing, just to do it, but I can already tell it was a bit repetitive lol.
Kaleah wrote: "Great review, and love that gif! 😆 I'm currently listening to an abridged version. Eventually I want to read the whole thing, just to do it, but I can already tell it was a bit repetitive lol."Thanks, Kaleah! Every time this review gets a comment and I open it up, the gif makes me laugh all over again. So, I guess sometimes repetition is good! :)
Lol! Great review! Never tackled this one or Frankenstein
Michael wrote: "Lol! Great review! Never tackled this one or Frankenstein"Thanks! Frankenstein is definitely my favorite of the two.
Hilariously brilliant review, Matthew.
Javelyn wrote: "Hilariously brilliant review, Matthew."Thank you very much, Javelyn! :)
I have read this book twice. I remember liking it the first time when I was about 20. The next time when I was 33 I found it absolutely painful to get through. First thing, is it seemed like it was going to turn into a bad porn movie at any moment with the men all guarding the girl. That probably sounds awful but that is what I kept thinking. Second, it was just SO slow. Anything scary or creepy about it was lost in a sea of repetition. I appreciate that it’s a classic, I do understand why it’s a classic but it’s just a slog overall.
Jennifer wrote: "I have read this book twice. I remember liking it the first time when I was about 20. The next time when I was 33 I found it absolutely painful to get through. First thing, is it seemed like it was..."Very great way to describe it! Many classics seem to have this sort of divide. But, it is kind of interesting to read them and evaluate the highs and lows - even if it is one with more lows than highs! 🙂
It seems like so many classics have a lot of exposition and it takes forever to get to the point. I do end up wondering if it speaks to the audience that it was written for. Did they expect more explanation than we do? Is it because we make assumptions from the action that past readers might not? I find there’s a lot of dead horse beating in classics whether it’s Dracula or Moby Dick or David Copperfield.
You ain't right! This review made me giggle.
Cindy wrote: "It seems like so many classics have a lot of exposition and it takes forever to get to the point. I do end up wondering if it speaks to the audience that it was written for. Did they expect more ex..."Very true - whenever I am starting a classic I always wonder if I am about to embark on a lot of dead horse beating!
Alondra wrote: "You ain't right! This review made me giggle."😁😁😁😁
The long exposition is partly because, without magazines or television or lots of travel, this was the only way to "see" other parts of the world. You were also more likely to run out of reading material than today, so you wanted a book to take its time.Dickens was paid by the word, so he really milked that aspect.
My husband and I read this together when we were dating, and finally we were yelling, "Just die already! Come on!" (view spoiler)
I often wonder if some of these folks were paid by the word. That would explain it....
Audrey wrote: "The long exposition is partly because, without magazines or television or lots of travel, this was the only way to "see" other parts of the world. You were also more likely to run out of reading ma..."Ha! Hey, ya gotta get paid! 🤑🤑🤑
Cindy wrote: "I often wonder if some of these folks were paid by the word. That would explain it...."I'm pretty sure Dickens was, at least.
Mark wrote: "#nailedit"BOOM! Thanks, Mark! 😁😁😁
This is the only review in my life that had me laughing so hard tears ran down my cheeks!!!
Eric wrote: "This is the only review in my life that had me laughing so hard tears ran down my cheeks!!!"I am always happy to entertain, Eric! 🤣. Glad to hear you got a good laugh!
I'm about 70% completed the book now and I am soooo tired of the conversations they have about rallying their strength and how much of an obstacle stands before them. Each scenario like this gets played out multiple times. I understand that the repetition is used to describe just how unholy Dracula is and how great of a feat it will be to defeat him, but good God is it getting exhausting. Still intend to finish it eventually just because I love the parts w/ Dracula, whether it be his actual presence or just his influence on other characters. Glad to hear other's are feeling the same way.
