Dracula may have been before its time...

Figure 1: Early Edition of Dracula

       Imagine this: It's the late 19th century and bookstores have a new novel to hit the shelves, Dracula (Figure 1). As a potential customer, I decide to skim through the book to see what it is about. Vampires, bats, wolves, hypnotism, blood, and insane asylums seem to be the entirety of the novel. What are my thoughts?

        That scenario probably isn't how the reviewer's brain process went about Bram Stoker's novel, Dracula, but is it that far off? During the time period that Dracula was released (1897), talk about vampires and other mythological creatures was more of a newer topic, so what were some of the thoughts that readers of Dracula in the 19th century had?

Figure 2: Manchester Guardian
Review of Dracula

         On July 15th, 1897, The Manchester Guardian (newspaper), had a few things to say about Bram Stoker and his new novel at the time (1, Figure 2). Firstly, the review expressed how bold it was of Bram Stoker to change the usual ending of a gothic novel, referencing to the overthrow of Dracula by the human characters. Though the reviewer acknowledges the bold choice, they did not favor Stoker's approach, "[m]an is no longer in dread of the monstrous and the unnatural, and although Mr. Stoker has tackled his gruesome subject with enthusiasm, the effect is more often grotesque than terrible." The reviewer also made it evident that they were not a fan of the idea of an entire novel of such a horrible creature, "[i]t is, however, an artistic mistake to fill a whole volume with horrors." The review goes on to compliment the settings appeared in Dracula and to compliment Bram Stoker's ability to write such a chaotic novel in a way that is comprehensible to the general public.

      Another perspective comes from The Pall Mall Gazette (newspaper), published on June 1st, 1897 under the "For Midnight Reading" section (2, Figure 3). The review begins with a very sexist tone, referencing the fact that women should not be able to read this novel because they are not "strong" like men and will take the idea of vampires and run with it. The reviewer loves the writing of Bram Stoker and acknowledges the fact that once again "can be followed without a headache (referencing the plot)." This review mentions that the novel gives more information about what a vampire is, which was not an idea implored yet. The reviewer also summarizes very little of the novel because "[t]o expand the story in any detail would be grossly unfair to Mr. Bram Stoker."

Figure 3: Pall Mall Gazette
Review of Dracula

       
Reading the reviews, I was pleasantly surprised by the reactions of folk in the 19th century. I feel that if this novel was published several years earlier, the reviews would have been more of what I was expecting. I was expecting a mass hysteria of some sort, even though the novel is based on fictional creatures. The fact that gothic novels were trending at this time definitely helped Stoker gain popularity on Dracula. For other viewpoints of reviewers, click here.

(1) Niland, Lauren. "Bram Stoker's Dracula: a review from 1897." The Guardian, 20 Apr. 2012, https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/from-the-archive-blog/2012/apr/20/bram-stoker-centenary-dracula-review. Accessed 4 March 2020.

(2) Staff_reporter. "Early review of Bram Stoker's "Dracula", 1897." Newspapers, 20 May 2019. https://www.newspapers.com/clip/31757310/early-review-of-bram-stokers/. Accessed 4 March 2020.

(Figure 1) Found, The British Library, https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/first-edition-of-dracula

(Figure 2) Found, The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/from-the-archive-blog/2012/apr/20/bram-stoker-centenary-dracula-review

(Figure 3) Staff_reporter. "Early review of Bram Stoker's "Dracula", 1897." Found, Newspapers, 20 May 2019, https://www.newspapers.com/clip/31757310/early-review-of-bram-stokers/.https://www.newspapers.com/clip/31757310/early-review-of-bram-stokers/