What do you think?
Rate this book
রিটার্ন অভ ড্রাকুলা, রিভেঞ্জ অভ ড্রাকুলা
রিটার্ন অভ ড্রাকুলা/ফ্রেডা ওয়ারিংটন
সবাই জানে, মারা গেছে কাউণ্ট ড্রাকুলা। নিজ হাতে তাকে ধ্বংস করে দিয়েছেন প্রফেসর আব্রাহাম ভ্যান হেলসিং ও তাঁর সঙ্গীরা। নিরুদ্বিগ্ন ও শান্তিময় সাতটি বছর কেটে গেছে তারপর। হঠাৎ করেই বদলে গেল সব। রাতদুপুরে দুঃস্বপ্ন দেখতে শুরু করল জোনাথন হারকার। মিনার জানালার বাইরে আবারও পাক খেতে শুরু করল কুয়াশার মেঘ। একটাই অর্থ এর—ফিরে এসেছে অন্ধকারের রাজপুত্র! আগের চেয়ে কয়েক গুণ ভয়ঙ্কর রূপে, প্রতিশোধের তীব্র আক্রোশ নিয়ে। শুরু হলো দুঃস্বপ্ন আর আতঙ্কের নতুন এক অধ্যায়।
রিভেঞ্জ অভ ড্রাকুলা/পিটার ট্রিমেন
পুরনো মালের দোকান থেকে প্রাচীন এক ড্রাগনের মূর্তি কেনাটাই যেন কাল হলো আপটন ওয়েলস্ফোর্ডের জন্য। অশরীরী এক ডাক ভেসে আসছে ওটার মাঝ থেকে—ওকে টেনে নিয়ে যেতে চাইছে সুদূর ট্রানসিলভ্যানিয়ায়... বোর্গো গিরিপথের পাশে এক দুর্গম দুর্গে। হাজার চেষ্টা করেও এড়ানো গেল না সে-আহ্বান, রূপসী এক তরুণীকে বাঁচাবার জন্য ওকে বেরোতেই হলো রূদ্ধশ্বাস অভিযানে। কিন্তু কী দেখবে আপটন ওখানে গিয়ে? ড্রাকুলার প্রতিহিংসা থেকে কীভাবেই বা বাঁচাবে মেয়েটিকে?
সবাই জানে, মারা গেছে কাউণ্ট ড্রাকুলা। নিজ হাতে তাকে ধ্বংস করে দিয়েছেন প্রফেসর আব্রাহাম ভ্যান হেলসিং ও তাঁর সঙ্গীরা। নিরুদ্বিগ্ন ও শান্তিময় সাতটি বছর কেটে গেছে তারপর। হঠাৎ করেই বদলে গেল সব। রাতদুপুরে দুঃস্বপ্ন দেখতে শুরু করল জোনাথন হারকার। মিনার জানালার বাইরে আবারও পাক খেতে শুরু করল কুয়াশার মেঘ। একটাই অর্থ এর—ফিরে এসেছে অন্ধকারের রাজপুত্র! আগের চেয়ে কয়েক গুণ ভয়ঙ্কর রূপে, প্রতিশোধের তীব্র আক্রোশ নিয়ে। শুরু হলো দুঃস্বপ্ন আর আতঙ্কের নতুন এক অধ্যায়।
রিভেঞ্জ অভ ড্রাকুলা/পিটার ট্রিমেন
পুরনো মালের দোকান থেকে প্রাচীন এক ড্রাগনের মূর্তি কেনাটাই যেন কাল হলো আপটন ওয়েলস্ফোর্ডের জন্য। অশরীরী এক ডাক ভেসে আসছে ওটার মাঝ থেকে—ওকে টেনে নিয়ে যেতে চাইছে সুদূর ট্রানসিলভ্যানিয়ায়... বোর্গো গিরিপথের পাশে এক দুর্গম দুর্গে। হাজার চেষ্টা করেও এড়ানো গেল না সে-আহ্বান, রূপসী এক তরুণীকে বাঁচাবার জন্য ওকে বেরোতেই হলো রূদ্ধশ্বাস অভিযানে। কিন্তু কী দেখবে আপটন ওখানে গিয়ে? ড্রাকুলার প্রতিহিংসা থেকে কীভাবেই বা বাঁচাবে মেয়েটিকে?
464 pages, Paperback
First published October 30, 1997
147 people are currently reading
2703 people want to read
About the author
Freda Warrington
52 books327 followersFreda Warrington is an award-winning British author, known for her epic fantasy, vampire and supernatural novels.
“The Blood Wine books are addictive, thrilling reads that are impossible to put down and they definitely deserve more attention” – Worldhopping.net
Her earliest novels, the Blackbird series, were written and published in the 1980s. In the intervening years she has seen numerous novels of epic fantasy, supernatural and contemporary fantasy, vampires, dark romance, horror and alternative history published.
Her novel ELFLAND won the Romantic Times BEST FANTASY NOVEL Award in 2009, while her 1997 Dracula sequel DRACULA THE UNDEAD won the Dracula Society's BEST GOTHIC NOVEL Award.
Four of her novels (Dark Cathedral, Pagan Moon, Dracula the Undead, and The Amber Citadel) have been nominated or shortlisted for the British Fantasy Society's Best Novel award. The American Library Association placed MIDSUMMER NIGHT in its Top Ten for 2010.
Recently Titan Book reissued her popular romantic-gothic Blood Wine vampire series set in the 1920s - A Taste of Blood Wine, A Dance in Blood Velvet and The Dark Blood of Poppies - along with a brand new novel, The Dark Arts of Blood. In 2017, Telos Publishing will publish her first short story collection, NIGHTS OF BLOOD WINE, featuring fifteen lush dark tales - ten set in her Blood Wine world, and five others of gothic weirdness.
In 2003, Simon & Schuster published The Court of the Midnight King, an alternative history/ fantasy retelling of the story of King Richard III. To celebrate all the events surrounding the discovery of Richard III's remains in Leicester, The Court of the Midnight King is now available on Kindle and in paperback format. Most of her backlist titles, including the Blackbird series, Dracula the Undead, Dark Cathedral and Pagan Moon, can already be found on Kindle or will be available in the next few months.
Warrington has also seen numerous short stories published in anthologies and magazines. For further information, visit her website Freda Warrington
Born in Leicester, Warrington grew up in the Charnwood Forest area of Leicestershire. After completing high school, she trained at Loughborough College of Art and Design and worked in medical illustration and graphic design for some years. She eventually moved to full-time writing, and also still enjoys design, photography, art, jewellery-making and other crafts, travelling and conventions.
Series:
* Jewelfire
* Dark Cathedral
* Aetherial Tales
* Blackbird
“The Blood Wine books are addictive, thrilling reads that are impossible to put down and they definitely deserve more attention” – Worldhopping.net
Her earliest novels, the Blackbird series, were written and published in the 1980s. In the intervening years she has seen numerous novels of epic fantasy, supernatural and contemporary fantasy, vampires, dark romance, horror and alternative history published.
Her novel ELFLAND won the Romantic Times BEST FANTASY NOVEL Award in 2009, while her 1997 Dracula sequel DRACULA THE UNDEAD won the Dracula Society's BEST GOTHIC NOVEL Award.
Four of her novels (Dark Cathedral, Pagan Moon, Dracula the Undead, and The Amber Citadel) have been nominated or shortlisted for the British Fantasy Society's Best Novel award. The American Library Association placed MIDSUMMER NIGHT in its Top Ten for 2010.
Recently Titan Book reissued her popular romantic-gothic Blood Wine vampire series set in the 1920s - A Taste of Blood Wine, A Dance in Blood Velvet and The Dark Blood of Poppies - along with a brand new novel, The Dark Arts of Blood. In 2017, Telos Publishing will publish her first short story collection, NIGHTS OF BLOOD WINE, featuring fifteen lush dark tales - ten set in her Blood Wine world, and five others of gothic weirdness.
In 2003, Simon & Schuster published The Court of the Midnight King, an alternative history/ fantasy retelling of the story of King Richard III. To celebrate all the events surrounding the discovery of Richard III's remains in Leicester, The Court of the Midnight King is now available on Kindle and in paperback format. Most of her backlist titles, including the Blackbird series, Dracula the Undead, Dark Cathedral and Pagan Moon, can already be found on Kindle or will be available in the next few months.
Warrington has also seen numerous short stories published in anthologies and magazines. For further information, visit her website Freda Warrington
Born in Leicester, Warrington grew up in the Charnwood Forest area of Leicestershire. After completing high school, she trained at Loughborough College of Art and Design and worked in medical illustration and graphic design for some years. She eventually moved to full-time writing, and also still enjoys design, photography, art, jewellery-making and other crafts, travelling and conventions.
Series:
* Jewelfire
* Dark Cathedral
* Aetherial Tales
* Blackbird
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews
November 21, 2010
I just finished 'Dracula the Undead,' by Freda Warrington, and I'm in awe. I have to say I love this book! Best vampire book I've read in a long time! I read vampire literature all the time, and I've found that most vampire books are pretty weak. They're light and fluffy, filled with vampires that are for the most part are pretty harmless, and there's not a lot of depth to them.
Ever since I was a teenager and read 'Dracula' by Bram Stoker, I've loved the book.
Most sequels though are travesties, changing the characters basic personality and making Dracula just sappy and misunderstood. In 'Dracula The Undead,' Dracula is rather nasty, and he's dangerous too, but then he shows another side, with makes him wonderfully well-rounded at the end, probably more so than in the original. Mina loves her husband Jonathan Harker deeply, and she does not just shrug off her moral Victorian sensibilities so she can run away with Dracula.
'Dracula' is definitely a novel of it's time. It's very Victorian, and the characters themselves are very Victorian, and very British. I've never read a book that captures that Victorian flavor. 'Dracula the Undead' captures the feel and the time of the book though. It's written beautifully, with rich prose, and pieced together in diary form like the original. The pacing is wonderful too. I simply could not put it down, and I experienced true feelings of macabre horror reading it. This book was so rich with vivid description, and creative, it was a feast for my imagination.
