What do you think?
Rate this book
The Blood of the Vampire
Miss Harriet Brandt, daughter of a mad scientist and a voodoo priestess, comes of age and leaves her home in Jamaica for the first time, travelling to Europe. Beautiful and talented, Harriet will gain the affections of many of the men and women she meets and a bright future seems assured for her.
But there is something strange about Harriet. Everyone she gets close to seems to sicken or die. Doctor Phillips has a theory: the blood of the vampire flows through Harriet's veins, and she is draining the life out of those she loves. Are the misfortunes that seem to follow Harriet merely coincidence? Or is she really afflicted with the curse of the vampire?
One of the strangest novels by the prolific Florence Marryat (1837-1899), "The Blood of the Vampire" was the "other vampire novel" of 1897, appearing the same year as "Dracula." Marryat's novel is fascinating not only for its sensational plot and bizarre characters, but also because of its engagement with many of the issues that haunted the late Victorian imagination, such as race, heredity, women's roles, Spiritualism, and the occult. This edition includes the unabridged text of the exceedingly rare 1897 first edition and a new introduction by Brenda Hammack.
But there is something strange about Harriet. Everyone she gets close to seems to sicken or die. Doctor Phillips has a theory: the blood of the vampire flows through Harriet's veins, and she is draining the life out of those she loves. Are the misfortunes that seem to follow Harriet merely coincidence? Or is she really afflicted with the curse of the vampire?
One of the strangest novels by the prolific Florence Marryat (1837-1899), "The Blood of the Vampire" was the "other vampire novel" of 1897, appearing the same year as "Dracula." Marryat's novel is fascinating not only for its sensational plot and bizarre characters, but also because of its engagement with many of the issues that haunted the late Victorian imagination, such as race, heredity, women's roles, Spiritualism, and the occult. This edition includes the unabridged text of the exceedingly rare 1897 first edition and a new introduction by Brenda Hammack.
227 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 1897
63 people are currently reading
8503 people want to read
About the author
Florence Marryat
462books38followersBritish author and actress, daughter of author Capt. Frederick Marryat (Children of the The New Forest), particularly known for her sensational novels and her involvement with several celebrated spiritual mediums of the late nineteenth century. Her works include There is No Death (1891) and The Spirit World (1894).
Marryat's parents separated when she was young; her childhood was divided between her parents' residences, where she was privately educated.
Shortly before her 21st birthday, she wed Thomas Ross Church, an officer in the Madras staff corps of the British Army in India; they spent the first seven years of their married life traveling India extensively before she returned to England in 1860. They had eight children but divorced in 1879; later that year, Marryat wed Colonel Francis Lean.
At the age of 43, Marryat entered the stage, taking a role in a drama she had written, Her World Against a Lie, in 1881.
Marryat's parents separated when she was young; her childhood was divided between her parents' residences, where she was privately educated.
Shortly before her 21st birthday, she wed Thomas Ross Church, an officer in the Madras staff corps of the British Army in India; they spent the first seven years of their married life traveling India extensively before she returned to England in 1860. They had eight children but divorced in 1879; later that year, Marryat wed Colonel Francis Lean.
At the age of 43, Marryat entered the stage, taking a role in a drama she had written, Her World Against a Lie, in 1881.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 139 reviews
March 18, 2020
I'm glad someone finally wrote a book about just how exhausting some people are.
October 8, 2020
It just goes to show -- sometimes we all ought to go into our books with zero expectations.
I started this one looking at that interesting cover and looking at that interesting title and heard things like sexual mores and seduction and when it became clear that this was the OTHER vampire novel that came out the same year as Dracula (and fifty years after Varney the Vampire popularized the hell out of the meme) I kinda expected something sensational and daring and shocking for all those ladies with their swooning couches.
INSTEAD, we get something like a cross between (quality as well, mind you,) and Charlotte Perkins Gilman's , but set as something like a psychological and even broad-scientific rebuttal to Gilman's story's theme.
Say, huh?
The main character, a fish out of water, exploring her budding sexuality and feeling out of sorts with the stifling Victorian society, blames herself for all the strange tragedies going on around her. She takes it on herself, believing herself to be some kind of monster. A vampire.
We get an interesting mix of reasoning around genetics, social mores, psychological damage, expectations, and even a rather destructive and reactionary take on women's rights -- if we read rather deeper into the tale.
All those Freudian neuroses. This is a novel about turning the blame upon oneself. And it does a rather good job of convincing the reader, too.
For that, it's pretty scary. But while it DOES take on so many of the similar kinds of issues of the day, of the OTHER, of sexuality, like Dracula, it keeps the tale much closer to home and perhaps, for that reason, it might have been a bit more disturbing. Still, it is its own tale. :)
This is NOT something I'd recommend for, say, Spooktober.
I started this one looking at that interesting cover and looking at that interesting title and heard things like sexual mores and seduction and when it became clear that this was the OTHER vampire novel that came out the same year as Dracula (and fifty years after Varney the Vampire popularized the hell out of the meme) I kinda expected something sensational and daring and shocking for all those ladies with their swooning couches.
INSTEAD, we get something like a cross between (quality as well, mind you,) and Charlotte Perkins Gilman's , but set as something like a psychological and even broad-scientific rebuttal to Gilman's story's theme.
Say, huh?
The main character, a fish out of water, exploring her budding sexuality and feeling out of sorts with the stifling Victorian society, blames herself for all the strange tragedies going on around her. She takes it on herself, believing herself to be some kind of monster. A vampire.
We get an interesting mix of reasoning around genetics, social mores, psychological damage, expectations, and even a rather destructive and reactionary take on women's rights -- if we read rather deeper into the tale.
All those Freudian neuroses. This is a novel about turning the blame upon oneself. And it does a rather good job of convincing the reader, too.
For that, it's pretty scary. But while it DOES take on so many of the similar kinds of issues of the day, of the OTHER, of sexuality, like Dracula, it keeps the tale much closer to home and perhaps, for that reason, it might have been a bit more disturbing. Still, it is its own tale. :)
This is NOT something I'd recommend for, say, Spooktober.
