**"My Take on Bram Stoker's Dracula"**

3.5 stars. Wait a moment. Let me make something clear.

Five sanctimonious and horny gentlemen chase my poor old man Dracula across Europe (where's the respect for his old age?), their intentions are shady and motives are obscure, and I'm supposed to root for them???

The little toerags led by Van Helsing should have found something better to do than be so ridiculously uptight. Their Victorian prudery and self-righteous bigotry scared me more than Dracula's fangs. Obsessing over Mina's and Lucy's safety didn't make them look any better.

"Children of the night what music they play" ; Jonathan Hawker hears those chilling, famous words from the inhuman appearing Count Dracula, in the remote Castle Dracula, Transylvania (Romania).

What started out as a simple real estate deal by an English solicitor and a foreign nobleman, becomes a blood sucking nightmare. The shell shocked Jonathan is imprisoned by the creepy Count, a "person" you wouldn't want to see in a dark alley on a moonless midnight walk. Three strange, bizarre, but very beautiful women, brides of Dracula, the weird sisters, are in his room looking not quite real. When Dracula arrives also, they fade away.... into nothingness.

Next day the Englishman can't decide if what he saw last night was a dream or fact... Either way the terrified Mr. Hawker escapes, as if his life depended on it, not caring about those eerie wolves, surrounding the building and disappears. Back in "civilized", safe England his fiance Mina on vacation in Whitby, is visiting her sick, good friend Lucy Westenra, she becomes very pale too, almost like ill Lucy who is losing blood. Why? Dr. Seward with the help of Dr. Van Helsing an expert in little known diseases, gives her Lucy four transfusions. Still she becomes weaker, and small punctures are spotted on Miss Westenra's neck. What can they be? A gruesome Bat is seen flying outside the window, lurking about waiting for who knows what... Mists come into poor Lucy's room...

Dr. Seward, the head of an insane asylum, has a star inmate named Renfield he likes keeping busy, by eating flies and spiders. Something unnatural is disturbing the disturb man. Renfield even attempts to kill the good doctor. On the continent the dazed Jonathan, is found in a hospital in Budapest, disclosing events, in his journal, read by Mina when they get him back home. Dracula is seen by Hawker in England, or was this man, the undead fiend, actually the Count? Better speak to Dr. Van Helsing, who they say has read about vampires and is an expert on the subject. This old Dutchman doesn't mind getting his hands dirty.

The novel has inspired countless films, books and television shows...the endless flow of vampires stories more than a century after this classic was published. There is an obvious reason for this phenomenon...It still scares people...in an entertaining manner. The historical figure was a Romanian Prince, Vlad III or Dracula, (son of Dracul, the Dragon) 1431 - 1476, known as the Impaler, an alias he acquired, and well deserved too...for his bloody treatment of captured soldiers. Guess what he did to his many enemies, by the thousands...he is a national hero.

Dracula is a classic for a reason! It doesn't just feel like a relic from the past. I can't believe it took me this long to pick up this masterpiece. But once I did, I was completely hooked. It delivered on all fronts and exceeded my expectations.

The gothic horror elements were aplenty. The initial setting of Dracula's castle was spine-chilling, with the gradual build-up of tension and a sense of impending doom. The "creatures of the night" added an extra layer of mystery and fear. Stoker's writing style was also a major highlight. The use of "letters" to tell the story was a brilliant choice, as it created a rich tapestry of dark, gothic brilliance.
What really surprised me, though, was how modern the story felt. The short and sharp chapters, along with the jumps between different point-of-view characters, made for a fast-paced and engaging read. The convergence of characters as their needs aligned was also expertly done. And the level of brutality and darkness was far greater than I expected. Stoker didn't shy away from the details, which added to the overall impact of the story.
Despite its modern feel, Dracula is still a classic tale of "Good V Evil". The central characters are faced with horror and suffering, but they find the strength to fight back against an almost incomprehensible evil. The morally ambiguous characters, like Renfield, added depth and complexity to the story, offering discussions on redemption, madness, and the importance of meaning.
Overall, I loved Dracula. It's now my favorite pre-20th century classic. The only minor gripe I had was the ending, which I felt could have been a bit more dramatic. But that's a small complaint in what is otherwise an exceptional story that has stood the test of time. It's a must-read for any fan of horror or classic literature. 5/5 STARS

This was truly an extremely enjoyable read.

