Freda Warrington's Dracula the Undead
Okay, had my lunch break and am continuing with review of Dracula the Undead by Freda Warrington. Apologies for spamming with multiple posts!
From journal - July 12th-ish
Title: Dracula the Undead.
Author: Freda Warrington
Published: Penguin Books 1997
This is touted on the cover as 'the chilling sequel to Bram Stoker's Dracula '.
First thoughts: can this strictly be a sequel since it was written by someone other than Stoker? I feel much the same way about Jean Rhys's Wide Sargasso Sea and Scarlett (can't remember who wrote this offhand, but it's the 'sequel' to Gone with the Wind. I don't know, maybe I'm being too critical and nit-picky here. I feel that maybe 'imagined sequel' might be a better way of looking at it, since we can't possibly know what the original authors intended the progression of their works, if they intended anything at all. It also seems to me that these could be considered to be published versions of fan fiction, but avoid that stigma because they're published. And before anyone says that fan fiction is often badly written and that's why it's stigmatised, well, yeah, a lot of it is, but so's way too much stuff that gets published. A lot of fan fiction is extremely well written but the writers never get seen by publishers, and of course, copyright's always a problem.
Anyways, Dracula the Undead is written by one of my favourite supernatural fantasy writers. I feel nowadays that maybe I don't rate her as highly as I once did, but she's still a enjoyable read.
Here, Warrington was obviously so fascinated by the Dracula legend that she felt compelled to add another chapter to its history. Its style is a very good facsimile of Stoker's original book. It's told almost solely in diary form, which is a bit of a shame, since I liked Stoker's original journal/epistolary/newspaper articles/phonogram recording, and found it to be an interesting way to present a text. This continuity of style would have been beneficial to this novel.
There are two new 'journalists': Elena Kovacs and her uncle, Professor Andre Kovacs. These add different styles to those established already. Elena's entries show her transformation from innocent, if slightly wilful, young girl to a corrupted, confused, jealous, half-undead creature who will do anything for her 'Master', Dracula. Professor Kovacs goes from enthusiastic academic in search of ultimate 'truths' to a sad, self-loathing vampire whose thirst for blood soon rivals his undying thirst for knowledge.
The language of the novel, while closely replicating that of Stoker's original, is nonetheless rather more modern. Although the discourses are still quite formal and 'Victorian', some of Warrington's phrasing doesn't ring quite true. However, in keeping with Stoker and the Victorian way of writing, there's quite a bit of melodrama in the text, and lots of exclamation points in the journal entries. I found this added an authentic feel to Warrington's prose.
Original characters used are Mina Harker, Jonathan Harker, Abraham Van Helsing and Jack Seward. Again, the 'voices' are close to the original and, in context, believable. Unfortunately Van Helsing is only seen through his letters and the other characters' eyes, rather than through his own journal entries. This detracts a little for me, but not too much.
The narrative picks up seven years after the end of Stoker's. This has given the characters time to recover from the events of the original novel. The Harkers are happily married. Their son, Quincey (named after one of the characters of the original novel, who died killing Dracula), is a sickly child who suffers from frequent illnesses. The Harkers' marriage is of course very traditional, and follows Victorian values. Mina looks after her child and the home, Jonathan continues his work for the solicitors' firm. Here, Warrington sticks closely to the God-fearing, almost chaste ideal of the Victorian marriage. The marriage is more a friendship, and passion is seen as 'grim animal fire' and 'base' by Jonathan. The Victorian views of women are also present: 'if these lusts are base in a man, in woman they are an abomination.' (Jonathan Harker in Dracula the Undead - can't remember what page, ooops!!)
The plot is quite intricate. Basically, Dracula returns after his spirit has been awoken by Harker et al, who go back to Transylvania in order to lay the ghosts of their past. There is the subplot in which Prof Kovacs, an associate of Van Helsing's, is driven by a fatal desire for knowledge, and seeks out the Scholomance, the Devil's school that Dracula was reputed to have attended in order to learn the secrets of undeath and eternal life. While in Transylvania, they meet Elena. Mina befriends her, and this sets the scene for the rest of the action.