October 9, 2020
Well. This was ... different. 1897 was a good year for one of our favourite monsters: vampires. Along with THE most well-known book about them, Bram Stoker's Dracula, this book was published. The author is a woman and so is the main character which might, in part, account for it having been less popular. Harriet Brandt being a different kind of vampire, if at all, might be the other reason (and at least for me the stronger one).
The book starts with us readers meeting a group of people who have travelled to Heyst, a seaside resort in Belgium. One, Elinor, is a lady so prim and proper that she doesn't even tell of her engagement for fear of gossip, the other is Margaret, her much more approachable friend / soon to be sister-in-law with her baby Ethel. Yet another is the Baroness Gobelli, who is a bully (not even her timid husband and pathetic son are safe from her awfulness). Then there is Elinor's womanizer fiancé as well as a novelist and a Dr. Phillips, who knew the MC's parents.
There is a lot of gossip going back and forth between the people, even more so once Harriet arrives.
Harriet is from Jamaica, the daughter of a white scientist and a Creole madwoman (herself the daughter of a white man and a black slave). The father was experimenting on natives while her mother was supposedly bitten by a vampire bat while being pregnant. So when the natives rose up and killed her parents, Harriet fled the convent she grew up in to spend the money she inherited by travelling Europe in desperate search for affection.
According to Dr. Phillips, however, there is no escaping her degenerate heritage (hence the title).
Interestingly, the doctor immediately tells everyone what Harriet supposedly is. There is no element of surprise, no creepy exploration of her actions for us readers. That was the first highly unusual thing in this tale. What follows is an interesting take on vampirism. You see, there is no bloodsucking here. Sorry if that disappoints you and yes, I was also somewhat let down by that fact.
Instead, we get an unsurprising story that is more an exploration of Harriet's mind and soul than anything else. Her need for closeness and affection is sucking the others dry so to speak.
But is this REALLY killing them? Or are the alternatives suggested by the author the real cause and entirely natural?
I think one of the book's main weaknesses, for me at least, was the lack of suspense. We are always shown and told everything immediately. Nevertheless, there was some tension and I liked a different approach to the vampire tale, not to mention the implications her innocence would have (racism, social prejudice).
I also enjoyed the author's exploration of nature vs. nurture as well as women's place in society.
Why am I going into detail about a book that hasn't rocked my world? Because I still think it's an interesting and important piece of the time, especially in comparison to the big names (like Bram Stoker).
Not least because the author had quite a remarkable life: she wrote scores of popular novels, worked as an actress, edited a successful literary magazine, ran a school for would-be journalists, divorced two husbands, gave birth to eight children, and eventually lived with a much younger man and actively promoted spiritualism. All of which must have been quite scandalous at the time.
In light of the author's own adventurous life, I'm actually surprised she wrote a main character as "chaste" as Harriet. *lol*
It's hard to say who this book is for and to recommend it to a specific type of reader. I'd say it's interesting in historical and social context and as something a little different. As a creepy tale for Spooktober, it sadly isn't gonna satisfy you though, I think.
The book starts with us readers meeting a group of people who have travelled to Heyst, a seaside resort in Belgium. One, Elinor, is a lady so prim and proper that she doesn't even tell of her engagement for fear of gossip, the other is Margaret, her much more approachable friend / soon to be sister-in-law with her baby Ethel. Yet another is the Baroness Gobelli, who is a bully (not even her timid husband and pathetic son are safe from her awfulness). Then there is Elinor's womanizer fiancé as well as a novelist and a Dr. Phillips, who knew the MC's parents.
There is a lot of gossip going back and forth between the people, even more so once Harriet arrives.
Harriet is from Jamaica, the daughter of a white scientist and a Creole madwoman (herself the daughter of a white man and a black slave). The father was experimenting on natives while her mother was supposedly bitten by a vampire bat while being pregnant. So when the natives rose up and killed her parents, Harriet fled the convent she grew up in to spend the money she inherited by travelling Europe in desperate search for affection.
According to Dr. Phillips, however, there is no escaping her degenerate heritage (hence the title).
Interestingly, the doctor immediately tells everyone what Harriet supposedly is. There is no element of surprise, no creepy exploration of her actions for us readers. That was the first highly unusual thing in this tale. What follows is an interesting take on vampirism. You see, there is no bloodsucking here. Sorry if that disappoints you and yes, I was also somewhat let down by that fact.
Instead, we get an unsurprising story that is more an exploration of Harriet's mind and soul than anything else. Her need for closeness and affection is sucking the others dry so to speak.
But is this REALLY killing them? Or are the alternatives suggested by the author the real cause and entirely natural?
I think one of the book's main weaknesses, for me at least, was the lack of suspense. We are always shown and told everything immediately. Nevertheless, there was some tension and I liked a different approach to the vampire tale, not to mention the implications her innocence would have (racism, social prejudice).
I also enjoyed the author's exploration of nature vs. nurture as well as women's place in society.
Why am I going into detail about a book that hasn't rocked my world? Because I still think it's an interesting and important piece of the time, especially in comparison to the big names (like Bram Stoker).
Not least because the author had quite a remarkable life: she wrote scores of popular novels, worked as an actress, edited a successful literary magazine, ran a school for would-be journalists, divorced two husbands, gave birth to eight children, and eventually lived with a much younger man and actively promoted spiritualism. All of which must have been quite scandalous at the time.
In light of the author's own adventurous life, I'm actually surprised she wrote a main character as "chaste" as Harriet. *lol*
It's hard to say who this book is for and to recommend it to a specific type of reader. I'd say it's interesting in historical and social context and as something a little different. As a creepy tale for Spooktober, it sadly isn't gonna satisfy you though, I think.
August 4, 2023
No, no y no! Empiezo diciendo que esto no es TERROR, es una novela victoriana, dramática, romántica y con un ligero toque vampírico.
