The publisher behind the hit Jane Austen horror remix novel Pride and Prejudice and Zombies is planning a prequel to the book, entitled Pride and Prejudice and Zombies: Dawn of the Dreadfuls.

The original Pride and Prejudice and Zombies was published in April this year by Quirk Classics and quickly became a hit, with readers around the globe soaking up Grahame-Smith’s injection of Jane Austen’s classic text (now out of copyright) with a number of zombie incursions and other references to the undead; for example, it is common for polite ladies to study martial arts.

The book was quickly followed by Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters, created by another author, Ben H. Winters. The book was published in September this year, but has not yet found the same level of acclaim and Pride and Prejudice and Zombies.

On its site, Quirk has published a blurb for the new book, billed as a prequel to the original Pride and Prejudice and Zombies:

“In this terrifying and hilarious prequel, we witness the genesis of the zombie plague in early-nineteenth century England. We watch Elizabeth Bennet evolve from a naïve young teenager into a savage slayer of the undead.

We laugh as she begins her first clumsy training with nunchucks and katana swords and cry when her first blush with romance goes tragically awry. Written by acclaimed novelist (and Edgar Award nominee) Steve Hockensmith, Dawn of the Dreadfuls invites Austen fans to step back into Regency England, Land of the Undead!”

The book does not appear to be a direct mixup of a Jane Austen novel with horror themes, as the previous two books were. It is slated to go on sale in March 2010.

Readers so far appear to be skeptical about the new Quirk effort. In the comments on the AustenProse blog, one wrote: “I enjoyed P&P&Z but a prequel? And not even written by the same author(s)? Now it just seems like a money-making scheme. I have a feeling this one won’t have the same success as the other two.”

But in the comments on the Shelf Life blog on Entertainment Weekly, another reader wrote:

“Well, I’m a bit of a sucker for this stuff. I really liked PPZ – it was silly and yeah, the zombies stuff felt jammed in there a bit, but if I wanted to read P&P I would have just reread it, you know? SS&SM was actually better at the fantasy stuff – there was more original writing, so the story flowed more naturally and it was very inventive. I’ll probably read this prequel too.”

Commentary
I’ve only read snippets of Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, but there is certainly a great deal of humour to be found in the book. I have also read almost all of Jane Austen’s work (without zombies or sea monsters).

However, the problem I found was that there weren’t nearly enough supernatural events or action in Pride and Prejudice and Zombies to keep me interested … the book actually reads relatively similarly to the original in most parts!

Apparently, from reading reviews, the author of Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters realised this problem and injected quite a bit more original prose into its pages, making it easier to get into for modern readers.

So where does leave the third book, which seems entirely without direct input from Austen? Probably in murky waters. So far publisher Quirk appears to have survived on what I would call a book ‘gimmick’ – take a classic work of literature and inject a modern spin. It’s easy marketing; you can sell such books to several ready-made audiences.

However, I would say this kind of gimmick can only last so long before audiences get tired of it and want to return to more original worlds. The next Pride and Prejudice and Zombies book will likely sell, but I wouldn’t expect a bestseller.

Legendary writer Stephen King has achieved overwhelmingly positive reviews for his 1,088 page science fiction opus Under the Dome: A Novel, which is slated to be published on November 10 this year.

The author is best-known for his horror books, but he has also written in a number of other genres, including the science fiction and fantasy fields. Under the Dome examines events in the town of Chester’s Mill in Maine, when the town is, according to the book’s description, “inexplicably and suddenly sealed off from the rest of the world by an invisible force field”.

If this sounds like it has the potential to create a situation right out of the television series Lost, that’s because it does. Nobody in the town can work out what the barrier is, or why it’s there, or how to get out of their sudden prison. Meanwhile, all sorts of secrets in the town come floating to the surface, as well as internal politics raising its ugly head.

Most critics who have received advance reading copies of the book have praised it, although some have noted its length could put some readers off. Writes Publisher’s Weekly:

“King’s return to supernatural horror is uncomfortably bulky, formidably complex and irresistibly compelling … King handles the huge cast of characters masterfully but ruthlessly, forcing them to live (or not) with the consequences of hasty decisions. Readers will recognize themes and images from King’s earlier fiction, and while this novel doesn’t have the moral weight of, say, The Stand, nevertheless, it’s a nonstop thrill ride as well as a disturbing, moving meditation on our capacity for good and evil.”

Dan Traeger, another reviewer whose look at Under the Dome was published on BlogCritics, said the book should be in line for a major prize, stating: “If there is any bit of class or good taste left in the science fiction community, Under The Dome will be put into contention for both the Hugo and Nebula awards.”

Writing on Suite101.com, Lindsey Mason wrote they couldn’t put the book down, claiming it was action-packed and a must-read for Stephen King fans, thriller fans, and those in general who enjoyed life-changing novels. And Total Sci-Fi Online gave the book a 9/10, describing it as an epic tale “in every sense of the word”.

However there have also been several less positive reviews of the book, with reviewers particularly pinioning its length – clocking in at nearly 1,100 pages. Austin Post writer David Fried said the book “shoulda been shorter” and noted some sections meandered, while Joseph Savitski from Sci-Fi Ghoul went even further:

““Under the Dome” is a decent novel, but certainly not up to the standard of King’s previous works. Despite being well-researched with well-drawn characters, the story feels drawn out with little to drive it forward but crimes the townspeople commit on each other for a large part of the novel. A good buy in its paperback format, but there isn’t enough in this effort to justify spending the price for a hardcover.”

Commentary
I haven’t read much Stephen King – I’m not a horror fan by any stretch of the imagination – I’ve only read the author’s 1987 work The Eyes of the Dragon (which was chilling).

