Hot Best Seller

The Dracula Tape

Availability: Ready to download

Count Dracula tells his own version of his fateful journey to England in 1893, presenting a surprising revision to the well-known tale. Original.


Compare

Count Dracula tells his own version of his fateful journey to England in 1893, presenting a surprising revision to the well-known tale. Original.

30 review for The Dracula Tape

  1. 3 out of 5

    Dan

    Honestly, not the worst book I have ever read. But why the fuck would you want to do this??? Why lay a copy of Dracula on the ground, squat over it and spread your ass cheeks wide, and proceed to take a great big stinking shit on top of every single page of Bram Stoker's original brilliantly written story??!! *SPOILER ALERT* (actually, I'm not spoiling shit for you, cause this book sucks) Okay, it's the twentieth century and Mina and Jonathan Harker's great grand kids are trapped in a car during a Honestly, not the worst book I have ever read. But why the fuck would you want to do this??? Why lay a copy of Dracula on the ground, squat over it and spread your ass cheeks wide, and proceed to take a great big stinking shit on top of every single page of Bram Stoker's original brilliantly written story??!! *SPOILER ALERT* (actually, I'm not spoiling shit for you, cause this book sucks) Okay, it's the twentieth century and Mina and Jonathan Harker's great grand kids are trapped in a car during a snowstorm and Count Dracula is sitting in the back seat with a tape recorder telling them that they were lied to by their family and that the event's in Dracula were not the correct account of what happened. Basically tells how Dracula was just the misunderstood guy. It makes, although well explained, tall claims about what "really" happened in Dracula. Like, "Oh no, that part where Jonathan Harker said I fed my brides a baby. That wasn't a baby, it was a piglet!". And constantly talks about how he hated Van Helsing, but portrays him as stupid, self righteous and cowardly. He refers to Van Helsing as "The Butcher" throughout the whole book. It's not surprising that these two characters would hate one another, but Van Helsing is portrayed as a careless, sadistic asshole in this...not the wise hero that Stoker meant him to be. Oh, and R. M. Renfield was a rapist. Yeah of course, it was real convinient to say Renfield was a rapist cause he had psychological problems! And therefore he has to be full of shit too then! Also stripping away his heroic and redeeming death in the original. Even Dracula expert, Leonard Wolf, said "It is a gimmicky fiction whose primary gimmick is is that Dracula is the book's narrator and the fun is supposed to come from the ways in which the characters Stoker invented are made to look lugubrious or silly as they are seen from Dracula's point of view. The trouble is that Saberhagen like many practitioners of vampire fiction who have chosen to depict their vampires as sympathetic figures, leaches the horror from the image of the vampire. The result is that The Dracula Tape, though it is a pleasant enough fiction, is thin." Yeah, it's like all the other characters are made to be one dimensional cartoon characters...and "Oh, poor Dracula...he was just in love with Mina, that was it! He wasn't evil!". It's not listed in the credits to the movie, but supposedly Fred Saberhagen had a hand in writing the script for Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula. I actually liked that film, but the only thing I didn't like was the Romeo & Juliet/Anne Rice bullshit between Dracula and Mina in there. Not to speak ill of the dead, but...FUCK YOU, FRED SABERHAGEN FOR WRITING THIS!!!.