Con eso ya te lo he dicho todo.
Que esta novela fuese publicada el mismo año que Drácula de Bram Stoker , no os confunda, sus similitudes son las mismas que la de un huevo 🥚 y una castaña 🌰. NINGUNA.
¿Esperáis sangre? Pues esperad sentados.
Una última apreciación: ¡por qué chillan todo el rato! ¡No lo sé! ¡Dios qué desatino!.
Esta forma será la que utilicen normalmente para comunicarse entre sí los diferentes personajes. Puede emplearse para decir que las gambas son muy ricas, para qué nariz aguileña tiene aquella mujer, y para qué divertido es todo.
No, no me ha gustado.
—ĔĔĔ�
No, no and no! This is not HORROR, this is a Victorian, dramatic, romantic story with a gentle vampiric touch.
Nothing compares to Bram Stoker’s novel Dracula, don’t be fooled!
Con eso ya te lo he dicho todo.
Que esta novela fuese publicada el mismo año que Drácula de Bram Stoker , no os confunda, sus similitudes son las mismas que la de un huevo 🥚 y una castaña 🌰. NINGUNA.
¿Esperáis sangre? Pues esperad sentados.
Una última apreciación: ¡por qué chillan todo el rato! ¡No lo sé! ¡Dios qué desatino!.
Esta forma será la que utilicen normalmente para comunicarse entre sí los diferentes personajes. Puede emplearse para decir que las gambas son muy ricas, para qué nariz aguileña tiene aquella mujer, y para qué divertido es todo.
No, no me ha gustado.
—ĔĔĔ�
No, no and no! This is not HORROR, this is a Victorian, dramatic, romantic story with a gentle vampiric touch.
Nothing compares to Bram Stoker’s novel Dracula, don’t be fooled!
December 29, 2015
4.5 rounded up to a 5. Another excellent Valancourt reprint -- I've been so lucky in my choices with this publisher that I shouldn't be amazed, but I am every time I pick up one their books.
To say I was mildly surprised and very pleased with this book is an understatement. Although it came out in the same year that Stoker published his novel Dracula, the titular vampire in this story doesn't bite anyone in the neck, nor is there any bloodletting or bloodsucking here. As I generally do with any new author (or at least anyone new to me), I went into this novel with zero expectations and quickly realized that while there are definitely commonalities between the two, Marryat's book is vastly different. And it's really, really good, feeding my need for that perfect blending of truly dark and literary fiction that I crave. It's also another one of those books about which dissertations might be written because of what's going on underneath the surface. In short, it's probably not for everyone, but it's right up my alley.
I will say that it's not the sort of thing I'd recommend to someone who wants the standard sort of vampire-horror novel. Au contraire, it's something I'd definitely recommend to anyone like me who is fascinated by Victorian society and how it is captured in literature, most especially by women of the time. There are plenty of online reviews & dissections of this novel, but do read it first.
for plot, etc. (without spoilers, I promise), you can click to get to my reading journal.
Lovely book -- sending me after more of Marryat's work.
To say I was mildly surprised and very pleased with this book is an understatement. Although it came out in the same year that Stoker published his novel Dracula, the titular vampire in this story doesn't bite anyone in the neck, nor is there any bloodletting or bloodsucking here. As I generally do with any new author (or at least anyone new to me), I went into this novel with zero expectations and quickly realized that while there are definitely commonalities between the two, Marryat's book is vastly different. And it's really, really good, feeding my need for that perfect blending of truly dark and literary fiction that I crave. It's also another one of those books about which dissertations might be written because of what's going on underneath the surface. In short, it's probably not for everyone, but it's right up my alley.
I will say that it's not the sort of thing I'd recommend to someone who wants the standard sort of vampire-horror novel. Au contraire, it's something I'd definitely recommend to anyone like me who is fascinated by Victorian society and how it is captured in literature, most especially by women of the time. There are plenty of online reviews & dissections of this novel, but do read it first.
for plot, etc. (without spoilers, I promise), you can click to get to my reading journal.
Lovely book -- sending me after more of Marryat's work.
August 31, 2024
Ok so this is the other 'vampire' book published the same year as Dracula. However ignore that cover, this is not a horror tale or even a thriller. It has more in common with the more drama based X-Men stories than Dracula.
But its a really intersting drama. I did keep thinking it might slip into thriller territory as the main character is a little bit of a psycho stalker, but only a wee bit.
The writing is not fantastic but the cast is different enough, lot of female characters. Its written NOTHING like dracula, and feels more like it was published in the 1920s/1930s than 1890s.
I have no idea which characters i was supposed to like or dislike. There's quite a bit of racism from good and bad characters, but also the reverse. Some people will probably hate how characters came and went from the plot, and it seemed like the story was falling apart near the middle but thats actually part of the best element.
I was completely unable to predict where the story was going next, combined with as i said being unsure who i was even supposed to be rooting for, led to an engaging reading experience.
Note: While he doesn't play as prominent a role there's a doctor character functionally similar to Van Helsing. Given this came out the same year as dracula that was a odd coincidence.
Until i remembered that the older pennydreadful Varney the Vampire had such a character, so presumably both books copied that guy.
Made available by .
But its a really intersting drama. I did keep thinking it might slip into thriller territory as the main character is a little bit of a psycho stalker, but only a wee bit.
The writing is not fantastic but the cast is different enough, lot of female characters. Its written NOTHING like dracula, and feels more like it was published in the 1920s/1930s than 1890s.
I have no idea which characters i was supposed to like or dislike. There's quite a bit of racism from good and bad characters, but also the reverse. Some people will probably hate how characters came and went from the plot, and it seemed like the story was falling apart near the middle but thats actually part of the best element.
I was completely unable to predict where the story was going next, combined with as i said being unsure who i was even supposed to be rooting for, led to an engaging reading experience.
Note: While he doesn't play as prominent a role there's a doctor character functionally similar to Van Helsing. Given this came out the same year as dracula that was a odd coincidence.
