Yes, you read the title right. Someone named ‘Stoker’ wrote a book titled Dracula. No, it’s not the same Stoker as Bram, but close: it’s his great grand-nephew. And yes, it is the same Dracula, but 25 years later.
Like an old pair of pants you slip back on, the book seems oddly familiar and yet strangely different at the same time (provided you still fit in them). The characters are all back, but the 25 years between the last time we saw them and this reconnection have changed them, almost beyond recognition. Van Helsing, the leader of the intrepid band that chased after Dracula 25 years ago is old and dying; Jonathan and Mina Harker are unhappily married with a son who has grown up without knowing of his parents’ past; Arthur Holmwood, Lucy’s fiancé, is now full of anger and bitterness over his loss; his close friend, Dr. Jack Seward, is a drug addict and has lost both his practice and the respect of his peers.
It’s a little distressing to see the protagonists from the classic Bram Stoker Dracula fall from such heroic heights to such conditions. But it’s only natural that the horrific adventures the group went through 25 years earlier left an indelible impression on each of them, affecting them to the point that they are almost unrecognizable. These changes become all the more logical as one works one’s way through the book, which traces the path each one walked in the last 25 years. As understanding dawns, so does a sad acceptance that even the bravest of heroes, who willingly faced evil and death in the name of God and goodness, can sink into a pit of despair.
It’s quite realistic, scarily so, which makes Dracula: The Un-Dead a sequel worthy of the original. The story is a page-turner; the details are gripping; the horror, well, it’s horrifying. It’s a great book to read – albeit an imperfect one.
The original Dracula was written by Bram Stoker and first published in 1897. In (very) short, it tells the story of a band of heroes traveling to Eastern Europe to pursue the evil known as Dracula. Just this month, on October 13th to be exact (too bad it wasn’t a Friday), the sequel, Dracula: the un-dead was published. Written by the great-grandnephew of Bram Stoker (Dacre Stoker), the book finds our intrepid band of heroes 25 years later. This book is brilliantly written and a page-turner.
Article comments
1 - Della Perkins
An amazing sequal cram packed full of adventure and bloodlust horror. with a different twist to the amazing dark prince from the ariginal horror clasic Bram Stokers Dracula. to Dracula fans this is one you can not put down for theirs a bloodcurtling adventure around the next corner. A great big thanks to Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt the genusees that put the book together. Cant wait for the next.
2 - Chelsea Doyle
This sounds like a fascinating book, both in concept and in execution. I really want to try this out, and I'm kind of excited it was written by another Stoker! I will miss the subtle ways of the original, but I'm not surprised they went with the more in your face gore. Great review Sahar!
3 - Sahar
Della: I also think there is going to be a next - they left the ending wide open for that! I just hope they take their time writing it so that it's also as amazing as the first two.
Chelsea: Thank you! I wasn't surprised with the more in your face gore either - it was just a little shocking because I had just finished rereading the classic. I wonder if they are going to remake the classic into a movie and then make the sequel into one, too. It definitely would look amazing on the big screen. Let me know what you think when you do read it :)
4 - NYJ
The book is an abomination that spits all over the original. Tripped out in forced, pointless subplots, mind-numbingly cliched "twists," stunningly bad dialogue, torture porn and homophobia, the "sequel" takes the events, characters and tone of Stoker's (the real one) Dracula and "improves" them by turning it all into formulaic trash that blatantly contradicts the very events and tenets that made the book and it's characters classic. Obviously designed to appeal to the Anne Rice/ Twilight crowd rather than fans of the original, as nearly all the events of the original are tossed out as "inaccurate." That's right, the classic that created the vampire archetype hasn't been out of print in over a century is completely wrong, and THIS is the "real" story. Please. Dacre Stoker was obviously recruited for name recognition only as I doubt this garbage would've been published otherwise.
5 - Sahar
NYJ thank you for your comment; I'm sad you don't like this book, and I do understand why. Like I mentioned in the review, it was pretty shocking in its goriness - but do you really think it was only a publicity stunt to make some money of the Twilight-inspired vampire obsession, and not something inspired by Bram Stoker's own notes?