What do you think?
Rate this book
Classics of Horror: Dracula & Frankenstein
Vintage book club edition, hardcover. Two classic horror novels in one! Dracula by Bram Stoker and Frankenstein by Mary Shelley! Cover art of Dracula and Frankenstein by legendary artist, Frank Frazetta! 655 pages! Tight straight spine. Pages in overall excellent condition - some light tanning to top exterior pages edges from age and a few surface marks to the bottom. Black cloth boards in overall excellent condition. Dustjacket intact with surface, corner, edge wear, chips, etc - most of the chipping along the top spine edge. Jacket protected in brand new, clear plastic brodart protective cover!
655 pages, Hardcover
Published January 1, 1991
37 people are currently reading
937 people want to read
About the author
Bram Stoker
2,320 books5,476 followersIrish-born Abraham Stoker, known as Bram, of Britain wrote the gothic horror novel
Dracula
(1897).
The feminist Charlotte Mathilda Blake Thornely Stoker at 15 Marino crescent, then as now called "the crescent," in Fairview, a coastal suburb of Dublin, Ireland, bore this third of seven children. The parents, members of church of Ireland, attended the parish church of Saint John the Baptist, located on Seafield road west in Clontarf with their baptized children.
Stoker, an invalid, started school at the age of seven years in 1854, when he made a complete and astounding recovery. Of this time, Stoker wrote, "I was naturally thoughtful, and the leisure of long illness gave opportunity for many thoughts which were fruitful according to their kind in later years."
After his recovery, he, a normal young man, even excelled as a university athlete at Trinity college, Dublin form 1864 to 1870 and graduated with honors in mathematics. He served as auditor of the college historical society and as president of the university philosophical society with his first paper on "Sensationalism in Fiction and Society."
In 1876, while employed as a civil servant in Dublin, Stoker wrote a non-fiction book (The Duties of Clerks of Petty Sessions in Ireland, published 1879) and theatre reviews for The Dublin Mail, a newspaper partly owned by fellow horror writer J. Sheridan Le Fanu. His interest in theatre led to a lifelong friendship with the English actor Henry Irving. He also wrote stories, and in 1872 "The Crystal Cup" was published by the London Society, followed by "The Chain of Destiny" in four parts in The Shamrock.
In 1878 Stoker married Florence Balcombe, a celebrated beauty whose former suitor was Oscar Wilde. The couple moved to London, where Stoker became business manager (at first as acting-manager) of Irving's Lyceum Theatre, a post he held for 27 years. The collaboration with Irving was very important for Stoker and through him he became involved in London's high society, where he met, among other notables, James McNeil Whistler, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. In the course of Irving's tours, Stoker got the chance to travel around the world.
The Stokers had one son, Irving Noel, who was born on December 31, 1879.
People cremated the body of Bram Stoker and placed his ashes placed in a display urn at Golders green crematorium. After death of Irving Noel Stoker in 1961, people added his ashes to that urn. Despite the original plan to keep ashes of his parents together, after death, people scattered ashes of Florence Stoker at the gardens of rest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bram_Stoker
The feminist Charlotte Mathilda Blake Thornely Stoker at 15 Marino crescent, then as now called "the crescent," in Fairview, a coastal suburb of Dublin, Ireland, bore this third of seven children. The parents, members of church of Ireland, attended the parish church of Saint John the Baptist, located on Seafield road west in Clontarf with their baptized children.
Stoker, an invalid, started school at the age of seven years in 1854, when he made a complete and astounding recovery. Of this time, Stoker wrote, "I was naturally thoughtful, and the leisure of long illness gave opportunity for many thoughts which were fruitful according to their kind in later years."
After his recovery, he, a normal young man, even excelled as a university athlete at Trinity college, Dublin form 1864 to 1870 and graduated with honors in mathematics. He served as auditor of the college historical society and as president of the university philosophical society with his first paper on "Sensationalism in Fiction and Society."
In 1876, while employed as a civil servant in Dublin, Stoker wrote a non-fiction book (The Duties of Clerks of Petty Sessions in Ireland, published 1879) and theatre reviews for The Dublin Mail, a newspaper partly owned by fellow horror writer J. Sheridan Le Fanu. His interest in theatre led to a lifelong friendship with the English actor Henry Irving. He also wrote stories, and in 1872 "The Crystal Cup" was published by the London Society, followed by "The Chain of Destiny" in four parts in The Shamrock.