This is altogether a more romantic plot, reminiscent of Coppola's film Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992). Dracula appears to have affection for Mina and she for him. This stems from the scene in the book and Coppola's film where Mina is forced to drink Dracula's blood, thus, according to Warrington, causing an indissoluble bond between them. Elena becomes the vessel through which Dracula regains his body and gains access to Mina. In an interesting twist, it's also suggested that Quincey might be the product of this blood bond between Mina and Dracula, i.e. she was pregnant when she drank Dracula's blood, and some vampiric blood entered the placental system, infecting the foetus. This is never negated in the test, and at the end of the novel, when Quincey is twenty one, and 'cured' of his childhood illnesses by Dracula himself before his final defeat, he vows to try to find out the truth about his other 'father'. So far there are no further books in the series, and I feel that it's best to keep the reader wondering.
The themes are slightly different, although immortality, good vs evil, the nature of friendship and co-operation, and female sexuality are all continued from the original, the latter actually is developed so that there are distinct similarities between this text and Le Fanu's Carmilla in the relationship between Mina and Elena. However, here Warrington has added other themes such as the notion of parenthood and paternity, the desire for forbidden knowledge, and its consequences.
So, what has Warrington added to the original? Was this a necessary sequel, other than from the point of view of the writer herself? Personally, although the end of Stoker's original was, I felt, a little rushed, I don't feel there was any need for loose ends to be tied up. However, the premise of the Scholomance is an interesting new aspect, as is the Quincey-might-be-Dracula's-blood-child (hehe, could be a new idea for a soap opera!!!) The Mina/Dracula relationship was rather too romantic, implausible for me considering that Dracula was an irredeemable monster in Stoker's novel. It seems unlikely to me that he - and especially Mina - would have gelled with the other in the way they did. However, it's a satisfying enough read.
From journal - July 12th-ish
Title: Dracula the Undead.
Author: Freda Warrington
Published: Penguin Books 1997
This is touted on the cover as 'the chilling sequel to Bram Stoker's Dracula '.
First thoughts: can this strictly be a sequel since it was written by someone other than Stoker? I feel much the same way about Jean Rhys's Wide Sargasso Sea and Scarlett (can't remember who wrote this offhand, but it's the 'sequel' to Gone with the Wind. I don't know, maybe I'm being too critical and nit-picky here. I feel that maybe 'imagined sequel' might be a better way of looking at it, since we can't possibly know what the original authors intended the progression of their works, if they intended anything at all. It also seems to me that these could be considered to be published versions of fan fiction, but avoid that stigma because they're published. And before anyone says that fan fiction is often badly written and that's why it's stigmatised, well, yeah, a lot of it is, but so's way too much stuff that gets published. A lot of fan fiction is extremely well written but the writers never get seen by publishers, and of course, copyright's always a problem.
Anyways, Dracula the Undead is written by one of my favourite supernatural fantasy writers. I feel nowadays that maybe I don't rate her as highly as I once did, but she's still a enjoyable read.
Here, Warrington was obviously so fascinated by the Dracula legend that she felt compelled to add another chapter to its history. Its style is a very good facsimile of Stoker's original book. It's told almost solely in diary form, which is a bit of a shame, since I liked Stoker's original journal/epistolary/newspaper articles/phonogram recording, and found it to be an interesting way to present a text. This continuity of style would have been beneficial to this novel.
There are two new 'journalists': Elena Kovacs and her uncle, Professor Andre Kovacs. These add different styles to those established already. Elena's entries show her transformation from innocent, if slightly wilful, young girl to a corrupted, confused, jealous, half-undead creature who will do anything for her 'Master', Dracula. Professor Kovacs goes from enthusiastic academic in search of ultimate 'truths' to a sad, self-loathing vampire whose thirst for blood soon rivals his undying thirst for knowledge.