Until i remembered that the older pennydreadful Varney the Vampire had such a character, so presumably both books copied that guy.
Made available by .
December 7, 2016
I am actually torn by this book. On one hand, it is a novel that is ahead of its time. It features themes of otherness, racism, genetic inheritance, loneliness, and sexism to name a few ideas. On the other hand, it is not daring enough, and its conclusion punishes and sacrifices a supposed "bad' girl to make some purportedly "poor but more deserving " good girl rich. To put it concisely, this book is about slut-shaming more than anything else.
I know that today we have discovered that sociopathy is inheritable, but the main character is not a sociopath. She is not a rabid killer who wants blood and drains people to keep living. She wants love which is seen as unnatural in the story even for an orphan who was walled up in a nunnery for ten years. Her passionate and blooming sexual nature, which would be considered demure these days, is vilified (as are all displays of affection).
The main character is as unaware of her power of attraction as she is of her parentage. The type of persecution she suffers at the hands of the Doctor underlies every form of racism, sexism, homophobia and so on. This book promotes the idea of bad blood. A person may not mean to be bad. They just are born that way. We are right to not pity them and to stay away from them at all costs because look what happens when you befriend strangers who are not exactly like you: people start to die.
The only guy who is sympathetic to the cause of the poor and wants all people to be treated equally gets his for believing in human kind. He wanted a passionate woman like himself, and got punished for it. Stay with the boring waters you are familiar with, this novel says. Marry boring girls without passion who treat you coldly and prudishly because they are safe. And for the girls, marry handsome, vain, flirty guys who have wandering eyes because one day they will learn to appreciate you (Sure they will).
This book feels like an even more xenophobic rendition of "Jane Eyre." The Victorian women must have been terrified when foreign ladies showed up full of exotic passion. They felt so threatened by their ability to emote and be sexual they had to write many novels vilifying them and elevating themselves.
This story was a trail breaker at its time for women authors, but I am not liking where the trail is leading. It crushes one type of woman to raise up another. There seems to be good reasons for this book no longer being popular. Maybe there is a reason it should fade away into the past and not be read anymore except by scholars who can recognize and analyze the depth and destructiveness of its message.
I know that today we have discovered that sociopathy is inheritable, but the main character is not a sociopath. She is not a rabid killer who wants blood and drains people to keep living. She wants love which is seen as unnatural in the story even for an orphan who was walled up in a nunnery for ten years. Her passionate and blooming sexual nature, which would be considered demure these days, is vilified (as are all displays of affection).
The main character is as unaware of her power of attraction as she is of her parentage. The type of persecution she suffers at the hands of the Doctor underlies every form of racism, sexism, homophobia and so on. This book promotes the idea of bad blood. A person may not mean to be bad. They just are born that way. We are right to not pity them and to stay away from them at all costs because look what happens when you befriend strangers who are not exactly like you: people start to die.
The only guy who is sympathetic to the cause of the poor and wants all people to be treated equally gets his for believing in human kind. He wanted a passionate woman like himself, and got punished for it. Stay with the boring waters you are familiar with, this novel says. Marry boring girls without passion who treat you coldly and prudishly because they are safe. And for the girls, marry handsome, vain, flirty guys who have wandering eyes because one day they will learn to appreciate you (Sure they will).
This book feels like an even more xenophobic rendition of "Jane Eyre." The Victorian women must have been terrified when foreign ladies showed up full of exotic passion. They felt so threatened by their ability to emote and be sexual they had to write many novels vilifying them and elevating themselves.
This story was a trail breaker at its time for women authors, but I am not liking where the trail is leading. It crushes one type of woman to raise up another. There seems to be good reasons for this book no longer being popular. Maybe there is a reason it should fade away into the past and not be read anymore except by scholars who can recognize and analyze the depth and destructiveness of its message.
June 26, 2021
Το βιβλίο της Φλόρενς Μάριατ ήταν ένα από αυτά που περίμενα εδώ και καιρό να κυκλοφορήσουν στα ελληνικά, έτσι μόλις έσκασε μύτη στα βιβλιοπωλεία το τσίμπησα, παρά την ομολογουμένως τσουχτερή τιμή του. Πρόκειται για ένα κλασικό έργο της Βικτωριανής Εποχής -με τα υπέρ και τα κατά που έχουν συνήθως αυτά τα βιβλία-, το οποίο προσωπικά ευχαριστήθηκα σε μεγάλο βαθμό, έστω και αν βέβαια δεν άναψαν τα αίματα, όπως είχε συμβεί με τον Δράκουλα του Μπραμ Στόουκερ, έργο που κυκλοφόρησε την ίδια χρονιά με το "Το αίμα του βαμπίρ". Εδώ που τα λέμε, όσοι περιμένουν ατμοσφαιρικό τρόμο και σκηνές που ανατριχιάζουν, καλύτερα να διαβάσουν άλλο βιβλίο, μιας και εδώ το... βαμπίρ της υπόθεσης, η όμορφη και εξωτική Χάριετ Μπραντ, δεν πίνει καν αίμα, αλλά απλώς απομυζεί τη ζωτική δύναμη των θυμάτων της. Θα έλεγα ότι το συγκεκριμένο μυθιστόρημα είναι ένα οξυδερκές κοινωνικό δράμα με αχνά στοιχεία παραφυσικού τρόμου, το οποίο μεταξύ άλλων αγγίζει και θέματα όπως η φυλετική καταγωγή, η κληρονομικότητα, η γυναικεία χειραφέτηση και ο αποκρυφισμός (που εκείνη την εποχή ήταν στο ζενίθ του), με το ενδιαφέρον στοιχείο να είναι φυσικά ότι το βιβλίο είναι γραμμένο από γυναίκα και ότι τρόπον τινά αποτελεί ένα ντοκουμέντο για τα ήθη και τις συνήθειες των αστικών οικογενειών της εποχής. Όσον αφορά τη γραφή, οφείλω να παραδεχτώ ότι μου άρεσε, ότι με κράτησε από την αρχή μέχρι το τέλος με τις περιγραφές και τους διαλόγους, έστω και αν σε διάφορα σημεία έτεινε λίγο προς το μελόδραμα, που η αλήθεια είναι ότι δεν συμπαθώ ιδιαίτερα. Ναι, γενικά πέρασα πολύ καλά, σίγουρα το απόλαυσα, αλλά, είπαμε, δεν είναι για όλα τα γούστα.
