Anno Dracula

This felt as if it was more fun to write than it was to read. You could tell it was exhaustively researched even without reading the various afterwords and annotations, but I'm kind of glad I'm not more literate, so many of the references passed me by completely. So much of the book is filled with name-dropping fictional and non-fictional characters, and it always felt more distracting than organic. Unlike “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen,” which used the same conceit, the characters seemed to be used for surface-level name recognition more than real narrative function.

Also, it felt distractingly crafted to be the start of a series instead of a complete narrative. The introductions seemed to go on interminably, but the story finally got really engaging with the introduction of a Chinese vampire. But that entire storyline just petered off as anti-climactically as possible, suggestion that Newman was hoping to introduce a spin-off series. And the novel on the whole just seems to leave its characters, reluctant to draw any of its stories to a conclusion.

I can't be too critical, since it flowed well and did have an engaging middle section, but it ultimately felt like an exercise more than anything else. It never quite settled for me as a satisfying alternate universe story, since the premise suggested a lot more upheaval than was actually shown. (The book simply wanted to have Victorian London + vampires, but having Dracula and his Carpathians actually take over the country to the degree that the book suggests would've made Victorian London unrecognizable). And ultimately, there was no “soul” to it — I don't feel any connection to any of the characters, and I don't believe it had much to say apart from plot.

I suspect this is an unfair review, mostly because I wanted the book to be something other than what it actually was.