Customer Reviews

A Sharpness On The Neck

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I have read and re-read all of Saberhagen's books in the Dracula series, and this book, along with exceptional The Dracula Tapes, are easily my favorites. Saberhagen brilliantly paints a truly loathsome character in Radu, Vlad Dracula's sadistic little brother. But one HAS TO READ *ALL* THE BOOKS IN THE SERIES TO GET THE FULL ENJOYMENT FROM THIS NOVEL! It stands alone, as a great novel, but, trust me, you'll understand more if you've read the other books in the series. It may not be the most well-edited book, but it is full of well-researched history, as are the other novels in this series, and a delightful humor.

Saberhagen weaves all sorts of figures in history into this novel, such as the Marquis de Sade, a "friend" of Radu, and The Scarlet Pimpernel. This is a enchanting and innovative tale, particularly how they manage to save the Philip Radcliffe in the time of the French Revolution. I HIGHLY recommend this book to anyone that loves history, or even vampires. And read the other books in The Dracula Series, too, including the soon-to-come A Coldness in the Blood!

As a fan of most fiction related to the French Revolution and as a seeker of the perfect Dracula, I was pleasantly surprised that a book I was drawn to more by the guillotine than the vampires may wind up leading me to my answer. I may be at somewhat of an advantage, already being familiar with the historical references and other literary characters, but I find this to be a highly skilled connection of different worlds of fact and fiction. I am highly dissapointed that several books in the series seem to be out of print, although I know they will not share the setting that attracted my attention.

I have followed Fred Saberhagen through most of his works, including the Swords and the Dracula series and have usually found him to be a riviting author. Of course, some stories are better than others... I started out the Dracula series a little backwards -- I had some "grave" misgivings about Dracula and Sherlock Holmes ("The Holmes-Dracula File") appearing together. And, although there was a cringe or two, the book was very good. Over the years I have managed to read the rest of the Dracula series, including this latest one. "A Sharpness in the Neck" was not bad but certainly wasn't as good as some of the others in this series. The back cover is very misleading -- it mentions Napoleon, Dupin, the Marquis de Sade and the Scarlet Pimpernel, as being characters in this tale. They are not. Napoleon and de Sade do have a few lines -- none of which is the least important to the storyline -- but the others are mentioned very obliquely in passing. The story itself is not very clear; The Count's immortal, sadistic brother, Radu, is back to revenge himself for Dracula's very imaginative punishment; i.e. leaving Radu in pieces in a grave for a few decades. Why Radu is so hot and bothered about killing a 20th century decendant of a man (Phillip Radcliff) who had helped the Count during the Revolution, is not real clear. For that matter, it's rather vague as to why Radu was so hung up on killing the origional Radcliff, other than a petty annoyance for the Count. The back-and-forth from the 20th century to the Reign of Terror, is also kind of confusing. Was the entire story, as written here by "Mr. Graves", on the tape that today's Radcliff's had to watch? Or was it Dracula's remembrances? The switching of Radcliff -- who thought he was a vampire who had been beheaded -- with a wax dummy was nicely done; it accomplished the goal of being a surprise. But it didn't fill in the plot enough. All in all, I didn't find the story too bad -- although Saberhagen did tend to describe the actual beheadings (up to and including why a decapitated body doesn't appear to have any neck) in perhaps a bit too much detail. But then again, since the story is supposed to be written by Vlad Dracula (and who am I to say it wasn't?) I suppose gory details are to be expected. Hopefully we won't have to wait too long for another installment in this series. And equally hopefully, the next tale will regain the "sharpness" of some of the older works.

Philip and June Radcliffe are kidnapped on their honeymoon. They were confrined and told it was for their own protection that they were kidnapped. Their captor called himself Mister Graves. He, and a young woman, were vampires.

Of course, Philip and June do not believe them. Slowly, however, they find out all they have been told is true. These vampires WERE protecting them...from Mister Graves's brother.

Philip Radcliffe was named after his ancestor, who was the bastart don of Benjamin Franklin. Mister Graves was as close to death as a vampire could be, thanks to his brother, Radu. The Philip of long ago had saved the life of Mister Graves. This earned him and his descendants Radu's hatred.

