An interesting question regarding the novel of Dracula.

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

What I plan to do for the Halloween holiday is to actually read the original Dracula novel as written by Bram Stoker himself and since the Novel I think is in Public Domain I can read it free off the internet (Creepypasta website has the whole novel)

But the narrative focus of the novel is that it utilzes a first person narrative via journal writings like it starts with the writings written from the charcater Johnathan Harker himself.

But my question is this, is there a version of the Dracula novel where its Narration is in the third person and has a more traditional way writing the story? We only follow Harker and Dracula via the Third Person, not via Harker's perspective through his journals?

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

What I plan to do for the Halloween holiday is to actually read the original Dracula novel as written by Bram Stoker himself and since the Novel I think is in Public Domain I can read it free off the internet (Creepypasta website has the whole novel)

But the narrative focus of the novel is that it utilzes a first person narrative via journal writings like it starts with the writings written from the charcater Johnathan Harker himself.

But my question is this, is there a version of the Dracula novel where its Narration is in the third person and has a more traditional way writing the story? We only follow Harker and Dracula via the Third Person, not via Harker's perspective through his journals?

I mean, you could, but then it wouldn't be Bram Stoker's Dracula, now would it?

Just man up and read the original version as it was intended to be read.

Oh I will, I was just mearly curious if there was a version written the way I ask, because well this is a very old work of Litirature and I assume things like edits and changes in narration have been made over the centuries.

 

[Ogoid]

Could be, but I'm not aware of any... being an epistolary novel [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistolary_novel], Bram Stoker's Dracula is actually told through the writings and correspondence of several characters, not just Jonathan Harker; there's actually an in-story reason for that, but I'm not going to spoil it.

Its a style that does take some getting used to, but I'd recommend you gave it a shot anyway - it's worth it.

 

[DoPo]

Its a style that does take some getting used to, but I'd recommend you gave it a shot anyway - it's worth it.

I second this. When I first read it, it was...not what I expected. I'm not even sure what I expected, to be honest, but it surprised me. I actually found the book by, more or less, an accident - I think it was in a box of second hand books in one of those stalls by the road. When I saw it I went "Hey, it's that novel. Let's see what it's about".

I did quite enjoy it, at the end, though. Especially when I compared Dracula to more modern takes on vampires.

One thing I'd mention is - don't expect to be absolutely scared shitless. I've seen few people who have apparently gone into the novel with that expectation but...not entirely sure why. It's not that scary.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I'm sure certain children's or abbreviated versions go the third person route but where would be the fun in that?

 

[Fox12]

What I plan to do for the Halloween holiday is to actually read the original Dracula novel as written by Bram Stoker himself and since the Novel I think is in Public Domain I can read it free off the internet (Creepypasta website has the whole novel)

But the narrative focus of the novel is that it utilzes a first person narrative via journal writings like it starts with the writings written from the charcater Johnathan Harker himself.

But my question is this, is there a version of the Dracula novel where its Narration is in the third person and has a more traditional way writing the story? We only follow Harker and Dracula via the Third Person, not via Harker's perspective through his journals?

No. Dracula is what we call an epistolary novel. All that means is that it is written as a collection of journals, letters, and newspapers. All of the original novels were written this way. If you read a third person version of Dracula by someone else then it's not Dracula anymore. Besides, what might have been shocking for Victorian audiences is pretty tame by today's standards. There's also a lot of stuff that goes over people's heads. For instance, there's a scene with blood transfusion. Today that's taken for granted. At the time it was cutting edge technology. The point was to show modern technology fighting an ancient evil, as well as to demonstrate how intelligent the doctor was. That gets lost to modern readers.

It sounds to me like you just want the story, which is fine. In that case I would either recommend watching one of the many movies out there, or reading a different set of vampire books. I would suggest some of the novels by Anne Rice. She has top notch vampire fiction, and you can't do too much better then her. Or you could try reading Frankenstein, which is probably a little more readable for modern audiences.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

What I plan to do for the Halloween holiday is to actually read the original Dracula novel as written by Bram Stoker himself and since the Novel I think is in Public Domain I can read it free off the internet (Creepypasta website has the whole novel)

But the narrative focus of the novel is that it utilzes a first person narrative via journal writings like it starts with the writings written from the charcater Johnathan Harker himself.

But my question is this, is there a version of the Dracula novel where its Narration is in the third person and has a more traditional way writing the story? We only follow Harker and Dracula via the Third Person, not via Harker's perspective through his journals?

No. Dracula is what we call an epistolary novel. All that means is that it is written as a collection of journals, letters, and newspapers. All of the original novels were written this way. If you read a third person version of Dracula by someone else then it's not Dracula anymore. Besides, what might have been shocking for Victorian audiences is pretty tame by today's standards. There's also a lot of stuff that goes over people's heads. For instance, there's a scene with blood transfusion. Today that's taken for granted. At the time it was cutting edge technology. The point was to show modern technology fighting an ancient evil, as well as to demonstrate how intelligent the doctor was. That gets lost to modern readers.