The story was ingeniously structured as an epistolary novel, consisting of letters, journal entries, and short newspaper articles.

It was told from the perspectives of all the characters who were involved with the shadowy and elusive Count Dracula.

The story was superbly crafted, filled with vivid and descriptive imagery. Bram Stoker did an excellent job of creating a mental image of gothic eeriness and mystery.

Some of the particularly creepy moments that stuck in my mind were: the ghastly ship that arrived at port with the dead sailor lashed to the helm, the newspaper clipping about the stalking "Bloofer Lady", and the men breaking into and investigating the creepy house on Piccadilly Street.

Initially, my impression of the narrative style was negative. I thought these diary entries and letters would detract from the story. However, as I continued reading, it gradually began to add depth and dimension to the tale.

The story was a dark, gothic horror, with elements of creepiness that I truly relished!

There's no need to repeat the plot, but I'm angry that it took me so long to read this masterpiece. I would highly recommend it because of its originality, which set the standard for the entire genre.

Thanks!

In the peaceful and enchanting Whitby, Lucy and Mina try to soothe their anxiety about Lucy's missing fiancé in Romania.

A psychiatrist, troubled by Lucy's rejection of her fiancé, occupies himself with following a particular patient...who loves hunting mosquitoes and spiders...and is obsessed with living things.

A dark ship looms in Whitby during a menacing storm and a murky, chilly atmosphere...with no crew on its surface except a priest...a priest bound to his fate, Meta.

The invasion of the houses in England...a journey by the Orient Express...and another by river...wolves, vampires, and a world obsessed with fairy tales and legends...and more.

What did you think? Did you assume you would just stay holed up in a castle in Transylvania writing your memoirs?

Get away from those cheesy movies that distorted the original story and imprisoned it in clichés.

And get away from the love story between the girl with the determined features and the boy who shines in the sunlight.

Dracula is a better love story than Twilight :)

And above all else....a crazy writer claims that all the important events in the novel are based on real events, even the characters, and even the English language in it is real.

Bram Stoker actually built a world of bloodsuckers in an academic way and with a diverse framework of adventure, characters, and places at the same time. It's truly a work that will make you feel the exhaustion of the five years he spent gathering real information from different countries about legends and cultures.

Real historical information about Vlad the Impaler, which he continued to collect, about the rulers of Romania and their cruelty, information about bloodsucking vampires, and a blend of some local legends, folkloric events that may be based on real origins with the fictional framework of the novel and adventure.

I really liked those tourist scenes in Whitby, especially the ones that Bram Stoker described in detail, making you feel as if you were actually visiting the place and experiencing the murky atmosphere that prevailed at that time.

Some information about the legends in different countries of the world that Van Helsing actually aroused my curiosity to search for...as well as the author's own introduction, which insists that the events contain a lot of truth...and some of the characters are real too. This made me imagine the author as Van Helsing himself.

It is urban fantasy in its first form, and it is my favorite type of fantasy.

Urban Fantasy

There have been two previous vampire novels before Dracula...but Dracula remains the original and the cornerstone of all that has come after it regarding vampire legends.

Perhaps later novels have elaborated on the vampire legend more and given it more charm and depth "usually those that are based on the cornerstone that Bram Stoker laid" but sometimes others are just copies, imitations, and imprisoned in the corner of a Romanian castle. But in the original novel in 1819 or, here in Stoker's wonderful one in 1897, you will truly learn the origins of that legend.

***************************************

The Arabic version

------------------

I didn't initially intend to read the novel...due to my sensitivity to classics for years.

But the translations, which are excellent and powerful, are what attracted me to the idea in the first place.

As I said in the initial review

"The initial review

The first time I saw the novel in the book fair in Alexandria, I was amazed by its enormity"whether the number of pages or the size of the book itself"

What is this? Is this the novel Dracula?

Yes, it's a classic and not just a classic but the most famous horror classic in the world "I should write the world in capital letters because although it's my favorite word, this time it's not an exaggeration"

Dracula has been translated, adapted, and played with by a million authors and authors alike, whether in writing movies, series, or anything.