July 23, 2023
Puntuación: 3,8/5
"Todavía había en ellos la inocencia de la ignorancia, pero el fuego adormecido en sus profundidades demostraba de lo que sería capaz su naturaleza cuando se le diera la oportunidad de manifestarse. Tenía un temperamento apasionado, deseoso de expresarse, anhelante del amor que nunca había conocido."
Aquella mujer me había apabullado. Entró por la vista desde que la vi. No era una belleza de las que atrae a la primera, era de las que se amplían cuando comienzas a entablar una conversación con ellas. Es un magnetismo de los que se amplifican con las sonrisas, con las agudas conversaciones, con las traviesas y divertidas insinuaciones. Me tendría que hacer sentir mejor que nunca, sin embargo, cada vez me sentía con menos fuerzas. Según aumentaba mi dependencia y mis ganas de estar con ella me sentía más enfermo hasta el punto de que puede que esto que escriba sea lo último que haga en la vida...
Sentimientos encontrados con esta novela. Es cierto que es una obra totalmente adelantada a su tiempo. La escritora, Florence Marryat, fue una de tantas que decidieron alzar la voz en los estertores del esplendor de la época victoriana. Una escritora valiente que abordó de frente y sin miedo temas que en esos tiempos no se podían abordar abiertamente, y menos por parte de una mujer. Esta es la faceta más brillante de esta historia. La denuncia al racismo, el clasismo, el materialismo y todos los -ismos nocivos desde una perspectiva lúcida y por momentos aguda.
También es muy brillante el desarrollo psicológico de la protagonista ya que por la particularidad del vampirismo que practica, alejado de los cánones clásicos, la escritora entra en un juego muy interesante que si descubrís a tiempo sin duda disfrutaréis, si no lo hacéis, una segunda lectura dotará de una dimensión diferente a la obra.
La sangre del vampiro es una de esas novelas que tienen el mérito de intentar entrar en terrenos oscuros desde la luz, sin entrar en atmósferas góticas, tenebrosas, nauseabundas o recargadas propias del gótico. Introduce lo extraño en el día a día y es un primer paso a los renovadores posteriores que nos introducen el terror en lo cotidiano.
He leído muchas comparaciones haciendo analogías entre esta obra y el Drácula de Bram Sotker. La única coincidencia entre ambas obras es la fecha de publicación. En todo lo demás son antagónicas. Si Stoker es visual, excesivo, recargado, oscuro, y romántico Marryat es psicológica, comedida, pragmática, luminosa y deseperanzada. Por favor, editores, no juguéis con esos trucos con los lectores y no nos toméis el pelo con las expectativas porque puede volverse en vuestra contra.
Para ser la primera obra publicada por el joven sello Beetruvian la edición es correcta. Es cierto que contiene algunos errores (hay concretamente una incorrección en el uso del verbo haber y hallar que merece cárcel) pero el papel es de calidad, la fuente es de buen tamaño y los márgenes generosos. Además cuenta con algunos extras al final de la lectura que ayudan a contextualizar y
En definitiva, una obra que podréis disfrutar como folletín, muy recomendable desde ese punto de vista, pero más cercano a una obra de Jane Austen, sin que esto sea despectivo, que a una de LeFanu o Bram Stoker.
¿Qué os parece? ¿Os llama la atención?
"Todavía había en ellos la inocencia de la ignorancia, pero el fuego adormecido en sus profundidades demostraba de lo que sería capaz su naturaleza cuando se le diera la oportunidad de manifestarse. Tenía un temperamento apasionado, deseoso de expresarse, anhelante del amor que nunca había conocido."
Aquella mujer me había apabullado. Entró por la vista desde que la vi. No era una belleza de las que atrae a la primera, era de las que se amplían cuando comienzas a entablar una conversación con ellas. Es un magnetismo de los que se amplifican con las sonrisas, con las agudas conversaciones, con las traviesas y divertidas insinuaciones. Me tendría que hacer sentir mejor que nunca, sin embargo, cada vez me sentía con menos fuerzas. Según aumentaba mi dependencia y mis ganas de estar con ella me sentía más enfermo hasta el punto de que puede que esto que escriba sea lo último que haga en la vida...
Sentimientos encontrados con esta novela. Es cierto que es una obra totalmente adelantada a su tiempo. La escritora, Florence Marryat, fue una de tantas que decidieron alzar la voz en los estertores del esplendor de la época victoriana. Una escritora valiente que abordó de frente y sin miedo temas que en esos tiempos no se podían abordar abiertamente, y menos por parte de una mujer. Esta es la faceta más brillante de esta historia. La denuncia al racismo, el clasismo, el materialismo y todos los -ismos nocivos desde una perspectiva lúcida y por momentos aguda.
También es muy brillante el desarrollo psicológico de la protagonista ya que por la particularidad del vampirismo que practica, alejado de los cánones clásicos, la escritora entra en un juego muy interesante que si descubrís a tiempo sin duda disfrutaréis, si no lo hacéis, una segunda lectura dotará de una dimensión diferente a la obra.
La sangre del vampiro es una de esas novelas que tienen el mérito de intentar entrar en terrenos oscuros desde la luz, sin entrar en atmósferas góticas, tenebrosas, nauseabundas o recargadas propias del gótico. Introduce lo extraño en el día a día y es un primer paso a los renovadores posteriores que nos introducen el terror en lo cotidiano.
