Catch-up time

My entries on here can be fairly sporadic, as I don't feel compelled to write just for the hell of it but only when I've got something to say or find something particularly compelling. That said, I don't like to let this thing go dormant, either. So, occasionally, I'll do a little 'catch-up' time with my readers to see what I've been up to and whatnot.

Firstly, you may've noticed that I've reinstated LinkWithin after banishing it several months ago. Wow. October. Time flies! I brought it on the same day I wrote the previous post. What inspired me to do that? You might be surprised. 

The article's full of useful tips for getting your stuff 'out there', but here's another: quantity may be more important than quality, according to a study by The British Psychological Society. The theory's not without criticism, however.

---

I've noticed Hammer's interested in making another Dracula flick. They've already had a recent stab at the vampire genre with Beyond the rave (2008). Prior to that, Hammer tried 'keeping up' with the young'uns by adding more sadism, more boobs and more groovy theatrics in the flicks that (not coincidentally) served as the last gasps of their reign over British horror films. 

Yes, I'm talking about Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972), The Satanic rites of Dracula (1974) and, let's not forget, the kung-fu 'spectacular' that was The legend of the 7 golden vampires (1974). Christopher Lee patently refused to star in that one and was replaced by John Forbes-Robertson.

I'm a fan of the Hammer Dracula flicks. Taste the blood of Dracula (1970) is one of my favourite vampire movies and I also enjoy their non-Dracula effort, Vampire circus (1972). What I'm saying is, these guys knew how to do it 'right'. Mostly.

So I can't help wondering whether they're gonna 'update' Dracula like they did in the latter stages, only to compete with other hyper-modernisations of the vampire myth like the Blade and Underworld series. Hopefully, Beyond the rave's not a warning sign. Point is, that angle's been done.

The thing that worked best in the Hammer Dracula/vampire flicks, in my opinion, was their 'gothicness'. That angle's lost when you update the vampire too much. They just become run-of-the-mill leather-jacketed action antiheroes—with fangs. Boooooring. I'm so over it. And enough with the bloody ramping, already (see point 3)! This isn't the bloody Matrix. And get offa my lawn!

Anyhoo, if there's anything that demonstrates what an updating of Hammers' gothic Dracula would look like, it's this. That said, they were also smart enough to back Let the right one in, so I probably shouldn't be cutting 'em down just yet.

---

Robin Hood—and Highgate vampire—fans, for that matter, will get a kick out of Kai Roberts' recently-published, Grave concerns: the follies and folklore of Robin Hood's final resting place (2011). The 'resting place' is located on the Kirklees Hall Estate, Yorkshire. It was also the scene of Sean Manchester's second-most famous vampire case.

Roberts presents an objective overview of the case and—before I continue, I've gotta disclose that he's a mate of mine. But he's a mate as a result of the correspondence that place during the draft stages of the book.

You see, its sixth chapter, 'Vampire blues', deals with the Highgate vampire case, which I was asked to view before it was 'locked in' for publication. Kai was familiar with my other blog, Did a wampyr walk in Highgate? and thought I might be qualified to do so. I made forty-eight notes to it, but not many made the cut. Mind you, they weren't major alterations, more like expanding on points—with a few corrections—Kai made throughout the draft. There wasn't really much more I could add, as Kai did such a brilliant job of summarising the case.

Now, because I mentioned on Facebook that I helped 'edit' his chapter (before I'd seen the final copy, no less), Della Farrant, and her husband David, took it upon themselves to jump down my throat—with hilarious consequences! What I also find funny, is that Kai's criticism is much more brutal than mine, yet they compliment him. Bit of a Freudian slip there! That, or they don't want to muddy the waters with someone who's given 'em public exposure and knows how to cut down their 'work' a peg or two with utmost precision.

As if it wasn't sad enough, Dave's wife's now started writing weaksauce apologia and bitter diatribes on her husband's behalf. A real shame, because she's a very smart woman and a talented writer (cursive font to the contrary). Just goes to show how 'blind' love can be.

Apart from that, I've also dealt with the usual pitiful, passive-aggressive mind games the President of the Highgate Vampire Society likes to play.

Anyhoo, grab a copy of Kai's book. I've started reading the rest of it—keeping in mind I only saw one chapter, pre-publication—and it's proving to be a gripping read.

---

Speaking of reads, Bertena Varney sent me a copy of her book, Vampire news: tasty bits to sink your fangs into (2012), which I'll get round to reading properly when I have some time.

