The Historian a.k.a. Dracula 2 a.k.a. Crap
Something intrigued me about Elizabeth Kostova’s “The Historian “. I am not a big horror fan, but a good story is something you cannot argue with. I will, however, argue with this one…
The book started so well, and in fact trucked along at a fantastic pace for about two thirds of it’s length. But there are a couple of major issues with it. Firstly, it is the over complicated descriptions of places and events. Everything is brought down to the most minute details, and if I was reading a travel log, then fine. But this is supposed to be a horror / thriller and it comes off as self absorbed and drawn out. The other major thing is that Kostova is obviously a [[Dracula]] romantic, subscribing to Stoker’s tale of love that stretches across time etc… I have not read Dracula, and so cannot comment, but one interesting chat I had with a former colleague highlighted that some see this subplot as important, while others believe it to be an over-emphasised plot device that is better taken at face value. Whatever the conclusion, Kostova writes this horror more like [[Mills and Boon]] in places which is pretty sodding annoying.
Case in point, after the two hero’s of the story have visited Helen’s mother in Romania, they leave only to have have Paul turn and kiss Helen’s mother on the lips. The prose made me want to drop the book then and there, take it out side to burn it in my garden whilst screaming “Here the harlot sleeps for all eternity!”. {josquote}Who the Hell would kiss his potential mother-in law on the lips as a sign of affection?{/josquote} There is nothing (I REPEAT NOTHING) romantic about this situation… they are hunting a friend who to all intents and purposes is a sodding vampire by this point in the narrative. Furthermore, where would this idea come from as a token of affection? My thought processes were more along the lines of Paul buying some warm blankets or food as a sign of gratitude and praise. Not laying a fat wet one on her. Does Kostova’s husband do this to her mother? Is that where this came from? If I were so inclined, my better half would beat me with a stake! It is bloody bonkers…
The book is an anti-climax to the most extreme level. Even when we get to see Dracula, he is gone before we know it. And considering the in depth descriptions of trees, bricks and other dross in the preceding chapters, ‘ole Vlad is glossed over completely. It is as though Kostova thought that everyone knows what Dracula looks like, so let’s ignore any pretence. Yeh, that’s right; permed shoulder length hair, chisled cheeks and eyeliner. I’ve seen Buffy too.
And before you know it…it is finished. A very poor ending and all the talk of a worthy sequel to Stoker’s work (I read a quote somewhere) get’s ashed. This is no more of a horror than the Smurfs, but maybe that was the intention. The comparisons to the [[Davinci Code]] are valid in many respects, although the prose is a little better in this case. But the book was just one of those that you thought would go somewhere, and it ended up making you feel like you wanted the hours of reading given back (and with significant interest!). And that is a significant gripe because the first part of the book is so really, really good.
Apparently there is a movie in the pipeline (no doubt with [[Tom Hanks]] in the lead role), but I cannot believe it being anything more than a PG based on the the content of this book. What humoured me was that about the that these movie rights were bought up, two other Dracula movies were being put into pre-production; [[Dracula Year Zero]] from [[Universal]], and [[Castlevania]], and video game tie in form the master of bad direction [[Paul W. S. Anderson]]. You can just imagine the way that Movie Studio Execs think though, can’t you?
“Look, a book that has sold millions -quick turn it into a film.”
“No! The rights have been bought! Damn it!”
“What’s it about? The real Dracula you say?”
“Oy! You! Hack! Write me a story about Vlad The Impaler!”
Simple innit?!?
Posted in Dracula | No Comments »