I must read more books by Freda Warrington. She's an incredible writer. So if you loved the novel 'Dracula,' you simply must read this sequel.
Ever since I was a teenager and read 'Dracula' by Bram Stoker, I've loved the book.
Most sequels though are travesties, changing the characters basic personality and making Dracula just sappy and misunderstood. In 'Dracula The Undead,' Dracula is rather nasty, and he's dangerous too, but then he shows another side, with makes him wonderfully well-rounded at the end, probably more so than in the original. Mina loves her husband Jonathan Harker deeply, and she does not just shrug off her moral Victorian sensibilities so she can run away with Dracula.
'Dracula' is definitely a novel of it's time. It's very Victorian, and the characters themselves are very Victorian, and very British. I've never read a book that captures that Victorian flavor. 'Dracula the Undead' captures the feel and the time of the book though. It's written beautifully, with rich prose, and pieced together in diary form like the original. The pacing is wonderful too. I simply could not put it down, and I experienced true feelings of macabre horror reading it. This book was so rich with vivid description, and creative, it was a feast for my imagination.
I must read more books by Freda Warrington. She's an incredible writer. So if you loved the novel 'Dracula,' you simply must read this sequel.
April 2, 2018
কিছু কিছু বই তাকে নিয়ে লিখতে বাধ্য করে, কিছু মুগ্ধতা না প্রকাশ করে থাকা যায় না, 'রিটার্ন অব ড্রাকুলা' তেমনি এক উদাহরণ।
শুরু থেকে শেষ অবধি রুদ্ধশ্বাসে পড়ে গেছি, কোথাও একটু হাপিয়ে উঠার সুযোগ ছিলো না। শেষ হয়ে যাওয়া একটা কাহিনীকে কি অসামান্য দৃঢ়তায় ই না গতিশীল করা হয়েছে!
স্কোলোম্যাক্সে যতক্ষণ কাহিনী চলেছে, আমি দমবন্ধ করে পড়েছি। বর্ণনার প্রতিটি ওয়ার্ড ই যেনো ছিলো প্রয়োজনীয়।
তবে..... তবে সবচে বেশী ধাক্কা খেয়েছি কাউন্ট ড্রাকুলাতে!!! কাউন্টের প্রতি এমন ভালবাসা অনুভব করবো আমি কল্পনাও করিনি।
প্রিয় কাউন্ট ড্রাকুলা,
জানিনা আপনি আবার ফিরে আসবেন কিনা, তবে আপনার ভালবাসার প্রতি রইলো আমার অগাধ শ্রদ্ধা, মুগ্ধতা আর ভালবাসা। যেখানেই থাকুন, ভালো থাকুন।
আমার মনে হচ্ছিলো, একটা হরর ফ্যান্টাসি বই থেকে পাঠক যা চায়, তার সব ই যেনো ছিলো! প্রতিটা শব্দ যেনো গাঁথা হয়েছে পাঠকের হৃদয় পাঠ করে করে!!! আমি মুগ্ধ, ভীষণভাবে মুগ্ধ😍
শুরু থেকে শেষ অবধি রুদ্ধশ্বাসে পড়ে গেছি, কোথাও একটু হাপিয়ে উঠার সুযোগ ছিলো না। শেষ হয়ে যাওয়া একটা কাহিনীকে কি অসামান্য দৃঢ়তায় ই না গতিশীল করা হয়েছে!
স্কোলোম্যাক্সে যতক্ষণ কাহিনী চলেছে, আমি দমবন্ধ করে পড়েছি। বর্ণনার প্রতিটি ওয়ার্ড ই যেনো ছিলো প্রয়োজনীয়।
তবে..... তবে সবচে বেশী ধাক্কা খেয়েছি কাউন্ট ড্রাকুলাতে!!! কাউন্টের প্রতি এমন ভালবাসা অনুভব করবো আমি কল্পনাও করিনি।
প্রিয় কাউন্ট ড্রাকুলা,
জানিনা আপনি আবার ফিরে আসবেন কিনা, তবে আপনার ভালবাসার প্রতি রইলো আমার অগাধ শ্রদ্ধা, মুগ্ধতা আর ভালবাসা। যেখানেই থাকুন, ভালো থাকুন।
আমার মনে হচ্ছিলো, একটা হরর ফ্যান্টাসি বই থেকে পাঠক যা চায়, তার সব ই যেনো ছিলো! প্রতিটা শব্দ যেনো গাঁথা হয়েছে পাঠকের হৃদয় পাঠ করে করে!!! আমি মুগ্ধ, ভীষণভাবে মুগ্ধ😍
November 18, 2020
4.5 Sterne für eine wirklich gut gelungene Fortsetzung des Dracula Klassikers von Bram Stoker
Nachdem ich endlich mal wieder etwas über Vampire lesen wollte - und zwar die klassischen, bin ich dem Lesetipp von Blackfairy gefolgt. Freda Warrington hat sich dem Urvater der Vampire gewidmet: Dracula und lässt ihn mit Bravour wieder auferstehen.
Ich denke, man sollte Bram Stokers Dracula zuvor gelesen haben oder zumindest die Grundzüge der Geschichte kennen, damit man hier den Fäden, die die Autorin weiterspinnt, gut folgen kann.
Sie bedient sich dem gleichen Aufbau bei der Erzählung, nämlich in Form von Tagebucheinträgen und Briefen und schafft es tatsächlich, bei mir die gleiche Atmosphäre zu schaffen, die ich schon beim Klassiker so gemocht habe.
Es gibt zwar kleine Abschnitte, die sich für mich etwas ziehen, aber im ganzen geht es gut voran und man spürt den Hauch des Todes im Nacken, wenn der unsterbliche Vampir seine Macht ausspielt, manipuliert und damit immer mehr das Grauen um sich greift.
Gerade weil Jonathan und Mina Harker, sowie Prof. Van Helsing, Dr. Seward und Lord Godalming ihm schon einmal gegenüberstanden, ist die Wiederkehr umso schlimmer, da sie genau wissen, mit welchem Gegner sie es zu tun haben.
Auch hat die Autorin etwas zur Entstehung des Grafen und die Hintergründe erzählt, was ich sehr gelungen fand. Allerdings wurden auch manche Entscheidungen der Protagonisten zugunsten der Handlung etwas töricht, um die Dramatik zu schüren, was mir an manchen Stellen aufgefallen ist.
Besonders gefallen hat mir dafür die innere Zerrissenheit gegenüber Dracula als "Monster", denn neben seinem grausamen Egoismus zeigt er doch auch die wenigen guten Seiten, die in ihm stecken - die Liebe zu den Menschen und die Liebe zum Leben, die wir ja alle in uns tragen.
Etwas befremdlich fand ich ja, dass die Lust und Leidenschaft bei Eheleuten "verpönt" und nicht normal ist. Ich bin mir zwar sicher, dass sich tatsächlich damals Paare an diese Art des ehelichen Vollzugs gehalten haben, der nur zur Zeugung der Nachkommen gedacht war oder um den Trieb zu stillen, so schnell und unnahbar wie möglich - dennoch denke ich, dass die meisten hoffentlich ihrer Leidenschaft freien Lauf gelassen haben.
Es war hier für die "Verführung des Bösen" wichtig, es so darzustellen, trotzdem waren die Beschreibungen eines solchen für mich schon gefühllosen Aktes innerhalb zwei sich liebender Menschen seltsam.
Dazu kommt, was ich letztens in einer Rezension gelesen habe, ich weiß leider nicht mehr wo oder über welches Buch. Es ging darum, dass eine "Bedienstete" nachts im Bett der "Herrin" schlief. Also einfach nur zur Gesellschaft, das hatte nichts mit Sex zu tun - und die Rezensentin schrieb, wie komisch sie das fand. Hier wird das jetzt auch ähnlich erwähnt, und man kennt das doch auch aus der Jugendzeit, wenn man bei Freund/Freundin übernachtet ... einfach das Gefühl, nicht allein zu sein, kuscheln zu können, die Nähe des anderen zu spüren. Umarmungen und Berührungen sind so wichtig und stärken die Seele und damit auch den Körper.
Grade in Bezug hier auch auf die Ehe der Harkers, die zwar Nähe zulässt, aber ansonsten nicht viel, da vermisst man diese Art von Zärtlichkeit doch sicher.
Ruhig erzählt nimmt es jedenfalls immer mehr an Spannung zu und gerade im letzten Drittel konnte ich das Buch nicht mehr aus der Hand legen!
Insgesamt mochte ich diese Geschichte aber sehr gerne, weil sie wirklich sehr an den Klassiker erinnert und man wieder "nach Hause kommt" zu den bekannten Figuren.
Nachdem ich endlich mal wieder etwas über Vampire lesen wollte - und zwar die klassischen, bin ich dem Lesetipp von Blackfairy gefolgt. Freda Warrington hat sich dem Urvater der Vampire gewidmet: Dracula und lässt ihn mit Bravour wieder auferstehen.
Ich denke, man sollte Bram Stokers Dracula zuvor gelesen haben oder zumindest die Grundzüge der Geschichte kennen, damit man hier den Fäden, die die Autorin weiterspinnt, gut folgen kann.
Sie bedient sich dem gleichen Aufbau bei der Erzählung, nämlich in Form von Tagebucheinträgen und Briefen und schafft es tatsächlich, bei mir die gleiche Atmosphäre zu schaffen, die ich schon beim Klassiker so gemocht habe.
Es gibt zwar kleine Abschnitte, die sich für mich etwas ziehen, aber im ganzen geht es gut voran und man spürt den Hauch des Todes im Nacken, wenn der unsterbliche Vampir seine Macht ausspielt, manipuliert und damit immer mehr das Grauen um sich greift.
Gerade weil Jonathan und Mina Harker, sowie Prof. Van Helsing, Dr. Seward und Lord Godalming ihm schon einmal gegenüberstanden, ist die Wiederkehr umso schlimmer, da sie genau wissen, mit welchem Gegner sie es zu tun haben.
