←back to thread

272 points lermontov | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
staticman2 ◴[] No.41907241[source]
I remember reading somewhere- I think it was in an annotated addition of Dracula, or maybe it was a journal article- that said that Bram Stoker wrote a large number of novels but everything he wrote other than Dracula was awful. Per Wikipedia he wrote 14 books, supposedly he was only able to write one good one.
replies(3): >>41907394 #>>41908266 #>>41909707 #
reaperducer ◴[] No.41907394[source]
I suspect you're getting downvoted by people who haven't actually read anything by Stoker.

My wife has read most of his stuff. I know because I buy it for her. She says aside from Dracula, most of it is not great.

replies(1): >>41908080 #
timeinput ◴[] No.41908080[source]
For me it feels like Stokers dracula is only so popular because it's where all the tropes come from, not because it's particularly well written, or something like that.

It's one of those firsts that established a genre.

I know Stoker didn't invent vampires, but they came into western English speaking culture through his Dracula.

replies(4): >>41908278 #>>41909647 #>>41910269 #>>41911807 #
1. nu11ptr ◴[] No.41908278[source]
I am not a literary critic, but I very much enjoyed Dracula. When I read it, I did not know there were claims he wasn't a good writer, so I had no bias, I simply liked it quite a bit.