  2. 3 out of 5

    Stacia

    I'm wavering between 3 & 4 stars on this one.... As I'm a Dracula fan, I quite enjoyed this twist on Stoker's Dracula tale, told from the viewpoint of Dracula himself. There are fairly big portions that are quotes from Stoker's work, followed by a differing response in Dracula's voice. Any weak points in Stoker's work have been fully exploited here in presenting Dracula's view. Of course, Dracula saves a special dislike for Van Helsing; Dracula considers him both a quack & a religious nut I'm wavering between 3 & 4 stars on this one.... As I'm a Dracula fan, I quite enjoyed this twist on Stoker's Dracula tale, told from the viewpoint of Dracula himself. There are fairly big portions that are quotes from Stoker's work, followed by a differing response in Dracula's voice. Any weak points in Stoker's work have been fully exploited here in presenting Dracula's view. Of course, Dracula saves a special dislike for Van Helsing; Dracula considers him both a quack & a religious nut. Some of Dracula's descriptions of Van Helsing had me rofl, such as... "...the old maestro of obfuscation..." and "The vision of Van Helsing as a vampire is one before which my imagination balks; this is doubtless only a shortcoming on my part; he may have been well fitted for the role, since as we have seen he had already the power, by means of speech, to cast his victims into a stupor." This is a fun October read, especially if you are team Dracula.

  3. 5 out of 5

    Jim

    Before Anne Rice, Saberhagen was writing a modern vampire tale based on Stoker's own. In this book, we get Vlad's take on how things actually went down in Dracula. It's a great first person narrative complete with some of the most damning paragraphs reproduced here & explained in a far more logical tone. I see some reviewers have said that Vlad is the good guy. I don't fully agree. He's a cold-blooded bastard in many ways, but he has a code of honor that he follows rigorously, too. He's a man Before Anne Rice, Saberhagen was writing a modern vampire tale based on Stoker's own. In this book, we get Vlad's take on how things actually went down in Dracula. It's a great first person narrative complete with some of the most damning paragraphs reproduced here & explained in a far more logical tone. I see some reviewers have said that Vlad is the good guy. I don't fully agree. He's a cold-blooded bastard in many ways, but he has a code of honor that he follows rigorously, too. He's a man who has endured much, but also has expectations as befitting an older gent who rules a land. The unreasoning fear that the rest of mankind has for him is their problem & he does little to dispel it. I only wish I had read Dracula more recently before reading this. I think that would have made it better.

  4. 5 out of 5

    Willow

    This book starts out with a tape recording found in a car. On the tape, Count Dracula tells his account of what really happened in the book Dracula. Only in Vlad’s account, he is a great guy who’s been horribly maligned, and Van Helsing is an evil quack. I suppose when The Dracula Tape was first published it was probably quite innovative. Unfortunately, it lacks suspense, because it follows the events of Bram Stokers classic almost exactly. There are even long quotes from Dracula (which is kind This book starts out with a tape recording found in a car. On the tape, Count Dracula tells his account of what really happened in the book Dracula. Only in Vlad’s account, he is a great guy who’s been horribly maligned, and Van Helsing is an evil quack. I suppose when The Dracula Tape was first published it was probably quite innovative. Unfortunately, it lacks suspense, because it follows the events of Bram Stokers classic almost exactly. There are even long quotes from Dracula (which is kind of jarring considering Stoker’s prose is so much more gothic than Saberhagen’s.) I knew exactly what was going to happen. Vlad is pretty much invincible. Most of Van Helsing’s weapons are rendered useless since religious artifacts don’t affect vampires. Vlad is also always twelve steps ahead of everybody. He’s smarter, sexier and nobler than all the other characters. I certainly wasn’t worried about him. This makes him a Gary Stu. *yawn* Yes there are parts that are funny and the book has some clever ideas. Unfortunately, it’s not enough to carry a whole book. I found it kind of dull.

