books

Dracula

/ austinfey / Leave a comment

I thought the winter would be a great time to dive into the adventures of the original vampire. The story was somewhat familiar, not least because of the popularity of horror-story creatures in movies and tv shows these days. I think these stories have just about reached saturation, but I thought I’d visit the original tale before enthusiasm completely dies out (see what I did there?).

Since it was published in 1897 by Bram Stoker, the style of writing occasionally meandered a bit more than I’d like, but for the most part the story moves along at a good clip.

The book also consists mostly of diary entries and letters of the protagonists, with very little other narration — an interesting frame to the story. The reader only sees Dracula through the narrative eyes of other characters, which I think heightens the sense of mystery around him.

The Story

The story starts with Jonathan Harker, a solicitor’s clerk, who goes to visit his client, Count Dracula, in Transylvania to inform him of the purchase of a home for the Count in England. After arriving, Harker is trapped in the Count’s Castle and eventually left there for the three vampire women who live with the Count to feast on once the Count has left for England and fresh blood. Fortunately for Harker, he’s clever and escapes.

Meanwhile, his fiancee, Mina, is in England with her best friend Lucy. Dracula is on board a ship that happens to land at the seaside town where Mina and Lucy are staying, which is a huge coincidence. Later Mina notices that Lucy is growing pale and is sleepwalking a lot.

If Mina had watched more tv, she’d have recognized the signs, but alas….

Anyway, adventures ensue, with vampire-hunter Van Helsing arriving midway through the book to help track down and destroy the evil Un-Dead before he can claim more victims. He brings a lot of garlic and a lot of vampire knowledge, which is good for the protagonists and bad for Dracula.

Other Thoughts

Since this story was written by a male author in the 19th century, there were a few times I rolled my eyes at the depiction of Mina and Lucy. When the vampire hunting is in full force, the men decide that although Mina has been super helpful and transcribed all their notes and organized them (to be fair, Jonathan helps her some), for her protection they stop telling her what’s going on and keep her in the dark. Because…she’s a woman and should be spared the worry. They respect her though, because she has a brain that’s shockingly almost as smart as a man’s. Cool cool.

So this awesome plan of protection backfires when the next morning she turns up pale and somewhat blood-drained…. Good job, guys. Never leave someone out of your plans if you’re in a horror story! So other than a few eye-rolling remarks about men vs. women, I enjoyed the tale of suspense.

Also of interest were the abilities Dracula possessed and his weaknesses when compared to other vampires in pop culture. The one thing I didn’t quite understand was that Dracula couldn’t cross flowing water on his own, unless it was at low or high tide? I’m not really sure about the symbolism of flowing water as it relates to vampires, so if anyone knows, pass that along.

All in all, a pretty good horror tale.

Also, at no point does Dracula say, “I vant to suck your blood!” That’s a relief.

Rating

★ ★ ★ ★

Back to the Classics Challenge 2017

/ austinfey / Leave a comment

Well, it’s that time of year again…I make reading goals that I may or may not complete.

Back to the Classics Challenge 2017

I’m going to try to read books from the categories in the Back to the Classics Challenge this year.

For the full rules, visit Karen’s Books and Chocolate blog to see what it’s all about and/or participate.

Here are the 12 categories, with my tentative book choices (I’ll update if I change my mind or pick titles for the categories I haven’t chosen a book for yet):

1. A 19th century classic – The Tenant of Wildfell Hall (A. Bronte)

2. A 20th century classic – TBD

3. A classic by a woman author – Lark Rise to Candleford (F. Thompson)

4. A classic in translation – something by A. Dumas…not sure which one yet.

5. A classic originally published before 1800 – Richard III? Henry IV? …one of the histories (W. Shakespeare)

6. A romance classic – Doctor Thorne (A. Trollope)

7. A Gothic or horror classic – Dracula (B. Stoker)

8. A classic with a number in the title – A Tale of Two Cities (C. Dickens) or The Two Towers (J. R. R. Tolkien)

9. A classic about an animal or which includes the name of an animal in the title – Animal Farm (G. Orwell)

10. A classic set in a place you’d like to visit – TBD…let’s be honest, it’ll probably be something else by a British author because I want to visit the UK next. 🙂

11. An award-winning classic – The Man in the High Castle (P. K. Dick)

12. A Russian classic – TBD

We’ll see how it goes this year! I’m a little over halfway through Dracula now, and I started Doctor Thorne, both of which I’m enjoying. More on those when I finish them.

Books (Re)Read: Persuasion

/ austinfey / Leave a comment

For #AusteninAugust (genius idea for an excuse to read or re-read some Jane Austen or Austen-inspired literature), I re-read Persuasion. I think this is probably my second favorite Jane Austen book. Well…it might be tied with Emma for that distinction.

Title & Author:

Persuasion, by Jane Austen (1818)

Persuasion by Jane Austen

Summary:

Anne Elliot, the daughter of a spendthrift baronet, is 28, unmarried, and without immediate prospects. She was engaged 8(?) years before the story opens to a young naval officer, Frederick Wentworth, but was persuaded by her almost-surrogate mother to break off the engagement as the young man was poor and unknown, and her rank should attract much better options.

When Anne’s family moves out of their house and rents it to his sister and brother-in-law, Captain Wentworth re-appears on the scene, but makes it clear that he no longer cares for Anne. It has been years since their engagement, and she knows everything is over between them.

They both make it quite clear that they have moved on. There’s no reason to suspect they might still like each other. Definitely not. Read this book and read how fine they are without each other. Nothing to see here.

Thoughts:

…Jane Austen puts all of this much more eloquently than my summary, which may have devolved a bit at the end.