I couldn't - if one day I say I read it - that I read it in translation. I respect Dr. Ahmed Khaled Tawfik and love his information about this novel in most of his books, but with all due respect, I couldn't read his translation. It's not that I don't trust him, but because of the role of publishing.

But the surprise here is that there are 2 translators and they are also brothers and there is another oversight from a third party. The first time I heard about them, I said, should I read this version and is it a complete and accurate translation of the original novel by Bram Stoker? I met them and they didn't promise us a detailed and complete translation of the original novel, but they also returned to us in the book "The Giant" with additions. Honestly, the first time I heard about it, it added a lot to the book as they described.

It's really something that encourages one to get this translated version of the novel.

Anyway, I bought it but only in a note at the end...this is the first edition and if I saw that the cover was scary but I wanted it to be professional too, like a picture of the author behind it and so on, and the color was in a way that suits the strength of its content between what is written behind it...or its size is larger than the ordinary paperback novels - almost the size of a large hardcover - but my look couldn't wait for a second edition and I bought it. I'm waiting for the opinions of the people here before our exhibition ends so that I can decide.

:)

It was actually a good translation, including the original additions by the author Bram Stoker from a whole chapter in the introduction to a simple edit at the end that was not published.

Not including the appendix about Vlad the Impaler himself.

But to be honest, in many cases, the dialogue didn't flow for me. I sometimes felt its length and difficulty in understanding. It's clear, but it requires more concentration than usual.

And soon I discovered that the problem was not with the translation, but that the dialogue in the English version is actually a bit difficult, especially in the dialogue of Van Helsing, who is not originally English. I confirmed this for myself by getting another English version.

In general, the novel in the late nineteenth century really makes you amazed by "the exaggerated emotions of men and women, which you will feel in many cases that the dialogue is too much."

You will find men being gentle with ladies, amazed and extremely respectful of the signs of intelligence that appear on the little ladies.

And they may be overcome by love at some times...because it is a time -whatever it was- that is characterized by a certain etiquette, and although it is exaggerated in its presentation, it is a classic.

You may find the events calm in many cases, not a climax scene full of action as you expect -as I expected myself-, but as I said, it's a classic novel...it was a rarity in its era and remained an icon of vampire novels for future generations.

******************************************

Rose, in the end, I really, really thank one of the friends I was honored to know from here.

For gifting me that version, and I also thank the review and its encouragement to me.

And of course, the translators, Muhammad Al-Duwakhli and Muneer Al-Duwakhli, for that rich journey.

Mohammad Al-Arabi

From May 13, 2014

To May 20, 2014

This book has been truly amazing. I deeply regret not having read it before.

It is the most famous vampire story in history, a classic of the horror genre. And yes, it really scares in many moments.

Despite being a classic, it has a rather contemporary vocabulary. So, you have no excuse because I promise you it won't be burdensome for you. It's only a little over 100 years old, not that much time has passed since it was written. The story is told in an epistolary way. Almost all are letters, parts of personal diaries and articles, so dialogues are often scarce. Personally, it hasn't bothered me. Moreover, I think it gives a very interesting touch to read everything from the thoughts of the characters in this way, making me feel quite close to them.

It touches on very interesting themes such as the fear of death and the dead. There are quite eye-catching erotic touches, and well, it's not a love story although it has a little bit of this theme. The characters seemed to me very advanced for their time, especially Lucy. And I assure you that you will love to get into the minds of these peculiar characters.

As a curiosity, I would say that I expected more prominence of Dracula because, listen, the novel is called that. And although everything revolves around him, he is by no means the protagonist of the story, but rather Jonathan and Mina.

Welcome to my house. Come freely. Go safely. And leave something of the happiness you bring!

These words, spoken to Jonathan Harker upon his arrival at Count Dracula's castle in Transylvania, set the stage for a terrifying adventure. Just minutes after a nightmare journey through a landscape of gothic horror, Harker finds himself in the presence of the world's most famous vampire. Within days, he has some hair-raising encounters with the Count and begins to realize the true nature of his evil.

