Dracula is possibly the most notable and original concept of a vampire novel and the most faithful to the mythological elements of common vampirsm. Dracula in my opinion can not be beaten by any vampire novel of our time, Twilight fans will strongly disagree, but I fail miserably how such things can be argued as Stephenie Meyer was - whether she is aware or not - heavily inspired by Bram Stoker's spectacular Dracula.
I've read several vampire novels, none of which are as original and creative as Dracula. Stoker was not inspired by any other vampire novels nor was he influenced by any films productions of our movie-saturated generation...simply because he could not, such things were unavailable, non-existent...Bram Stoker is simply THE creator of vampire literature!!

In recent times vampire fiction has become dramatically different from what it was only one-hundred years previously. Vampires sparkle in sunlight. Some are invulnerable to sunlight. They do not require to feed upon humans. They are great enemies of (were)wolves. In Dracula or similar fiction from around the same time, you'll find none of that. No. It's back to the drawing board, good old traditional vampires. Disinetergration at the sight of the sun. Staking at heart. Decapitation. Hunger for the blood of humans. True intelligent writing!!

I loved this book, it took me about five days to read just two-hundred pages, I was really annoyed at this because I like to finished books as quickly as possible. In the first two-hundred pages which felt unbearable draggy to me, there were several different protagonists all telling their stories via diary entries. Jonathan Harker as the prisoner of Count Dracula, Mina Harker and Lucy Westernra's entries and a meeting with Dracula. Also, the famous Van Helsing (who is an original character of Stoker) becomes a recurring character. All of these parts are good, but they felt like different stories and unrelated. However, once I had reached page two-hundred, things began to come clear to me.
The ending and eventual destruction of Dracula and all of his, how do I say? Familars? was a little disappointing.

'salem's Lot. As you may or not be aware, I read Stephen King's 'salem's Lot and King revealed in his introduction that his novel was inspiured by Bram Stoker's Dracula. I really loved 'salem's Lot and when Stephen King mentioned in his Afterword that he had read Dracula at the age of nine I was like :O OMFGGGG I'M FIFTEEN!!! Haha, yeah, I was impressed no wonder King is such a great writer. I know what I said about Dracula was the original vampire novel but I liked Stephen King's 'salem's Lot better than Dracula and respectfully King did stick very religiously to the vampire tradition: crosses, stakes, sunlight, blood and Barlow as the Dracula grand vampire figure. Yes I loved Dracula and would give it five but it was a little confusing. ( )

The original vampire novel. Since vampires have been reinvented, this one might seem a bit dated. Vampires that feed on human blood? Vampires that plot and scheme to control others and preserve their ancient lives, no matter what the cost? Humans who hunt down evil vampires because they are evil? How 19th century!
This is still the best vampire novel, as long as you are willing to go back to the original vampire concept. ( )

Generally I enjoyed [Dracula]. It had a sort of action adventure quality while maintaining the dark and moody tone. Each characters letters and journals were usually distinct, although at times some of the denser material read like standard prose. I could not bring myself to like Mina. I found her insufferable and boring most of the time and a ‘product of her time’ at the best. ( )

I don't know enough about literary history to talk about the book in context of when it was written and what it really means, so instead I will say that I liked the themes and progression of the story. Stoker begins by creating a convincingly menacing atmosphere for Harker as he slowly realizes that he is not Dracula's guest but actually his captive, while at the same time showing us letters from Mina's quiet life at home. I enjoyed how the story went from ominous ship docking at the harbor with no crew to people disappearing to Mina's corruption and release, and really enjoyed the theme of faith as power. I thought the story ended a bit abruptly, however. Dracula is slain within view of his castle in less than a page.

I read this in real time in the form of a blog (http://dracula-feed.blogspot.com/), which I think gave me a better appreciation for the story's timeline. In general I think this form of delivery worked well, although during the meat of the book it felt like every day there were 8 lengthy new posts to read, which really wore me down. ( )

I've seen a lot of Dracula movies. Some were good, most were bad and a few bordered on ridiculous. The book that spawned them all wasn't any of these things, but should be respected for all of the wonderful vampires it has inspired today. Dracula was dry and took a while to get through. Was it worth it? Sure, but only to those who love the vampire genre and want to experience that started it all. ( )