Dracula by Bram StokerMy rating: 5 of 5 stars
This book was amazing, and soooo much better than the Keanu Reeves movie from the 90's. Why did they change so many plot details for the movie? They made Dracula a sympathetic character by adding the scene where he lost his love, whereas in the book Dracula's history is mostly unknown and he is a true villain, only sympathetic in death when he is released from being a monster. The change the movie made to Mina's character is unforgivable. She is the heroine of the novel to me, even though Dr. Van Helsing is the leader in the mission to destroy the vampires. She is the strongest character aside from Van Helsing, even under Dracula's power she plots against him to cause his downfall. In the movie she is weak and helpless against Dracula, a terrible injustice in my opinion, although it seemed to be because she was a reincarnation of his lost love, making the movie more of a romance than a horror film.
I'm reading Frankenstein right now and there is a great difference in readability between the two novels. Dracula was a quick read, action packed and engaging with few extraneous details to slow it down. Frankenstein is much more tedious and I find myself skimming along trying to get to the main plot points. I haven't enjoyed a novel for a long time as much as I enjoyed Dracula. Finding such a strong female character as Mina in a novel from this time period was a surprise to me, especially since my expectations for the novel came from the movie based on it. Although it's not like the entire novel is free from the sexism of the time period, it is much more subdued than I expected. It's almost like Bram Stoker is mocking it in some ways, like Mina would make some comment about being a woman and therefore not as clever as her lawyer husband, but then her habit of memorizing the train tables would keep the expedition on track, or she would solve some clue to finding Dracula from information she found typing everyone's journals. The weakness and frailty of women is alluded to several times, but Mina's husband Jonathan is laid up for several weeks with fever, delirium, and partial amnesia after being kept captive in Dracula's castle even though he was physically unharmed, while Mina seems clear headed and able to tell them how it happened after being attacked, bitten by, and forced to drink Dracula's blood.
I also really liked the character of Dr. Van Helsing who, while not the muscle bound action hero portrayed in the movie "Van Helsing", was still the heroic mastermind of the whole operation to take down Dracula before he created an army of undead monsters. I can't remember his character at all from the 1992 Dracula movie, which is surprising because he is certainly a very memorable character in the novel and the hero to Mina's heroine, although the complete group of vampire hunters is comprised of Dr. Seward, Arthur Godalming, and Quincey Morris, who all were in love with Lucy (a victim of Dracula), Dr. Van Helsing (a friend of Dr. Seward's originally consulted to examine and diagnose Lucy's illness), and Jonathan Harker and his wife Mina (Lucy's friend and companion for the summer). The format of the novel is letters and journal entries, mostly by Jonathan, Mina, Dr. Seward, and Dr. Van Helsing. This makes the book very readable although some excuses are made to explain how the characters are able to recall detailed conversations word for word, for instance Mina is trying to copy conversations from memory into her journal like a newspaper journalist would in order to be of use to her husband in his law firm as a secretary.
I'll probably watch that terrible movie again just to see what other aspects of the movie are recognizable from the novel, and then I'll read the book again to replace in my mind the poor plot of wimpy humans powerless against fate.
View all my reviews