Auch hat die Autorin etwas zur Entstehung des Grafen und die Hintergründe erzählt, was ich sehr gelungen fand. Allerdings wurden auch manche Entscheidungen der Protagonisten zugunsten der Handlung etwas töricht, um die Dramatik zu schüren, was mir an manchen Stellen aufgefallen ist.
Besonders gefallen hat mir dafür die innere Zerrissenheit gegenüber Dracula als "Monster", denn neben seinem grausamen Egoismus zeigt er doch auch die wenigen guten Seiten, die in ihm stecken - die Liebe zu den Menschen und die Liebe zum Leben, die wir ja alle in uns tragen.
Etwas befremdlich fand ich ja, dass die Lust und Leidenschaft bei Eheleuten "verpönt" und nicht normal ist. Ich bin mir zwar sicher, dass sich tatsächlich damals Paare an diese Art des ehelichen Vollzugs gehalten haben, der nur zur Zeugung der Nachkommen gedacht war oder um den Trieb zu stillen, so schnell und unnahbar wie möglich - dennoch denke ich, dass die meisten hoffentlich ihrer Leidenschaft freien Lauf gelassen haben.
Es war hier für die "Verführung des Bösen" wichtig, es so darzustellen, trotzdem waren die Beschreibungen eines solchen für mich schon gefühllosen Aktes innerhalb zwei sich liebender Menschen seltsam.
Dazu kommt, was ich letztens in einer Rezension gelesen habe, ich weiß leider nicht mehr wo oder über welches Buch. Es ging darum, dass eine "Bedienstete" nachts im Bett der "Herrin" schlief. Also einfach nur zur Gesellschaft, das hatte nichts mit Sex zu tun - und die Rezensentin schrieb, wie komisch sie das fand. Hier wird das jetzt auch ähnlich erwähnt, und man kennt das doch auch aus der Jugendzeit, wenn man bei Freund/Freundin übernachtet ... einfach das Gefühl, nicht allein zu sein, kuscheln zu können, die Nähe des anderen zu spüren. Umarmungen und Berührungen sind so wichtig und stärken die Seele und damit auch den Körper.
Grade in Bezug hier auch auf die Ehe der Harkers, die zwar Nähe zulässt, aber ansonsten nicht viel, da vermisst man diese Art von Zärtlichkeit doch sicher.
Ruhig erzählt nimmt es jedenfalls immer mehr an Spannung zu und gerade im letzten Drittel konnte ich das Buch nicht mehr aus der Hand legen!
Insgesamt mochte ich diese Geschichte aber sehr gerne, weil sie wirklich sehr an den Klassiker erinnert und man wieder "nach Hause kommt" zu den bekannten Figuren.
November 11, 2025
কিছু চরিত্র আছে যাদের নিয়ে যা তা লিখলেও আমি তরতর করে পড়ে ফেলতে পারি কোনরকম অনীহা কিংবা বিরক্তি ছাড়ায়। ড্রাকুলা, মিনা, ভ্যান হেলসিং এরকমই সব চরিত্র। এটাও বেশ উপভোগ করেছি। বিশেষ করে স্কোলোমাস ও ডক্টর কোভ্যাক্সের অংশটুকু তো খানিক বাড়তি উত্তেজনা তৈরি করেছে। তবুও শেষ পাতে বইটা ভীষণ বোকা বোকা হয়ে গেছে। মিনার প্রতি ড্রাকুলার অপার্থিব ভালোবাসা এবং সেইহেতু ড্রাকুলার প্রতি মিনার ভালোবাসার উদ্রেক বিষয়টা শুধু বোকাবোকাই না বরং হাসির উদ্রেক ঘটিয়েছে।
November 20, 2023
This is a really great follow up to the original book, written in the same style. We have letters and diary entries from several perspectives. The original posey of vampire killers return to Transylvania to ensure themselves that all is over. As Dracula feels Mina’s spirit near his spirit rises and he possesses a wolf and ensnares a young woman to bring him back in human form. I thoroughly enjoyed this, a perfect November read!
January 10, 2021
What a thriller it was!
If you want to enjoy it to the fullest, you have to read right after reading the classical Dracula by Bram Stroker. It's been a while I read a horror story. Well, after twilight, vampires are pretty much considered under the romantic book genre. Nowadays, no one is afraid of vampires anymore. Everyone wants to be with a vampire these days!! I think this book is the best vampire book of all time. It didn't fail to show the evil side of being an immortal nasty night creature. It did not sugar-coat the love affair of a vampire rather this book showed us the fallbacks of such relationships.
It is very hard to express my feeling towards this book without spilling beans. This book is very fast pacing and with a lot of twists from the beginning to the end. If you are looking for a horror thriller, I can say this book is a safe bet.
If you want to enjoy it to the fullest, you have to read right after reading the classical Dracula by Bram Stroker. It's been a while I read a horror story. Well, after twilight, vampires are pretty much considered under the romantic book genre. Nowadays, no one is afraid of vampires anymore. Everyone wants to be with a vampire these days!! I think this book is the best vampire book of all time. It didn't fail to show the evil side of being an immortal nasty night creature. It did not sugar-coat the love affair of a vampire rather this book showed us the fallbacks of such relationships.
It is very hard to express my feeling towards this book without spilling beans. This book is very fast pacing and with a lot of twists from the beginning to the end. If you are looking for a horror thriller, I can say this book is a safe bet.
March 2, 2016
Just this year I read Bram Stoker's Dracula. I was in love with the character and I wanted more, so I went searching and stumbled across this book.
Dracula the Undead is in the exact same style of the original Dracula with some great new characters and the original characters are so well portrayed it seems like Bram Stoker himself wrote this novel. It's perfect.
The plot is fast paced from the very beginning and has a very interesting twist. You also discover much more of Dracula and his past which I found intriguing.
Overall, this book was fantastic. Highly recommend to anyone who's read the original Dracula.
Dracula the Undead is in the exact same style of the original Dracula with some great new characters and the original characters are so well portrayed it seems like Bram Stoker himself wrote this novel. It's perfect.
The plot is fast paced from the very beginning and has a very interesting twist. You also discover much more of Dracula and his past which I found intriguing.
Overall, this book was fantastic. Highly recommend to anyone who's read the original Dracula.
July 1, 2021
Sequels to Dracula ... the only one I've ever seen done well was Elizabeth Kostova's 'The Historian', and I'm not sure that one entirely qualifies as a sequel. Spin-off, maybe. Anyway, any novel with Dracula or a character from Dracula featured in its narrative is bound to at least get my attention. But I do find these are usually just awful ... or at least interesting concepts poorly executed. Even a descendant of Bram Stoker isn't able to do well at working with these characters.
Freda Warrington, however, has done much better than I expected at producing a possible 'sequel' to the original novel. Picking up about seven years after the earlier events, she manages the difficult task of how the human characters have changed in that time (partly resulting from shared trauma and partly just the fact that seven years have gone by), while they are still recognizable as the same people from Stoker's novel. For example, Van Helsing's English has improved and Arthur is more 'beaten down' than I would have realized. There are interesting changes in Mina and Jonathan's inner lives as well as their relationship.
Warrington also raises the stakes a fair bit for the heroes in an interesting way. I hesitate to say too much in terms of spoilers, but despite Dracula exclaiming toward the end 'I do not change' I found the narrative surprising at several points and could not put the book down. I was pleased that Dracula did indeed remain quite the same type of vampire from Stoker's novel with just a tad of Anne Rice thrown in. He's a monster, and it may be up to the reader to decide whether or not he's a monster with anything resembling a soul.
Freda Warrington, however, has done much better than I expected at producing a possible 'sequel' to the original novel. Picking up about seven years after the earlier events, she manages the difficult task of how the human characters have changed in that time (partly resulting from shared trauma and partly just the fact that seven years have gone by), while they are still recognizable as the same people from Stoker's novel. For example, Van Helsing's English has improved and Arthur is more 'beaten down' than I would have realized. There are interesting changes in Mina and Jonathan's inner lives as well as their relationship.
Warrington also raises the stakes a fair bit for the heroes in an interesting way. I hesitate to say too much in terms of spoilers, but despite Dracula exclaiming toward the end 'I do not change' I found the narrative surprising at several points and could not put the book down. I was pleased that Dracula did indeed remain quite the same type of vampire from Stoker's novel with just a tad of Anne Rice thrown in. He's a monster, and it may be up to the reader to decide whether or not he's a monster with anything resembling a soul.