  5. 4 out of 5

    Martel

    Bram Stoker's classic rewritten from Dracula's point of view. And guess what...? He's the good guy ! I loved this. Spend almost the entire audiobook laughing. Good thing I listened to it at home. Of course I'm a fan of the original, so I guess I was fair game on this one. Special mention to the narrator who did an amazing job personifying Vlad, with all his humor and volatile temper. I especially enjoyed how insincere he sounded sometimes. Many of the flaws from the first novel have been exploited, Bram Stoker's classic rewritten from Dracula's point of view. And guess what...? He's the good guy ! I loved this. Spend almost the entire audiobook laughing. Good thing I listened to it at home. Of course I'm a fan of the original, so I guess I was fair game on this one. Special mention to the narrator who did an amazing job personifying Vlad, with all his humor and volatile temper. I especially enjoyed how insincere he sounded sometimes. Many of the flaws from the first novel have been exploited, or explained away with brio. If you ever had, like me, some questions about Stoker's plot, (view spoiler)[ (ahem... blood transfusions from three different guys, really ?) (hide spoiler)] they'll be answered here. Some parts were a bit weaker, but I guess even Fred Saberhagen couldn't do better with the ship or Mina's story. Or maybe Vlad was just a bit less convincing on these parts ;) All in all, it was amazing. But to enjoy it to the fullest, you have of course to like the original and not minding read or listen to the same story again, even if a bit... different.

  6. 4 out of 5

    Sarah

    Seeing that 'Dracula' was the first classic novel I truly fell in love with, I am always on the lookout for pastiches and have found, like in most other venues of art, there are many, many bad ones; however a friend suggested this to me and I was more than willing to give it a go. And I'm so glad I did! Usually the narration of these types of novels gets a bit muddled and lost when trying to craft a new story within the limits of the already existing story; however, this being narrated be Drac Seeing that 'Dracula' was the first classic novel I truly fell in love with, I am always on the lookout for pastiches and have found, like in most other venues of art, there are many, many bad ones; however a friend suggested this to me and I was more than willing to give it a go. And I'm so glad I did! Usually the narration of these types of novels gets a bit muddled and lost when trying to craft a new story within the limits of the already existing story; however, this being narrated be Dracula himself gave the story the clarity and whole new point of view it needed to both work and be independent, but still existing within Stoker's world. If you are at all interested in Dracula, or real vampires (aka not Twilight ones) the I highly recommend this to you and hope you love it as much if not more than I did. It's a wonderful new side of a classic, that's not often done justice.

  7. 3 out of 5

    Tony

    This is an old novel, but still a long time favorite, and one I have reread quite a few times. Saberhagen essentially took the Stoker "Dracula" story, and told it from Dracula's point of view. He also brings up certain details that I never considered in reading the original, that does call into question some of the events in the Stoker story. This turned out to be the first in a series of Dracula novels by Saberhagen. The only one that I really feel had close to the same level of enjoyment was This is an old novel, but still a long time favorite, and one I have reread quite a few times. Saberhagen essentially took the Stoker "Dracula" story, and told it from Dracula's point of view. He also brings up certain details that I never considered in reading the original, that does call into question some of the events in the Stoker story. This turned out to be the first in a series of Dracula novels by Saberhagen. The only one that I really feel had close to the same level of enjoyment was The Holmes/Dracula File. (yes, just what it sounds like)

  8. 3 out of 5

    Becka Sutton

    The Dracula Tape by Fred Saberhagen is a book with the power to make me go WOOT. Well it's got vampires in it which helps. But more importantly this is a bloody good book! Back when I first read it in 2000 I wrote the following review on Amazon UK. "This is a gem in my opinion. The case for the defense as it were and in places it truely tears the prosecution (Dracula by Bram Stoker of course :-)) to shreds. In others the defense case has it's own weaknesses but I suspect this was deliberately done The Dracula Tape by Fred Saberhagen is a book with the power to make me go WOOT. Well it's got vampires in it which helps. But more importantly this is a bloody good book! Back when I first read it in 2000 I wrote the following review on Amazon UK. "This is a gem in my opinion. The case for the defense as it were and in places it truely tears the prosecution (Dracula by Bram Stoker of course :-)) to shreds. In others the defense case has it's own weaknesses but I suspect this was deliberately done by Saberhagen. There are three sides to every story, your side, my side and the truth inbetween. So now we have two sides... will we ever have the third? Well not until the Dracula tape goes out of Copyright I guess :-). That's the one problem the dracula tape, it does quote large chunks of Dracula verbatim, then again it never claims to do otherwise. This is not a book that could have been written while the original was still in copyright. Then again we have our imaginations... don't we." I stick by this even now nine years later. (Though hopefully with better punctuation and without the missing words). This book is still a gem. It's no spoiler to say that this novel consists of Dracula telling his version of the events of "Dracula" by Bram Stoker to the descendents of Jonathan and Mina Harker while they tape it. That's just the starting point for a very interesting sideways look at "Dracula". Saberhagen's novel is in many ways a deconstruction of Stoker's most famous work. It gleefully points out all the plot holes in "Dracula". Plot holes that when considered at length make Stoker's storyline a real mess. I will say no more, because if I describe the plot holes there's no point in reading Saberhagen's classy tale. It's these plot holes that allow Saberhagen to have Dracula make a compelling -- if occasionally rocky -- case in his own defense. The book is actually the first in a series but I have only read the original book. My verdict: Classy, witty and very imaginative. This is definately a novel I recommend to anyone and everyone.