He leído muchas comparaciones haciendo analogías entre esta obra y el Drácula de Bram Sotker. La única coincidencia entre ambas obras es la fecha de publicación. En todo lo demás son antagónicas. Si Stoker es visual, excesivo, recargado, oscuro, y romántico Marryat es psicológica, comedida, pragmática, luminosa y deseperanzada. Por favor, editores, no juguéis con esos trucos con los lectores y no nos toméis el pelo con las expectativas porque puede volverse en vuestra contra.
Para ser la primera obra publicada por el joven sello Beetruvian la edición es correcta. Es cierto que contiene algunos errores (hay concretamente una incorrección en el uso del verbo haber y hallar que merece cárcel) pero el papel es de calidad, la fuente es de buen tamaño y los márgenes generosos. Además cuenta con algunos extras al final de la lectura que ayudan a contextualizar y
En definitiva, una obra que podréis disfrutar como folletín, muy recomendable desde ese punto de vista, pero más cercano a una obra de Jane Austen, sin que esto sea despectivo, que a una de LeFanu o Bram Stoker.
¿Qué os parece? ¿Os llama la atención?
Read
December 28, 2021Abgebrochen. Dieses Buch wurde mir empfohlen als -- Vampirroman, gleichzeitig mit Dracula erschienen, aber von einer Frau und deshalb wenig(er) beachtet. Wie viel, teils auch grafisch beschriebener, Rassismus in dem Buch ist, davon war nicht die Rede. Ja ja, das Buch ist in seiner Zeit entstanden und so, das heißt aber nicht, dass ich so was jetzt noch lesen will oder die entsprechenden Stellen "überlesen" und des Rest genießen könnte. Bye.
November 16, 2023
Maravilla. Eso me he encontrado en esta original y curiosa novela que supuso la entrada en escena de la editorial @beetruvian; y es que La sangre del vampiro, como su título bien indica, es una novela de vampiros, vampiresas en este caso, pero para nada una novela al uso.
Ambientada en un pequeño hotel costero belga y en la ciudad de Londres, en un contexto casi costumbrista donde conocemos a la alta sociedad inglesa, Harriet Brandt, acaba de llegar de Jamaica tras una vida insulsa recluida en un internado. El descubrimiento de la vida, la alegría y la gente, vendrá de la mano turbios acontecimientos que desestabilizarán todo su entorno.
Tras una premisa bastante convencional, la originalidad de esta novela estriba en que la vampiresa de nuestra historia no es diabólica ni perversa, si no que rezuma dulzura e inocencia. No ataca a sus víctimas y los vacía de sangre, Harriet se alimenta de la fuerza vital, arranca la vida poco a poco sin ni siquiera ser consciente a veces de ello. ¿A qué tipo de vida desesperada estás abocado siendo culpable del daño que haces a tus seres más queridos? ¿El ostracismo total? ¿La absoluta soledad? ¿La vida sin vida?
Publicada el mismo año que el Drácula de Stoker y además por una mano femenina, La sangre del vampiro estuvo desde el principio condenada al olvido. Una historia con una narrativa excepcional, con tintes góticos y victorianos y una trama bien hilada que acompaña al lector de forma sosegada, incluso agradable. Sobresaliente también, la intensa crítica social a la superficialidad de la sociedad inglesa del momento que deja caer entre líneas.
Una novela recomendadísima para los amantes del género, pero también para los que sean un poco aprensivos, su terror estriba en los sentimientos que provoca, no esperéis grandes sustos ni pasar un mal rato, pero sí contad con una sensación de desasosiego y pesar que os seguirá acompañando tras cerrar sus páginas. Al final, el mayor terror no tiene la forma de ningún monstruo, si no la de la soledad y tristeza más absoluta.
Extrapolando un poco esta historia, podemos incluso hacerla muy actual, ¿quién no conoce a algún vampiro o vampiresa de esta índole? #Haberlashailas.
Ambientada en un pequeño hotel costero belga y en la ciudad de Londres, en un contexto casi costumbrista donde conocemos a la alta sociedad inglesa, Harriet Brandt, acaba de llegar de Jamaica tras una vida insulsa recluida en un internado. El descubrimiento de la vida, la alegría y la gente, vendrá de la mano turbios acontecimientos que desestabilizarán todo su entorno.
Tras una premisa bastante convencional, la originalidad de esta novela estriba en que la vampiresa de nuestra historia no es diabólica ni perversa, si no que rezuma dulzura e inocencia. No ataca a sus víctimas y los vacía de sangre, Harriet se alimenta de la fuerza vital, arranca la vida poco a poco sin ni siquiera ser consciente a veces de ello. ¿A qué tipo de vida desesperada estás abocado siendo culpable del daño que haces a tus seres más queridos? ¿El ostracismo total? ¿La absoluta soledad? ¿La vida sin vida?
Publicada el mismo año que el Drácula de Stoker y además por una mano femenina, La sangre del vampiro estuvo desde el principio condenada al olvido. Una historia con una narrativa excepcional, con tintes góticos y victorianos y una trama bien hilada que acompaña al lector de forma sosegada, incluso agradable. Sobresaliente también, la intensa crítica social a la superficialidad de la sociedad inglesa del momento que deja caer entre líneas.
Una novela recomendadísima para los amantes del género, pero también para los que sean un poco aprensivos, su terror estriba en los sentimientos que provoca, no esperéis grandes sustos ni pasar un mal rato, pero sí contad con una sensación de desasosiego y pesar que os seguirá acompañando tras cerrar sus páginas. Al final, el mayor terror no tiene la forma de ningún monstruo, si no la de la soledad y tristeza más absoluta.
Extrapolando un poco esta historia, podemos incluso hacerla muy actual, ¿quién no conoce a algún vampiro o vampiresa de esta índole? #Haberlashailas.
June 20, 2022
One of the more interesting vampire books out there. I'm not sure of the author's intentions with the themes she includes, but it's a fascinating use of vampirism to talk about deeply ingrained racism, classism, and eugenics in the late Victorian era. I'm still thinking about how surprisingly complex the story is and how much it feels like a very early ancestor to today's socially conscious "elevated' horror. Content warning in the book, however, for anti-Black racism and pretty horrid racist language at times as well as for suicide.