The language of the novel, while closely replicating that of Stoker's original, is nonetheless rather more modern. Although the discourses are still quite formal and 'Victorian', some of Warrington's phrasing doesn't ring quite true. However, in keeping with Stoker and the Victorian way of writing, there's quite a bit of melodrama in the text, and lots of exclamation points in the journal entries. I found this added an authentic feel to Warrington's prose.
Original characters used are Mina Harker, Jonathan Harker, Abraham Van Helsing and Jack Seward. Again, the 'voices' are close to the original and, in context, believable. Unfortunately Van Helsing is only seen through his letters and the other characters' eyes, rather than through his own journal entries. This detracts a little for me, but not too much.
The narrative picks up seven years after the end of Stoker's. This has given the characters time to recover from the events of the original novel. The Harkers are happily married. Their son, Quincey (named after one of the characters of the original novel, who died killing Dracula), is a sickly child who suffers from frequent illnesses. The Harkers' marriage is of course very traditional, and follows Victorian values. Mina looks after her child and the home, Jonathan continues his work for the solicitors' firm. Here, Warrington sticks closely to the God-fearing, almost chaste ideal of the Victorian marriage. The marriage is more a friendship, and passion is seen as 'grim animal fire' and 'base' by Jonathan. The Victorian views of women are also present: 'if these lusts are base in a man, in woman they are an abomination.' (Jonathan Harker in Dracula the Undead - can't remember what page, ooops!!)
The plot is quite intricate. Basically, Dracula returns after his spirit has been awoken by Harker et al, who go back to Transylvania in order to lay the ghosts of their past. There is the subplot in which Prof Kovacs, an associate of Van Helsing's, is driven by a fatal desire for knowledge, and seeks out the Scholomance, the Devil's school that Dracula was reputed to have attended in order to learn the secrets of undeath and eternal life. While in Transylvania, they meet Elena. Mina befriends her, and this sets the scene for the rest of the action.
This is altogether a more romantic plot, reminiscent of Coppola's film Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992). Dracula appears to have affection for Mina and she for him. This stems from the scene in the book and Coppola's film where Mina is forced to drink Dracula's blood, thus, according to Warrington, causing an indissoluble bond between them. Elena becomes the vessel through which Dracula regains his body and gains access to Mina. In an interesting twist, it's also suggested that Quincey might be the product of this blood bond between Mina and Dracula, i.e. she was pregnant when she drank Dracula's blood, and some vampiric blood entered the placental system, infecting the foetus. This is never negated in the test, and at the end of the novel, when Quincey is twenty one, and 'cured' of his childhood illnesses by Dracula himself before his final defeat, he vows to try to find out the truth about his other 'father'. So far there are no further books in the series, and I feel that it's best to keep the reader wondering.
The themes are slightly different, although immortality, good vs evil, the nature of friendship and co-operation, and female sexuality are all continued from the original, the latter actually is developed so that there are distinct similarities between this text and Le Fanu's Carmilla in the relationship between Mina and Elena. However, here Warrington has added other themes such as the notion of parenthood and paternity, the desire for forbidden knowledge, and its consequences.
So, what has Warrington added to the original? Was this a necessary sequel, other than from the point of view of the writer herself? Personally, although the end of Stoker's original was, I felt, a little rushed, I don't feel there was any need for loose ends to be tied up. However, the premise of the Scholomance is an interesting new aspect, as is the Quincey-might-be-Dracula's-blood-child (hehe, could be a new idea for a soap opera!!!) The Mina/Dracula relationship was rather too romantic, implausible for me considering that Dracula was an irredeemable monster in Stoker's novel. It seems unlikely to me that he - and especially Mina - would have gelled with the other in the way they did. However, it's a satisfying enough read.