You might recall her as the author of Lure of the vampire: a pop culture reference book of lists, websites and "very telling personal essays" (2011). The same book also reveals the head of the Federal Vampire and Zombie Agency, which many people think is a legit government organisation.

If Vampire news is non-fictional—as my brief flick-through suggests it is—you may even see a review on this blog. Stay tuned! But let this also be a head's up to other authors/publishers: please don't send me movies or fictional works. I appreciate the effort, but I won't review them. If you've got vampire documentaries (like this one) or non-fiction vampire books, on the other hand...

In the meantime, I actually kinda dig the cover and you can download a copy of it free—yes, free—from its co-author, Stavros', website: Bite me really hard. Click on the cover to take you there.

---

Even though this isn't a movie review blog, I'll occasionally refer to vampire flicks I've seen, keeping in tune with the online 'diary' nature of blogs. So, in that spirit, I'll mention that I caught Lesbian vampire killers (for vampire content, honest!) on DVD. 

Despite the rash of negative reviews—and its co-star calling it 'a pile of shit'—I kinda liked it. It reminded me of a far-less gorier version of Død snø (2009), another enjoyably mindless horror-comedy released the same year. It's not Shaun of the dead, sure, but dumb fun, nonetheless. For another 'take', see what Andrew M. Boylan had to say about it.

---

Well, that's enough rambling and links to wade through, for today. We'll catch-up again soon. Oh, but before I forget, John Edgar Browning gave me a head's up on the release of his book, Bram Stoker's Dracula: the critical feast, an annotated reference of early reviews & reactions, 1897-1913 (2012). It's now available in paperback form on Amazon; there's a copy for the Kindle-inclined. Another addition to my wish list—and yours, too, I hope.

On the feast front

I recently mentioned an upcoming book called Bram Stoker’s Dracula: the critical feast, an annotated reference of reviews and reactions, 1897-1920, which is compiled and edited by John Edgar Browning. John saw my post and shared further information, 'hot off the press', on the 18th via Facebook:

BRAM STOKER’S DRACULA: THE CRITICAL FEAST
An Annotated Reference of Early Reviews and Reactions, 1897-1913


Compiled and Annotated, with an Introduction, by
John Edgar Browning

Bibliographical Afterword by
J. Gordon Melton

PRAISE
“Both scholars and devoted fans will rejoice in Bram Stoker’s Dracula: The Critical Feast. This exhaustive compilation fulfills a long-standing need in the realm of Dracula studies and provides a valuable fresh perspective on the early popular and critical reception of Stoker’s masterpiece.”
—Dr. Margaret L. Carter, The Vampire in Literature: A Critical Bibliography and Different Blood: The Vampire as Alien

“This meticulously researched book puts to rest misconceptions long held by many Dracula scholars (myself included) about the reception of Stoker's novel. A superb achievement and a scholar’s delight!”
—Dr. Elizabeth Miller, Bram Stoker’s Dracula: A Documentary Journey into Vampire Country and the Dracula Phenomenon and Bram Stoker’s Notes for Dracula: A Facsimile Edition

“Dryden said of The Canterbury Tales that “here is God’s plenty,” and one might say the same thing about Bram Stoker’s Dracula: The Critical Feast. Browning has assembled an exhaustive collection of contemporary reviews of Dracula, reviews that put Stoker’s novel into context and demonstrate its almost instantaneous popularity. In addition, The Critical Feast includes copies of early covers and photographs of Stoker. This is a book that every student of Dracula will be proud to own…and pore over, a feast for the eyes and for the mind.”
—Dr. Carol A. Senf, Bram Stoker (Gothic Authors: Critical Revisions) and The Critical Response to Bram Stoker

SYNOPSIS
There is a common misconception that the early critical reception of Bram Stoker’s famed vampire novel, Dracula (1897), was “mixed.” This reference book sets out to dispel this myth en force by offering the most exhaustive collection of early critical responses to Stoker’s novel ever assembled, including some 91 reviews and reactions as well as 36 different press notices, many of which have not been seen in print since they appeared over 100 years ago. What these early critical responses reveal about Dracula’s writing is that it was predominantly seen by early reviewers and responders to parallel, even supersede the Gothic horror works of such canonical writers as Mary Shelley, Ann Radcliffe, and Edgar Allan Poe.

Accompanying the critical responses are annotations and an introduction by the editor, a bibliographical afterword by J. Gordon Melton, 32 illustrations, and a bibliography.

