Tonight’s Dracula
update:
Stoker is a strange writer. As previously opined, he writes
lunatics and brutality very well, using a style that is tight, eloquent and
relatively restrained. His ‘ordinary’ characters, on the other hand, are a bit
limp, and his relating of procedural detail is overdone. But now I’ve come to
the real problem. We’re in the emotional aftermath of Mina’s assault by the
Count, and the excesses are almost wondrous to behold. Whether he was trying to
out-worst the worst of Dickens, I don’t know, but page after torturous page is
so overloaded with excessive melodrama and mawkish sentimentality that reading
them feels like drowning in a vat of disgustingly sweet syrup.
I think I’m just about through it now, and there is
adventure in prospect, so I will persevere.
4 comments:
We both just popped onto my blog at the same time. heh.
I was making a piece of toast when you popped onto mine, so now I'm going to make another one to see whether it works twice.
Well, i'm back, but perhaps a little later.
I'm enjoying your insight on Dracual. Its been a few years since i've read it... i'll have to read it again soon. Didn't read Mists this year, or my usual Autumnal reading of Sleepy Hollow and Rip Van Winkle. So, Dracula will probably make a good change.
I think I should stop criticising Stoker's style and stick to commenting on the plot. The problem is that there isn't much plot at the moment. The first third of the book was atmospheric and quite fast paced, but the middle is descending into a sentimental swamp. I have confidence that it will pick up again.
Post a Comment