Leonard Wolf (1923–2019)

With this—probably my second or third—reading of “Dracula,” certain surprising aspects of the novel (which would elude most first-time readers) became glaringly apparent to me. I will forego a summary of the plot, since the tale is almost universally known. Instead, I’ll simply identify those aspects of the novel that seem to go unrecognized in the wake of its legacy and undeniable impact on the horror genre and our culture’s insatiable fascination with vampires. First of all, show more the narrative structure of “Dracula,” despite its being a conventional Victorian romance, is quite postmodern—the titular character is, in fact, the antagonist of the story rather than the protagonist; the tale is told from the perspectives of numerous narrators, and this poly-vocal, cobbled-together story features numerous narrative voices (none more annoying than Van Helsing’s convoluted and at times unintelligibly purple prose) and genres (diaries, letters, newspaper stories). And, shockingly, the conclusion of the novel deconstructs the entirety of the narrative that has preceded it. Jonathan Harker writes:

“We were struck with the fact, that in all the mass of material of which the record is composed, there is hardly one authentic document; nothing but a mass of type-writing, except the later note-books of Mina and Seward and myself, and Van Helsing’s memorandum. We could hardly ask any one, even did we wish to, to accept these as proofs of so wild a story.” (pp. 444-445)

This edition is particularly rich and rewarding for readers who are returning to “Dracula” for subsequent readings. Leonard Wolf’s introduction and his abundant footnotes enrich the tale and supplement the story in a highly entertaining fashion. It’s like reading the novel with a literary tour guide looking over your shoulder and making sure you don’t miss any point of interest.

Ultimately, a careful rereading of “Dracula” reveals just how little it contains of what we now consider conventional about the vampire myth. The “horror” it contains is also quite tame—much of the terror throughout the novel is masterfully implied rather than blatant, and Dracula himself is hardly even present for the majority of the action. “Dracula” is indeed a classic—one that rewards rereadings, reconsideration, and constant review. show less

The story of the life and times of Gilles De Rais, a famous and obscenely wealthy French nobleman who achieved great honor as a warrior and fought alongside Joan of Arc...and was eventually put to death for kidnapping, raping, torturing and murdering scores of children, mainly the sons of local peasants.

Not all that much is known about this fifteenth-century figure (one of the earliest serial killers known to history), but Leonard Wolf does a respectable job fleshing out his life. He show more speculates some, but not too much, as to what made De Rais the way he was, and also includes the story of Joan of Arc. (In fact at times it seemed he wanted to write about her more than about De Rais.) A decent enough bio for those interested in historical serial killers. show less

last time i read frankenstein was probably 20 years ago. rereading it now, i still love it. this heavily-annotated edition is great for a reread, but i wouldn't recommend it for a first-time reading (too distracting, and too spoilery). i learned a lot more about mary shelley and the context in which the book was written.

also of possible interest is that this edition is based on the original 1818 version of frankenstein. the annotations make note of where the more-widely-read 1831 edition show more differs significantly.

i have to admit that one of the reasons i like this book so much is that both frankenstein and his creature are so tortured and angsty about the act of creation and about one's own monstrous nature... etc etc. i dig it. show less

I am not a fan of the original book, which I think has major flaws. But this is by far the best edition of the book I have ever read, and the annotations are both helpful and interesting (my rating is a blended rating of the book and the annotations; I'd give the annotations 5 stars). I especially liked how the annotations include recipes for unfamiliar dishes mentioned in the story, which was a nice addition that I've never seen in any other annotated book.