What makes a story, a good story?
Some may say it’s the characters, some say the plot or theme, and some may argue it’s the message. Maybe the ending, the beginning, or the middle. The voice, the style or the prose. But, what about how it all fits together? How everything combined can make it feel like a perfect game of Tetris?
Let’s dive in to find an answer.
That said, let me welcome you to this spoiler-free review series where the best of the best will be ranked as ‘Tetris-style’—What can I say? Gaming has a big chunk of me.
Note: I don’t intend to say that the parts make the whole. Sometimes, many things converge and end up producing a much greater result—or worse, for that matter. So, stay tuned!
W H A T I S T H E D R A C U L A ?
If you don’t know Bram Stocker’s Dracula, I sincerely doubt you’re from this planet. But in case you aren’t, I will summarize it for you.
The story starts when Johnathan Harker, a lawyer, is invited to Transylvania, by none other but a wealthy count named Dracula. It turns out he is to act as the Count’s real estate agent, and help him finalize his contract, so he can finally move to London after years of pursuing it. Things get complicated when Jonathan discovers he’s a prisoner at the Count’s castle and has no way of returning home alive to his fiancée, Mina Murray. Little does he know, the very Count under his roof is a vampire venturing to expand his business overseas. Johnathan has but one option left: escape alive to stop Dracula’s plans.
Being a fantasy classic—though one might call it a ‘Gothic Horror’— I had to give this book a chance. Beautiful prose, elegant characters, and a mysterious vibe, all seemed to compel me to dive deeper and figure out what this book concealed beneath.
Once I finished it though, I couldn’t help but wonder how this book’s narrative could hold up to today’s standards. However unfair that might seem.
Could a classic be always relevant and poignant?
I will make the disclaimer that this book was written way back in 1897 England, which means its storytelling style is completely different from today’s, thus it having a different charm. Not to say it’s better or worse, but some readers might find a book’s age unappealing. It may be unwise to do a comparison against modern books, but modern readers are sure to pick it up, and may not know how to tread ahead.
Let us see how it scores.
C h a r a c t e r s
When looking at Dracula’s characters, you get what you most definitely expect. Gentlemen and ladies of the 1800s, all elegant and poised, belonging to the higher classes of Europe. The nature in which they speak reminds you of their precedence, and the way they act is as Victorian as it can get. Each of them is “proper” as one can suppose and as respectful as one wishes people behaved.
But that’s precisely who they are. They are modeled after Victorian virtues and values, so some of them could eventually find themselves fusing with each other and losing individuality. Though this happens in select moments of the book, characters are sometimes hard to pinpoint through actions and speech; the one thing different, is in name only.
Following this line of thought, characters in this novel do seem more like flat ones; we don’t have traces of backstory, nor some kind of personal, or emotional weakness to each of them. They all appear to be strong and capable, and the only injuries they get, they get from the plot’s unfolding. They can lose a fight, but they are mostly on a winning streak.
This is not to say that there aren’t interesting moments with them; especially Quincey, his voice is one of the more defined; he is portrayed as very Texan-like, which gives him a unique appeal amongst a bunch of English posh. Same with Van Helsing and his intelligence, though he can get a bit infuriating at times, his quirkiness can be enjoyed from time to time.
This particular characteristic can be something more of a taste issue. I personally enjoy seeing characters grow in a novel and change from start to finish, but some people can enjoy their characters without any of this. Though I wasn’t all satisfied, I did enjoy being in their shoes as the story progressed; it made it all seem more dramatic than anticipated.
Verdict? N O T F O R M E
P l o t
Trying to imagine what could happen in a vampire novel of the 1800s, I was surprised at how interesting it was. Granted, not every inch of it kept me up at night, but it was something I hadn’t seen coming. Lucky me, I had never been exposed to Dracula’s plotline before, so I was able to enjoy the mystery to its fullest.
The very first half of the book was engaging in a way I didn’t think it would be. Though I do have to admit that it has some evident plot holes to the modern reader, I still wanted to know what would happen with the whole Lucy and Mina plot point; this section knew how to build tension enough to keep me turning pages.
Unfortunately, the second half of the book dragged. Some of its contents were not quite believable, and some turned out to be somewhat disappointing.
Another thing worth mentioning. The pacing of the story had its faults, and I have seen others say the story could’ve been told in a lot fewer pages. I agree. Many scenes are repeated over and over, with little to nothing changing each iteration. A little less of this, and the book would’ve been a lot more enjoyable.
In the end, I was left wishing for things that didn’t happen. I wouldn’t say the whole book kept me bored, but it missed some vital things to make it more credible and seat-grabbing.
Verdict? N O T F O R M E
W r i t i n g
Let it be stated on record that this is why I enjoyed Dracula the most. The characters might’ve not been too relatable, and the plot slow, but the writing is impeccable. I could picture everything happening with as much detail as needed, in a poetic way that left me hanging on to more.
I was definitely transported to Victorian London with its creepy facets; the mood was achieved spectacularly, and one could even feel the fog coming every time Dracula neared. How the blood flowed, how eyes penetrated, everything was felt to the very bone.
But my favorite of all, contrary to popular opinion, is character monologues. The way they discuss morality, and philosophy; the way they speak to one another caringly; how they convey their innermost feelings… I am sure many don’t like purple prose, but in Dracula, it is exquisitely done. And it has its poetic phrases to cherish.
But to some, it might be a bit too much.
Verdict? W O R K S F O R M E
T h e m e s
Themes are known to line up with conflict. They are the very thing the author means to say with their writing, and what the characters learn throughout the story. In which case, Dracula's main theme is directly tied to the creature itself. To keep away from spoilers, I will only mention that the theme this novel explores is a repeating message we've seen countless times in movies, cartoons, books, and any sort of entertainment medium. I can understand that the moral of the story is deign of high praise by Victorians, but modern readers might find it stale.
Verdict? N O T F O R M E
To make a long story short, this book is:
Not for me.
F i n a l t h o u g h t s
Classics remain classics for a reason, they open your mind to the feats of language, and to whole new worlds that existed, but we never realized. Dracula is the very embodiment of that, with a touch of terror and a tint of fantasy. Alongside books of today, one might find it hasn’t aged too well, but it is still a story that revolutionized literature, and that alone grants it well-deserved praise. I know I said this book wasn’t for me, but I do encourage people to read it, for it may teach us more about where we came from as a society and how we can overcome beliefs created from its breast. Maybe we can learn the lesson and move on.
If you do take the risk to read it, buy it here. I am proud.
…And follow me here, too.
Self-promotion can’t hurt anyone, right?
Comments