Mister Graves had vowed to save Philip and June from Radu who planned to behead them with a guillotine and drink their blood.

I only recently finished reading The Dracula Sequence book series by Fred Saberhagen and I think I have grown to adore his version of Dracula. My only regret in regard to these books is that I only recently started reading these books and sadly the author, Fred Saberhagen, passed away in 2007. I wish I had discovered these books while he was still alive. Also, it's very apparent to me that he did not mean for this book series to end where they did. The book series is clearly unfinished.
His first book in the series begins with the novel The Dracula Tape which is a very tongue in cheek re-telling of the novel Dracula by Bram Stoker but from Dracula's point of view. Some of his justifications for the events are somewhat... questionable, such as his claim that what happened on the Demeter was the result of the first mate going insane because he thought a vampire was on board. Okay, so the first mate went insane and caused everything but... the cause of his insanity was true... there was a vampire on board... Then there's his claim that his relationship with Lucy was casual and consensual. But in the next breath he admits she thought it was all a dream. So, yes. Our narrator is not exactly honest and sometimes you have to read between the lines to catch the truth. He leaves out the details he doesn't like, apparently lies, and slants things to the way he wants to remember them. But for all his flaws you start to like Saberhagen's Dracula. He's no Edward Cullen. He doesn't lament being a vampire. He's proud of what he is and has a very strong, personal sense of honor. It also has a very satisfying ending for those who love the idea of Mina and Dracula as a couple, without actually re-writing the ending of Stoker's novel.
The one thing I dislike is that Dracula's only real vulnerability in these books is wood. The reasoning given is that like a vampire wood is something that was once alive and transformed into something new.

The second book in the series is called The Dracula - Holmes file. This story starts with Dracula roaming Victorian London, shortly after the events of Dracula. He accidentally gets involved in a very disturbing case with Sherlock Holmes, who actually resembles Dracula, himself.

The Third book in the series called Old Friend of the Family, serves as a sort of glue linking the literary Dracula to the modern world through his connection to Mina's family. In this novel Mina's descendants are desperate for aide when young Johnny Southerland (the youngest of her line at this point) is kidnapped and his pinky fingers have been viciously torn off. The family, in desperation, use a spell left by "Grandma Mina" to summon help, at which point Dracula (under the alias Dr. Corday) turns up and becomes self-appointed guardian of Mina's family. And it becomes strangely satisfying when Dracula takes brutal revenge for what was done to poor Johnny. He even brutally mangles one of the kidnappers. You find yourself starting to root for him, despite his viciousness. He is a fantastic anti-hero.
This book also introduces us to Joseph Koegh, who marries into the Southerland family (descendants of Mina and Jonathan Harker). Joe becomes a private investigator and recurring character in the series and he serves as a good counter balance to our not-always-nice narrator.

The fourth book of the series is Thorn. In this book Dracula is attempting to win (at auction) a painting of his own "deceased" second wife from his mortal life only to find himself involved in a strange mystery that may involve his own half-vampire wife from his mortal life. The quality of the book series starts to slide a little bit here and the story alternates between the modern setting and the past. It actually has the feel of an episode of Forever Knight (The Canadian Vampire TV series from the early nineties). The best part of this book has to be Dracula's temper tantrum near the end of the book where Mina herself (now a vampire) shows up to warn one of the main protagonists not to go near him until it was over because of how dangerous he could be when angry. It was disturbing and amusing all at once. But considering what happened to lead to the tantrum it was completely understandable. Dracula and his lover were both blown up in a car. He survived by turning into mist and narrowly escaping. The woman was badly mangled to the point that she couldn't even ingest Dracula's blood to be transformed into a vampire and so she died in agony in his arms... which lead to a monstrous, probably warrented, vampire temper tantrum from Dracula.

