To cope with my vampire novel burnout (plus, I've finished them all), I've defaulted to older books about real people by my fave, Jodi Picoult. But another bloodsucker tale is back on my reading list ... Dracula: The Undead.
The English Lit major in me has to read this one. It's the sequel to the original Dracula written by ... get this ... the great grandnephew of the books' original creator, Bram Stoker, in 1897.
That's no guarantee the book's going to be good, or even readable. But at least he has the same last name -- Darce Stoker. Apparently, this guy is a bit of a preppie, not the image I usually conjure for a vampire novel writer, but then again look at Stephenie Meyer -- the ultimate Mormon mommy. I hope some of Uncle Bram's writing genes didn't get diluted through the generations.
Sequels to the classics are not new, but they are often a huge disappointment. Really, how could they not be?
There's a sequel to Winnie the Pooh, Cafe Sheri tells us in Toddler Buzz. A lot of critics say the story line loses a lot with the introduction of a new character and a modern sensibility. There's also the ghoulish continuations of Jane Austen ... yes, "ghoul" and "Jane Austen" are not phrases that you'd think to put together, but it's true. Jane Austen, vampires and zombies.
Do you read sequels to the classics -- either by the creator's ancestor or otherwise? Will you read the new Dracula?