![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Book Review: Anno-Dracula by Kim Newman
Title: Anno-Dracula
Author: Kim Newman
Published: New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., 1992 (1993)
Page Count: 359
Total Page Count: 39,551
Text Number: 113
Read For: my own enjoyment, checked out from the library
Short review: In 1885, Count Dracula came to London to spread vampirism into the heart of Victorian England. But in this retelling of (literary) history, Van Helsing did not defeat Dracula; rather, Dracula succeeded, marrying Queen Victoria and becoming Prince Consort. Now, in 1888, vampires fill positions of power—but also the streets of Whitechapel, where a murderer is killing and mutilating young vampire prostitutes. The attempt to catch him brings together a upper class adventurer named Charles Beauregard and an ancient vampire elder named Genevieve Diuedonne. A clever concept that intertwines alternate history with horror and includes many familiar faces (including, of course, Jack the Ripper, known here as the Silver Knife), this is a promising political intrigue enrichened by vampires that, unfortunately, falls flat. Although the horror is indeed gruesome, the plot is detailed, and the vampires are skillfully conceived, the book's premise is impossible to believe and the writing style is cheap at best (and desperately in need of an editor at worst). This is a swift read and holds a lot of promise, but it is also, frankly, quite bad. I don't recommend it.
This premise as well as the character cameos create a promising and interesting starting place for the book. The Victorian setting, touching both on high society and the slums of Whitechapel, the characters which range from vampire elders to Jack the Ripper to minute appearances from even Oscar Wilde, and finally the vampires, conceived in thoughtful detail and as well as gruesome horror, certainly seems promising. And to his credit, Newman conceives and explores his plot well: it's a detailed combination of horror and history and politics, knitted together neatly but not too simply, and so remains interesting, readable, and both logical and unpredictable.
But the premise does not live up to its potential by a long shot. Instead, the book is bogged down by an underlying fault in the premise as well as poor storytelling. The premise's flaw is that Queen Victoria married Count Dracula prior to the start of the book, and that by the time of the book his plan to take control over England has proceeded largely without difficulty. Vampires roam the streets, and more are being reborn into vampirism every day—including those in the upper class. All of this, despite the fact that Dracula remains excessive, appalling, and violent as ever. Why is there no social resistance to vampirism? The book makes a big deal of it, but there is clearly no major social backlash—or the vampires would not have gotten so far. Jack the Ripper killing vampires makes more sense than anything else in the book, including the social struggles between the vampires and the "warm" and new politics including vampire rulers, in particular a vampire as Prince Consort. Despite the careful scripting and weaving of disparate threads and concepts, the result is a premise and plot that are, for lack of a better word, impossible, thus tainting the rest of the book with the reader's disbelief.
Worse than the premise is, unfortunately, the writing. The book depends on short chapters to keep the plot moving and repeated ellipses to create a sense of urgency (especially in the later chapters), and with constant errors in punctuation and capitalization it is in dire need of an editor. By contrast, there is nothing about the writing that stands out as artful, skillful, or even simply good. To an extent, the short chapters and simple writing keep the book moving smoothly and help to simplify what could be an overly complex plot, but on the whole the bad writing style is just that: bad. So, despite the promise of the premise, the unfeasible plot and the poor writing make this a disappointing, lackluster novel. I appreciate the attempt, but I didn't enjoy the product, and I don't recommend this book.
Review posted here at Amazon.com.
Author: Kim Newman
Published: New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., 1992 (1993)
Page Count: 359
Total Page Count: 39,551
Text Number: 113
Read For: my own enjoyment, checked out from the library
Short review: In 1885, Count Dracula came to London to spread vampirism into the heart of Victorian England. But in this retelling of (literary) history, Van Helsing did not defeat Dracula; rather, Dracula succeeded, marrying Queen Victoria and becoming Prince Consort. Now, in 1888, vampires fill positions of power—but also the streets of Whitechapel, where a murderer is killing and mutilating young vampire prostitutes. The attempt to catch him brings together a upper class adventurer named Charles Beauregard and an ancient vampire elder named Genevieve Diuedonne. A clever concept that intertwines alternate history with horror and includes many familiar faces (including, of course, Jack the Ripper, known here as the Silver Knife), this is a promising political intrigue enrichened by vampires that, unfortunately, falls flat. Although the horror is indeed gruesome, the plot is detailed, and the vampires are skillfully conceived, the book's premise is impossible to believe and the writing style is cheap at best (and desperately in need of an editor at worst). This is a swift read and holds a lot of promise, but it is also, frankly, quite bad. I don't recommend it.
This premise as well as the character cameos create a promising and interesting starting place for the book. The Victorian setting, touching both on high society and the slums of Whitechapel, the characters which range from vampire elders to Jack the Ripper to minute appearances from even Oscar Wilde, and finally the vampires, conceived in thoughtful detail and as well as gruesome horror, certainly seems promising. And to his credit, Newman conceives and explores his plot well: it's a detailed combination of horror and history and politics, knitted together neatly but not too simply, and so remains interesting, readable, and both logical and unpredictable.
But the premise does not live up to its potential by a long shot. Instead, the book is bogged down by an underlying fault in the premise as well as poor storytelling. The premise's flaw is that Queen Victoria married Count Dracula prior to the start of the book, and that by the time of the book his plan to take control over England has proceeded largely without difficulty. Vampires roam the streets, and more are being reborn into vampirism every day—including those in the upper class. All of this, despite the fact that Dracula remains excessive, appalling, and violent as ever. Why is there no social resistance to vampirism? The book makes a big deal of it, but there is clearly no major social backlash—or the vampires would not have gotten so far. Jack the Ripper killing vampires makes more sense than anything else in the book, including the social struggles between the vampires and the "warm" and new politics including vampire rulers, in particular a vampire as Prince Consort. Despite the careful scripting and weaving of disparate threads and concepts, the result is a premise and plot that are, for lack of a better word, impossible, thus tainting the rest of the book with the reader's disbelief.
Worse than the premise is, unfortunately, the writing. The book depends on short chapters to keep the plot moving and repeated ellipses to create a sense of urgency (especially in the later chapters), and with constant errors in punctuation and capitalization it is in dire need of an editor. By contrast, there is nothing about the writing that stands out as artful, skillful, or even simply good. To an extent, the short chapters and simple writing keep the book moving smoothly and help to simplify what could be an overly complex plot, but on the whole the bad writing style is just that: bad. So, despite the promise of the premise, the unfeasible plot and the poor writing make this a disappointing, lackluster novel. I appreciate the attempt, but I didn't enjoy the product, and I don't recommend this book.
Review posted here at Amazon.com.