It sounds to me like you just want the story, which is fine. In that case I would either recommend watching one of the many movies out there, or reading a different set of vampire books. I would suggest some of the novels by Anne Rice. She has top notch vampire fiction, and you can't do too much better then her. Or you could try reading Frankenstein, which is probably a little more readable for modern audiences.

Mind you when I was reading the first chapter I did not find the First Person Journal style of the writing to be un-readable or unfollowable.

I could comprehend what is said and written. I mean hell I am also reading the Silmarillion right now and I am convinced it can never be adapted unless you only adapt parts of it.

 

[Fox12]

What I plan to do for the Halloween holiday is to actually read the original Dracula novel as written by Bram Stoker himself and since the Novel I think is in Public Domain I can read it free off the internet (Creepypasta website has the whole novel)

But the narrative focus of the novel is that it utilzes a first person narrative via journal writings like it starts with the writings written from the charcater Johnathan Harker himself.

But my question is this, is there a version of the Dracula novel where its Narration is in the third person and has a more traditional way writing the story? We only follow Harker and Dracula via the Third Person, not via Harker's perspective through his journals?

No. Dracula is what we call an epistolary novel. All that means is that it is written as a collection of journals, letters, and newspapers. All of the original novels were written this way. If you read a third person version of Dracula by someone else then it's not Dracula anymore. Besides, what might have been shocking for Victorian audiences is pretty tame by today's standards. There's also a lot of stuff that goes over people's heads. For instance, there's a scene with blood transfusion. Today that's taken for granted. At the time it was cutting edge technology. The point was to show modern technology fighting an ancient evil, as well as to demonstrate how intelligent the doctor was. That gets lost to modern readers.

It sounds to me like you just want the story, which is fine. In that case I would either recommend watching one of the many movies out there, or reading a different set of vampire books. I would suggest some of the novels by Anne Rice. She has top notch vampire fiction, and you can't do too much better then her. Or you could try reading Frankenstein, which is probably a little more readable for modern audiences.

Mind you when I was reading the first chapter I did not find the First Person Journal style of the writing to be un-readable or unfollowable.

I could comprehend what is said and written. I mean hell I am also reading the Silmarillion right now and I am convinced it can never be adapted unless you only adapt parts of it.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply you couldn't understand it. I have no doubt you could read through it without much trouble. What I mean to say is that... how do I put it? Dracula isn't a particularly terrifying novel. It's creepy, yes, but a lot of people go into it expecting tons of blood and sex, and there isn't really that much in there. They expect to see Vanhelsing kick the door down with a blunderbuss and a wooden stake, and what they get is an elderly doctor. Dracula has evolved a lot over the years. Now he represents blood, and violence, and lots and lots of sex. While these things were in the original novel, they were rare, and usually conveyed through metaphor. A faithful adaptation would probably get a PG rating today.

Furthermore, the way that the novel is written changes the pacing. Everything is conveyed in past tense, so the action is over before you start. This isn't bad at all, but it does mean that the story never builds up any real momentum. It never becomes an action series, or leaves you on the edge of your seat. The mere fact that the letter was written means that the person writing it survived the ordeal. Dracula is an awesome book, I just don't want you to read through most of it and get disappointed because you thought it was something completely different. You have to expect something a little slower and more methodical. The reason I suggested the film is because it's the closest thing to a third person version of the story you're going to get. You're watching the events in real time, so you don't know what's going to happen next. In the book, if you read a letter from Lucy, then you know that Lucy has survived at least one more chapter.

 

[CaitSeith]

What I plan to do for the Halloween holiday is to actually read the original Dracula novel as written by Bram Stoker himself and since the Novel I think is in Public Domain I can read it free off the internet (Creepypasta website has the whole novel)

But the narrative focus of the novel is that it utilzes a first person narrative via journal writings like it starts with the writings written from the charcater Johnathan Harker himself.

But my question is this, is there a version of the Dracula novel where its Narration is in the third person and has a more traditional way writing the story? We only follow Harker and Dracula via the Third Person, not via Harker's perspective through his journals?

If there is something like that, I doubt it will be public domain too, as it's no longer the Bram Stroker's Dracula; but a different version wrote by someone else.

 

[hermes]

Well, at that point, you could watch "Dracula Untold" or "Bram Stoker's Dracula" for all the similarities it would have with the actual book...

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Well, at that point, you could watch "Dracula Untold" or "Bram Stoker's Dracula" for all the similarities it would have with the actual book...