In 1878 Stoker married Florence Balcombe, a celebrated beauty whose former suitor was Oscar Wilde. The couple moved to London, where Stoker became business manager (at first as acting-manager) of Irving's Lyceum Theatre, a post he held for 27 years. The collaboration with Irving was very important for Stoker and through him he became involved in London's high society, where he met, among other notables, James McNeil Whistler, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. In the course of Irving's tours, Stoker got the chance to travel around the world.
The Stokers had one son, Irving Noel, who was born on December 31, 1879.
People cremated the body of Bram Stoker and placed his ashes placed in a display urn at Golders green crematorium. After death of Irving Noel Stoker in 1961, people added his ashes to that urn. Despite the original plan to keep ashes of his parents together, after death, people scattered ashes of Florence Stoker at the gardens of rest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bram_Stoker
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
September 27, 2015
4.5 stars (for Frankenstein).
October 19, 2022
This classic horror novel needs no introduction but does need some clarification. The Universal Horror Film version of the monster has become ubiquitous in Western culture and overshadows the depiction of the creature in the novel. The mute, zombie-like Boris Karloff incarnation is physically similar to but lacks the persuasiveness, cunning, and agility of the book's monster. The monster learns to speak and is quite eloquent and self-aware, especially of his needs for a companion. The book has a different story and a much closer link between the doctor and his creation.
The parallel between Victor Frankenstein and the monster is fascinating. Frankenstein has great ambition and curiosity. He wants to be a great scientist but gets off on the wrong foot in his youth by reading Paracelsus and other (unknown to Frankenstein) scientifically discredited writers. When he goes to university, some professors mock him for reading worthless trash. One teacher takes pity on him and helps guide him to more fruitful learning. Frankenstein keeps his desire to create life hidden even from his greatest sympathizers (i.e., that professor and his family). He works alone and eventually has success, a success that horrifies him so much that he flees his own lab. He can't face what he's done now that he can see it more clearly. He goes home to recover from the stress.
The newly-awakened monster also flees the lab. He struggles to understand the world around him and receives no help at all from anyone. People who see him are revolted by his appearance and always choose the "fight" part of the primitive "fight or flight" response. The monster eventually finds an isolated cabin with a father and two adult children. He listens to their conversations, learning a language and how people normally interact. He chops wood for them at night and is an unseen benefactor, just as he benefits from them. When he finally reveals himself to the father (who is blind and so does not have an immediate negative reaction), he almost makes a human connection. Then the son and daughter return and the son beats on the monster. The monster is forced to flee again. He discovers who his true creator is and goes to the Frankenstein home in hopes of finding a sympathetic creator. The monster persuades Frankenstein to make him a female companion so that he won't be alone and won't cause problems for Frankenstein and the rest of humanity. He's killed Frankenstein's younger brother and put the blame on an innocent woman who is executed, so the monster has already demonstrated a malicious cunning that could (and does) make Frankenstein's life miserable.
Both Frankenstein and the monster are in desperate need of other people in their lives to support them. The doctor has had mixed responses from the academics; the creature has had nothing but hard treatment from anyone. The monster goes to the only person he thinks might help him; the doctor seeks out no help with his problems (either creating another monster or getting rid of the monster he has created), even though he has a loving family and an academic friend who would give the assistance he needs. If Frankenstein had shown care and support to his creation, the story would be very different. Both need genuine love and affection in their lives. The creature does not have it because everyone else cannot see past his physical deformity. Frankenstein has it but is unwilling to be completely honest with anyone, so he can't benefit from their love in any way other than superficial. Frankenstein is clearly culpable; the monster is more a victim of circumstance (though he has culpability too).
The book is an amazing look at obsession and the need for love. The central characters struggle with each other and with themselves but cannot win. Their main problem is isolation, self-imposed in Frankenstein's case. A lot of the horror was avoidable. Making bad choices spirals out of control and leads to a tragic ending.
Highly recommended.
Check out the discussion on A Good Story is Hard to Find Podcast 125.