March 28, 2021
প্রথমে বয়স��র লেহাজ রেখে ভাবলাম একটা গুরুগম্ভীর রিভিউ লিখি। মনের ভাবটা মার্জিত ভাবে, গুছানো শব্দে তুলে রাখি খন। কিন্তু পড়ে ভাবলাম রিভিউ আমার পড়া বইয়ের মতোই হালকা হোক।
এ আমি কি পড়িলাম, কেন পড়িলাম।
ড্রাকুলা পড়বার স্মৃতি আমার ভয়াবহ কারণ তাকে পাঠিকা হবার আগে আমার চাচা ফুপু তাদের মুখের বলা গল্পে ভয়ানক করে তুলে ধরেছিলেন। ব্রাম স্ট্রকার মশায় ও তাই। এবং আমি তা নিয়ে খুশি ছিলাম। এই যে আমাদের স্বপ্নের নায়ক এডওয়ার্ড কে চিকিমিকি চিকিমিকি করে যা হয়রানি করা হলো, ফ্রেডা ওয়ারিংটনের ড্রাকুলা পড়লে তার জন্য লজ্জা পেতে হবে। ড্রাকুলার মুখে মিনা হারকারের জন্য প্রেম নিবেদনের বাক্য শুনে ভ্রু কুঁচকানোর সাথে সাথে আমার মন কুঁচকে যায়, মুখ বেঁকে যায় যাকে আধুনিক ইংরেজি-বাংলাতে বলি - 'ক্রিঞ্জ খাওয়া'।
ড্রাকুলার সাথে সাথে আরেক ভিলেন এসেছে বেহেরিত। ও মা গো মা! গাঁয়ে মানে না, উনি আপনি মোড়ল। বইয়ের দুতিনটা অধ্যায়ে উঁকিঝুঁকি দিয়ে সুপারভিলেন হতে চায়। আমি এই রোমান্টিক ড্রাকুলা, ক্রিঞ্জি স্বামী জোনাথন, দুই দুইটি ড্রাকুলার প্রেমে পাগল নারী নিয়ে ফাঁদা বই জোর করে পড়ে শেষ করেছি তার কারণ আমার বইয়ের ব্যাপারে ওসিডি আছে। একবার একটা বইয়ের এক লাইন পড়া শুরু করলে, শেষ দেখে ছাড়ি। আপনারা পড়েননা! সময় নষ্ট।
এ আমি কি পড়িলাম, কেন পড়িলাম।
ড্রাকুলা পড়বার স্মৃতি আমার ভয়াবহ কারণ তাকে পাঠিকা হবার আগে আমার চাচা ফুপু তাদের মুখের বলা গল্পে ভয়ানক করে তুলে ধরেছিলেন। ব্রাম স্ট্রকার মশায় ও তাই। এবং আমি তা নিয়ে খুশি ছিলাম। এই যে আমাদের স্বপ্নের নায়ক এডওয়ার্ড কে চিকিমিকি চিকিমিকি করে যা হয়রানি করা হলো, ফ্রেডা ওয়ারিংটনের ড্রাকুলা পড়লে তার জন্য লজ্জা পেতে হবে। ড্রাকুলার মুখে মিনা হারকারের জন্য প্রেম নিবেদনের বাক্য শুনে ভ্রু কুঁচকানোর সাথে সাথে আমার মন কুঁচকে যায়, মুখ বেঁকে যায় যাকে আধুনিক ইংরেজি-বাংলাতে বলি - 'ক্রিঞ্জ খাওয়া'।
ড্রাকুলার সাথে সাথে আরেক ভিলেন এসেছে বেহেরিত। ও মা গো মা! গাঁয়ে মানে না, উনি আপনি মোড়ল। বইয়ের দুতিনটা অধ্যায়ে উঁকিঝুঁকি দিয়ে সুপারভিলেন হতে চায়। আমি এই রোমান্টিক ড্রাকুলা, ক্রিঞ্জি স্বামী জোনাথন, দুই দুইটি ড্রাকুলার প্রেমে পাগল নারী নিয়ে ফাঁদা বই জোর করে পড়ে শেষ করেছি তার কারণ আমার বইয়ের ব্যাপারে ওসিডি আছে। একবার একটা বইয়ের এক লাইন পড়া শুরু করলে, শেষ দেখে ছাড়ি। আপনারা পড়েননা! সময় নষ্ট।
November 12, 2021
I thought it was interestingly put together. The book and story come together using only the journals and notes of the characters. I was a little put off by all the proper Christian morales, and Jonathans and Minas constant concern about being proper in their marriage and in each other’s eyes. In the end they do realize that they are only human. As we are all, right?
February 5, 2020
আগের পর্বের মতোই বেশ উপভোগ্য। একজনের লেখা চরিত্রগুলো যেন ধারণ করেছেন পরেরজন, তাইতো মনেই হয় নি যেন আরেকজন লেখছে বইটা। আবার বর্ণনাভঙ্গি বা বইয়ের গঠনরীতির সাদৃশ্যও লেখিকার মুন্সিয়ানার কথাই সাক্ষ্য দেয়। আগের সেই ভয়ংকর ড্রাকুলাকেও পাওয়া গেছে, মিল আছে জীবনযাত্রা ও অন্যান্য জায়গাতেও। আর বাড়তি হিসেবে শয়তানের স্কুল বা স্কলোম্যান্সের বর্ণনাটুকু বেশ আকর্ষণীয় ছিল, উপভোগ করেছি ড্রাকুলা আর বেহেরিটের ক্ষমতার দ্বন্দ্ব। কিন্তু যে বিষয়টা কিছুটা অস্বস্তিকর ছিল তা হলো ড্রাকুলার মানবিক চেতনা। কেননা প্রথম পর্বে যেখানে ড্রাকুলাকে আমরা ভয় পেয়েছি এবং ঘৃণা করেছি সেখানে এই পর্বে লেখিকা এমনভাবে চিত্রিত করেছেন যে ঘৃণার পরিবর্তে ভালো লাগা কাজ করছিল যা মূল বইয়ের থিমের সাথে যায় না। আবার শেষদিকে পিশাচগুলোর পরিণতিও যেন কিছুটা তাড়াহুড়ো করে করা যেন পৃথিবীকে পিশাচ মুক্ত করাই লেখিকার উদ্দেশ্য! মোটের উপর বলতে গেলে ভালোই লেগেছে নতুন এই ড্রাকুলাকে…
April 26, 2017
বাজে বই,মেইন ড্রাকুলার মজাটাই নষ্ট করে দিয়েছে।
October 2, 2024
I got a good sense that I would be a fan of Freda Warrington's ever since learning about her connection to one of my favorite authors of all time, Tanith Lee. And after reading Dracula the Undead, I'm so happy to confirm that my hunch was right.
Dracula the Undead is a worthy sequel to the original and a well-written, nuanced, engaging gothic novel in its own right. Following the original heroes of Dracula (Mina and Jonathan Harker, Van Helsing, etc.) it kept me interested the entire way through, with delicious insight into the mind, emotions, and past of Dracula, himself.
I appreciated the way Warrington handled both the vampire and human characters with moral nuance, revealing the undead's capacity to feel and even love and our human heroes' shortcomings (to our modern eyes) in their repression and xenophobia. But Warrington is never heavy-handed with this, never delivering some trite, pat "Maybe humans are the real monsters" message.
Readers with a fascination with (and, perhaps, attraction to) Dracula who want a story that explores a potential intimacy between Mina and Dracula will love this book. It's important to stress, however, that Dracula the Undead is gothic fiction in the purest sense. Not gothic romance. And while sensual and even erotic at times, it's not explicit. The dark eroticist in me would have loved more explicit scenes with acts that went further than the novel took them, but given the epistolary format and the mindset of the characters, it made perfect sense that they were more restrained.
I'm sure I'll be reading much more from Freda Warrington.
Dracula the Undead is a worthy sequel to the original and a well-written, nuanced, engaging gothic novel in its own right. Following the original heroes of Dracula (Mina and Jonathan Harker, Van Helsing, etc.) it kept me interested the entire way through, with delicious insight into the mind, emotions, and past of Dracula, himself.
I appreciated the way Warrington handled both the vampire and human characters with moral nuance, revealing the undead's capacity to feel and even love and our human heroes' shortcomings (to our modern eyes) in their repression and xenophobia. But Warrington is never heavy-handed with this, never delivering some trite, pat "Maybe humans are the real monsters" message.
Readers with a fascination with (and, perhaps, attraction to) Dracula who want a story that explores a potential intimacy between Mina and Dracula will love this book. It's important to stress, however, that Dracula the Undead is gothic fiction in the purest sense. Not gothic romance. And while sensual and even erotic at times, it's not explicit. The dark eroticist in me would have loved more explicit scenes with acts that went further than the novel took them, but given the epistolary format and the mindset of the characters, it made perfect sense that they were more restrained.
I'm sure I'll be reading much more from Freda Warrington.
January 18, 2018
Freda Warrington has written the best sequel to Bram Stoker's Dracula ever.
Written in the in journal form, from Mina and Jonathan's point of view and the journals of their friends, it keeps the reader enthralled. The dark foreboding atmosphere, of the Carpathian countryside and chilling cries of the wolves, are enough to keep the reader looking over his or her shoulder.
Seven long years have passed since Dracula was beheaded, and now both Mina and Jonathan, need to put their minds to rest and to also eradicate their dark memories, and to do so, they travel back to Transylvania, leaving their son Quincey at home in England.
Beneath the earth. in limbo lies the dark soul of Dracula, desperate to regain his blood, to become whole once again, to reclaim what was his, so for Mina and Jonathan, the terror, is about to reclaim the lives..
I read this while listening to a thunder storm, cd,and can honestly say. it made the book even darker! Brilliant
Written in the in journal form, from Mina and Jonathan's point of view and the journals of their friends, it keeps the reader enthralled. The dark foreboding atmosphere, of the Carpathian countryside and chilling cries of the wolves, are enough to keep the reader looking over his or her shoulder.
Seven long years have passed since Dracula was beheaded, and now both Mina and Jonathan, need to put their minds to rest and to also eradicate their dark memories, and to do so, they travel back to Transylvania, leaving their son Quincey at home in England.
Beneath the earth. in limbo lies the dark soul of Dracula, desperate to regain his blood, to become whole once again, to reclaim what was his, so for Mina and Jonathan, the terror, is about to reclaim the lives..
I read this while listening to a thunder storm, cd,and can honestly say. it made the book even darker! Brilliant
April 19, 2023
Really enjoyable
In this sequel to Bram Stocker’s classic novel, Dracula. The fabled vampire, even though reduced to ashes in the first book, is not really dead (shocker). Instead he raises and seeks what he did not attain seven years previous and eventually learns of ways that can make him even more evil and powerful found within a legendary college of evil, the Scholomance. Many of the same characters from Stocker’s book, Dr Van Helsing, and Mina and Jonathan Harper match wits with Dracula in a truly entertaining book. The events in the book intersect smoothly and lead to a satisfying ending. Really, no complaints. If this is a genre you enjoy, try it.
In this sequel to Bram Stocker’s classic novel, Dracula. The fabled vampire, even though reduced to ashes in the first book, is not really dead (shocker). Instead he raises and seeks what he did not attain seven years previous and eventually learns of ways that can make him even more evil and powerful found within a legendary college of evil, the Scholomance. Many of the same characters from Stocker’s book, Dr Van Helsing, and Mina and Jonathan Harper match wits with Dracula in a truly entertaining book. The events in the book intersect smoothly and lead to a satisfying ending. Really, no complaints. If this is a genre you enjoy, try it.
