![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
marydellI managed at last to slog my way to the end of The Historian, aided by an audiobook version that employed one good, engaging reader (the fellow doing "Paul"), and one reader who...well, she brought the dullness of the primary narrator fully to life. I think she's actually a good reader, but hadn't much of interest to work with.
Overall, I liked the book pretty well. I enjoy travelogues and memoirs, and I don't mind long stretches where not much happens, as long as they're portrayed engagingly. The book's primary narrative is the one told in the letters by Paul (the father of the primary narrator), and I found his voice and story entertaining and reasonably suspenseful. The framing stuff, featuring his daughter, is mostly tedious, because there is literally nothing interesting about her, despite her interesting forbears.
People seem to be disappointed by the ending of the book, but because this is usually stated without spoilers, I'm unsure which feature of "the ending" they mean. The part where Dracula is dispatched is a bit abrupt and silly, but that didn't bother me because it's true to genre--every time Dracula is dispatched in any book, it's anticlimactic, and he always comes back. I was sort of touched by Master James showing up and turning out to be THAT James fellow, even though it reminded me amusingly of Scatman Crothers' ill-fated rescue attempt in The Shining (well, it really reminded me of the Groundskeeper Willie version as featured on the Simpsons. "Och...I'm bad at this!" ). The way they all assume Dracula is really dead is par for the course, and I found the almost-very-end of the story, with the bit about Helen's funeral, satisfying and appropriate.
The very-very-very end, where the primary narrator receives her own copy of the book, annoyed me because it's another pointless step in the DUMBEST DUMBEST DUMBEST SCHEME EVER. So if people who dislike the ending are talking about the reveal of Dracula's incredibly dumb scheme, I'm right there with them.
I can't figure it. I, Dracula, have an awesome library--that I built, book-by-book, so presumably I actually know what all these books are--and I am going to live forever. I want my library catalogued. Ok, why don't I catalogue the damn thing myself? It's MINE. I'm immortal. Daylight hours are boring and this would give me something to do, since apparently I've given up my old hobby of impaling people over brunch. But assuming I don't want to do it myself, I have loyal vampire servants in libraries and archives all over the world. Actual, real librarians with degrees and expertise and a desire to serve me. I could have 5 of them come work in the place, and have plenty of company and get everything catalogued really professionally, and they would be deliriously happy with the books and the vampirism and they would bring me people to eat and so forth.
But no. Instead, I want to have my library catalogued by a historian--in particular, a historian who HATES me. I'm willing to wait 500 years to coax someone from the wrong academic discipline to come and be a librarian against his will, because...? When I find a promising young historian, I give them a book to entice them to start researching me and my story (what this has to do with being able to catalog a rare books collection, I don't know, but apparently I am a narcissist). Then I kill or harm someone or something they love, in order to deter them from continuing their research. Also to make them hate me, I guess. If they continue their research anyway, I judge them "worthy," even though at this point they are continuing their research 100% out of a desire to kill me and avenge their loved one. I make sure to do this with several historians simultaneously so that I can be hunted by a lot of people at once. Neato! I'm sure this will get my library straightened out in no time! Meanwhile I ignore the very persistent and clever librarian-vampire-servant who really wants the job, because...um, because shut up, that's why.
Yeah. The core conceit of the book, once revealed, kind of spoils it, because it's so monumentally stupid and impractical.
Other peeves are:
Overall, I liked the book pretty well. I enjoy travelogues and memoirs, and I don't mind long stretches where not much happens, as long as they're portrayed engagingly. The book's primary narrative is the one told in the letters by Paul (the father of the primary narrator), and I found his voice and story entertaining and reasonably suspenseful. The framing stuff, featuring his daughter, is mostly tedious, because there is literally nothing interesting about her, despite her interesting forbears.