The parallel between Victor Frankenstein and the monster is fascinating. Frankenstein has great ambition and curiosity. He wants to be a great scientist but gets off on the wrong foot in his youth by reading Paracelsus and other (unknown to Frankenstein) scientifically discredited writers. When he goes to university, some professors mock him for reading worthless trash. One teacher takes pity on him and helps guide him to more fruitful learning. Frankenstein keeps his desire to create life hidden even from his greatest sympathizers (i.e., that professor and his family). He works alone and eventually has success, a success that horrifies him so much that he flees his own lab. He can't face what he's done now that he can see it more clearly. He goes home to recover from the stress.
The newly-awakened monster also flees the lab. He struggles to understand the world around him and receives no help at all from anyone. People who see him are revolted by his appearance and always choose the "fight" part of the primitive "fight or flight" response. The monster eventually finds an isolated cabin with a father and two adult children. He listens to their conversations, learning a language and how people normally interact. He chops wood for them at night and is an unseen benefactor, just as he benefits from them. When he finally reveals himself to the father (who is blind and so does not have an immediate negative reaction), he almost makes a human connection. Then the son and daughter return and the son beats on the monster. The monster is forced to flee again. He discovers who his true creator is and goes to the Frankenstein home in hopes of finding a sympathetic creator. The monster persuades Frankenstein to make him a female companion so that he won't be alone and won't cause problems for Frankenstein and the rest of humanity. He's killed Frankenstein's younger brother and put the blame on an innocent woman who is executed, so the monster has already demonstrated a malicious cunning that could (and does) make Frankenstein's life miserable.
Both Frankenstein and the monster are in desperate need of other people in their lives to support them. The doctor has had mixed responses from the academics; the creature has had nothing but hard treatment from anyone. The monster goes to the only person he thinks might help him; the doctor seeks out no help with his problems (either creating another monster or getting rid of the monster he has created), even though he has a loving family and an academic friend who would give the assistance he needs. If Frankenstein had shown care and support to his creation, the story would be very different. Both need genuine love and affection in their lives. The creature does not have it because everyone else cannot see past his physical deformity. Frankenstein has it but is unwilling to be completely honest with anyone, so he can't benefit from their love in any way other than superficial. Frankenstein is clearly culpable; the monster is more a victim of circumstance (though he has culpability too).
The book is an amazing look at obsession and the need for love. The central characters struggle with each other and with themselves but cannot win. Their main problem is isolation, self-imposed in Frankenstein's case. A lot of the horror was avoidable. Making bad choices spirals out of control and leads to a tragic ending.
Highly recommended.
Check out the discussion on A Good Story is Hard to Find Podcast 125.
December 7, 2023
3.5
My rating is for Frankenstein.
My rating is for Frankenstein.
October 24, 2023
Dracula 2/5 ✨
Frankenstein 4/5✨
Frankenstein 4/5✨
October 25, 2024
I listened to both of these as audiobooks.
I could have sworn I had read these or at least parts when I was younger. But, after listening to these I think my memories are from all the other media representations of these stories. I've read other comics & books, and watched every TV show & movie. Even the stories, TV shows, and movies about the creation of these stories. I really enjoyed these stories. It's very interesting to see/hear the original material.
I could have sworn I had read these or at least parts when I was younger. But, after listening to these I think my memories are from all the other media representations of these stories. I've read other comics & books, and watched every TV show & movie. Even the stories, TV shows, and movies about the creation of these stories. I really enjoyed these stories. It's very interesting to see/hear the original material.
October 8, 2024
Dracula was definately better than Frankenstein for me. Frankenstein was just hard to get into after reading Dracula.
October 16, 2024
For the record, I only read the Frankenstein half ofnthis book.
That did NOT play out as I imagined. I always assumed this story took place in one location and the monster was hunted down by villagers and burned. Im not certain why i thought that, but that's not the case at all. Mary Shelley had a strong grasp of the English language. Her descriptions are enchanting and poetic. I haven't read a book that uses words in the same manner.
My only gripe is that there's no distinction between characters. Yes, you know who is speaking and who is doing what, but the dictionary is the same for each character. The monster, who had to learn language, spoke as eloquently and philosophically as his creator, who in turn speaks and writes identically to his father, professors, and friends. But the words are beautiful and I forgive it.
