ANOTHER AWESOME REVIEW!!
Media Studies by Charlie Thomason
Book Review: “Dracula: The Un-Dead,” the official sequel by Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt
December 14, 2009 at 11:27 am
Even though Bram Stoker’s Dracula now rests peacefully in the public domain, the fact that his estate would approve an official sequel should tell you something right away about the caliber of the story. Despite having Bram’s great-grandnephew, Dacre, as co-writer, there are so many ways this great idea could have gone wrong—given the extent to which the Dracula story has been used and abused. Nevertheless, Dracula: The Un-Dead is an outstanding work of pure imagination… and that has nothing to do with how you feel about the original.
Set in the year 1912 (”twenty-five years later”), Un-Dead focuses primarily on Mina Harker and her son Quincey (an aspiring actor), along with Lord Godalming (formerly Arthur Holmwood), Van Helsing, Bram Stoker himself, and a great Shakespearean actor named Basarab. When both Jack Seward and Jonathan Harker are savagely and suspiciously murdered, Scotland Yard calls on Inspector Cotford—the man who investigated Jack the Ripper. Meanwhile, having learned about his mother’s old affair with a vampire, Quincey Harker decides he wants nothing to do with his family and begins learn from the mysterious Basarab. (And that’s all I can tell you without getting into spoilers.)
Though the story is billed as the “official sequel,” the overview on the official website bills it as “deeply researched … and lovingly crafted as both an extension and celebration of one of the most classic popular novels in literature.” This is, perhaps, more to the point; given that the original Dracula book and its author play a significant role in this new story, an “extension” is far more appropriate. Co-writers Stoker and Dracula-scholar Ian Holt have obviously done an immense amount of research for this and, thus, the result is something much different from the original—which is, in my opinion, a good thing.
The story moves incredibly fast, though it’s easy to understand; generally the story is just intense, both thematically and in terms of pace, rather than complicated in details. The authors aren’t afraid to build your love and devotion to certain characters, only to then brutally snatch them away later on. Even though the plot is based in actual history, it’s never all that predictable and the very end is well worth the wait. My understanding is that Stoker and Holt wrote this, instead of a screenplay, as their first step toward a motion picture. That much is clear just by reading the book—the way they can create a visual image of the story in your head is almost terrifying sometimes.
Lastly, it should be noted that this is not a children’s story: very mature, modern themes are incorporated into this book, such as rape, drug-use, homosexuality, sadism, and what you might call “anti-family values.” Though it’s not necessarily a sad story, it will make you reconsider everything that you have come to know about the famous vampire.
As for my own satisfaction with this read… I would go so far as to say I enjoy it more than the original, though that may be largely due to it being a more contemporary style of literature. I love the nonfictional references, the way it retells the original story, and the new developments made to old characters. Though there are a million ways the film adaptation could truly fail, I am very optimistic as this is a novel fully prepared to become a motion picture. So, congratulations to Stoker and Holt on a job well done! Dracula: The Un-Dead is, by far, the best book I’ve read all year and has turned me back on to the horror genre in written form.