The quotations from the book make it clear that Dracula is a sensation fiction, full of scares, horror, and disgust. It's a cross between an epistolary novel, a detective novel, and a save-my-wife story, all told in a lurid tone that befits the subject of the living dead. However, the book also has its flaws. Van Helsing, one of the heroes, is unconvincing as a Dutchman, and the story loses power when Dracula is not on the page. The ending is also anticlimactic, leaving the reader feeling a bit disappointed.

Despite these flaws, Dracula is still an exciting read, especially the first half. Stoker's legacy will undoubtedly last for centuries to come, and the book has inspired countless adaptations and imitations. While it could have been better, it still deserves the praise it has received.

I've grown to appreciate this more with age.

Especially as I've put more distance between myself and the time I studied Dracula at school.

But I still think it's overrated.

Dracula isn't nearly scary enough.

Jonathan Harker is a wet mop of a protagonist.

Mina is annoying.

And the best character [spoiler alert!] gets killed less than halfway into the book.

Perhaps it's because the horror tropes that were once novel have now become commonplace.

Or maybe it's because the characters lack the depth and complexity that modern readers expect.

Whatever the reason, I just can't seem to get into Dracula the way that so many others do.

Sure, it has its moments, but overall, it's just not the classic that it's made out to be.

Maybe I'll give it another try someday, but for now, I'm content to leave it on the shelf.

NOSFERATU

Murnau's "Nosferatu" was not the first adaptation, but it was the first to leave an indelible mark. It is a masterpiece of the silent era and German expressionism. Due to legal rights issues of the original work, Murnau had to modify the title, the names of the characters (Count Dracula became Count Orlok, played by Max Schreck), and the locations (from London to Wisborg). However, the director was still sued by Stoker's heirs. He lost the case for copyright infringement and was sentenced to destroy all copies of the film. Fortunately, a "clandestine" copy was saved by Murnau himself, and the film was able to survive and reach us today. The Prana-Film G.m.b.H., the production company of the film, was forced to declare bankruptcy after the lawsuit with Stoker's heirs because it was obliged to pay for the legal dispute over the copyright. It has been hypothesized that behind the pseudonym of Max Schreck ("maximum horror" in German) was actually Murnau himself, heavily made up to play the character.

"Dracula" is one of the outstanding Gothic novels published in 1897 when the genre had already shown its best, at least in terms of quantity. This is my late reading. Although I had the long and clear feeling that it was a rereading: the recognition, the feeling of "I have already been here", accompanied me from the first to the last of the nearly five hundred pages. But maybe it was the images deduced from the many films I had seen, who knows.

The 1979 remake by Werner Herzog is also splendid. Unforgettable Kinski, but even more so Isabelle Adjani. Werner Herzog appears in the scene of the customs inspection of Nosferatu's coffins: it is his hand as the customs officer who inspects the earth in the coffins infested with rats. According to what Herzog himself declared in the commentary on the film, contained in the DVD, no one else in the troupe had the courage to touch the rats.

The vampire comes from far away. And since he is almost immortal, he goes far: on this subject, I highly recommend the study by Tommaso Braccini, rich in documentation, funny and passionate, which shows how before 1897, the birth of Dracula, vampires, before being dangerous, were monstrous, disgusting, even smelly (including breath), figures relegated to popular folklore. With Dracula - and never was a name more appropriate and more memorable - the beautiful, dark, refined, and aristocratic vampire is born. The evident erotic connection between the vampire who bites and sucks and the beautiful girl with tender flesh and immaculate skin is born: the vampire enters only if invited, crosses the threshold only if desired. It is the prey, even before the predator, who claims the pleasure of the hunt, not vice versa.

Bela Lugosi is Dracula in the eponymous film of 1931 directed by Tod Browning, perhaps the most famous adaptation. By critics and film enthusiasts, Bela Lugosi's interpretation of the character is considered the "definitive" interpretation of Dracula. Due to his magnetic performance, Dracula became the characteristic role of Bela Lugosi, and made his "Dracula" a cultural icon, and the actor himself a legend of the horror cycle of Universal Pictures. However, the role of Dracula would prove to be both a blessing and a curse for Lugosi: despite his successful theatrical acting career in various roles, from the moment Lugosi put on the vampire's cloak, despite his contrary attempts, he remained forever "trapped" in the role of Count Dracula. Lugosi was buried, wearing the cloak of Dracula, at the Holy Cross Cemetery in Culver City, California. Contrary to what is commonly believed, the actor never left any instructions to be buried with the cloak; his son Bela G. Lugosi has confirmed on numerous occasions that he and his mother, Lillian, made the decision because they believed it would have been the wish of the deceased.