That did NOT play out as I imagined. I always assumed this story took place in one location and the monster was hunted down by villagers and burned. Im not certain why i thought that, but that's not the case at all. Mary Shelley had a strong grasp of the English language. Her descriptions are enchanting and poetic. I haven't read a book that uses words in the same manner.
My only gripe is that there's no distinction between characters. Yes, you know who is speaking and who is doing what, but the dictionary is the same for each character. The monster, who had to learn language, spoke as eloquently and philosophically as his creator, who in turn speaks and writes identically to his father, professors, and friends. But the words are beautiful and I forgive it.
June 4, 2015
I struggled between three stars and four stars with these two books. Considering that they were written in the 19th century, and I don't read many novels from the 19th century, I have a feeling they were excellent novels in their time. But, given the context of the 21st century and the evolution of writing during that time, especially in the horror and science fiction drama, specifically the horror novels that I've read, these two would be more of a three star rating. Don't get me wrong, I think Stoker and Shelley were geniuses in their day, and the contribution of these novels to popular culture is immeasurable. I did enjoy the discussion and depictions of the natural surroundings and geography of the settings in both books. I feel like Dracula had a little more action than Frankenstein, but Frankenstein was a little more dramatic and emotional. I think I felt more for the characters in Frankenstein. They both reminded me of Greek or Shakespearean tragedies. Again, if I read these books at face value in today's context I think the actual writing would be a three-star for me, but the impact these characters that Stoker and Shelley created on culture and the number of stories and characters that have been expounded on since then, make both of these novels seminal moments in the history of horror and science fiction literature. I contemplated that with awe the whole time I read these novels. I am intrigued to learn more about these characters and the books, plays, novels and movies that have spun off over time.
January 9, 2009
I read Frankenstein first. This book I'd rate two stars. Slow start, but the fifth chapter was as good as promised. Terrifying premise, and very real. And then some of the later chapters switched to philosophical treatise, which wasn't as interesting. I skipped over a lot of those. The story of how this novel evolved was the amazing part; the author was only 18/19, Lord Byron challenged her and other writers to write a horror story, and she had this dream.
The four stars of this review was really for Dracula. Unrelenting suspense, although sometimes the characters did head scratchers, the kind that makes a reader say, "Don't go into that room after dark!! Duh!" Some details seemed really bizarre, but the author ties up the details very nicely. The movie which starred Winona Ryder was very exploitative of the story's Freudian elements. It was good to read the original, devoid of Hollywood sensationalism, and to see why this book is considered the best of horror fiction.
The four stars of this review was really for Dracula. Unrelenting suspense, although sometimes the characters did head scratchers, the kind that makes a reader say, "Don't go into that room after dark!! Duh!" Some details seemed really bizarre, but the author ties up the details very nicely. The movie which starred Winona Ryder was very exploitative of the story's Freudian elements. It was good to read the original, devoid of Hollywood sensationalism, and to see why this book is considered the best of horror fiction.
January 11, 2018
this is for Dracula only. I'd rather save Frank for another day when I'm feeling this genre. I really loved the story. It was suspenseful and wonderfully written. I loved how Dracula was so gentlemanly and accommodating to Mr. Harker in the beginning of his stay at the castle. It was almost hard to see him as the villain. It was somewhat annoying though that Van Helsing seemed to go from a respected Dr. to a bit of a drama queen.
Dec 5-6 2017
so I finally read Frankenstein....it started a bit slow and boring, but by chapter 5 things finally got interesting. I have to admit my favorite chapters were those told by the "monster" himself. this story was nothing like I expected. I cant help but wonder how different things would have been if only he were given time with the blind man. or even just kind words from Frankenstein himself.
Dec 5-6 2017
so I finally read Frankenstein....it started a bit slow and boring, but by chapter 5 things finally got interesting. I have to admit my favorite chapters were those told by the "monster" himself. this story was nothing like I expected. I cant help but wonder how different things would have been if only he were given time with the blind man. or even just kind words from Frankenstein himself.
