Dracul

by Dacre Stoker and J.D. Barker

It is 1868, and a twenty-one-year-old Bram Stoker waits in a desolate tower to face an indescribable evil. Armed only with crucifixes, holy water, and a rifle, he prays to survive a single night, the longest of his life. Desperate to record what he has witnessed, Bram scribbles down the events that led him here ... A sickly child, Bram spent his early days bedridden in his parents' Dublin home, tended to by his caretaker, a young woman named Ellen Crone. When a string of strange deaths occur in a nearby town, Bram and his sister Matilda detect a pattern of bizarre behavior by Ellen--a mystery that deepens chillingly until Ellen vanishes suddenly from their lives. Years later, Matilda returns from studying in Paris to tell Bram the news that she has seen Ellen--and that the nightmare they've thought long ended is only beginning. A riveting novel of gothic suspense, Dracul reveals not only Dracula's true origin, but Bram Stoker's---and the tale of the enigmatic woman who connects them.

• ISBN10: 0735219346
• ISBN13: 9780735219342
• Publish Date: 2 October 2018
• Publish Status: Out of Stock
• Imprint: G.P. Putnam's Sons
• Format: Hardcover
• Pages: 512
• Language: English

Reviews

[brokentune]

Dracul was a wonderfully Gothic read that includes many of the elements that we know from Dracula, the original story and the adaptations.

However, this re-assembling of the different elements of the Dracula story, unfortunately, did not work for me: the familiar elements somehow just felt old when in Dracula they felt novel.
And the inclusion of Stoker himself and his family in the story of Dracul, just did not work for me, even if there are some interesting twists with respect to the motivation of the "undead".

I'd this is more a fault in this reader than it is of the book. I just have never done well with fiction that tries to hard to come across as "historical fiction", even less so with fiction that tries to come across as "faction".

I also struggled with the writing itself, which at times felt gimmicky, overwrought, and not particularly of its time. I.e. if this was supposed to be a prequel to Dracula, I would have expected a closer resemblance to the language used in Dracula. This is a minor quibble, tho. My main issue was that I was just bored for about 250 pages until the conclusion of the story.

[Witty and Sarcastic Bookclub]

Admission: I’ve read Bram Stoker’s Dracula three times throughout my life and I still don’t like it. I find that it drags. But Dracul looked so enticing, I had to give it a go. I was not disappointed.

While Dracul is written in the vein (pun intended) of Dracula, I found it to be much more interesting. Its gothic atmosphere and slow build worked in its favor, making it eerie fun. The authors chose to follow firmly in the Dracula mythos, eschewing Anne Rice’s additions to the genre (she’s a brilliant author, by the way).

Why did I enjoy this book, when I don’t like Dracula? Honestly, I think it’s because the female characters in this book have spunk. They aren’t helpless at all, and they move the story along. In fact, without Ellen, there would be no story.

The switch-off between different character’s points of view was a fascinating choice, and the fact that some parts were told as letters made it easy for pertinent information to be included without boring the reader to death (again-pun intended. I’m having way too much fun with this).

I found the Author’s Note at the end to be extremely interesting. It talked a lot about the Stokers, and gave the most enthralling information. If you enjoyed The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova, chances are you’ll want to sink your teeth (Bwahaha!) into Dracul.

[littleread1]

OK, that ended up being a lot more fun than I thought it would be. That author's note at the end really sealed the deal.