Dracula appeared when cinema was taking its first steps. And it immediately proved to be a precious source for the screen: already in the silent era, Murnau's Nosferatu was unforgettable and unsurpassable. The eroticism of the vampire is evident in Polansky's hilarious film "Dance of the Vampires", probably better known as "The Fearless Vampire Killers", in Italy it became "Please Don't Bite Me on the Neck" (1967), where, one year before being killed, Sharon Tate displayed all her feminine charm. And where the vampire, in its youngest incarnation, also assumed homosexual eroticism. The connection became even more evident in Francis Ford Coppola's cinematic adaptation, where Dracula/Gary Oldman becomes a dark object of desire, a dispenser of pleasure even before immortality.

Other famous vampires on the screen: Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt in "Interview with the Vampire" by Neil Jordan (1994), based on a novel by Anne Rice. The three women all had very white teeth that shone like pearls in contrast to the ruby red of their voluptuous lips. There was something in them that made me uncomfortable, something that was very attractive and at the same time terribly frightening. In my heart, I had a sinful and burning desire that they would kiss me with those red lips. But we know that the voluptuous red lips that frame very white teeth are more interested in the neck than the lips. The neck is the source of the pleasure they seek.

Other famous vampires on the screen: my beloved Bill Nighy in the "Underworld" film saga. Then, of course, the vampire is the hidden part of each of us, our Mr Hyde: for what other reason does the mirror not reflect the presence of the vampire if not because the vampire is inside us, not outside? Then, again, Count Dracula comes from Transylvania, the border between eastern and western Europe. But, forcing the hand, also the door to the East in general. And so the tenacity and persistence with which Dracula wants to settle in London testify to how much the East wants to invade the West, for better or for worse, then as today, considered the cradle of true civilization (at the end of the 19th century, the United Kingdom was at its greatest expansion, controlling almost a quarter of the globe).

Other famous vampires on the screen: Robert Pattinson is the vampire in the "Twilight" film saga adapted from the series of novels by Stephanie Meyer. Through Jonathan's travel diary, Mina-Lucy's correspondence, various letters, diaries, newspaper articles (of improbable length unless the newspaper was on a single topic), memorandums, medical reports, telegrams, phonographic recordings, stenographic notes, ship's logs (i.e., of navigation, written rather improbably by a person about to be killed): the narrators change, the testimony is never passed to Dracula, but the story told is indeed his.

Other famous vampires on the screen: Wesley Snipes in the "Blade" saga based on the Marvel comic book series. Blade is half-vampire, the son of a vampire and a human: in the Bonelli house, he would be called Dampyr, the best vampire hunter, the worst enemy of vampires. There are many passages that I find unforgettable: Dracula who slides along the outer walls of the castle like a fast "snail"; the ship that enters the port (of Whitby) captained by the dead captain who has tied himself to the helm (almost a new Christ); Lucy, the first described victim, is a woman, white, young, and suffers from sleepwalking, also she, like the vampire, transforms at night; the long, slow transformation from human to vampire, undead; the meeting between the married and deeply in love couple, she now a vampire; how to eliminate a vampire (a stake driven into the heart, classic - with surprise, also the head cut off and the mouth filled with garlic)…

Gary Oldman is Coppola's Dracula here in the aged version. However, among the aspects that I found less effective, I would put an excessive and unnecessary length; a tendency to repetition or to lengthening the times; the excessive emphasis, especially if the story progresses through a diary or correspondence. But above all, the absurd way of speaking English of Professor Van Helsing that makes the reading difficult and remains rather incomprehensible, both because the man is learned and has a great store of knowledge, and because notoriously the Dutch speak English perhaps with an accent, but without errors. I have thought a lot and often of Truman Capote in the role of Lionel Twain in "Murder By Death - Invitation to a Dinner with a Crime" who corrects Peter Sellers in the role of the Chinese detective Wang by reminding him of the use of articles and compound prepositions. The whole "Dutch question" leaves one perplexed: both the linguistic aspect and the geographical one (the professor travels between Amsterdam and London or other English places back and forth in 24 hours, rather improbable - as the reasons that drive him to such frequent returns home remain incomprehensible).

