Dracula: The Original 1897 Edition (A Bram Stoker Classic Novel)

I was fifteen when I first read Dracula. My parents refused to give me permission because its was too scary. So I had to sneak it away and read it under the covers at night in secret with a flashlight. I was terrified. I couldn't take the trash out at night or go into the basement alone for a month. One early scene when Dracula crawls down the castle wall head first haunted me and chilled me to the core. When I was 30 while visiting my parents I saw the same Dracula on the bookshelf. I thought I had been silly to be so frightened and read it again. I was just as frightened! But I got more insight. Instead of simply being carried away by the story I learned more about psychopathology, gender roles, appreciation for education and the "rules" that govern vampires as metaphors for various kinds of evil in this world. The main and recurrent lesson I took then was that Dracula had many weaknesses. The force of his power rested in the fact that no one believed in him. That gave him full access to whatever he wanted (except to enter a home. He had to be invited in before he could visit when he wished.) At the Nuremberg trials when high ranking Nazis were in the dock, one witness took her time when she got off the stand. She walked slowly passed each defendant and looked carefully at his face. She said she did this because she knew she would never again have the opportunity to see them. Her shock and horror was that they looked like ordinary people. They didn't look like the monsters they were. I have to wonder if the Nazi atrocities and the atrocities that occur today are allowed to build momentum because so many people don't believe those horrors are possible. This class has given me my third reading of Dracula. Memories of old fears from previous readings came back, but this time I saw more depth in the characters and the story itself. The need for sacred space made me wonder if the vampire and the psychopath are particularly attracted to spiritual innocents among us or are innocents simply more vulnerable to exploitation. I never noticed until this reading that terriers drove the thousands of rats away from our heroes. I was delighted at this scene. I have three terriers and love them even more now that I know they will charge at Dracula's attempts to overwhelm someone with rats and save the day (or night). :) I didn't know, until this class, that Bram Stoker was a great friend of Oscar Wilde. Wilde's imprisonment for sodomy was ruinous to the heart and soul of Stoker. Stoker went into a serious retreat and started writing Dracula a month after Wilde went to prison. I can see the methodical force of evil infiltrating sweet and loving lives in a new way. It must have been Stoker's experience of the oppression and cruelty pressed upon the homosexuality community. It's a wonder to me that Stoker insists on giving not only Lucy and Mina, but all affected by the vampire contagion a release into kindness and spiritual freedom. I find it amazing that he could include redemption in his story. But maybe granting the possibility of redemption saved his own soul. Joanna Poppink, MFT Los Angeles eating disorder recovery therapist author: Healing Your Hungry Heart: recovering from your eating disorder

I chose this classic book for my first hosted read along and I am glad I finally decided to. Once I got started reading it I had to wonder why I waited so long to start. I did have some reservations as too how the writing would be but I just jumped right in. I don't get to creeped out or scared anymore when I read horror books. And I had really been wanting to find something that could provide that for me. I think I found that with this book. The very beginning of the book gave me that creepiness factor and also that sense of impending doom. And then as I continued to read I still had a sense of that creepiness as I delved into the characters thoughts, especially Jonathan's trip to the castle. The characters were great in the story and I loved them all, however in my head I had expected a more significant role for Lucy and it was not as enhanced as I thought it would have been I guess. But still she was a great character. I have to say that my favorite character would have to be Dr, Van Helsing! Such a strong prominent character. He was developed very well. I could totally visualize him in my head. I thought that Jonathan's end days at the castle was a bit vague and had me wondering what all had happened, I thought that part of the story kind of fizzled out a bit and left me hanging. I had hope more of that would have come into play on that so it was just a little disappointing. I had a little bit of an issue with some of the grammar in the story but I expected that and knew some of it would have been a little hard to understand. I really had a hard time with a couple of parts where Stoker gave the characters an 'accent'. It was a little hard to decipher through it at times. I thought the ending was pretty well built up and I felt as though I was on a journey myself with everyone as they all made their way to the castle. I felt as though I was sitting on the edge of my seat too as I was totally immersed in the story at that point. Overall this was a great classic and a very enjoyable read for me

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.

This great thing about this book is that it's an easy read, unlike a lot of other books written during this time. The story is easy to follow and held my attention throughout because of the alternating narrations in first person. The main protagonists of the novel share their perspectives through journal entries, so part of the intrigue is that the reader is always putting together information like the characters in the book. I won't reveal too much, but I did think the the ending wasn't as great as the earlier parts of the story (I thought it was anticlimactic). However, this is a classic novel - well-written, well thought-out, different. I highly recommend reading it if just to see how time has changed many aspects of the original story. The Kindle version doesn't have ridiculous formatting, so it's safe to buy the electronic version.