August 22, 2023
ড্রাকুলার সিক্যুয়েল অসংখ্য।
তারমধ্যে এই আনঅফিসিয়াল সিক্যুয়েলটাতেই সম্ভবত ব্রাম স্টোকার এর লেখার একটা স্পষ্ট ছাপ পাওয়া যায়।
লেখিকা অরিজিনাল ড্রাকুলার লেখন শৈলীকে পুরোপুরি নিজের মধ্যে ধারণ করেই লিখতে বসেছিলেন হয়তো!
স্কুলে থাকাকালীন পড়েছিলাম। এক অন্য ধারার চমৎকার প্লট আর স্টোরি বিল্ড আপ!
তারমধ্যে এই আনঅফিসিয়াল সিক্যুয়েলটাতেই সম্ভবত ব্রাম স্টোকার এর লেখার একটা স্পষ্ট ছাপ পাওয়া যায়।
লেখিকা অরিজিনাল ড্রাকুলার লেখন শৈলীকে পুরোপুরি নিজের মধ্যে ধারণ করেই লিখতে বসেছিলেন হয়তো!
স্কুলে থাকাকালীন পড়েছিলাম। এক অন্য ধারার চমৎকার প্লট আর স্টোরি বিল্ড আপ!
October 19, 2024
In theory I am wary of sequels/prequels especially when dealing with classics such as this, you might feel such a cult title as 'Dracula' would be untouchable/unwise it might result in pastiche or worse be downright ghastly.
But this was a pleasant suprise, Freda Warrington writes brilliantly, her prose and lavish visuals match Stoker's, and whilst her story might not be the most original it is a markedly strong offering to the vampire canon.
I look forward to sampling more of her work!
But this was a pleasant suprise, Freda Warrington writes brilliantly, her prose and lavish visuals match Stoker's, and whilst her story might not be the most original it is a markedly strong offering to the vampire canon.
I look forward to sampling more of her work!
January 12, 2020
Full disclosure: I've been obsessed with Dracula since I was a child and spent years reading and watching everything I could about the book, the films, the character, the associated folklore and anything else I could find. When I went to university, my degree dissertation was on portrayals of Dracula, my central point being that the character has long since transcended his origins in Bram Stoker's novel. At the start of this year I watched (and loved) the BBC's three-part series written by Mark Gatiss and Stephen Moffat and starring Claes Bang as the Count, which rekindled the smouldering embers of my Dracula interest. Once the series had finished I wanted to start exploring the character again in light of this new version, and started reading Freda Warrington's Dracula sequel Dracula The Undead, commissioned by Penguin and first published in 1997 to mark the centenary of Bram Stoker's original novel.
I'll be honest, I was fully expecting not to like it much, but I actually found most of it a lot of fun. Set seven years after Dracula's demise at the hands of Van Helsing, Harker et al, it begins with the group making a return journey to Transylvania to achieve some sort of closure on their traumatic experience and to reassure themselves that no trace of Dracula remains. There they spend time with a friend of Van Helsing's, Andre Kovacs, who shares his academic interest in vampires. Satisfied that Dracula's evil truly has been vanquished, they return home, and Jonathan and Mina Harker take on Andre's niece Elena as a nanny to their frail son Quincey. Meanwhile, Andre decides to search for the Scholomance - known in legend as the school in which the Devil teaches ten scholars and grants them special powers while taking one of ten for himself - which Dracula is rumoured to have attended.
It's obviously not a spoiler to reveal that, needless say, Dracula is not as dead as Van Helsing and his friends believed him to be - his body might be ashes, but his spirit still survives. All that's required to bring him back is for someone to resurrect him, and the Count, even when deprived of a corporeal form, is a very persuasive man. And once he's back, he wants his revenge.
The book is written in a fair imitation of Bram Stoker's Victorian Gothic style, and like the original novel it comprises journal entries and letters by the different characters. For the most part, it feels in keeping with Stoker and works well as a sequel, although from a horror fan's point of view it lacks the impact of Stoker's creepiest scenes. What we do see more of in Dracula The Undead is Dracula himself. In Dracula, the Count doesn't actually appear very often after the opening chapters set in his castle, and when he does he doesn't have much to say for himself, but this time he converses with the other characters quite a lot - this is certainly a plus, as anyone who has read Dracula will be fully aware that Dracula is by far the most interesting and charismatic presence in the novel while most of the other characters are so insipid as to be almost interchangeable.
In Dracula The Undead, we learn a more about the Count's background and motives, and his cunning and manipulative duplicity are at the forefront. I do have a quibble with one element of his storyline here, which is that I don't think his motive for pursuing Mina Harker, or the influence that this has on the end of the story, is at all true to Dracula as a character. I find an eloquent and urbane but utterly selfish and amoral Dracula more interesting (and frightening) than a melancholic Gothic-romantic one, and I believe that nobility describes only his bloodline and absolutely not his personality. The Dracula we see here doesn't quite fit that bill in the latter chapters and consequently I didn't feel satisfied with the end of his story. This is a pity, because in most other respects Warrington has done a good job with the Count.
The plot elements involving the Scholomance are interesting, but in many ways feel as if they belong in a different book altogether: they work perfectly well in isolation but don't always gel particularly well with the rest of the novel. However, of the multitude of Dracula prequels, sequels and alternative versions that are out there, I'd say this is certainly among the better ones, and I'm glad I read it.
I'll be honest, I was fully expecting not to like it much, but I actually found most of it a lot of fun. Set seven years after Dracula's demise at the hands of Van Helsing, Harker et al, it begins with the group making a return journey to Transylvania to achieve some sort of closure on their traumatic experience and to reassure themselves that no trace of Dracula remains. There they spend time with a friend of Van Helsing's, Andre Kovacs, who shares his academic interest in vampires. Satisfied that Dracula's evil truly has been vanquished, they return home, and Jonathan and Mina Harker take on Andre's niece Elena as a nanny to their frail son Quincey. Meanwhile, Andre decides to search for the Scholomance - known in legend as the school in which the Devil teaches ten scholars and grants them special powers while taking one of ten for himself - which Dracula is rumoured to have attended.
It's obviously not a spoiler to reveal that, needless say, Dracula is not as dead as Van Helsing and his friends believed him to be - his body might be ashes, but his spirit still survives. All that's required to bring him back is for someone to resurrect him, and the Count, even when deprived of a corporeal form, is a very persuasive man. And once he's back, he wants his revenge.
The book is written in a fair imitation of Bram Stoker's Victorian Gothic style, and like the original novel it comprises journal entries and letters by the different characters. For the most part, it feels in keeping with Stoker and works well as a sequel, although from a horror fan's point of view it lacks the impact of Stoker's creepiest scenes. What we do see more of in Dracula The Undead is Dracula himself. In Dracula, the Count doesn't actually appear very often after the opening chapters set in his castle, and when he does he doesn't have much to say for himself, but this time he converses with the other characters quite a lot - this is certainly a plus, as anyone who has read Dracula will be fully aware that Dracula is by far the most interesting and charismatic presence in the novel while most of the other characters are so insipid as to be almost interchangeable.
In Dracula The Undead, we learn a more about the Count's background and motives, and his cunning and manipulative duplicity are at the forefront. I do have a quibble with one element of his storyline here, which is that I don't think his motive for pursuing Mina Harker, or the influence that this has on the end of the story, is at all true to Dracula as a character. I find an eloquent and urbane but utterly selfish and amoral Dracula more interesting (and frightening) than a melancholic Gothic-romantic one, and I believe that nobility describes only his bloodline and absolutely not his personality. The Dracula we see here doesn't quite fit that bill in the latter chapters and consequently I didn't feel satisfied with the end of his story. This is a pity, because in most other respects Warrington has done a good job with the Count.
The plot elements involving the Scholomance are interesting, but in many ways feel as if they belong in a different book altogether: they work perfectly well in isolation but don't always gel particularly well with the rest of the novel. However, of the multitude of Dracula prequels, sequels and alternative versions that are out there, I'd say this is certainly among the better ones, and I'm glad I read it.
December 2, 2014
This book started out well, it followed Bram's characters almost religiously.Three fourths of the way through the book the plot begins to wain. Two things I really disliked about this book was. First Mina and Dracula's love sub-plot. Second Van Helsing was unwavering and a solid character in the first book, but in this one he has become a little weak willed. Other than that this book was an entertaining read. I do admit I am a purist and I do not think a sequel is necessary. Bram Stokers Dracula ended well. But if I were to pick a Dracula sequel out of the ones out there it would be this one. Do not waste your time with Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt's anything but a Dracula sequel. If you are searching for a Dracula sequel read this one.
September 26, 2017
This sequel to Bram Stoker's famous Dracula lowers the stakes (pun intended) and ups the romance for a disappointing read.
Don't get me wrong, this book isn't some shoddy attempt to cash in on Dracula's fame. It actually takes a plot that springs naturally from the events of the original, does a skillful job of using the original's writing style, and adds a great backstory for Dracula that should have made this a great read. Unfortunately, the book was brought down by inconsistent characterization, an over-romanticization of Dracula, and an anticlimactic plot that rapidly ran out of steam.
Don't get me wrong, this book isn't some shoddy attempt to cash in on Dracula's fame. It actually takes a plot that springs naturally from the events of the original, does a skillful job of using the original's writing style, and adds a great backstory for Dracula that should have made this a great read. Unfortunately, the book was brought down by inconsistent characterization, an over-romanticization of Dracula, and an anticlimactic plot that rapidly ran out of steam.
March 8, 2017
No one should ever try to emulate Bram Stoker. The journal method used her is annoying at best. If the master chose not to write a follow up the apprentice should not have made the effort. Don't waste your time with this.
October 19, 2014
This is the second book I have read with this title. The other is by a relative of Bram Stoker. Neither adds anything to the tale and the world would have survived if neither had been written.
December 1, 2018
A really good continuous of Dracula
January 29, 2019
Riveting and true to the original source.
Absolutely loved this book. I could see it unfold and wish it could be the next Dracula entry in cinemas as well.
Absolutely loved this book. I could see it unfold and wish it could be the next Dracula entry in cinemas as well.
March 5, 2020
This book transfers you into the world of vampires draculas and the devil.. Far better experience than watching than watching horror movie..