But if Gary Dracula Oldman drinks fresh blood, he appears so beautiful and dark. Although Francis Ford titled his film "Dracula's Bram Stoker", he takes many liberties with respect to the novel: not for nothing, essentially Coppola's film is a sumptuous and magnificent love story that crosses oceans of time. How can I - how could anyone - describe that strange scene, its solemnity, its gloom, its sadness, its horror, and, together with all this, its sweetness?

But if they attack him and make him angry, the beautiful dark one becomes like this.

Andy Warhol also took on the challenge, although the original title is not "Andy Warhol's Dracula", but "Blood for Dracula", and the direction was entrusted to the reliable Paul Morrissey, and on stage there is the reliable Joe Dallesandro. The story is set in Italy, Vittorio De Sica also appears, and the Italian distribution gave birth to the brilliant title of "Dracula Sought the Blood of a Virgin... and Died of Thirst!!!"

This was good.

It was a perfect in the first half. The story was engaging, the characters were well-developed, and the plot was moving forward at a brisk pace.

However, then it dragged and just got chronic in the second half. The pacing slowed down significantly, and it felt like the author was just filling in the pages with unnecessary details.

Or perhaps it is because I have read so many renditions of this character that it was not that exciting anymore by the time I reached the final chapters. I had become so familiar with the character's traits and behaviors that there were no surprises left.

Overall, it was an okay read, but it could have been better if the author had tightened up the second half and added some more unique elements to the story.

✩ 4 stars ✩

“Ah, it is the fault of our science that it wants to explain all; and if it explain not, then it says there is nothing to explain.” This profound statement sets the tone for the engaging read that is Bram Stoker's "Dracula".

For a classic, this was surprisingly accessible. The story unfolds mainly through the reading of journals and letters of different characters. Each character has a distinct voice, and while all are well-developed, some are more favored than others.

Like many readers, I had a soft spot for Jonathan Harker's part in Dracula's castle. It features Dracula prominently, but unfortunately, the middle 50% felt a bit dull and repetitive in comparison.

With Vampire lore being so common today, there were frustrating moments. The characters leaving Lucy alone at night, despite knowing something was wrong, made me want to scream.

The most surprising thing was how dopey Van Helsing came across. His accent in the writing likely contributed, but he was also much older and more academic than the movie portrayal.

The quote “…the world seems full of good men--even if there are monsters in it” sums up my main takeaway. There were four male characters who seemed very good and brave.

I wonder if Bram Stoker believed in firmly established gender roles. The women were capable but treated like damsels in distress.

Despite a slow middle, this was a great read with a solid ending. Definitely a must-read classic.

✼　 ҉ 　✼　 ҉ 　✼　 ҉ 　✼　 ҉ 　✼　 ҉ 　✼　 ҉ 　✼

Pre-read: October classic pick! Was there really any other choice?

Two things stand out about this book.

Firstly, it is a truly great and creepy story that merits classic status. The atmosphere and the overall concept are captivating.

However, everything is repeated an excessive number of times without any clear advantage. It seems as if Bram Stoker was overly insistent on driving home certain points.

Here is what might be imagined as actual footage of Bram Stoker writing this novel:

If Stoker had been more concise and to the point, this book would have been far more exciting and suspenseful. The constant repetition of the same mysterious events night after night, Dracula's boxes of dirt, and the bringing of Winchester rifles for protection became tiresome.

Moreover, as a horror story, it has some rather odd aspects. It's almost as if it's the grandfather of the trope of heading up the stairs to hide instead of running outside or through the graveyard when a serial killer is on the loose. The characters keep leaving people alone, even though those people are repeatedly attacked when left alone. And then, when they finally decide to guard someone, that person insists they only need God to guard them! It seems rather illogical considering God doesn't seem to have been very interested in protecting them thus far.

So, it gets three stars because it is a classic and the story is enjoyable. I particularly like Lucy's suitors and their over-the-top manliness. But the repetition and the illogical behavior in the face of a bloodsucking monster are enough to deduct a couple of stars.