Sounds good! Personally speaking, I find it interesting to read contemporary views on the novel, long before it morphed into the Gothic legend it's become. Back when it was more 'grounded'. Anyhoo, John also kindly sent me the book's cover, today. Here tis:

Nifty, ain't it? He also let me know that 'with any luck, I'll be contracting my 9th and 10th book in the next 30 days'! Considering the first book he edited appeared in 2009—Draculas, vampires, and other undead forms: essays on gender, race, and culture—that's a hell of an achievement. Let's not forget his 'critical edition' to Montague Summers' The vampire in Europe (1929) is also due sometime this year.

In this capacity, John reminds me of Peter Haining (1940–2007), another prolific guy with a knack for turning up obscure goodies.

Dracunews

Wikipedia

As Niels points out, 2012 marks the 100th anniversary of Bram Stoker's passing. His death was largely overlooked at the time, due to the aftermath of a certain event. Bad timing, Bram!

Niels' post also reveals that Constable & Robinson—the modern incarnation of Dracula's original publisher, Archibald Constable and Company—will be releasing a facsimile edition of the 1897 novel. The pre-release prices for the hardback edition are, how should I put this—exorbitant. However, paperback copies will be far cheaper.

I'm sure the book will be invaluable to Dracula scholars, as an original text, rather than various abridged versions published over the years. But did you know Stoker's work was republished with edits made by the author, himself? That's the 1901 edition. Transylvania Press reprinted it in 1994. Unfortunately, it was a limited to a press run of 500 copies—all sold out.

Barring the original works, themselves—which sell for thousands—the upcoming facsimile and the 1901 abridged edition reprint would be perfect companions to Bram Stoker's notes for Dracula: a facsimile edition (2008).

Speaking of companions, John Edgar Browning has complied and annotated Bram Stoker’s Dracula: the critical feast, an annotated reference of reviews and reactions, 1897-1920 which will be published by The Apocryphile Press. So, stay tuned for that.

He's previously co-edited Draculas, vampires, and other undead forms: essays on gender, race, and culture (2009), edited The vampire, his kith and kin: a critical edition (2011) and co-wrote Dracula in visual media: film, television, comic book and electronic game appearances, 1921-2010 (2010). He even made contributions to S.T. Joshi's Encyclopedia of the vampire: the living dead in myth, legend, and popular culture (2010).

The guy's a machine. He's been involved in consistently good works, too, so if you see his name attached to something, chances are, it'll be a recommended purchase.

All up, 2012 looks like it'll be a great year for Dracula scholars. Let's not forget upcoming conferences like the University of Hull's Bram Stoker and Gothic Transformations on 12-14 April and Bram Stoker: life and writing, which will be held on 5-6 July at Stoker's old stomping ground, Trinity College, Dublin. You can read about other commemorative events via Stoker's estate website.

Critiquing the critical

Amazon

I thought Niels' review of Montague Summers' The vampire: his kith and kin—a critical edition (2011) was 'brutal'. It prompted me to share my thoughts on criticism, which, in its own way, was probably to dull the impact of his blunt—and clearly frustrated—approach. But, at the time, I hadn't read the book.

Perhaps I was grateful to see an edition of Summers' work accompanied by 'rare contextual and source materials, correspondence, illustrations, as well as Greek and Latin translations.'

I was also 'starstruck' by its contributors, John Edgar Browning (editor), J. Gordon Melton (foreword), Rosemary Ellen Guiley (introduction) and Carol A. Senf (afterword). All are prominent authors of—and contributors to—vampire studies. But I confess I wasn't familiar with Gerard P. O'Sullivan (prologue) or Grace de Majewski (translations). Nonetheless, all that extra material and at a bargain price, too. My copy arrived on September 14th.

When I finally got round to reading through the book's additional material, I realised—Niels was right. After all, what is criticism but 'the judgement of the merits and faults of the work or actions of an individual or group by another'. Now, you would think that 'a critical edition' of a book would examine its text in-depth. This book doesn't. What we have instead, is a book amended with largely supplementary material about Summers, contributors' exposure to his work, biographical material and a few extracts from his sources.

Case-in-point. Browning, noted Summers' 'occasional documentation errors and omissions'¹ and Guiley said 'This work is not perfect, to be certain, and scholars have pointed out its flaws and errors of commission and omission'.² That may be, but where are the corrections? Which scholars noted them? A 'critical edition' is the perfect chance to amend these errors—but neither of them did.

Two notable examples have been discussed by Niels. W. S. G. E.'s Curieuse und sehr wunderbare Relation, von denen sich neuer Dingen in Servien erzeigenden Blut-Saugern oder Vampyrs (1732) is featured in Summers' bibliography, despite there being no proof 'that he actually read it.' It also cited Johann Heinrich Zopf's Dissertatio de Vampyris Serviensibus (1733), even though the passage Summers quoted is taken from a later work.

