Sway through the crowd to an empty space

The story that Stoker tells, via letters, diary entries, telegrams, and even a few newspaper articles, is about what happens when the undead Count Dracula travels to London and how his activities (mainly bloodsucking and general bad vibes vampire business) interact with the protagonists of the novel.

This isn’t my first encounter with the Count; I read a children’s version as a child and then delved into the actual text during high school. Since then, I’ve consumed numerous other adaptations of this tale. My decision to revisit the story was inspired by reading Reluctant Immortals, which continues the story of Lucy Westenra, one of the Count’s early victims in Stoker’s narrative.

Our main point-of-view characters, whose writings we get to spy upon, are Jonathan Harker, a young English lawyer, Mina his finance, Dr. Seward who oversees a mental institution, and Lucy, Mina’s close friend. Despite being the character mentioned in the title, we don’t get Dracula’s point of view. In fact, upon rereading, I was shocked by the long stretches of the novel where Dracula was off-screen. His machinations could be felt, and we learn about some of his victims, but the Count himself was not physically present for much of it. It’s fair to say that even while being “off-screen” for a lot of the novel, the Count casts a long, dark shadow. I think it’s a testament to Stoker’s writing that he’s able to pull off this trick.

While I do love epistolary novels, there can be a bit of a lack of suspense at times because you know the characters lived long enough to record their impressions, be it in a diary, telegram, letter, or even a phonograph recording in the case of Dr. Seward. However, there is still tension because some of the characters never reveal their inner thoughts, so their fate remains uncertain. There’s always the sense that once a character finishes their writing, they could be in grave danger.

As an aside about the novel’s writing style, I admired the use of letters and telegrams to convey parts of the story. It’s not a major plot point, but I enjoy it when modern epistolary novels include text messages or emails, so the inclusion of telegrams here made me smile.

For a book first published in 1897, I have to say, it holds up! Sure, its age shows from time to time, but the story’s beats remain compelling. It’s a good story! Revisiting it in its original form after consuming so many other versions of the tale was interesting. My biggest quibbles with the book are:

1. Specifically regarding the audiobook version I listened to, the voice acting for Van Helsing did not work for me at all.
2. The story just doesn’t stick the landing for me. The tension builds up to a pretty high level, and then it just… ends. The wrap-up afterward didn’t feel satisfying to me.

Overall, I’m glad I re-read the book. It’s been ages, and it was nice to get a reminder of what happened in the book versus what has happened in various adaptations of the source material over the years.