/r/ Brams Stoker's Dracula

please, mah bois

shit sucks, it's mostly just a chick romance novel. You're better off without it.

there's not even that much romance in in.

The book is really good so far. Its really unique in the sense that its just a bunch of people's journels and diarys being crammed together but its pretty good.

>>4
Dracula is actually a pretty good example of the epistolatory novel, which was very popular in Victorian times.

>>2
>>3
As a novel it's a pretty good indication of the issues on people's minds: imperialism, the fear of foreigners, dissatisfaction with Anglican Protestantism and the allure of Roman Catholicism, the notion of "proprietry", uncertainty over gender roles.

tl;dr: it's not a "chick romance novel", you're illiterate, get off /books/

Good story, but it could have been shortened.

here: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dracula
And since it's on wikisource if it turns out you don't enjoy it you can just subtly replace words with "penis."

it may give people things to talk about, and be of important to popular culture, but it's a shit book. overlong, weak writing and plotting, and an awful method of delivery. had to read it all for school sadly

It is indeed truly horrifying - and as such either a very good or terribly poor choice for virtually every 'gothic literature' module on any english course anywhere...
Dear god, it's slow, poorly plotted, does indeed have terrible delivery and, by the end of the book, all connection to the characters has been lost through the sheer boringness of the characters themselves.
Painful.