No spoilers are in this review. As such I will be intentionally vague at times. It is a good read, certainly better than any of the on screen adaptions with their attempts to improve the story but it was rarely a "must read on" with a partial exception of the last few chapters. The story is told exclusively from diary entries and a couple of newspaper articles. The part that most detracted from my immersion was the idea that all the characters seemed to possess eidetic memory (as the book says you only need to train yourself), or at least good enough to remember whole conversations word for word. Nor does it seem to be the characters remembering to the best of their ability but the actual verbatim conversation for example when the other characters all get van Helsing's pidgeon english exactly the same, (speaking of which it can get tiresome at times). This may be a problem inherent to the decision to write exclusively from diary entries. One of the most interesting parts while mostly incidental to the plot, was it's portrayal of women. It is horrible from a modern egalitarian view but it does give a little perspective on how these values existed. It is no surprise that the males could be chauvinistic (though usually well meaning) and chivalrous at the same time but the self-deprecating opinions of the two female characters was surprising. Though one only needs to think about how thoroughly women were taught that they were lesser to understand the opinions. The plot moves along in the style of a typical plot line graph, and builds up the tension to a final climax which serves everyone well except the Count though this is understandable given the nature of the final encounter. The plot itself seems contrived at times the way it keeps drawing the main characters back in in what seems random chance but on retrospect most of it was probably the Count himself engineering it though at the time it wasn't emphasized enough, like the Count deciding to go to Whitby to find Mina. In the end it was better than OK, but not much more than that.

I usually read sci-fi, fantasy and thrillers. However, I wanted to read Dracula based on recommendations from friends and general acclaim. I would overall give it between a 4 and 4.5 for being quite a thrilling and daring tale of mystery and the supernatural (for its time). Some spoilers to follow. Nowadays, stories about vampires and werewolves are a dime a dozen, right? But, here's one book that helped start it all and probably sparked the imaginations of many. Dracula starts out following the narrative of Jonathan Harker and the world soon expands to include his wife (who is eventually afflicted), Dr. Van Helsing and Dr Seward (two relative experts and practitioners in psychology), Quincey Morris and Lord Godalming--in effect from the POV of one character to several. It can get confusing at times, but I feel the story is wonderfully interwoven by the mixed narrative. The story starts out following Harker (he's an associate) as he travels to and interacts with Count Dracula (who is buying some land in England). He is warned by the locals, sees little to heed their warning... until he has some strange encounters involving some siren-esque female vampires and then Count Dracula himself. He is eventually set under house-arrest, whereupon the first part of the story ends and we travel back to England. Here, the story mellows quite a bit and the pacing and intrigue (in my opinion) of the first part is undone. For modern readers, used to fast paced storytelling, the middle portion seems to drag on as we follow what eventually turns out to be one of the first major victims of Count Dracula (a friend of Mrs Harker). The gang eventually determines that the victim has been afflicted and they must take drastic measures to contain her actions. Upon doing so and with the return of Mrs Harker with Jonathan Harker, they whole crew sets about trying to thwart and actually defeat Dracula. Now, we come to the final part of the story where the narrative picks up again towards a strong end. I won't spoil it, but there is much adventuring and sleuthing on the parts of all the characters. The story is able to convey some strong emotional connections between the reader and the characters. Ultimately, the story delivers on a strong beginning and lands a great ending. I would recommend this to anyone who enjoys mysteries, slow-burn narratives and fans of the classic.

"Dracula" was not the first vampire novel, nor was it Bram Stoker's first book. But he managed to craft the ultimate vampire novel, which has spawned countless movies, spinoffs, and books that follow the blueprint of the Transylvanian count -- not to mention the vampire mythology and tropes that are still the standard to this day (despite Stephenie Meyer's best efforts). Eerie, horrifying and genuinely mysterious, "Dracula" is undoubtedly the most striking and unique vampire novel yet penned. Real estate agent Jonathan Harker arrives in Transylvania, to arrange a London house sale to Count Dracula. But as the days go by, Harker witnesses increasingly horrific events, leading him to believe that Dracula is not actually human. His fiancee Mina arrives in Transylvania, and finds that he has been feverish. Meanwhile the count has vanished -- along with countless boxes filled with dirt. And soon afterwards, strange things happen: a ship piloted by a dead man crashes on the shore, after a mysterious thing killed the crew. A lunatic talks about "Him" coming. And Mina's pal Lucy dies of mysterious blood loss, only to come back as an undead seductress. Dracula has arrived in England -- then the center of the Western world -- and intends to make it his own... "Dracula" is the grandaddy of Lestat and other elegantly alluring bloodsuckers, but that isn't the sole reason why this novel is a classic. It's also incredibly atmospheric, and very well-written. Not only is it very freaky, in an ornate Victorian style, but it is also full of restrained, quiet horror and creepy eroticism. What's more, it's shaped the portrayal of vampires in movies and books, even to this day. Despite already knowing what's going on for the first half of the book, it's actually kind of creepy to see these people whose lives are being disrupted by Dracula, but don't know about vampires. It's a bit tempting to yell "It's a vampire, you idiots!" every now and then, but you can't really blame them. Then the second half kicks in, with accented professor Van Helsing taking our heroes on a quest to save Mina from Dracula. And along the way, while our heroes try to figure stuff out, Stoker spins up all these creepy hints of Dracula's arrival. Though he wrote in the late 19th-century manner, very verbose and a bit stuffy, his skill shines through. The book is crammed with intense, evocative language, with moments like Dracula creeping down a wall, or the dead captain found tied to the wheel. Once read, they stick in your mind throughout the book. It's also a credit to Stoker that he keeps his characters from seeming like idiots or freaks, which they could have easily seemed like. Instead, he puts little moments of humanity in them, like Van Helsing admitting that his wife is in an asylum. Even the letters and diaries are written in different styles; for example, Seward's is restrained and analytical, while Mina's is exuberant and bright. Even Dracula himself is an overpowering presence despite his small amount of actual screen time, and not just as a vampire -- Stoker presents him as passionate, intense, malignant, and probably the smartest person in the entire book. If Van Helsing hadn't thwarted him, he probably would have taken over the world -- not the Victorian audience's ideal ending. Intelligent, frightening and very well-written, "Dracula" is the well-deserved godfather of all modern vampire books and movies -- and its unique villain still dwarfs the more recent undead.