March 23, 2019
I thought I had read these a long time ago, when I found this copy from my aunt from way back in 1974. So, I thought I would read these. I saw all the movies, so I knew the stories. DRACULA was an amazing story and well written. It was different than what I thought it would be and I thoroughly enjoyed it. FRANKENSTEIN was a bit of a disappointment. I enjoy the story and I felt pathos for the monsters and for Frankenstein, but I thought the writing was not as beautiful or as fluid. I also think that there were threads that were not handled clearly and characters that were not fleshed out or even discussed after one or two mentions. (Frankenstein brother, Edward, isn't even discussed and he is the only family member let alive by the end.)
October 31, 2017
A re-read for me; I remember reading this book in my mid twenties, but appreciated it more this time round. The Victorian era was certainly the high watermark of British literature and storytelling. In this book we have two classic horror novels, which in my opinion neither film or TV adaptation has ever fully done justice to the books. Indeed, the written word of Dracula in particular, has at times, been totally forgotten in modern screenplays. These are as the title states two "Classics of Horror". and must reads for any lovers of "proper" literature! :)
Read
November 5, 2017Dracula
0/5
-Was looking forward to this book because I wanted to get into more classics. My main three points of negativity:
*Two main characters are barely featured in the book
*The book was too long
*The more I read the book, the less interested I became
Frankenstein
0/5
-Was looking forward to this book because I wanted to get into more classics (Same as Dracula)
-10 chapters in (of 16), book never caught my attention
-Main character not very interesting
0/5
-Was looking forward to this book because I wanted to get into more classics. My main three points of negativity:
*Two main characters are barely featured in the book
*The book was too long
*The more I read the book, the less interested I became
Frankenstein
0/5
-Was looking forward to this book because I wanted to get into more classics (Same as Dracula)
-10 chapters in (of 16), book never caught my attention
-Main character not very interesting
June 12, 2017
I just rated the stories with three stars and I am already starting to feel guilty. There are the classics, the modern variations might be a better read in the 21st century, but they would never have been written if Dracula and Frankenstein had never existed. So please take your time and give it a chance. The classics deserve it.
October 17, 2021
These editions I bought a few years ago they are without introductions that other editions may have and are a really nice set to own,in smaller hardback editions easy to carry in luggage.
Dracula and Frankenstein both incredible books I cannot believe its taken me so long to get round to reading them.
Dracula and Frankenstein both incredible books I cannot believe its taken me so long to get round to reading them.
January 1, 2019
My goal for 2018 was to finally read this book that I've had for many, many years.
11:50 P.M. 12/31/2018 and Finished!
I found both of these books extremely tedious and am clueless as to the how and why of them being considered "classics".
Blech!
11:50 P.M. 12/31/2018 and Finished!
I found both of these books extremely tedious and am clueless as to the how and why of them being considered "classics".
Blech!
Read
October 13, 2023Frankenstein was super whiny and reeked of male entitlement. The writing was great and I’m still impressed by Mary Shelley but dang was I bored. Dracula was amazing. I’ve never read Dracula before and other than being over dramatic, ridiculous at times, and definitely sexist, it was a fun listen.
October 24, 2007
Great Halloween read...muah haha
April 26, 2008
Really good. Both books are monster classics that can be understood in modern times!
January 4, 2012
Read dracula first, finished it on Dec 1 2008.
Started reading Frankenstein October 2011 and am now about half way done with it.
Started reading Frankenstein October 2011 and am now about half way done with it.
October 29, 2008
Even though I didn't love either book that much I loved that they were combined in one volume here. The two books are just meant to be together.
August 1, 2009
Two classic horror stories merged into one book, i don't think modern horror could touch these two.
Read
April 15, 2010fiction,fantasy
December 5, 2011
I plan to read only the Dracula portion of this book at this time.
May 28, 2012
I didn't read Frankenstein, too much of the same context and genre for me. Sometime I'll get to Shelley's book, but right now I need some modern romance.
June 27, 2012
Just reading Frankenstein
August 8, 2012
Both classics for very good reasons, these books should be read especially by people who are familiar with the stories only from the movies.
Read
May 23, 2013i want read this book very much
February 14, 2015
Exaggerating and Thrilling and suspense Murdery ...
July 4, 2016
I enjoyed Dracula much more than Frankenstein. Frankenstein was a slow start and a pretty quick wrapped up ending.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews