Theresa Abney's Reviews > Dracula

Dracula by Bram Stoker
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
120540
's review
May 12, 11

bookshelves: kindle
Read in May, 2011

I'm making an effort to read the classics so that when I tell people that I majored in English Literature and they inevitably ask my opinion of some ridiculously boring book, I'll actually have a cogent response. My efforts so far have been flimsy at best, beginning with Pride & Prejudece & Zombies. (That counts, right?) That being said, I enjoyed Dracula.

It was in many ways the polar opposite of Stephanie Meyers' Twilight franchise.

For example, Dracula was beautifully written, whereas Mrs. Meyers produced a pathetic mess of word vomit. The villian is everything a monster should be; intelligent, scheming, ruthless. The vampires in Twilight sparkle. The only thing lacking from Dracula is a sense of urgency, due entirely to the fact that it's written as a series of diary entries and memorandums. The action occurs almost entirely in the past tense and their Victorian tendencies to fawn over each other were downright distracting. The writing was at times too floral to maintain any true sense of dread. Then we get to the climax, which was, well, anti-climactic. To summarize, while it is true that Dracula is, by far, the better written of the two, ultimately I think that Twilight maintained dramatic tension far more effectively. Bring on the judgment.
likeflag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Dracula.
sign in »

No comments have been added yet.