What if Vlad Ţepeş, Prince of Wallachia and the inspiration for Bram Stoker's Dracula, really was a vampire? Elizabeth Kostova's The Historian explores this question, following three different characters: in the 1930s, Bartholomew Rossi, an English professor, in the 1950s, his protégé Paul, and in the 1970s, Paul's unnamed daughter. Mysterious books and Rossi's disappearance spark a hunt for Dracula's tomb that crisscrosses Europe and lets Kostova use a buttload of historical and geographical research.

Kostova brings Eastern Europe to life in a way I've never seen even attempted in fiction before. From cities such as Istanbul and Budapest, to tiny villages in Romania, the author describes the sights, sounds, people, politics, and culture with such intensity that I could picture it and suddenly had an extremely strong desire to see it all myself. Without this element, the book would have been much less interesting.

The plot is as intriguing as the setting; despite being spread out over 40 years, there's a sense of urgency coupled with extreme creepiness that drives the story forward. As the characters get closer to discovering Dracula's secrets, they're warned off in violent ways. The story moves between all three time periods effortlessly and clearly. It's a more cerebral DaVinci Code, and the author seems to champion using the past for guidance on how to handle the present.

The book's only weakness is its ending; without revealing much, all I could think was, "What? That's IT? THAT'S why?" It folds nicely into the historical themes, but seems to be at odds with the direness that propelled the plot. A brief explanation was given for this, but it just seemed lame. If anyone wants to counter on me this, I welcome it, since I'm dying to find reasons to consider the ending just as wonderful as the rest of the book.

Heartily recommended.

The beginning of the The Historian is truly fascinating! I love mysteries that have travel in them. In any case, I don't think the author knows it, but in actuality she isn't talking about Vlad, she is talking about Antichrist. She keeps mentioning the Quran and stories in the Ottoman empire, an Island where he is imprisoned. The truth is, she is talking about an actual person we know, but the foreigners do not, they have their legends, but not the truth.



I keep imaging Cate Blanchett as Helen. I can't help it.



The tone of admiration the author has for Vlad is really sicking and giving me a headache. It just proves to me that the west and east will never meet. His own brother and people hated him, she gives him reasons and validation as if he's a wronged hero while in fact he's a sick, physcotic tyrant who I'm so glad was beheaded by the Ottoman empire. As a person who loves history I will address the author with this idea for her to bounder. Christians brought all kinds of evil throughout history on any land they inhabited. When the Muslim nation did inhabit their lands, they moved from their era of darkness... do you think that's a coincidence? The best thing that ever happened to the west was us. It removed people like Vlad and broke the power of the church which killed and destroyed many people and lands according to religion and color. We Muslims didn't do that, no matter what your history books say and to prove it, ALL the historical places in both our lands and yours are still reserved, because we as Muslims don't believe in killing locals, or burning or destroying buildings and lands. Islam brought stability and growth in every land they inhabited. Don't read history from one source and call yourself a scholar. All people from different religion live in peace in our lands and between us.



As for the ending, it was disappointing, I thought the daughter will play a huger part, I wanted the whole Mina charm of Stoker's Dracula, but it was missing, it's like the author was afraid to create a romance (other than Helen and the father), she talks extensively about the weather, travels, food and scholars and their books. A man like Vlad can't be educated let alone be sane (don't let me start talking about the creepy library). They say Hitler was the worst, I have to disagree.

I can't believe I read the whole thing. I mean, I really can't believe I read the whole thing. 679 pages of sheer boredom, style over substance. It didn't even pick up until around page 500. (It went from a snail's pace to a turtle's pace.) Dracula, the guy everyone is looking for, doesn't show up until somewhere around page 600. When he does show up, he is a total bore. How on earth can one make Dracula boring? This whole story could have filled 300 pages and been much more engaging and exciting.

The only reason I gave "The Historian" two stars instead of one is that Kostova did a fine job of research, had plenty of atmosphere and clearly showed some fine craftsmanship with the English language. Like I said, it was style over substance.

_____________________________________________________


Added one star on 1/9/10. After reading Dracula The Un-Dead, this book seems much improved.