  9. 3 out of 5

    Coyle

    This book was a bit underwhelming. I kept thinking of that scene from the movie version of Interview with the Vampire (I can't remember if it was in the book or not) where Tom Cruise said to Christian Slater something to the effect of "Man, aren't you sick of that whining?" That's pretty much Dracula in this book "I'm so misunderstood! Van Helsing was just a big meanie!" And so on. As I understand it, this is the first (or at least one of the first) in the "vampires aren't really so bad after al This book was a bit underwhelming. I kept thinking of that scene from the movie version of Interview with the Vampire (I can't remember if it was in the book or not) where Tom Cruise said to Christian Slater something to the effect of "Man, aren't you sick of that whining?" That's pretty much Dracula in this book "I'm so misunderstood! Van Helsing was just a big meanie!" And so on. As I understand it, this is the first (or at least one of the first) in the "vampires aren't really so bad after all" line of books, only later to be matched by "Interview with the Vampire", the Chairlane Harris things, and that series where they glitter instead of explode. So well done Mr. Saberhagen there. And I fully admit that this particular retelling of Dracula from the vampire's point of view was also clever. The problem was, it was a retelling of Dracula. There was some innovation, but by and large it was the same story (and the innovation wasn't good enough to make up for it). That said, Saberhagen is a competent enough writer. So this book is worthy enough if you're looking for an older take on the vampire legend.

  10. 4 out of 5

    Chris

    Saberhagen really knows the source text and is true to the original story, although he does add a few scenes that suit his purpose. I was anxious to read this one after enjoying Seance for a Vampire, in which Drac meets Holmes and Watson. In that book Drac was a formidable ally, full of swagger and charisma. In The Dracula Tape not so much. He came off to me as, dare I say it, a whiner--complaining that he got blamed for this or that or trying to make himself seem to be the good guy in the story Saberhagen really knows the source text and is true to the original story, although he does add a few scenes that suit his purpose. I was anxious to read this one after enjoying Seance for a Vampire, in which Drac meets Holmes and Watson. In that book Drac was a formidable ally, full of swagger and charisma. In The Dracula Tape not so much. He came off to me as, dare I say it, a whiner--complaining that he got blamed for this or that or trying to make himself seem to be the good guy in the story. He is one of the great villains of all time but seems very uncomfortable with the role. I really wanted the strong, swaggering, formidable Count (of the original or of Saberhagen's Seance for a Vampire) back and didn't recognize the guy in this book. I will keep reading, but this isn't my favorite of the series.

  11. 5 out of 5

    Ken

    This is a re-telling of Bram Stoker's Dracula from the point of view of the vampire himself. I thought the book well written but found myself bored at times as it was a little too much of a "re-telling" with multiple excerpts from the original text. 3 1/2 STARS

  12. 4 out of 5

    Graeme Davis

    Dracula in modern-day (or rather, 1980s) America. Well-written and workmanlike, but not a keeper in my opinion. There were other books in this series: Thorn is the only other title I can remember.