People seem to be disappointed by the ending of the book, but because this is usually stated without spoilers, I'm unsure which feature of "the ending" they mean. The part where Dracula is dispatched is a bit abrupt and silly, but that didn't bother me because it's true to genre--every time Dracula is dispatched in any book, it's anticlimactic, and he always comes back. I was sort of touched by Master James showing up and turning out to be THAT James fellow, even though it reminded me amusingly of Scatman Crothers' ill-fated rescue attempt in The Shining (well, it really reminded me of the Groundskeeper Willie version as featured on the Simpsons. "Och...I'm bad at this!" ). The way they all assume Dracula is really dead is par for the course, and I found the almost-very-end of the story, with the bit about Helen's funeral, satisfying and appropriate.
The very-very-very end, where the primary narrator receives her own copy of the book, annoyed me because it's another pointless step in the DUMBEST DUMBEST DUMBEST SCHEME EVER. So if people who dislike the ending are talking about the reveal of Dracula's incredibly dumb scheme, I'm right there with them.
I can't figure it. I, Dracula, have an awesome library--that I built, book-by-book, so presumably I actually know what all these books are--and I am going to live forever. I want my library catalogued. Ok, why don't I catalogue the damn thing myself? It's MINE. I'm immortal. Daylight hours are boring and this would give me something to do, since apparently I've given up my old hobby of impaling people over brunch. But assuming I don't want to do it myself, I have loyal vampire servants in libraries and archives all over the world. Actual, real librarians with degrees and expertise and a desire to serve me. I could have 5 of them come work in the place, and have plenty of company and get everything catalogued really professionally, and they would be deliriously happy with the books and the vampirism and they would bring me people to eat and so forth.
But no. Instead, I want to have my library catalogued by a historian--in particular, a historian who HATES me. I'm willing to wait 500 years to coax someone from the wrong academic discipline to come and be a librarian against his will, because...? When I find a promising young historian, I give them a book to entice them to start researching me and my story (what this has to do with being able to catalog a rare books collection, I don't know, but apparently I am a narcissist). Then I kill or harm someone or something they love, in order to deter them from continuing their research. Also to make them hate me, I guess. If they continue their research anyway, I judge them "worthy," even though at this point they are continuing their research 100% out of a desire to kill me and avenge their loved one. I make sure to do this with several historians simultaneously so that I can be hunted by a lot of people at once. Neato! I'm sure this will get my library straightened out in no time! Meanwhile I ignore the very persistent and clever librarian-vampire-servant who really wants the job, because...um, because shut up, that's why.
Yeah. The core conceit of the book, once revealed, kind of spoils it, because it's so monumentally stupid and impractical.
Other peeves are:
- that the narrator is never named, but at one point it's coyly mentioned that she was "named for Helen's mother" -- who is also not named, unless I overlooked that. Unless your character is Mrs. DeWinter this is an annoying and pointless thing to do. The story isn't about identity; I don't think her name is secretly Mina Harker, and since she's a completely bland character the lack of a name just makes her blander.
- that in a book full of endless descriptive passages, the primary narrator describes Dracula's boots as "indescribably different from any other boots." If you're writing descriptive prose, the word "indescribable" doesn't belong in it, particularly for anything as mundane as an article of clothing. They're BOOTS, for f's sake, not, say, a planetoid with a secretly malevolent personality. Just say what they frickin look like and move along.
- the best character in the book, Helen, who is fierce and dry and unsentimental, writes a series of sentimental motherly postcards to her daughter that read like something out of Anne's House of Dreams. Just unbearable.
- Helen spends years hunting Dracula, although he's not the vampire that bit her. That fellow gets a complete pass because apparently librarians are totally not important in this book-about-a-library even if they are gnawing on your neck.
- Helen runs out on her baby daughter because she's increasingly afraid she will taint her in some vague unnameable way, which is a pretty weak reason when she could have just admitted she increasingly wanted to eat her. I mean, come on, it's a vampire book! Try being a LITTLE creepy!
