Annotations from beyond the grave
Nov. 7th, 2024 07:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bloodygranuaileThis year I did Dracula Daily but unsubscribed from the actual Dracula Daily substack, instead reading along in my ancient copy of The Essential Dracula, an annotated version of the book with notes and a bunch of front and end matter by Radu T. Florescu and Raymond McNally, who were apparently bigshot Dracula scholars in the ‘70s or thereabouts.
The book itself continues to be phenomenal even reading it the third year in a row. Every year I find myself getting excited about stuff I’d completely forgotten from the previous year. I’m excited to rediscover next year what I’ve already forgotten since May.
The annotated version is honestly hilarious. Some of the annotations are really cool and interesting, because they’re about what was in Bram Stoker’s notes, which these editors seem to have been the first published people to have access to. Others are sort of goofy reading comprehension tidbits, and some are just the editors’ personal opinions on stuff. The book comes with an “annotated filmography,” which provides an interesting tour of vampire movies (not just Dracula adaptations) up to somewhere around when the Interview with the Vampire movie was announced but was still expected to star John Travolta. It is also shamelessly full of the editors’ personal opinions, as is the bibliography, which is even funnier because the bibliography contains the editors’ own books (unsurprisingly, they think their own books are great). There is also an interestingly dated guide to doing “Dracula tours” of England and what was at the time of publication the Socialist Republic of Romania.
Anyway, I am very glad I read this even if it’s not necessarily something I’d recommend to someone who’s new to Dracula today. It’s a great historical piece from the history of people being obsessed with Dracula, and also you get to read Dracula again.
The book itself continues to be phenomenal even reading it the third year in a row. Every year I find myself getting excited about stuff I’d completely forgotten from the previous year. I’m excited to rediscover next year what I’ve already forgotten since May.
The annotated version is honestly hilarious. Some of the annotations are really cool and interesting, because they’re about what was in Bram Stoker’s notes, which these editors seem to have been the first published people to have access to. Others are sort of goofy reading comprehension tidbits, and some are just the editors’ personal opinions on stuff. The book comes with an “annotated filmography,” which provides an interesting tour of vampire movies (not just Dracula adaptations) up to somewhere around when the Interview with the Vampire movie was announced but was still expected to star John Travolta. It is also shamelessly full of the editors’ personal opinions, as is the bibliography, which is even funnier because the bibliography contains the editors’ own books (unsurprisingly, they think their own books are great). There is also an interestingly dated guide to doing “Dracula tours” of England and what was at the time of publication the Socialist Republic of Romania.
Anyway, I am very glad I read this even if it’s not necessarily something I’d recommend to someone who’s new to Dracula today. It’s a great historical piece from the history of people being obsessed with Dracula, and also you get to read Dracula again.