December 25, 2023
There is a quasi-infinite catalogue of published Dracula fan-fiction out there. I don't intend for "fan-fiction" to come across as a value judgement, just an accurate description of what it is. Few other novels in the public domain continue to arrest the imagination of modern society quite like Bram Stoker's legendary book of Gothic horror, and I think it's great that people have re-interpreted and adapted the story in so many disparate ways over the last 120+ years.
I do not think that Dracula is a perfect novel, but as a colossal fan of it nonetheless I notice that modern Dracula storytellers have a tendency to revisit a small well of tropes over and over, many of which I am quite sick of, especially in works that claim to be accurately capturing the spirit of the original work. These include:
1. Removing the vampiric vulnerability to garlic, crucifixes, and other holy symbols to make them more like Anne Rice's vampires
2. Making explicit that Dracula and Vlad the Impaler are the same person, and also throwing in Elizabeth Bathory for some reason
3. Depicting Jonathan Harker as cowardly, unintelligent, overtly misogynistic, and a bad husband
4. Depicting Count Dracula as not evil, or at the very least misunderstood, and having his violent sexual advances towards Mina be welcomed by her
Freda Warrington's sequel Dracula the Undead (smartly subtitled as "A sequel to Dracula" rather than "The sequel", as was used by Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt's execrable and similarly-named Dracula the Un-Dead) does touch upon the last of these, which was frustrating, but the novel was such a gripping read that I'm willing to excuse it, and it was not handled in as unsavory a way as I have read or watched elsewhere.
Warrington's prose is not Bram Stoker's prose, it much is more cinematic and lurid, but it is sumptuous and Gothic nonetheless, and a perfect fit for the subject matter. Since we already know these characters, the book can get straight to putting them in horrid danger and building suspense. The Scholomance, alluded to twice by Stoker in his novel, is explored in greater detail here, to great effect. I cannot express how wonderful it is to read about vampires being overtly Satanic!
Now, the long-term problem of the cultural reputations of Jonathan Harker, Dracula, Mina, and the relationships between them - something that Francis Ford Coppola's film adaptation has a lot to answer for, as much as I love it. In the original novel, Count Dracula is unambiguously, unashamedly evil. Mina feels not a shred of attraction towards Dracula, and she is completely smitten and in love with her husband, and he with her. But in a hundred years of cinematic adaptations we have never had a single truly great Jonathan Harker depiction, and many great Draculas. Dracula is the star, he is dangerous, powerful, and mysterious, and he is a vampire, which is much cooler than not being a vampire. It's little wonder that he has become a well-liked character and Jonathan Harker has become something of a joke.
This novel ascribes a few flaws to Jonathan that aren't really there in the source material, but he gets over them through the course of the book. He is severely injured early on, and is not able to fight Dracula as effectively as he was the first time around. Mina despises Dracula, but despite herself comes to hold a certain attraction to him and starts to find redeeming qualities in him. This Dracula is evil and self-serving, but also merciful. His "vampiric baptism" of Mina in the original book is accurately depicted as sexual assault.
Even as distorted as these depictions are, this is BY FAR the closest these characters have come to their original versions in literature since Anne Rice rewrote the book on the vampire mythos in the late 70s. This is a testament to how overwhelmed Dracula the book has become by Dracula the cinematic figure, and how impressive it is that Warrington was able to shed much of this cultural baggage as well as she did to make a reasonably faithful sequel, the most faithful of any other book I've read.
And as taken as its own thing, Dracula the Undead is GREAT. It's bloody, thrilling, creepy, sexy, and deliciously Gothic, and I read the whole thing in one bite. Freda Warrington is a tremendously talented writer and I'm excited to read more from her in the future.
I do not think that Dracula is a perfect novel, but as a colossal fan of it nonetheless I notice that modern Dracula storytellers have a tendency to revisit a small well of tropes over and over, many of which I am quite sick of, especially in works that claim to be accurately capturing the spirit of the original work. These include:
1. Removing the vampiric vulnerability to garlic, crucifixes, and other holy symbols to make them more like Anne Rice's vampires
2. Making explicit that Dracula and Vlad the Impaler are the same person, and also throwing in Elizabeth Bathory for some reason
3. Depicting Jonathan Harker as cowardly, unintelligent, overtly misogynistic, and a bad husband
4. Depicting Count Dracula as not evil, or at the very least misunderstood, and having his violent sexual advances towards Mina be welcomed by her
Freda Warrington's sequel Dracula the Undead (smartly subtitled as "A sequel to Dracula" rather than "The sequel", as was used by Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt's execrable and similarly-named Dracula the Un-Dead) does touch upon the last of these, which was frustrating, but the novel was such a gripping read that I'm willing to excuse it, and it was not handled in as unsavory a way as I have read or watched elsewhere.
Warrington's prose is not Bram Stoker's prose, it much is more cinematic and lurid, but it is sumptuous and Gothic nonetheless, and a perfect fit for the subject matter. Since we already know these characters, the book can get straight to putting them in horrid danger and building suspense. The Scholomance, alluded to twice by Stoker in his novel, is explored in greater detail here, to great effect. I cannot express how wonderful it is to read about vampires being overtly Satanic!
Now, the long-term problem of the cultural reputations of Jonathan Harker, Dracula, Mina, and the relationships between them - something that Francis Ford Coppola's film adaptation has a lot to answer for, as much as I love it. In the original novel, Count Dracula is unambiguously, unashamedly evil. Mina feels not a shred of attraction towards Dracula, and she is completely smitten and in love with her husband, and he with her. But in a hundred years of cinematic adaptations we have never had a single truly great Jonathan Harker depiction, and many great Draculas. Dracula is the star, he is dangerous, powerful, and mysterious, and he is a vampire, which is much cooler than not being a vampire. It's little wonder that he has become a well-liked character and Jonathan Harker has become something of a joke.
This novel ascribes a few flaws to Jonathan that aren't really there in the source material, but he gets over them through the course of the book. He is severely injured early on, and is not able to fight Dracula as effectively as he was the first time around. Mina despises Dracula, but despite herself comes to hold a certain attraction to him and starts to find redeeming qualities in him. This Dracula is evil and self-serving, but also merciful. His "vampiric baptism" of Mina in the original book is accurately depicted as sexual assault.
Even as distorted as these depictions are, this is BY FAR the closest these characters have come to their original versions in literature since Anne Rice rewrote the book on the vampire mythos in the late 70s. This is a testament to how overwhelmed Dracula the book has become by Dracula the cinematic figure, and how impressive it is that Warrington was able to shed much of this cultural baggage as well as she did to make a reasonably faithful sequel, the most faithful of any other book I've read.
And as taken as its own thing, Dracula the Undead is GREAT. It's bloody, thrilling, creepy, sexy, and deliciously Gothic, and I read the whole thing in one bite. Freda Warrington is a tremendously talented writer and I'm excited to read more from her in the future.
December 12, 2023
This book could've been a convincing sequel. And in the beginning, it was to some extent.
I was intrigued during the first chapters when we followed our old heroes and then our new protagonists, Elena and Professor André Kovacs.
I already knew that this book would bring up the nowadays so beloved love story between Dracula and Mina (which isn't in the original), but at this point, I thought Ms. Warrington might be able to make it all work.
However,...
she did not.
Most media doing it manage to find at least a little reason for this love. Be it that Mina gets to know the Count before he's exposed as the villain or that she's the reincarnation of his former wife.
Here, I saw none. None besides the trope of the Victorian woman who needs some bad guy to finally bring her the sexual satisfaction the typical Victorian man can't provide her.
As to why Dracula loves Mina so much? We never get to know, too. The book doesn't leave to speculation whether this "love" was true or just part of Dracula's manipulation either and thus fails to explain some key events.
And eventually, it all leads to the deconstruction of what made the original characters who they are.
That was where the book lost me. It took very little here to make Jonathan doubt Mina's loyalty.
It took very little for him to fall for a vampire's seduction as well (because, of course, our Victorian gentleman, too, needs to be sexually liberated by a hot vampire.)
It took very little for Mina to give in to Dracula despite him kidnapping her child — and even less so to make her even consider turning her sick son into a vampire to "save his life".
It all didn't seem true to the characters, contradictory, and made no sense. Now, I see how all of this could be used to discuss Victorian ideals more critically. But to deconstruct much of the original's meaning only for the sake of bashing the oh-so-prudish Victorian society — which is a very limited interpretation of the time, anyway — wasn't the right way to do it.
The bottom line of this book seemed to be "those prudish Victorians needed some sexy vampire action to finally get some action into their marital bedroom", which is, pardon me, very shallow as a main message. And I refuse to believe that died for this.
Oddly enough, the very outdated ideas about England and Eastern Europe then again were mostly reproduced without concern. For example, Elena talks about how backward and superstitious "her people" are compared to Brits and how it's ingrained in her through her heritage. Which people? How? She's a young lady from Budapest, a city of culture and aristocracy, and she's from the educated class, not a peasant girl.
At least Dracula's ethnic features weren'weren't described as unpleasant but "aristocratic". If that was an intentional choice against the anti-Slavic implications of the original or just to make him more attractive to complement the love story...who knows?
In conclusion, I'm disappointed. This book started quite strong, with moments of great suspense and build-up. But Warrington used nothing to its full potential. It turned cheesy and unbelievable at some point and thus tainted my entire reading experience.
I was intrigued during the first chapters when we followed our old heroes and then our new protagonists, Elena and Professor André Kovacs.
I already knew that this book would bring up the nowadays so beloved love story between Dracula and Mina (which isn't in the original), but at this point, I thought Ms. Warrington might be able to make it all work.
However,...
she did not.
Most media doing it manage to find at least a little reason for this love. Be it that Mina gets to know the Count before he's exposed as the villain or that she's the reincarnation of his former wife.
Here, I saw none. None besides the trope of the Victorian woman who needs some bad guy to finally bring her the sexual satisfaction the typical Victorian man can't provide her.
As to why Dracula loves Mina so much? We never get to know, too. The book doesn't leave to speculation whether this "love" was true or just part of Dracula's manipulation either and thus fails to explain some key events.