  13. 5 out of 5

    Timothy Boyd

    Here we have the "true" story of Dracula. Well at least the story from Dracula's point of view. He defends himself and his actions as told in the original novel. Good read. Very recommended

  14. 3 out of 5

    David

    Good light-hearted fun.

  15. 4 out of 5

    Kylie

    Well, I guess I should probably give it 2.5 stars as it did retain my interest to keep me reading a bit every day, but overall I was underwhelmed. These days it's not all that shocking a concept that a vampire might be less of a nightmarish fiend from hell then it probably was when this was originally published. Also, while the events of the original novel are paraphrased and added upon there are also many sections where direct quotes from the Stoker novel are copied verbatim - usually for Saber Well, I guess I should probably give it 2.5 stars as it did retain my interest to keep me reading a bit every day, but overall I was underwhelmed. These days it's not all that shocking a concept that a vampire might be less of a nightmarish fiend from hell then it probably was when this was originally published. Also, while the events of the original novel are paraphrased and added upon there are also many sections where direct quotes from the Stoker novel are copied verbatim - usually for Saberhagen's Dracula to critique, but I still found that rather tedious and uninspired.

  16. 4 out of 5

    James Joyce

    In 1970s America, Dracula tells tale to descendants of Mina and Jonathan Harker. This book is from the cassette recordings made of that story. The driven, near-homicidal Dr. Van Helsing and his band of mislead heroes against the VERY maligned Count and his true love. Romance, adventure, tragedy, and someone finally explaining the ending of Stoker's novel, which just never made sense.

  17. 3 out of 5

    Natalie Keating

    I rather enjoyed this alternate retelling of Dracula. The basic premise is this: Count Dracula, tired of being maligned for years (remember, Bram Stoker's novel was published in 1897 and this book takes place in the 1970s), decides to tell his side of the story. For hours, he speaks into a tape recorder telling his version of events. He isn't quite as bad as everyone thinks he is, and the group of people who pursued him (Jonathan Harker, Abraham Van Helsing, and the like) were bumbling idiots at I rather enjoyed this alternate retelling of Dracula. The basic premise is this: Count Dracula, tired of being maligned for years (remember, Bram Stoker's novel was published in 1897 and this book takes place in the 1970s), decides to tell his side of the story. For hours, he speaks into a tape recorder telling his version of events. He isn't quite as bad as everyone thinks he is, and the group of people who pursued him (Jonathan Harker, Abraham Van Helsing, and the like) were bumbling idiots at best and malicious at worst. For those readers who reviewed it and criticized the fact that we know both the story line (since the events of Bram Stoker's novel are present in this one) and the ending (presumably, if Dracula still exists in the 1970s, Van Helsing and his posse didn't succeed in killing him, if killing is the right word to use for the undead!), I want to ask: why read this book?! If you want something new and with a surprising ending, it's probably smarter not to read a book that is a retelling of a classic. It's like complaining about knowing the end of Wide Sargasso Sea. Since this novel overlaps and complements the events described in Jane Eyre, of course one would know the basic premise of the ending if one has read the original work! So yes, I quite enjoyed this book. I enjoyed Dracula's voice throughout it. I think the author did a good job of capturing his erudite, slightly old-fashioned English. And the fact that Dracula's actually quite witty makes the book all the more enjoyable to read. There are nine other books following this one, if I remember correctly, and I enjoyed this one enough to want to seek out the others.

  18. 5 out of 5

    Jheurf

    "Hello, my name is...Drahculaa...and I am an insufferable bore. I just spent 10 hours trapped in a car in a snowstorm with a couple (for no other reason than to scare them) to record my side of the story. But don't worry, you won't learn anything exciting or new: I purposely decided to tell the exact same story from the book, but it will be in the first person because I am telling it. Whenever I briefly stray from the original narrative, I will quickly wave this off as unimportant and go back to "Hello, my name is...Drahculaa...and I am an insufferable bore. I just spent 10 hours trapped in a car in a snowstorm with a couple (for no other reason than to scare them) to record my side of the story. But don't worry, you won't learn anything exciting or new: I purposely decided to tell the exact same story from the book, but it will be in the first person because I am telling it. Whenever I briefly stray from the original narrative, I will quickly wave this off as unimportant and go back to telling you about Jonathan Harker's chamber pots I had to empty. In. Way. Too. Many. Details. I will also call all my enemies idiots because they don't know everything I do." Hi, my name is Jheurf and I got fed up with this annoying snob after 50 minutes of the audiobook. There might be something more happening later, but so far it is boring. It brings nothing new to the story and there was nothing intriguing enough to warrant further listening.

  19. 4 out of 5

    Sean Dhaliwal

    This book is a very entertaining breath of fresh air. I was always left a little underwhelmed by Stoker's original text, and I always wanted to believe that there was more to Dracula than meets the eye. Saberhagen fulfills that belief of mine. He turns the Count into a totally different but at the same time familiar character. He's also very likeable. I love how the premise of this story is a clearing up of matters by Dracula. He's been slandered in Stoker's text and he's now setting the record This book is a very entertaining breath of fresh air. I was always left a little underwhelmed by Stoker's original text, and I always wanted to believe that there was more to Dracula than meets the eye. Saberhagen fulfills that belief of mine. He turns the Count into a totally different but at the same time familiar character. He's also very likeable. I love how the premise of this story is a clearing up of matters by Dracula. He's been slandered in Stoker's text and he's now setting the record straight. I simply LOVE it! It's a very funny book, and Saberhagen knows his original text very well. Yes, he does take liberties with the source material, but the very nature of this book will require him to. Thankfully, he does it very well. Sure, this book has now totally colored my understanding of Dracula, but I don't care. I'd like to think that Dracula was a misunderstood vampire.

  20. 5 out of 5

    David Fackelman

    The Dracula Tape is a wonderful retelling of the classic story from Dracula's perspective. It is an exceptionally easy read in which Dracula is portrayed as a fallible, rational, introspective being, not at all like the cold, calculating, ravenous predator as told from living's point of view in Bram Stoker's work. Because of my esteem for the classic story, Saberhagen's portrayal of the events of that story from the Count's perspective was so much fun to read. Simply a fanciful twist to a wonder The Dracula Tape is a wonderful retelling of the classic story from Dracula's perspective. It is an exceptionally easy read in which Dracula is portrayed as a fallible, rational, introspective being, not at all like the cold, calculating, ravenous predator as told from living's point of view in Bram Stoker's work. Because of my esteem for the classic story, Saberhagen's portrayal of the events of that story from the Count's perspective was so much fun to read. Simply a fanciful twist to a wonderful story. There is not much new in terms of plot or events so I'm looking forward to reading the next in the series, The Holmes-Dracula File. For which I've seen there have been better reviews than for books later in the series. A definite recommendation from me for fans of Dracula.

  21. 3 out of 5

    Rasmus Skovdal

    This is not a bad book. But it's also not a very interesting book, beyond the premise. It's a fun idea, and it works - but it doesn't work for more than, say, 50 pages. There are some fairly good ideas throughout, but as a whole it just sort of levels out and goes for solidly mediocre. The two star 'it was ok' rating is perfect for something like this. The books aren't similar, but for an alternate take on Dracula, read Kim Newman's Anno Dracula instead.

  22. 5 out of 5

    Titus Hjelm

    The basic idea is intriguing, and after having read quite a bunch of bad vampire fiction lately, I looked forward to reading this a lot. Well, it turned out to be a disappointment. I really don't get what the fuss about this book is/was. But hats off to the author, you can only do so much trying to rewrite a classic, after all...

  23. 3 out of 5

    Kimber

    Definitely a unique take on the Dracula mythos. I was put off initially because it was just that different, and I'm generally a purist at heart. But as I read on and saw it as more of a perspective change than a retelling or alternate version it became fascinating. Fred Saberhagen never disappoints in his writing either. Very well done.

