Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Discuss Dracula part 1.

Well, I thought that since Dracula is such a ubiquitous story the book would hold little surprises for me. I couldn't be more wrong! I'm loving the book!
And its structure (letters, journal entries, newspapers cuts) is more interesting than I thought. It gives the reader different viewpoints for the same facts, so it's up to you putting all together.

I agree, Raphael. I have been pleasantly surprised at the structure and flow of the book so far.

My introduction discusses how hard it is for modern readers to give up our ideas and imags of Lugosi when we read the novel, but what I really wish I could do is read these opening chapters without simply knowing what the name Dracula implies. Imgine how much more suspenseful and frightening it would be to have no cultural context for that name! Just reading it is such a huge, clanging boulder though. I've started to just read it as the letter in my head. Count D-- this and Count D-- that. It works, a little.

Indeed Danielle! I thought the same thing: reading this book without any previous knowledge of the theme would be an even more powerful experience.
Imagine the experience of those who read it just after publication...

Raphael wrote: "Indeed Danielle! I thought the same thing: reading this book without any previous knowledge of the theme would be an even more powerful experience.
Imagine the experience of those who read it just..."

I agree with both of you. Although, I read the book some time ago, I must say that I shared the same pleasant feelings when I began the work. Obviously, we are more acquainted with WHAT Dracula is, rather than the details of the story, which leaves some mystery hanging in the air. I loved this book, even though I am not at all a fan of vampire books or movies. I, too, wished that I had never heard of Dracula before reading this book, and wondered how my feelings about it would have differed had I have not known his secret.

I first read this book some 40 odd years ago and did not remember alot of it. I just finished the first four chapters and was amazed at how I just got sucked into the story. The sense of dread that builds in Jonathan as he realizes his predicament is palpable. I am looking forward to reading the rest of this. It's like reading it for the first time.

What I hadn't appreciated when I first read this is book is that this is a horror story of ancient evils set in the modern day: just like Stephen King's Salem's Lot.

Reading it now, we see carriages and top hats and peasants and we see it all as being set in the distant past and the ancient evils that Dracula embodies and the Victorian stuffiness that Jonathan Harker comes from telescope together and we lose the radical twist that for the original readers this was a vampire popping up in *their* time, in their streets, in their cities, in their social groupings.

It only struck me when Harker mentioned that he'd brought Kodak photos of the estate Dracula's buying.

Just thought I'd mention this, in case it had passed anyone else by just as it did me on first reading.

Also - loved the sexiness of Harker being seduced by the three vampiresses. Stoker could really throw in the voluptuous, smouldering temptation. That scene where she kneels in front of him and he can feel her breath, her lips ... before being almost penetrated by her teeth ... must have really set the pulses racing.

well, I think I liked the first 3 chapters the most. this is where I was really hooked. I thought it would be slow and dull, but I was wrong.
I don't say I do remember it by details, but i really liked it :)

Interesting point Phil! I never realized that. Now I understand why (maybe) Stoker spend so much effort detailing the exact locations of every fact throughout the book.

I have never read this book and only really know the modern movie adaptation (Gary Oldman if I recall?) but I am really surprised by the ease of the prose, it's delightful! My only complaint is that it's springtime and the sun is shining and I'm in the mood for lighter fare, I suppose... I wish we were reading this in the dark of winter. :) It's spooky and suspenseful, how I remember old movies to be when I watched them as a kid.

Taughnee wrote: " but I am really surprised by the ease of the prose, it's delightful! ..."

See, I'm having the opposite reaction. I find the prose somewhat clunky, the one drawback in my mind. But I think this has a lot to do with just what we prefer as readers. I like long, winding sentences and Stoker is much more of a terse, useful writer.

Just finished chapter 4. Absolutely loving it so far. I really enjoy how Stoker describes people and objects.

There is so much more to this story than I have ever seen in any movie adaption of the book. Here I thought that there would be no surprises purely because Dracula is so well known today. I couldn't have been more wrong. (view spoiler)[The strange relationship between the Count and the wolves is something I've never heard before, and it has my curiosity growing. (hide spoiler)]
The scenes in which Harker is trapped inside Dracula's castle had my anxiety rising almost out of control, because that is one of my worst fears. I just love the way Stoker builds the situation and Harker's silent fear of being imprisoned by a monster.

Taughnee wrote: "I have never read this book and only really know the modern movie adaptation (Gary Oldman if I recall?) but I am really surprised by the ease of the prose, it's delightful! My only complaint is tha..."

I am actually not reading this now as I just read it recently at a more appropriate time in October right before Halloween!

Raphael wrote: "Indeed Danielle! I thought the same thing: reading this book without any previous knowledge of the theme would be an even more powerful experience.
Imagine the experience of those who read it just..."

I also agree with both of you. It would have been much more suspenseful to read this without knowing who Dracula is and what the name means as we now know it.

Danielle-
I'm afraid I must disagree with you. The book is set up to be suspenseful and therefore the relapse in days may make the text seem clunky but while reading the text it actually flows together quite smoothly.

Lauren wrote: "Danielle-
I'm afraid I must disagree with you. The book is set up to be suspenseful and therefore the relapse in days may make the text seem clunky but while reading the text it actually flows toge..."

I'm not concerned about plot flow, but the actual sentences. The sentences are very...useful, but not beautiful. The prose doesn't sing.

It is what it is. Some books have beautiful prose; others don't. This one doesn't - it wasn't the author's talent, I guess. However, he has a great plot and no doubt achieved his intention of shocking all the readers of London. I wonder if they slept well after reading this!

I appreciate Dracula for what it is... a fascinating epistolary novel in the horror genre. This is not a genre I usually read, but I'm loving this book anyway.

Danielle-
I don't believe the prose is meant to sing. The author clearly wants the prose to meet the plot style. A flowing prose would seem out of place here.

As I'm reading this I keep thinking about how people at the time of publication perceived this book. Today, vampires are way too pop-cultured and something we know like the back of our hand. But the Count and the ensuing vampires and the folklore behind it was terrifying and somewhat newfangled. This book is classic for a reason, and I can definitely see why.

I know Phil noted the sexiness of the three vampiresses seducing Harker and even a modern day reader like myself had to take a step back and say WHOA. Stoker is excellent at building tension and resolving it. Amanda also noted the tie between Dracula and wolves, and I agree that is something we don't hear of or put together.

I for one enjoy the prose.

These first chapters had me really feeling how Harker felt being trapped in the castle by Dracula. The scene with the vampiresses sensually attacking and trying to bite him gave me chills. It was a very sensual and sexy scene.

To me, the book flows nicely and the descriptions of the castle and Harker watching Dracula climb down the castle walls makes it very creepy.

I am actually quite astonished with how much I am enjoying this one. Had a lot going on in my world, so haven't gotten started on it until just this week. I'm one of the few that does not care at all for the modern, friendly vampire love stories, nor do I care for horror stories in general. It's also hard to read about "Count Dracula" without smiling, because it sounds so comical in our day. But as I got into the story further, it becomes more chilling, but not in an overly creepy way that would really screw with my mind living here by myself (although I think if I tried a film version, it would, much like with The Picture of Dorian Gray).

The style of writing and building suspense reminds me very much of Wilkie Collins' The Woman in White which I also found fantastic. It's got the mystery and suspense of that novel, but with supernatural elements.

I, like most of you have mentioned, am familiar with the basic idea of Dracula and vampires, but not with any specifics of the story. I am very curious to see how this all turns out, or at least to learn about the origins of this genre.

I, too, noticed about the Kodak photos, Phil. Amazing how long photography has been in existence!