And eventually, it all leads to the deconstruction of what made the original characters who they are.
That was where the book lost me. It took very little here to make Jonathan doubt Mina's loyalty.
It took very little for him to fall for a vampire's seduction as well (because, of course, our Victorian gentleman, too, needs to be sexually liberated by a hot vampire.)
It took very little for Mina to give in to Dracula despite him kidnapping her child — and even less so to make her even consider turning her sick son into a vampire to "save his life".
It all didn't seem true to the characters, contradictory, and made no sense. Now, I see how all of this could be used to discuss Victorian ideals more critically. But to deconstruct much of the original's meaning only for the sake of bashing the oh-so-prudish Victorian society — which is a very limited interpretation of the time, anyway — wasn't the right way to do it.
The bottom line of this book seemed to be "those prudish Victorians needed some sexy vampire action to finally get some action into their marital bedroom", which is, pardon me, very shallow as a main message. And I refuse to believe that died for this.
Oddly enough, the very outdated ideas about England and Eastern Europe then again were mostly reproduced without concern. For example, Elena talks about how backward and superstitious "her people" are compared to Brits and how it's ingrained in her through her heritage. Which people? How? She's a young lady from Budapest, a city of culture and aristocracy, and she's from the educated class, not a peasant girl.
At least Dracula's ethnic features weren'weren't described as unpleasant but "aristocratic". If that was an intentional choice against the anti-Slavic implications of the original or just to make him more attractive to complement the love story...who knows?
In conclusion, I'm disappointed. This book started quite strong, with moments of great suspense and build-up. But Warrington used nothing to its full potential. It turned cheesy and unbelievable at some point and thus tainted my entire reading experience.
September 17, 2023
হরর জনরার বই যাদের পছন্দের, তাদের কাছে 'ড্রাকুলা' নামটা অপরিচিত হওয়ার কথা নয়। অন্ধকারের রাজা, হাজার বছরের অভিশপ্ত সত্তাটিকে নিয়ে অনেকরকম বই-ই লিখা হয়েছে। তেমনই এক বহুল জনপ্রিয় বই হচ্ছে ব্রাম স্টোকারের 'ড্রাকুলা'।
ড্রাকুলা বইটিতে কাউন্ট ড্রাকুলার অস্তিত্বের বিনাশ হতে দেখা গেলেও আদতেই কি তা হয়েছে? হাজার বছরের পুরনো প্রাণ, শয়তানের উপাসনা করে যে একটু একটু করে অসীম ক্���মতাধর হয়েছে, তাকে সামান্য র ক্ত মাংসের মানুষ পুরোপুরি কি করে নিঃশেষ করতে পারে? তার দেহ ভস্ম করলেই কি তার আত্মার বিনাশ হয়ে যাবে? তার ফিরে আসার কি কোনো রাস্তা নেই? ড্রাকুলার ফিরে আসা, তার প্রতিশোধপরায়ণতা এবং তার শেষ পরিণতি নিয়েই লিখা হয়েছে ড্রাকুলার পরবর্তী সিক্যুয়েল 'রিটার্ন অব ড্রাকুলা'। ব্রাম স্টোকারের যোগ্য উত্তরসূরি তার যোগ্যতার সূক্ষ্ম প্রমাণ যেন রেখে গেছেন বইটিতে!
সাত বছর আগে সেই ঘটনার শুরু এবং শেষ ট্রানসিলভ্যানিয়াতেই হয়েছিল। যে ট্রানসিলভ্যানিয়ায় মানসিক প্রশান্তি এবং মনের দ্বিধাদ্বন্দ্ব দূর করার জন্য সাত বছর আগের সেই দুঃসাহসিক দলটি পুনরায় এক হয়েছে। কিন্তু এ কি তাদের ভুল? নাকি পুরোটাই ভ্রম? তারা কি নিজেদের ভুলেই সেই পুরনো আত্মাকে আহ্বান করে ফেলেছে প্রতিশোধ নেওয়ার জন্যে?
বইটিতে আমাদের পুরনো চেনা পরিচিত চরিত্রগুলোর থেকে পার্শ্ব চরিত্রগুলোই যেন নিজেদের খুব করে জানান দিয়ে গেছে। মিনা, জোনাথন আর ভ্যান হেলসিংকেই আমরা পুরনোদের মধ্যে থেকে পরিপূর্ণভাবে পেয়েছি। ড. সেওয়ার্ড পুরোটা সময় থাকলেও পুরোপুরি নিজের উপস্থিতি জানান দিতে পারেননি। আগের বইয়ে তার চরিত্র যতটা স্ট্রং মনে হয়েছে, এখানে ঠিক ততটা না হলেও বেশ অনেকটাই তার খেই হারিয়ে ফেলেছে। তবে নতুন চরিত্রের মাঝে আছে জোনাথন ও মিনার একমাত্র ছেলে কুইন্সি, ইলিনা, এমিল, কোভাক্স, মিসেস সেওয়ার্ড। এছাড়াও যার কথা না বললেই নয়। বেহেরিট! মাত্র কিছু মুহূর্তে যেন সে কাউন্টের থেকেও খানিকটা হলেও বেশি আমার মন বিষিয়ে তুলেছিল। কাউন্টের মাঝে সামান্যতম কোমলতা দেখা গেলেও এ চরিত্রের নিষ্ঠুরত বৈ আর কিছুই চোখে পড়েনি। শেষটা সত্যিই বেদনাদায়ক। বাস্তব জীবনে এমন বন্ধু পাওয়া সত্যিই ভাগ্যের ব্যাপার। যে বন্ধুর বিপদে নিজের বুক চিতিয়ে দাঁড়াবে।
তবে শেষ মুহূর্তে এসে কি কাউন্টের জন্যে আমার মনে একটুও সহানুভূতি জাগেনি? মিথ্যে বলবো না। আমার অবচেতন মন বারবার বলছিল বেহেরিট হেরে যাক। জিতে যাক শুধু কাউন্ট। শুধু তার রাজত্বই চলুক। পাশে কি মিনাকে আশা করেছিলাম? বোধহয় হ্যাঁ, বোধহয় না। কিন্তু একজন পিশাচের মনেও যে ভালোবাসা আছে সেটা কি ভাবতে পেরেছিলাম? আবার সেই ভালোবাসার জন্য নিজেকে উৎসর্গ? কোনো সুস্থ মানুষ বিশ্বাস করবে?
গল্পটার এক জায়গায় খটকা লেগেছে আমার। সম্মোহিত অবস্থায় মিনা ড্রাকুলার প্রতি দুর্বল হয়ে যায় এটা অস্বীকার করার জো নেই। হয়তো সে নিজের সাথে লড়াই করে হেরে যায়। কিন্তু সুস্থ মস্তিষ্কে সে কি করে ড্রাকুলাকে কামনা করতে পারে? যে তার থেকে কেড়ে নিয়েছে প্রিয় একেকটা তাজা প্রাণ? তার থেকেও বড় কথা, সে জোনাথনকে ভালোবাসে। তবুও এ আকর্ষণ কিসের? এর পেছনে কি অদ্ভুত কোনো কারণ রয়েছে? বা যুক্তি?
গতকাল পড়া শুরু করে আজই ফিনিশ করে ফেললাম। দেরি করতে পারলাম না একদমই। ড্রাকুলার প্রতি আমারও এক আকর্ষণ জন্মে গিয়েছিল। যেন এখনই শেষ করতে হবে এটাকে, জানতে হবে কি আছে ড্রাকুলার ভাগ্যে। সত্যি বলতে আমি ড্রাকুলার আরো সিক্যুয়েল আশা করে বসে আছি। এই কাহিনিনির্ভর, ড্রাকুলা বিষয়ক আর কোনো বই আছে কি? থাকলে জানাবেন।
বই- রিটার্ন অব ড্রাকুলা
লেখক- ফ্রেডা ওয়ারিংটন
রূপান্তর- ইসমাইল আরমান
প্রকাশনী- সেবা প্রকাশন
পৃষ্ঠা সংখ্যা- ৩৬৬
মূল্য- ৯৯ টাকা
ড্রাকুলা বইটিতে কাউন্ট ড্রাকুলার অস্তিত্বের বিনাশ হতে দেখা গেলেও আদতেই কি তা হয়েছে? হাজার বছরের পুরনো প্রাণ, শয়তানের উপাসনা করে যে একটু একটু করে অসীম ক্���মতাধর হয়েছে, তাকে সামান্য র ক্ত মাংসের মানুষ পুরোপুরি কি করে নিঃশেষ করতে পারে? তার দেহ ভস্ম করলেই কি তার আত্মার বিনাশ হয়ে যাবে? তার ফিরে আসার কি কোনো রাস্তা নেই? ড্রাকুলার ফিরে আসা, তার প্রতিশোধপরায়ণতা এবং তার শেষ পরিণতি নিয়েই লিখা হয়েছে ড্রাকুলার পরবর্তী সিক্যুয়েল 'রিটার্ন অব ড্রাকুলা'। ব্রাম স্টোকারের যোগ্য উত্তরসূরি তার যোগ্যতার সূক্ষ্ম প্রমাণ যেন রেখে গেছেন বইটিতে!
সাত বছর আগে সেই ঘটনার শুরু এবং শেষ ট্রানসিলভ্যানিয়াতেই হয়েছিল। যে ট্রানসিলভ্যানিয়ায় মানসিক প্রশান্তি এবং মনের দ্বিধাদ্বন্দ্ব দূর করার জন্য সাত বছর আগের সেই দুঃসাহসিক দলটি পুনরায় এক হয়েছে। কিন্তু এ কি তাদের ভুল? নাকি পুরোটাই ভ্রম? তারা কি নিজেদের ভুলেই সেই পুরনো আত্মাকে আহ্বান করে ফেলেছে প্রতিশোধ নেওয়ার জন্যে?