However I believe I can fairly confidently predict that King’s novel Under the Dome won’t be taken seriously by many in the science fiction and fantasy communities, even though it will no doubt be one of the most popular novels in the genre to be published in 2009. It’s currently sitting on top of the Amazon top ten bestseller list; and it hasn’t been published yet. That’s on pre-orders alone.

The reason for this is that King, despite his frequent excursions into the sci-fi and fantasy worlds, and the fact that his horror often has elements from these worlds, is considered a “mainstream” author.

It’s for this same reason that many in the sci-fi/fantasy community won’t go near the books of Margaret Atwood – even though some of her recent books are plainly post-apocalyptic sci-fi, she has denied that they fit in the genre, and most believe they do not. Witness the fact that Stephen King has never been a finalist for the Hugo Award – it’s always authors who are much more firmly situated in the sci-fi and fantasy genres which win these sorts of plaudits.

Of course, whether a book fits into a genre or not is ultimately not important – it’s the quality of the writing and the impression it makes which define its status. And there seems to be a fairly large consensus building that Under the Dome is one not to miss.

(But 1,088 pages? That’s long enough to give any sci-fi/fantasy writer a run for their money when it comes to length. Shoudn’t this have been two books? Or even three??)

]]> http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/10/27/reviews-praise-stephen-kings-under-the-dome/feed/ 8 http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/09/17/112-years-later-an-official-dracula-sequel/ http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/09/17/112-years-later-an-official-dracula-sequel/#comments Wed, 16 Sep 2009 22:04:56 +0000 Renai LeMay http://www.keepingthedoor.com/?p=585

A descendant of Irish novelist Bram Stoker has this month published what he claims is the first authorised sequel to Stoker’s 1897 classic horror story Dracula.

The book is dubbed Dracula: The Un-Dead (which was Bram Stoker’s first title for the original Dracula novel) and is being published by Stoker’s great-grandnephew Dacre Stoker and Dracula historian Ian Holt, who is also a screenwriter. It’s already out in the UK, and will hit the US and Australia in October.

According to the book’s website, it’s is the first story in the Dracula universe to win official support from the Stoker family since the 1931 Bela Lugosi film, and the book has been written based on Bram Stoker’s own handwritten notes for characters, and “plot threads excised from the original edition”. The book’s website states:

“Dracula: The Un-Dead begins in 1912, twenty-five years after Dracula “crumbled into dust.” Van Helsing’s protégé, Dr. Jack Seward, is now a disgraced morphine addict obsessed with stamping out evil across Europe. Meanwhile, an unknowing Quincey Harker, the grown son of Jonathan and Mina, leaves law school for the London stage, only to stumble upon the troubled production of “Dracula,” directed and produced by Bram Stoker himself.

The play plunges Quincey into the world of his parents’ terrible secrets, but before he can confront them he experiences evil in a way he had never imagined.  One by one, the band of heroes that defeated Dracula a quarter-century ago is being hunted down.  Could it be that Dracula somehow survived their attack and is seeking revenge? Or is their another force at work whose relentless purpose is to destroy anything and anyone associated with Dracula?”

The book has already won some positive reviews. Publisher’s Weekly wrote in late August that it was “energetically paced and packed with outrageously entertaining action”. And Alternative Worlds writes:

The clever story line is fast-paced while introducing the audience to the survivors of the previous horrific encounter to include Bram Stoker … Filled with terrific twists fans of Dracula and those who appreciate a strong historical urban fantasy will relish the THE UN-DEAD.

Dacre Stoker has a Twitter account here.

Commentary
Give me strength. Is there a relative of any famous writer anywhere who doesn’t feel the need to write a sequel to their deceased uncle/aunt/cousin/great grandfather/son’s work?

We’ve already got sequels and follow-up books from descendants of Frank Herbert, J. R. R. Tolkien and more. The estate of Kurt Vonnegut is publishing “un-published” short stories by the author. And now we have an “official” sequel to Dracula, which was published more than a hundred years ago.

What’s next? “The official sequel to Robert Heinlein’s Starship Troopers: penned by his late cousin’s fourth grandchild’s second wife?”

Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt

The website of Dracula: The Un-Dead pompously states: “At last—the sequel to Bram Stoker’s classic novel Dracula”.

Well I’ve got a message to pass on to Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt: You can’t possibly describe this book as a canonised sequel to Bram Stoker’s Dracula. Firstly, the book was published more than 100 years ago. There are no fans of the original book still waiting around for a sequel.

Secondly, you can’t know what Bram Stoker himself would have thought of this project. And, forgive me for my opinion, but it’s really only the original author that can bestow officialdom on sequels. Or maybe their spouse. But certainly not their great-grandnephew.

Now I will acknowledge that some sequels to deceased authors’ work have merit. For example, the books published by Christopher Tolkien following his father’s death have been praised, and there is the fact that Robert Jordan’s estate had the support of the author to arrange for his Wheel of Time series to be finished, following his death.

But that doesn’t change the fact that all, and I repeat all, such initiatives have a slight smell of cash-grab about them.

There was nothing to stop Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt from writing a book set in the Dracula universe, after all. The copyright on the original book has expired, and anybody is free to write a book using those characters and universe.

The attempt to badge this as an “official” sequel is a transparent attempt to grab hold of the fame of Bram Stoker’s original masterpiece and re-direct it to this new book, in my opinion.

There is no doubt that this book could be awesome on its own merits, and it should be reviewed as such. Maybe it will go on to achieve great fame on its own merits. But I believe its authors have already cheapened its image by marketing it the way they have.

And the last word? Maybe there’s a reason Bram Stoker excised certain plot elements from his original book. Maybe he didn’t want them published.

]]> http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/09/17/112-years-later-an-official-dracula-sequel/feed/ 6