I've been meaning to read Dracula for a while. I finally got my Nook and Dracula came on it as a complimentary classic. I have the physical copy, but I just hadn't been in any rush to read it.
So, finally I got around to reading it. I think Dracula would've been among my favorite suspense novels if not for that anticlimatic ending. It was a fun read and I can see how it was pop fiction back in the day.
I like how Stroker included so much to make it modern for the times. I could really get into it and feel as though I was in the time period or at the very least it was clear when this story took place. Some of the innocence of the time, in sciences and such, was charming. Helsing said that Dracula had a child-mind because, among other reasons, he tried the same method over and over again. I'm pretty sure we call that insanity these days.
All the characters were interesting; Mina and Seward were my favorites. There were a lot of fun scenes and suspenseful moments. After all, I wasn't left contemplating the end. I could only take the anticlimax as funny. In the end, the bad guy dies, they save the tomboy, a friend parishes, but life goes on (and he is remembered). Everything is wrapped up nice and neat. They saved the world. Despite being a classic, I do understand the criticism and can see how it wouldn't be considered among the "Higher" literature. It was entertaining, but it didn't really leave you pondering.
From a Vampire genre standpoint, this is the "original". Dracula is a true evil in this book and a villain. A selfish man with a criminal mind, he appeared somewhat like a devil. It's hard not to like Dracula a little, he's awful, weird and childish, but he's Dracula, King of Vampires. Dracula, as presented in Dracula, is terrible.
The only thing this book made me think much about was words. It's a shame how many words have died and lost meaning (have become slang).