বইটিতে আমাদের পুরনো চেনা পরিচিত চরিত্রগুলোর থেকে পার্শ্ব চরিত্রগুলোই যেন নিজেদের খুব করে জানান দিয়ে গেছে। মিনা, জোনাথন আর ভ্যান হেলসিংকেই আমরা পুরনোদের মধ্যে থেকে পরিপূর্ণভাবে পেয়েছি। ড. সেওয়ার্ড পুরোটা সময় থাকলেও পুরোপুরি নিজের উপস্থিতি জানান দিতে পারেননি। আগের বইয়ে তার চরিত্র যতটা স্ট্রং মনে হয়েছে, এখানে ঠিক ততটা না হলেও বেশ অনেকটাই তার খেই হারিয়ে ফেলেছে। তবে নতুন চরিত্রের মাঝে আছে জোনাথন ও মিনার একমাত্র ছেলে কুইন্সি, ইলিনা, এমিল, কোভাক্স, মিসেস সেওয়ার্ড। এছাড়াও যার কথা না বললেই নয়। বেহেরিট! মাত্র কিছু মুহূর্তে যেন সে কাউন্টের থেকেও খানিকটা হলেও বেশি আমার মন বিষিয়ে তুলেছিল। কাউন্টের মাঝে সামান্যতম কোমলতা দেখা গেলেও এ চরিত্রের নিষ্ঠুরত বৈ আর কিছুই চোখে পড়েনি। শেষটা সত্যিই বেদনাদায়ক। বাস্তব জীবনে এমন বন্ধু পাওয়া সত্যিই ভাগ্যের ব্যাপার। যে বন্ধুর বিপদে নিজের বুক চিতিয়ে দাঁড়াবে।
তবে শেষ মুহূর্তে এসে কি কাউন্টের জন্যে আমার মনে একটুও সহানুভূতি জাগেনি? মিথ্যে বলবো না। আমার অবচেতন মন বারবার বলছিল বেহেরিট হেরে যাক। জিতে যাক শুধু কাউন্ট। শুধু তার রাজত্বই চলুক। পাশে কি মিনাকে আশা করেছিলাম? বোধহয় হ্যাঁ, বোধহয় না। কিন্তু একজন পিশাচের মনেও যে ভালোবাসা আছে সেটা কি ভাবতে পেরেছিলাম? আবার সেই ভালোবাসার জন্য নিজেকে উৎসর্গ? কোনো সুস্থ মানুষ বিশ্বাস করবে?
গল্পটার এক জায়গায় খটকা লেগেছে আমার। সম্মোহিত অবস্থায় মিনা ড্রাকুলার প্রতি দুর্বল হয়ে যায় এটা অস্বীকার করার জো নেই। হয়তো সে নিজের সাথে লড়াই করে হেরে যায়। কিন্তু সুস্থ মস্তিষ্কে সে কি করে ড্রাকুলাকে কামনা করতে পারে? যে তার থেকে কেড়ে নিয়েছে প্রিয় একেকটা তাজা প্রাণ? তার থেকেও বড় কথা, সে জোনাথনকে ভালোবাসে। তবুও এ আকর্ষণ কিসের? এর পেছনে কি অদ্ভুত কোনো কারণ রয়েছে? বা যুক্তি?
গতকাল পড়া শুরু করে আজই ফিনিশ করে ফেললাম। দেরি করতে পারলাম না একদমই। ড্রাকুলার প্রতি আমারও এক আকর্ষণ জন্মে গিয়েছিল। যেন এখনই শেষ করতে হবে এটাকে, জানতে হবে কি আছে ড্রাকুলার ভাগ্যে। সত্যি বলতে আমি ড্রাকুলার আরো সিক্যুয়েল আশা করে বসে আছি। এই কাহিনিনির্ভর, ড্রাকুলা বিষয়ক আর কোনো বই আছে কি? থাকলে জানাবেন।
বই- রিটার্ন অব ড্রাকুলা
লেখক- ফ্রেডা ওয়ারিংটন
রূপান্তর- ইসমাইল আরমান
প্রকাশনী- সেবা প্রকাশন
পৃষ্ঠা সংখ্যা- ৩৬৬
মূল্য- ৯৯ টাকা
January 28, 2021
Warning: Spoilers Ahead!
It was with great anticipation that I began to read Ms. Warrington's much-praised "sequel" to Dracula, and there is no denying that the author has created an eminently readable book. Warrington's prose is masterfully composed, and she deserves a great deal of credit for crafting a follow-up to Bram Stoker's classic of horror which clearly endeavors to faithfully recapture the spirit of its forebear. To a large degree, Warrington manages to recreate not only the atmosphere and tone of the original novel, but, at least at first, the personality of the characters Dracula fans all know and love. The novel is written in the epistolary format of the original, and Warrington creates believable rationales for why all the principals feel compelled to write everything down. Alas, the further I got into the book, the more disappointed I gradually became. Despite Warrington's undeniably proficient writing, she makes some terrible decisions with regards to the plot. First and foremost, Warrington succumbs to the temptation to make Dracula a sympathetic character, and copies Francis Ford Coppola's interpretation of the relationship between Dracula and Mina not as one of predator and prey, but of tragic lovers. This is, despite modern taste running very much to the contrary, a total repudiation of Stoker's characterization of both Dracula and Mina, and while Warrington does handle this poor plot device better than have some other writers, it nonetheless takes the heart out of the tale. Warrington makes other mistakes, as well: she introduces another vampire named Beherit and a quest for a diabolical school called the Scholomance in a subplot that takes far too much time and dilutes the main storyline; moreover, she inexplicably takes two vital characters--Lord Godalming and Jonathan Harker himself--virtually out of the plot, the one permanently and the other long enough that his pre-eminence to the story is effectively undercut, presumably to better facilitate the emerging "romance" between Mina and the not-as-evil-as-he-should-be Count. Warrington does introduce a few interesting moral and theological questions, but while these lead to some fascinating dialogues at first, the "answers" the author leaves us with (including the idea that Dracula, for all his faults, has too much passion for life for his destruction to be a good thing, and more absurdly still that Mina and Jonathan can improve their love life by being a little more like him), are too ridiculous to hold up under their own weight. I give the book a decent rating, all the same, because it is a page-turner (once I started reading, I couldn't stop, even if after a while I began to wish I could)and the writer's literary style really is engaging, so much so that I wouldn't hesitate a bit to try out some of her other novels if opportunity arises. All the same, it's one more disappointing Dracula sequel. Is there no one who can do Stoker's masterwork justice?
It was with great anticipation that I began to read Ms. Warrington's much-praised "sequel" to Dracula, and there is no denying that the author has created an eminently readable book. Warrington's prose is masterfully composed, and she deserves a great deal of credit for crafting a follow-up to Bram Stoker's classic of horror which clearly endeavors to faithfully recapture the spirit of its forebear. To a large degree, Warrington manages to recreate not only the atmosphere and tone of the original novel, but, at least at first, the personality of the characters Dracula fans all know and love. The novel is written in the epistolary format of the original, and Warrington creates believable rationales for why all the principals feel compelled to write everything down. Alas, the further I got into the book, the more disappointed I gradually became. Despite Warrington's undeniably proficient writing, she makes some terrible decisions with regards to the plot. First and foremost, Warrington succumbs to the temptation to make Dracula a sympathetic character, and copies Francis Ford Coppola's interpretation of the relationship between Dracula and Mina not as one of predator and prey, but of tragic lovers. This is, despite modern taste running very much to the contrary, a total repudiation of Stoker's characterization of both Dracula and Mina, and while Warrington does handle this poor plot device better than have some other writers, it nonetheless takes the heart out of the tale. Warrington makes other mistakes, as well: she introduces another vampire named Beherit and a quest for a diabolical school called the Scholomance in a subplot that takes far too much time and dilutes the main storyline; moreover, she inexplicably takes two vital characters--Lord Godalming and Jonathan Harker himself--virtually out of the plot, the one permanently and the other long enough that his pre-eminence to the story is effectively undercut, presumably to better facilitate the emerging "romance" between Mina and the not-as-evil-as-he-should-be Count. Warrington does introduce a few interesting moral and theological questions, but while these lead to some fascinating dialogues at first, the "answers" the author leaves us with (including the idea that Dracula, for all his faults, has too much passion for life for his destruction to be a good thing, and more absurdly still that Mina and Jonathan can improve their love life by being a little more like him), are too ridiculous to hold up under their own weight. I give the book a decent rating, all the same, because it is a page-turner (once I started reading, I couldn't stop, even if after a while I began to wish I could)and the writer's literary style really is engaging, so much so that I wouldn't hesitate a bit to try out some of her other novels if opportunity arises. All the same, it's one more disappointing Dracula sequel. Is there no one who can do Stoker's masterwork justice?
February 20, 2021
Warrington’s sequel to Dracula is nominally original, but it lacks some of the focus on the characters that die hard fans of the original may be wanting. Dracula expansions seem to be fixated on the exoneration of the villain, and Warrington’s is no exception, complete with the obligatory exploration of the romance between Mina and the Count. The tired cliche of Dracula as a lover is enigmatic at best, because one need only look at Lucy Westenra, and the brides in castle Dracula, to be assured that he is not an undead Casanova, and he won’t be changed. Stoker’s vampire, despite other popular universes, is not a redeemable character, and I suppose the best way to characterize this work is that it’s “Anne Rice’s Dracula.”
The plot itself is fine, and the origin story of Dracula is inventive, but you’ll find too many similarities in the Dracula expansions amongst different authors that it was tired before Warrington ever put pen to paper. If you’re a tried and true Dracula fan, Dracula: The Undead will hold your interest long enough to warrant a recommendation, but don’t expect any great advancement. It’s certainly better than the Dacre Stoker sequel, but Warrington’s expansion of the Dracula mythos is not up to par with Newman, or even Saberhagen.
The plot itself is fine, and the origin story of Dracula is inventive, but you’ll find too many similarities in the Dracula expansions amongst different authors that it was tired before Warrington ever put pen to paper. If you’re a tried and true Dracula fan, Dracula: The Undead will hold your interest long enough to warrant a recommendation, but don’t expect any great advancement. It’s certainly better than the Dacre Stoker sequel, but Warrington’s expansion of the Dracula mythos is not up to par with Newman, or even Saberhagen.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews