The Dracula Dossier

Rixo commenter extraordinaire Serge sent me a copy of James Reese's The Dracula Dossier (William Morrow, 2008), and it floated to the top of my to-read pile when I was trying to upgrade my stress-reading from paranormal/new urban fantasy/whatever.  Vampire fiction, of course, is not generally a big step upward (the occasional brilliant entry like Fledgling excepted), but at least it's appropriate to the month.

(Major spoilers ahead.)

I went back and forth on this book.  On the good side, it's rich in historical detail, the sort that spurs me to go off and dig around for information about late nineteenth century literary/theatrical society.  I'd never known, for example, that Bram Stoker's wife picked him over Oscar Wilde or that Wilde's mother was as much of a character as he was.  I am not an obsessive follower of Jack the Ripper trivia, so I also hadn't known there was a suspect named Francis Tumblety.  I didn't know much about how Henry Irving's theatrical troupe operated or about his relationship with Stoker.  I learned quite a bit on the little research excursions this book induced, and as far as I can tell all the historical detail checks out.  That made me happy.  Good research job, Mr. Reese.

On the bad side, the book is a style pastiche.  The conceit is that Stoker is having all of these wacky life experiences and meeting people that he will eventually incorporate into Dracula.  That's not a bad idea, but Reese, unfortunately, has chosen to imitate Stoker's format by creating ersatz journal entries, newspaper articles, and correspondence, footnoted throughout by the supposed owner of the Dossier.  And while I am truly fond of Dracula, I would not call it an example of sparkling prose.  Turgid and overwrought come to mind.  The story is great, but the writing itself is, well, very nineteenth century.  And Reese has done a great job imitating it.  The writing, I mean, not the great story.

And the story is a problem.  (Here come the spoilers!)  This isn't a vampire novel, so anyone expecting one is going to be disappointed.  Instead, it's a Jack the Ripper novel that builds on recent discoveries about the aforementioned Tumblety, who actually seems to be a pretty good suspect (a violent misogynist with a collection of women's uteri in jars; hmm.)  The fictional Stoker (and possibly the real one; I didn't dig that deeply) has many close brushes with the weird and creepy Tumblety at the time of the Ripper murders.  Having those be an inspiration for Dracula makes a sort of sense; I thought he was going to have Tumblety be a vampire along with Jack the Ripper.  And that might have worked, despite the prose style and it not exactly being an original concept.

But instead Reese went all the way over a plot cliff and had Tumblety possessed by an evil Egyptian deity summoned up in a ritual of the Order of the Golden Dawn, into which Stoker is drawn by Constance (Mrs. Oscar) Wilde.  Seriously.  This was when I really started rolling my eyes...and there were still another 200-plus pages to read.  I made it through, but it took me a long, long time, and I persevered mainly because I'm someone who compulsively finishes books.  I didn't buy the idea that Stoker's supernatural experience resulted in Stoker's supernatural novel, especially not when the supernatural in question was so over-the-top compared to Stoker's vampire and mixed up with the Ripper murders to boot.  And prose that skittered between leaden and melodramatic, no matter how true to the period in style, was not enough to convince me to go there.

The proofreading was also a little dubious, and not just in the journal entries and correspondence, where the errors could be passed off as nineteenth century.  I was particularly charmed by speculation in a footnote about the possession of a "dominate" gene.  (I'm taking a med school course in clinical genetics for fun this month, so that one jumped right out at me.)

Overall, I can't recommend this book.  I can see why Serge was so willing to give it away.  I'll keep it on my shelves, but I have an entire bookshelf devoted to vampire fiction, even if this doesn't really qualify.  It can go with related works.  Otherwise, it's only going to be fun if you really like the period and want to play spot-the-reference.  And if you want to do that, I'd recommend Kim Newman's superb (albeit blood-drenched) Anno Dracula instead, which also incorporates both Dracula and Jack the Ripper and is a genuine vampire novel.

Shopping links below; pick the one on the right over the one on the left unless you're a glutton for punishment.

Comments

[Serge]

Rixo commenter extraordinaire Serge

C'est moi! C'est moi, I'm forced to admit.
'Tis I, I humbly reply.
That mortal who
These marvels can do,
C'est moi, c'est moi, 'tis I.

Actually, I never read the book. There was a review in Locus, and it sounded like a straight historical novel about the origins of Dracula, and I thought that might be right up your alley. I had no idea that the author had thown some supernatural elements into the mix.

[Susan de Guardiola]

So what did Locus have to say about it, Lancelot?

[Serge]

Well, Lancelot had to do some digging, but he found the Locus issue (#579) in which Dick Lupoff's review was.

Lupoff says that "...while Reese's attention to detail is admirable it is occasionally carried to excess. The Golden Dawn ceremony which Stoker attends, for instance, is described in stultifying detail..."

He also does say that "...There may be a supernatural element, a very important one, which would qualify The Dracula Dossier as a dark fantasy..."

I had read that to mean that the supernatural element was going to be presented in an ambiguous manner. Obviously, it was just the reviewer trying not to spoil anything. Either that or I had read it with insufficient caffeine in my bloodstream.

[Paul A.]

I wonder if Reese was also trying to fit in inspirations for Stoker's other less famous horror novels: one of them, The Jewel of Seven Stars, involves magically summoning up and ancient Egyptian something-or-other. (Hammer did a film version with the more marketable title of Blood from the Mummy's Tomb, and - since you mention him - Kim Newman has also done a book inspired by it, for an extremely loose value of "inspired by".)

Another very good novel that features both Dracula and Jack the Ripper, and is appropriate for this time of year, is Roger Zelazny's A Night in the Lonesome October. It isn't blood-drenched, but it's also not really a vampire novel, except inasmuch as one of the characters happens to be a vampire. (Which doesn't stand out as much as you might think, considering what some of the other characters happen to be.)

[Susan de Guardiola]

Paul:
I bet that's it. It would fit with Reese's approach. Not having read any other Stoker, I wouldn't catch the references. Of course, I think there may be a reason none of the other ones have become as famous as Dracula...

A Zelazny novel! I've liked most of what I've read of his. I will have to look for that one.

[Serge]

Paul A... Jewel of the Seven Stars was filmed again in the 1980s as The Awakening, with Charlton Heston and others. I remember not being overly impressed and, while I didn't see the Hammer version, it probably was more entertaining, in spite of the cheese factor - or maybe because of it.

[Serge]

I've never read Stoker's The Lair of the White Worm, but I was told that the 1988 movie version was dreadful. Or accidentally funny. Then again, the director was Ken Russell.

[Paul A.]

Serge, now I'm trying to imagine what it would be like if somebody came up with a scenario in which The Lair of the White Worm was inspired by something Stoker had really experienced...

[Serge]

Paul A... Does it help your imagination that Hugh Grant was in the movie version?

[Susan de Guardiola]

Serge,
Given the plotline in Dracula Dossier concerning the homosexuality of Stoker's close friend and the bad ending of the friend's relationship with Tumblety-the-possessed-by-Egyptian-deity-Ripper, I'm not sure what we're supposed to visualize a Grant-lookalike character doing...

If someone who's read Lair could tell me some of the major plot threads or characters I can try to recall whether Reese used them.

[Serge]

Susan... I was thinking about Grant as a slimy worm. I think I was anyway. Been a long October, with my working 3 weeks's worth of overtime in a period of 3 weeks. I'll be getting almost $3000 for it, even though I didn't want it, but my boss legally is obligated to give it to me. But I digress. Here is what Wiki has to say about "Lair of the White Worm". Anything in "Dossier" about a vicious mongoose?

[Susan de Guardiola]

I don't see anything that appeared in Dossier except perhaps hints of mesmerism (mixed into Tumblety's other talents), but I think that was popular enough in late 19thc society to not make it relevant as a reference.

[Clifton]

(Still catching up on recent Rixo in reverse order...)

Oh, Susan, you must read A Night in the Lonesome October. It's a very light but darkly whimsical novel; Zelazny in high form doing card tricks with all the great archetypes of horror fiction (The Count, The Doctor and his creation, ...) in an abstractly Lovecraftian setting. It was the last novel he wrote, so I also get very sentimental when I think of it, but it's a worthy coda to his career.

[Susan de Guardiola]

The moment it arrives, I promise!