until this past week i had never read bram stoker’s classic epistolary noveldracula”. by the way, epistolary was a completely new term to me before looking up some material on “dracula.” it is a type of novel that is written as a series of different documents that develop the story. i have really liked some of the post modern literature i have read and “dracula” was reminiscent of much of what i like of post modern literature (or since it was written in the later 19th century i guess i should say it seems to be a precursor for post modern literary style).

i am a big fan of zombie movies and literature because they aren’t really about the zombies. instead zombie stories are about the struggle and journey to survive with a group. the zombies are merely the catalyst for the struggle. “dracula” was similar to this except count dracula actually had intelligence and a bit of character development. the characters still had to travel to and fight for safety. the difference was that they weren’t just fight a strong, enormous, unfeeling, ignorant mass of violence and hunger. nope count dracula was purposefully evil. it made for a similar yet different experience that i really enjoyed.

why hadn’t i ever read this classic book? it was such a good struggle and journey.

2 Replies to “dracula”

  1. I did not like the book. It was slow and painful. It lacked a true narrative (obviously, as it is a epistolary novel). I’d say that it was part of the inspiration for Harry Potter.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.