Scan barcode
_n_m_'s review against another edition
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
Minor: Misogyny, Physical abuse, Sexual assault, Toxic relationship, Stalking, and Lesbophobia
maeverose's review against another edition
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
4.25
I loved the writing style of this book. It was atmospheric and gothic, I loved the setting of the castle and the grassy hills and the ruins of the old town. I just pictured fog over everything anytime they were outside. Now I just wanna have a picnic at old castle ruins in the fog with a pretty vampire. (Sadly that doesn’t happen in this book but it could’ve). This might be my favorite classic I’ve read so far… it’s at least tied with Dracula, but I think it tops it. It actually got pretty creepy at times.
Was also a little surprised how explicitly sapphic it was, given when it was written. I was expecting it to just be homoerotic in the way that classics sometimes are, or overtly homophobic. I think it’s safe to assume that the combination of sapphic elements and vampirism was very intentional.. automatically villainizing lesbianism by portraying it as a ‘virus’ that you can ‘catch’, something that’s evil and scary… But reading it it isn’t actually explicitly homophobic. It’s all subtext. It could easily be read through a more modern lens, removing that subtext.
Graphic: Death and Blood
Moderate: Child death, Emotional abuse, Physical abuse, Racism, Terminal illness, Toxic relationship, Lesbophobia, Gaslighting, and Toxic friendship
Minor: Ableism, Sexual content, Suicide, and Death of parent
Religious themes, beheading, cremation, sleep paralysis (not really but the descriptions are similar)shrutislibrary's review against another edition
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.75
Graphic: Confinement, Deadnaming, Death, Emotional abuse, Physical abuse, Toxic relationship, Cannibalism, Murder, Gaslighting, and Toxic friendship
chloebethx_'s review against another edition
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
Moderate: Confinement, Death, Emotional abuse, Physical abuse, Blood, Death of parent, Murder, Colonisation, Injury/Injury detail, and Classism
mal_eficent's review against another edition
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
I really like the Victorian style of horror shorts: the drip fed hints that nothing is as it seems, the dramatic setting, and the even more dramatic idea of someone sitting down years later to sigh and exclaim over this 'terrible' thing that happened in their past was. I fell in love with this way of writing horror reading Frankenstein in high school and I always forget how good it is until I pick up another. This was no exception to the rule: I really enjoyed it. It was creepy, the writing was really enjoyable, and the vampire lore was so interesting.
All that said, there's no escaping that the original intent behind this story is a bit homophobic. The idea of monsterhood and queerness being intrinsically tied together, and that you should be afraid of someone because of their queerness, is clearly a terrible opinion. (Using monsterhood as a metaphor so that people can explore their feeling of otherness without facing direct phobia is a different matter entirely, and I don't think this book is trying to do that.) As a modern reader it's not hard to just read this as a queer woman having been turned into a vampire, and Carmilla's predatory tendencies being only related to her vampire nature - and I think that's the way to approach it, with the writer long dead and the way the story has been embraced by queer women. There's certainly wiggle room within the original text to see it as Laura trying to come to terms with her own queerness, too, but due to society, the men in her life, and the whole vampire thing she's never allowed to. Because the story never outright says being a lesbian is bad, just the monsterhood of Carmilla, a modern reader can escape the homophobia.
I think it's one to read if you like Victorian classics and vampires, but not necessarily one to go to if you're looking for older queer books.
Graphic: Homophobia
Moderate: Physical abuse
Minor: Violence and Blood