The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova

This could have been a good book. Heck, there probably was a good book in there if you peel out 200 pages or so. The same details kept getting relayed over and over because of the epistolary gag, finding a cache of old letters, etc.

It sold big because it was a semi-fresh take on Dracula. Just like The Passage or Twilight. Everyone wants fresh vampires these days. I blame Bram Stoker. Leave them in the mausoleum. See if a hundred years of banishment sweetens them up at all.

I found the part about Paul and Helen interesting, but the first 200-300 pages were ridiculously slow, and the ending was mind-blowingly anticlimatic and forgettable.

No idea why it was so hyped and really hope it doesn't get made into a movie.

LOL - I don't know exactly why I loved it so much. I mean, I agree that at times it dragged, and yes, the ending was anticlimactic (Well, I guess it made sense at the very, very end when she gets a book). But I can't stop thinking about it. I found the history fascinating, and having been to several of the places mentioned in the book I loved how accurate it all was - especially turkey.

Alas, it seems I'm in the minority ;P

I went to bloody war with this book. I am the kind of reader that must stick it out. Once I start,I will finish. No matter how much I might curse and cry. I call it The Curse Of The Unstoppable Reader.

I read it. I survived. That is all.

Kostova's second novel is twice as slow as The Historian. One wonders how these things get published at all...

I read it many years ago, after a recommendation from a friend from Bulgaria. The book was ok, I wouldn't recommend people not to read it, but essentially I found it to be a homage to Dracula by Bram Stoker. If someone wants to read about vampires I would recommend them to read Dracula first, because it is better.

Yes, I also thought the end was a bit underwhelming.

I read it and I thought it was OK.

Then a few years later I was bored and I thought I'd read it again. But this time I found that I just couldn't be bothered.

On the other hand Jonathan Strange is the best book on the face of the earth.

I don't remember it all that well. I remember thinking that for a vampire book, it lacked anything resembling menace and was more like a travel guide that ended with a vampire doing the long, boring monologue-thing. Not the worst book I've ever read; but thoroughly forgettable.

It dragged very much for me. I eventually managed to read it but I skipped huge chunks because I wasn't interested in all of the backstory.

The writing was top notch however, loved it.

I loved The Historian, but I abandoned her next book after 100 pages. Just couldn't get into it.

I found the beginning to be interesting, the middle to be quite boring, but it picked up enough at the end for me to finish. I enjoyed it, bu that middle section was so hard to plow through.

You just called him the Vladinator. That made my day thank you.

I found it really boring and I'm astonished that I finished it.In fairness to the author I knew it wasn't my cup of tea before I bought it but I'm terrible for jumping on the bandwagon.I haven't enough fingers and toes to count the amount of books I've read just because of hype.