I love the protagonist, Anne Elliot. I wish she was real so we could be friends. She is so sweet and patient and kind and overlooked, as such people can be. Thankfully, Austen gives her a few true friends who appreciate and value her, and she is generally liked because she treats everyone with such understanding and is a sympathetic listener. She is kind to everyone she meets, even if she does not particularly care for them. She tries to give them the benefit of the doubt, but she is a good observer and does not excuse bad behavior.

Anne is a clever, reading woman, and is loyal to a fault. She cares and looks after her family and bears with them and doesn’t often give way to frustration or anger. In a culture that tells you to leave behind anything or anyone that doesn’t promote your personal happiness, Anne’s story and choices are unusual.

This is sometimes called one of Austen’s “more mature works,” which means it isn’t quite so overtly witty as Pride & Prejudice, and has a more melancholy tone. Austen shows us how lonely life can be sometimes, and the ways in which our internal dialogue can lead us astray. We are not always truthful even with ourselves, and that is fascinating to observe. We sometimes lie to ourselves because we think it will make a painful situation easier, or because we do not want to admit how we really feel.

Of course, as always, the secondary cast is full of wonderful characters. By “wonderful” I mean they are sharply drawn characters who are often ridiculous and hilarious, especially Anne’s vain father and attention-seeking youngest sister.

Maybe later I will write a post about my favorite Jane Austen secondary characters. There are so many to love and some I love to hate.

As always, I enjoyed this book immensely, and feel even more convinced that any Austen novel richly rewards the careful reader.

Rating:

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

Bronte vs. Austen, Continued

/ austinfey / 1 Comment

In an earlier post I started talking about how I’ve seen strong feelings about (see this Goodreads thread for just one example)

Charlotte Bronte (specifically, Jane Eyre)

JaneEyre

vs. Jane Austen (probably more specifically, Pride & Prejudice)

JaneAusten

Many people feel a stronger affinity for one or the other of the Janes, and do not care as much for the other. Bronte fans complain that they just can’t “get into” Austen, and Austen fans say the same about Bronte.

It is true that Austen and Bronte have quite different styles, and very different heroines (though both have strong female protagonists).

People tend to gravitate toward either the darker tone of the gothic-esque Jane Eyre, or they prefer the lighter tone of Pride and Prejudice (and the other Austen novels). Are you more drawn in by the passionate emotions of Jane Eyre, or by the wit and sparkle of Elizabeth Bennet?

Personally, I love both Jane Eyre and Pride and Prejudice, and have loved them both since I read them in high school. I love them for different reasons, but I generally hear of people connecting with one and not the other.

Some think that comparing the two authors is like comparing apples to oranges. While I agree that they are different, I think certainly some comparisons can be made, and of course, some room will have to be left for personal taste. I think a commenter on a Goodreads thread put it well:

“I always say that they’re like Bach and Beethoven. Jane Austen’s the better prose stylist, but Bronte has the power and passion.”

I too like them for different reasons, and appreciate them in different moods, just as I do with Bach and Beethoven. Bronte is able to capture emotion and drama and the wild passion and sometimes the creepy (what is the deal with Grace Poole??). Austen has more lightness and order, an understated style (for example, this gem: “Emma was not required, by any subsequent discovery, to retract her ill opinion of Mrs. Elton.”), and is able to capture a portrait of society and paints hilarious caricatures of people living in that society. In some ways, Bronte appeals to emotion and Austen to reason, though that is too simplistic; both have elements of each.

Austen has moments of passion (read Sense and Sensibility for its characterization of Marianne Dashwood; or read closely into the actions of Lydia Bennet). Nor is Bronte only wild, dark, and humorless (in one chapter of Jane Eyre, Mr. Rochester dresses up like a gypsy woman – while it’s slightly…offensive, he uses his disguise to poke fun at everyone). There are distinct differences between the two authors though, and there are generalities to make about their works. Art needs both of these ends of the spectrum (and others besides).

My goal here is to try to persuade those who only love one or the other of these great literary ladies to give the other a chance. And if you want a cheerleader for one of them, come talk to me. I’m happy to discuss their merits any time.

This post is getting too long, so I’ll save my suggestions for optimal reading conditions for another time. But I do think when and where you read makes a difference. More on that later….

Photos by Val used under Flickr Creative Commons license. 

Books Read: Crooked House

/ austinfey / 1 Comment

The list of Agatha Christie books I have not read is dwindling. Christie said that this was one of her favorites to write.

Crooked House, by Agatha Christie

Title & Author

Crooked House, by Agatha Christie (1949)

Summary & Thoughts

After meeting Sophia Leonides abroad and falling in love, Charles Hayward (the narrator) visits her back home in England to properly ask her to marry him. She says she can’t marry him because her grandfather has been murdered (she fears it might be one of the family), and until that is cleared up, she cannot start a new life with anyone. As his father conveniently works with the police (or Scotland Yard? I’m already forgetting which investigative branch he works for), Charles joins the investigation to discover the murderer and clear the air.

And so begin the twists and turns of interviewing the family and staff and looking for clues. Agatha Christie doesn’t disappoint with her usual style of red herrings and confused investigators, and she continues her theme of drawing upon nursery rhymes for titles.

If you haven’t read much Christie, some of my favorites are “Murder on the Orient Express,” “And Then There Were None,” “Cards on the Table,” and “The Murder of Roger Ackroyd.” Though maybe you shouldn’t start with those, as they are some of her best, and you may be disappointed if you read all the best first. Maybe sprinkle them throughout your reading.

Rating

★ ★ ★