Fun to read the “original”.

If you only reaed one Vampire story read this one. If you only read one horror story read this one. If you only read one book - well, that would be going a bit far. I've owned the Penguin Classics edition for years and have just bought the Kindle version which I've not downloaded yet so this is a review of the novel itself in whatever format. This is quite simply one of the best books I've ever read and by far the best horror story. It's an epistolary (as in epistle) novel which means it's made up of letters, notes, and journal entries written by the characters themselves. Because of that the author keeps himself out of it altogether. You don't feel like you're being told a story as much as piecing it together for yourself. Someone has arranged all the documents in order for you and left you to get on with it. This pulls you right into the heart of it. You're with every character intimately (always 'I' not 'he' or 'she') as events unfold around them, as things happen to them, and as they watch things happen to those they love. And what happens is horrible, appalling, revolting, terrifying. Don't think Victorian novels are difficult. This is an absolute page-turner, unputdownable. It never drags, not for a moment. The sense of uncertainty, of fear, of not knowing what is happening, and then the sense of horror and dread and terror when they finally understand soaks out of every page. The tension builds relentlessly and never lets up. At times it's excruciating. And this is a horror story. There are passages in here which will make your blood run cold. Dracula is no comedy villain: he is revolting, but at the same time he's sexually potent and irresistible. (As are the female vampires.) Imagine being helplessly drawn to something which disgusts you in ever fibre of your being. There is a definite sexual conflict between Dracula and the men who find themselves struggling to protect their women from him which adds another layer of tension and depth to events. Being a Victorian novel that element is not spread graphically across the pages with its legs open; it's more subtle than that, mostly between the lines or in metaphor, for instance with the Texan impotently waving his enormous knife around. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about 'Dracula' is that Dracula isn't in it much. But then he doesn't need to be. You can feel his presence all the way through. He's out there. Somewhere. Unless he's already in here. Leave the lights on.

Premesso che avevo visto il film di Coppola ma il libro non lo avevo mai letto, mi sono avvicinata pensando di sapere la storia perfettamente. In realtà il film si discosta di parecchio dal libro di Bram Stoker, resta comunque un ottimo film. Per quanto riguarda il libro, logicamente occorre sapere l'inglese oppure scegliere la versione italiana, a parte questo è emozionante e non annoia, pur essendo stato scritto fine ottocento, certi aspetti sono attualissimi. Concordo con chi, prima di me, ha scritto che si avverte, lungo tutto il racconto, la presenza del Conte. Una presenza inquietante e seducente. Consiglio davvero questa lettura

Un clásico escrito en un estilo y forma absolutamente impresionante. Una historia fascinante llena de giros recorriendo una Europa no tan lejana en el tiempo pero tan diferente y misteriosa que fascina desde la primera página

Not sure that much is needed to be written here, on a book much praised over the years. The style of writing is vastly different to that employed by modern mass fiction authors, but I enjoyed the ripping pace of the story and the build up to the finale.

Dieser große Klassiker der Horror Literatur mit Elementen der Invasion Literature des ausgehenden 19. Jhds weis gerade heute zu überraschen, da hier, obschon zusammen mit Sheridan Le Fanus "Carmilla" und Dr. Polidoris "The Vampyre" Quell vieler in Vampierfiktion vorkommenden Topoi, der Vampier keine romantische Figur ist sondern ganz klar ein Monster. Stokers Verständniss der historischen Figuren auf denen seine ikonische Figur basiert mag defizitär sein, aber sein Tagebuchroman bleibt eine noch immer sehr unterhaltsamme und kulturhistorisch spannende ikonische Geschichte.