  24. 3 out of 5

    Rebecca McNutt

    Interesting, kind of fun little novel. If you're a horror fan it'll definitely appeal to you.

  25. 4 out of 5

    Fred Fenimore

    ugh! blow by blow retelling of the original. like the wolf's retelling of the three pigs, except waaaay too long. perhaps I'll try one of the later more original ones..

  26. 5 out of 5

    Frank Showalter

    Stoker's Dracula as told by Dracula himself. The book entertains early with the Count playing an engaging anti-hero quoting Stoker's work and providing color commentary. Consider the classic scene where Harker stumbles upon the sleeping Count in his crypt: "There was no lethal weapon at hand, but I seized a shovel which the workmen had been using to fill the cases, and lifting it high, struck, with the edge downward, at the hateful face. But as I did so the head turned, and the eyes fell full upo Stoker's Dracula as told by Dracula himself. The book entertains early with the Count playing an engaging anti-hero quoting Stoker's work and providing color commentary. Consider the classic scene where Harker stumbles upon the sleeping Count in his crypt: "There was no lethal weapon at hand, but I seized a shovel which the workmen had been using to fill the cases, and lifting it high, struck, with the edge downward, at the hateful face. But as I did so the head turned, and the eyes fell full upon me, with all their blaze of basilisk horror. The sight seemed to paralyse me, and the shovel turned in my hand and glanced from the face, merely making a deep gash above the forehead." In rebuttal I can only reiterate that the sight of Harker swinging a shove at my head was somewhat perturbing to me as well. But as the story wears on, the adherence to the Stoker narrative proves confining. Saberhagen's humanized Dracula lacks edge, reducing him to a passive protagonist relating a story we've already heard.

  27. 3 out of 5

    Richard

    Excellent as an audio book. After all, Dracula is talking on a tape. The good Count gives his version of events detailed in Bram Stoker’s novel. I read this book years ago and thought it was just O.K. I hadn’t read Stoker’s book, I thought it was enough to know the story via movie adaptations and various other secondary sources. It was, and the book does stand on its own. Recently I read Stoker’s book. With that being relatively fresh, it brought a greater appreciation to Saberhagen’s work. He m Excellent as an audio book. After all, Dracula is talking on a tape. The good Count gives his version of events detailed in Bram Stoker’s novel. I read this book years ago and thought it was just O.K. I hadn’t read Stoker’s book, I thought it was enough to know the story via movie adaptations and various other secondary sources. It was, and the book does stand on its own. Recently I read Stoker’s book. With that being relatively fresh, it brought a greater appreciation to Saberhagen’s work. He mined Stoker’s inconsistencies to good effect and weaved a narrative that perfectly dovetails with Stoker’s version. Great listen.

  28. 3 out of 5

    Yafen Shen

    The more familiar one is with Stoker's novel "Dracula", the more s/he will enjoy Saberhagen's clever effort. Written in the first person as an apologia authored by the dark Count himself, he does a masterly job of addressing thoroughly every incident, spinning each so plausibly that, by the end, Van Helsing is a detestable fanatic; Mr Harker a contemptible, dimwitted cuckold; and Dracula the brave misunderstood lover one can't help cheering for.

  29. 3 out of 5

    Cyn

    It said, they said. That's basically what this boils down to. The testimony of Dracula himself against everyone else involved. I've never read the original Dracula (I'm allergic to novels that are more than 100 years old), but I knew enough about the sequence of events to be aware of how Dracula's take on things differed from the "original" story. I found this to be an interesting take on the classic tale. The narrator also did a decent job.

  30. 4 out of 5

    Diane

    I loved this. It was amusing hearing the Count explain things from his point of view. Especially as it relates to Van Helsing who he thinks talks too much (a complaint in which I whole heartedly agree). Dracula as really just misunderstood..... ;-)

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.