Material relating to the book's publication and contemporary coverage is comparatively thin. For example, only two reviews of the book were reproduced³ and one of them 'primarily' concerns Summers' companion tome, The vampire in Europe (1929). Two tiny ads for the book are also featured.⁴ Surely there's more than that out there. In fact, I know there is: Timothy d'Arch Smith cited a letter Summers wrote to Time and Tide's 18 January 1929 issue, 'Correcting the reviewer of his book.'⁵ That correspondence would've been much more relevant than correspondences and criticisms reproduced in the critical edition's appendix.⁶

At this point, I may well be guilty of being too 'brutal' on the book, myself. It might seem that readers have been 'ripped off', but that's far from the case. This book—without question—is an invaluable companion to Summers' work. While it doesn't delve too deeply into Kith, it certainly provides fascinating insights into Summers, himself. O'Sullivan's prologue⁷ is a brilliant overview of the darker aspects of Summers' shadowy life—molestation allegations, black mass participation, homosexual leanings, acquaintances, questionable ordination—leading to the recovery of various manuscripts that went missing after death. However, I am wary of Guiley's assertion that Summers would 'most likely be a secret player in the underground of the living vampire subculture' if he was still around⁸ due to his traditionalist Catholicism.

What we have here, is the bare bones of a Summers biography; an update on previous attempts like Joseph Jerome's (Brocard Sewell) Montague Summers: a memoir (1965), Frederick S. Frank's anthology, Montague Summers: a bibliographical portrait (1988) or even Summers' posthumously-published autobiography, The Galanty show (1980). Indeed, O'Sullivan mentioned that 'The full text of Redwood-Anderson's memoir [Recollections of Montage Summers: the early years] will be reproduced as part of prefatory materials to be included with a forthcoming edition of Summers's uncompleted novel, The Brides of Christ.'⁹

To that extent, the book could've been more vampire-centric. I would've loved to have known more about Summers' holograph manuscript, 'The vampires of the Carpathians'¹⁰ and surely they could've mentioned Peter Underwood's account of the anti-vampire medallion Summers (allegedly) gave him.¹¹ It would've also been pertinent to focus on the major sources of inspiration for Summers' book: John Cuthbert Lawson's Modern Greek folklore and ancient Greek religion: a study in survivals (1910)¹² and Bernhard Schmidt's Das Volksleben der Neugriechen und das hellenische Alterthum (1871).¹³

For all the book's flaws, it's definitely a worthy addition to your collection—and I can't get over how cheap it is. Forget the other reprints; this is the one you want. In the meantime, it'll be very interesting to see what Browning does with the forthcoming critical edition of Summers' The vampire in Europe (1929). If I was him, I'd recruit Niels to provide something. As far as I'm concerned, his brilliant blog entry, 'A delayed demonologist', is a taste of what could be.

---

^{1. M Summers, The vampire: his kith and kin—a critical edition, ed. JE Browning, The Apocryphile Press, Berkeley, Calif., 2011, p. xiv. Preface by John Edgar Browning.↩}

^{2. ibid., p. xxv. Introduction by Rosemary Ellen Guiley.↩}

^{3. ibid., pp. 373–7. Appendix B.↩}

^{4. ibid., pp. 379–80. Appendix C.↩}

^{5. T d'Arch Smith, Montague Summers: a bibliography, 2nd rev. edn, The Aquarian Press, Wellingborough, U.K., 1983, p. 113.↩}

^{6. Summers, pp. 382–94, 397–8. Appendix C.↩}

^{7. ibid., pp. xxviii–lxxii. Prologue by Gerard P. O'Sullivan.↩}

^{8. ibid., p. xix. Introduction by Rosemary Ellen Guiley.↩}

^{9. ibid., p. lxvii, n. 9. Prologue by Gerard P. O'Sullivan.↩}

^{10. ibid., pp. 406, 425.↩}

^{11. P Underwood (ed.), The vampire's bedside companion: the amazing world of vampires in fact and fiction, Leslie Frewin, London, 1975, pp. 69–74.↩}

^{12. A few pages from the book were reproduced in the appendix. Summers, ibid., pp. 412–15. Appendix E.↩}

^{13. Strangely, Summers did not cite the book in his bibliography, instead citing Schmidt's Griechische Märchen, Sagen und Volkslieder (1877).↩}