October 9, 2021
I don't know how to feel about this book because while it was a quick, enjoyable read (though not overly exciting), for me, most of the story doesnt work anymore due to a shift in attitudes towards the "scandelous" heiritage. Of all the numerous things that might affect Harriet's reputation, only one is still valid today and even that would earn her more pity than scorn, so there aren't many characters that don't seem incredibly cruel to a modern reader. In a lot of cases, that wouldnt hinder my enjoyment, but here the story lost its tragedy and meaning, I also just didn't love some of the elements to the story. The way Bobby was treated made me uncomfortable and Ralph's change of heart shouldnt have happened off page.
The writing still was nice. I had expected more like a gothic vibe, but it was closer to a drama or sensation novel. While the length of the book didn't allow for much depth of characters, they were pretty well characterized and I did feel for their various issues. Not a must read by any means but still interesting if you enjoy reading about Victorian morality.
The writing still was nice. I had expected more like a gothic vibe, but it was closer to a drama or sensation novel. While the length of the book didn't allow for much depth of characters, they were pretty well characterized and I did feel for their various issues. Not a must read by any means but still interesting if you enjoy reading about Victorian morality.
October 31, 2021
This vampire book was published the same year as Bram Stoker’s Dracula, but Marryat’s vampire story is very different. There is no blood sucking, no undead creature morphing into a wolf, bats, or smoke, no howling wolves and races through the forests of Transylvania to Dracula’s castle, no suspense even, but there is a lot simmering beneath the surface of this rather placid novel.
I read the Valancourt Classics edition, but I wish I had known about the edition published by Victorian Secrets which includes, “critical introduction, further reading, Florence Marryat chronology, explanatory notes, appendices including contextual material on female sexuality, pathologicalisation of female behavior and hysteria, race, eugenics, and the occult,� all of which would make this story much richer.
This is not a page turner, but as a study of Victorian era attitudes to all of the above it is interesting. There is a lot to unpack and would give a book group much to discuss.
I read the Valancourt Classics edition, but I wish I had known about the edition published by Victorian Secrets which includes, “critical introduction, further reading, Florence Marryat chronology, explanatory notes, appendices including contextual material on female sexuality, pathologicalisation of female behavior and hysteria, race, eugenics, and the occult,� all of which would make this story much richer.
This is not a page turner, but as a study of Victorian era attitudes to all of the above it is interesting. There is a lot to unpack and would give a book group much to discuss.
January 28, 2015
Oh god this is so excellent. I was expecting this to be really bad and/or poorly-written, but it's really worth the read if you're into vampires/Victorian ladies, as I am. Granted, Marryat has her moments when the prose isn't sparkling ("'The what,' said Elinor Leyton ungrammatically" springs to mind in particular), but it's an intriguing tale with a very interesting lead female character, and I don't know why more people haven't read this book. Please check it out!
July 8, 2020
An interesting foray into old gothic literature and the history of how the vampire theme was approached by authors before Bram Stocker and other classics.
It's also interesting in light of the pervasive casual racism to be encountered both in the characters (including the internalized kind) and in the author herself. It's sadly explainable considering the times it was written in, and interesting on an anthropological note, but it makes the novel a bit unpleasant to read.
Beyond the eye-rolls though, it's a well-paced story and it's sad that the author was not more promoted and recognized in her own time (at least compared to male authors who were her peers).
It's also interesting in light of the pervasive casual racism to be encountered both in the characters (including the internalized kind) and in the author herself. It's sadly explainable considering the times it was written in, and interesting on an anthropological note, but it makes the novel a bit unpleasant to read.
Beyond the eye-rolls though, it's a well-paced story and it's sad that the author was not more promoted and recognized in her own time (at least compared to male authors who were her peers).
September 13, 2015
Great melodrama. Harriet is an orphan, who is desparate for friendship and affection. She has an insensitive , sensual, selfish, greedy and needy nature. Early in the book, there is a description of her eating so greedily in a restaurant, that one character describes her as "Feeding like a cormorant."
She is immodest, careless, thoughtless. She is blessed with great physical beauty and plenty of money.
There are some descriptions of her background and early life which might seem racist, Harriet is pretty brutal in her own descriptions, and really shocks other people. It is not the races that are the problems, but what the individuals actually do that is the problem. As the story progresses, racial things are not as important to the main characters. It is the supposed hereditary behavior which is the big problem.
Is Harriet a psychological vampire with fatal effects? Or just a really high maintenance friend and girlfriend? Is the trail of fatalities she leaves in her wake a series of unfortunate coincidence or a sign of her literally fatal attraction?
I strongly recommend that a person ignore the introduction by Brenda Hammock until AFTER reading the novel. The intro is full of psychology, feminist theory and such. Fine reading for additional ideas, but way too much input before reading this story for the first time.
Treat Ms. Hammocks treatise on the book as an AFTERWARD, not an introduction.
Just enjoy the novel first.
She is immodest, careless, thoughtless. She is blessed with great physical beauty and plenty of money.
There are some descriptions of her background and early life which might seem racist, Harriet is pretty brutal in her own descriptions, and really shocks other people. It is not the races that are the problems, but what the individuals actually do that is the problem. As the story progresses, racial things are not as important to the main characters. It is the supposed hereditary behavior which is the big problem.
Is Harriet a psychological vampire with fatal effects? Or just a really high maintenance friend and girlfriend? Is the trail of fatalities she leaves in her wake a series of unfortunate coincidence or a sign of her literally fatal attraction?
I strongly recommend that a person ignore the introduction by Brenda Hammock until AFTER reading the novel. The intro is full of psychology, feminist theory and such. Fine reading for additional ideas, but way too much input before reading this story for the first time.
Treat Ms. Hammocks treatise on the book as an AFTERWARD, not an introduction.
Just enjoy the novel first.