At least Coppola's Dracula was a good movie on its own Merits. And arguably Coppola's last good movie.

 

[hermes]

Well, at that point, you could watch "Dracula Untold" or "Bram Stoker's Dracula" for all the similarities it would have with the actual book...

At least Coppola's Dracula was a good movie on its own Merits. And arguably Coppola's last good movie.

Sure, it is a good movie. But not a very faithful adaptation...

Which is why, if your intention is to find a modernized adaptation of the book, that trades faithfulness for readability, you should go all the way and just watch one of the hundreds of Dracula movies.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Well, at that point, you could watch "Dracula Untold" or "Bram Stoker's Dracula" for all the similarities it would have with the actual book...

At least Coppola's Dracula was a good movie on its own Merits. And arguably Coppola's last good movie.

Sure, it is a good movie. But not a very faithful adaptation...

Which is why, if your intention is to find a modernized adaptation of the book, that trades faithfulness for readability, you should go all the way and just watch one of the hundreds of Dracula movies.

You do know that I when I asked for a traditional third person narration I also meant still faithful to the story.

I mean it is curious to see someone actually write such a version.

 

[The Madman]

Not really much I can say that others haven't already, so I'd just like to comment that the original Dracula is actually quite good. By modern horror standards it's fairly tame and I wouldn't expect anyone reading it today to be getting nightmares or anything, but the storytelling mechanic is unique and there are quite a few genuinely cool moments throughout the book.

Without spoiling anything, even though it's been a few years since I last read it, I still remember vividly the part in which Dracula comes to the UK. Very cool. Reminds me of War of the Worlds which was also written around the same time period and had an awesome chapter involving coming to/leaving the UK at the time.

 

[maninahat]

What I plan to do for the Halloween holiday is to actually read the original Dracula novel as written by Bram Stoker himself and since the Novel I think is in Public Domain I can read it free off the internet (Creepypasta website has the whole novel)

But the narrative focus of the novel is that it utilzes a first person narrative via journal writings like it starts with the writings written from the charcater Johnathan Harker himself.

But my question is this, is there a version of the Dracula novel where its Narration is in the third person and has a more traditional way writing the story? We only follow Harker and Dracula via the Third Person, not via Harker's perspective through his journals?

Not Stoker's Dracula, no. I mean you might try a novelisation [https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dracula-Novelisation-Fred-Saberhagen/dp/0330328573] of one of the many, many movie adaptations, which technically will give you what you want (though there is no guarantee of quality, hell even Stoker's Dracula is so so).

 

[Recusant]

Read through it the way it's written or don't bother at all. Dracula isn't Gilgamesh or Genji or even Shakespeare; a modern English speaker should find it quite coherent, and if the slightly different pacing techniques bother you that much, it's likely not a book you'd enjoy anyway.

Plus, if you read it, you'll be far better able to appreciate Saberhagen's The Dracula Tape.

 

[stroopwafel]

Well, at that point, you could watch "Dracula Untold" or "Bram Stoker's Dracula" for all the similarities it would have with the actual book...

At least Coppola's Dracula was a good movie on its own Merits. And arguably Coppola's last good movie.

Sure, it is a good movie. But not a very faithful adaptation...

Which is why, if your intention is to find a modernized adaptation of the book, that trades faithfulness for readability, you should go all the way and just watch one of the hundreds of Dracula movies.

Didn't really enjoy Bram Stoker's Dracula to be honest. Sure, it had some beautiful cinematography(espescially the horse carriage ride to Dracula's castle) and there are glimpses of a way better movie buried somewhere in there but what brings the entire thing down is this characterization of Dracula as a sappy Don Juan. 'Dracula's cheesy love life' would have been a better title for this movie.

The best Dracula movie by and far remains the 1979 Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht in my opinion. This is really the Dracula the way I imagined the character even if it isn't a completely faithful adaptation of Stoker's novel(infact it's more considered a remake of the 1922 original Nosferatu). There is still a romantic pathos to the character but it's delivered with way more subtlety and the story is also much stronger and genuinely atmospheric(instead of just pretty pictures).

Check it out if you haven't seen it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosferatu_the_Vampyre

 

[Jute88]

After reading the novel you could try watching Hellsing Ultimate, in which the Hellsing family imprisons Dracula and refine him into a servant against other vampires.

 

[09philj]

What I plan to do for the Halloween holiday is to actually read the original Dracula novel as written by Bram Stoker himself and since the Novel I think is in Public Domain I can read it free off the internet (Creepypasta website has the whole novel)

But the narrative focus of the novel is that it utilzes a first person narrative via journal writings like it starts with the writings written from the charcater Johnathan Harker himself.

Not just Harker. There's also his lover/wife Mina's journal and letters, and the journal od Doctor Seward, as well as other miscellany such as newspaper cuttings.