October 30, 2021
I recently read a review by a GR reader whose tastes are very similar to mine, and she was very impressed by this book, so I decided to give it a try. It's a vampire novel without bloodsucking.
Harriet has just come to Europe from the West Indies, where she had spent 10 years in a convent, much to her chagrin. She's a young, rich lady of 21 and she wants to see the world, meet princes and dukes, and most of all, find new friends. She's passionate and wild and immediately forms strong bonds with all the people she likes. And she inadvertently sucks the life and energy out of them.
But that's not all there is to it: there's also talk about racism (warning: this book comes across as very racist, but bear in mind it was written in 1897), the role of women in society, superstition. It has many layers if one wants to find them out. If not, you can just enjoy the story and the great writing.
Harriet has just come to Europe from the West Indies, where she had spent 10 years in a convent, much to her chagrin. She's a young, rich lady of 21 and she wants to see the world, meet princes and dukes, and most of all, find new friends. She's passionate and wild and immediately forms strong bonds with all the people she likes. And she inadvertently sucks the life and energy out of them.
But that's not all there is to it: there's also talk about racism (warning: this book comes across as very racist, but bear in mind it was written in 1897), the role of women in society, superstition. It has many layers if one wants to find them out. If not, you can just enjoy the story and the great writing.
did-not-finish
October 21, 2022Cannot bring myself to get invested in this 😴 I put it down and read some comics as a break, but I don't want to pick it back up
May 11, 2024
Kitap o kadar ırkçıydı ki ağzım açık kaldı.
August 11, 2021
Wat een bijzondere verhaal over een vampier. Niet je traditionele vampier met bloedzuigen, maar deze vrouwelijke vampier neemt je levensenergie zonder dat ze het bewust doet.
November 23, 2014
This was a great book. Although the cover and title lead me to expect a horror story in the vein of the novel's contemporary, Dracula, The Blood of the Vampire is much more like a romance novel in the vein of Jane Austen with a supernatural horror element added in. The protagonist, Harriet Brandt, is a psychic vampire who absorbs energy from the people she's closest too, and this does lead to a certain amount of horror, but it is not the entire focus of the plot. Much of the story is concerned with Harriet coming into her own as a member of society and trying to navigate the difficult world of upperclass Britain while finding love and happiness. She does leave awful things in her wake thanks to her cursed blood, but the novel is surprisingly sympathetic towards her. The secondary characters are all quite well written and interesting. These include Margaret Pullen, a loving mother, her soon-to-be-sister-in-law Elinor Leyton, who's rather aloof for much of the novel, and the absolutely fascinating Baroness who is horrible and yet compelling. There are also fun male characters, especially the feminist, socialist, and all around forward-thinking Anthony Pennell. The romance in the novel is cute and well done, while the horror I felt at Harriet's inescapable condition was also quite deep and enjoyable. Over all, I really enjoyed this book, and I hope that it will begin to be less obscure, since I think other people would like it as well.
March 23, 2013
This novel was first published in 1897 � yes, the same year as Dracula.
Readers may well find the poisonously racist views expressed by the old doctor, who, I think, is intended to be a fairly sympathetic character more chilling than the suggestions of vampirism and end up with a good deal of sympathy for the most unwilling vampire Harriet Brandt, with her sad heritage. Apart from her unfortunate tendency to cause the death of anyone she is fond of she is blamed by the other characters for having a good appetite for food, and for being sexually attractive � and the author seems, implicitly, to be blaming her as well.
Well worth reading as a companion to 'Dracula.'
Readers may well find the poisonously racist views expressed by the old doctor, who, I think, is intended to be a fairly sympathetic character more chilling than the suggestions of vampirism and end up with a good deal of sympathy for the most unwilling vampire Harriet Brandt, with her sad heritage. Apart from her unfortunate tendency to cause the death of anyone she is fond of she is blamed by the other characters for having a good appetite for food, and for being sexually attractive � and the author seems, implicitly, to be blaming her as well.
Well worth reading as a companion to 'Dracula.'
December 12, 2019
Oh, man. I’m doing my undergraduate thesis on vampires who don’t suck blood, so I decided to anchor my historical reading of this phenomena with this book. I was so surprised at how much I genuinely enjoyed it, and think there’s a lot of interesting stuff going on. Would genuinely recommend this to anyone interested in vampires or “sensationalist� victorian literature!
July 1, 2024
Çok etkilendim ve başarılı buldum. O dönem için mazur görülebilecek tekrarlar,işaretlemeler var. Fakat özellikle dönemin kadınlarını, statülerini, yaşam standartlarını, erkeklerin akıl tutulmalarını bir enerji vampirliği ile, yaklaşık 320 sayfalık bir romanla bir araya getirmek; büyük iş! Gotik, 18. Yüzyıl dönem edebiyatını sevenlerin severek okuyacağını düşünüyorum.
October 11, 2017
My review:
April 17, 2024
After a re-read I’m bumping this up to 4 stars for its interesting social critique and engagement with contemporaneous Victorian debates surrounding disability, class, and race.
October 13, 2020
I can't decide if this one is a four or a five. Marryat's book is quite dense for as short as it is, packed to the gills with themes and ideas, many of which reminded me how barbaric the Victorian era really was. The Vampire of this novel is both a perpetrator of prejudice but also the victim of it. She is both an antagonist and the novel's most pitiful and misunderstood character. The ambivalence does add an interesting flavor to the proceedings, setting it apart from other "vampire" works.
There is a short story by Mary Wilkins Freeman which is quite similar to The Blood of the Vampire called Luella Miller. The protagonist in that story is, however, unsympathetic. I highly recommend Luella Miller to those who have read The Blood of The Vampire and are hungry for similar tales.
There is a short story by Mary Wilkins Freeman which is quite similar to The Blood of the Vampire called Luella Miller. The protagonist in that story is, however, unsympathetic. I highly recommend Luella Miller to those who have read The Blood of The Vampire and are hungry for similar tales.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 139 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.