The fifth book in the series is probably my least favorite. This one is called Dominion and deals with magick and Merlin himself (who has been wandering the streets under a curse that has left him an incompetent drunk...) Fred Saberhagen is not very good at describing magick. It's disjointed, hallucinogenic and a little incoherent. Fred Saberhagen can describe vampire powers fairly well but not generic magick or time travel very well. The best part though has to be when Dracula is tossed up into a whirlwind that tumbles him around through time, by an angry Merlin, who doesn't realize Dracula is actually on his side.

The sixth book in the series is a good one. This one is called A Matter of Taste. In this book it's revealed that the historical rogue Ceasar Borgia became a vampire and now wants revenge on Dracula (for something our narrator claims was accidental but that's debatable considering our narrator isn't very honest...) Dracula ends up poisoned and now it's up to Mina's human descendants to protect him while he is vulnerable. Meanwhile the now adult Johnny Southerland (the one Dracula saved in Old Friend of The Family) has to find a way to explain to his future wife that his "Uncle Matt" is not only a vampire but THE Dracula. The ending is surprisingly endearing and sweet.
In this book we learn that Dracula has a clever way of compensating for not having a reflection. He has replaced his bathroom mirror with a flat screened closed circuit television with a continual live feed of whatever is in front of it.

The seventh book of the series is one of the two I don't care much for. The other is Dominion. In this one, called A Question of Time, a lot of time travel happens and as I discussed before, Fred Saberhagen is not very good at writing magick or time travel. This particular book has no real impact on the majority of the series and I don't feel it was necessary in the grand scheme of things.

The eighth book of the series is called Seance for a vampire. And yet again our "Hero" makes some questionable decisions, such as wanting to seduce a young Medium whose brother has just been killed, But he was "considerate enough" to wait a night or so after the brother's death to seduce her. This was a fairly interesting one but the one thing about the book I don't care for is Fred Saberhagen sometimes puts his own opinion into the character. For example he has Dracula feel that all Mediums are frauds. He does not believe in ghosts. He believes in magick, time travel, spells, wizards, vampires, werewolves, and even karma but ghosts is the thing Dracula doesn't believe in? I don't buy it. It just doesn't make sense to me. This book deals with the historical Rasputin and is another cross over with Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson.

The ninth book of the series is A Sharpness on the Neck and here Fred Saberhagen seems to poke fun of himself a bit, poking fun of how "Mr. Graves" (Another alias for Dracula) shifts from third person perspective to first person perspective. And it also pokes fun at how boring and long winded he can be when explaining things to people. In this story we learn that Radu (Dracula's vampire brother) wants a man named Phillip Radcliffe dead as revenge against his ancestor. It's up to Dracula and a masked band of helpers (Mna's human descendants) to save them.
The story alternates with the past, particularly The French revolution, and the present day. There are subtle nods to A Tale of Two Cities and The Scarlet Pimpernel. At one point Dracula disguises himself as an executioner (and actually carries out several executions) to save a man he is honor-bound to protect.
The funniest part of this book is when Dracula makes a three to five hour long video tape of himself sitting at a desk explaining the back story and the people who are being made to watch the video find it boring and even try fast forwarding it. At one point he even enthralls them to watch it and they still fall asleep about five minutes into it.
Little things are there to remind you of the viciousness of our protagonist. Even though he goes out of his way to try to rescue a little girl at one point, he still mangles a group of vampires who side with his brother Radu, thralls animals to remain still so a little boy can kill them with his mini guillotine, and carries out executions he doesn't even really agree with. He also mentions beating his brother with a wooden cane and tells us that his brother only cried out in pain to "annoy" him. He is... still... Dracula.

The Tenth book in the series is called A coldness in the blood and deals with a self-proclaimed Egyptian deity and a quest to find the Philosopher's Stone. A serious and not-quite resolved strain is put on "Uncle Mathew" (Dracula) and his relationship with Mina's human family (who he's been more or less stalking ever since the book Old Friend of the Family, set twenty years earlier...) The strain comes when Andy (Joe's son) goes to Uncle Matt's apartment to put together a website for him. While there he gets unintentionally wrapped up into the chaotic adventure which subsequently leads to Andy's mother forbidding him from ever helping Uncle Matt with his computer and or going to his apartment again. I can't help but feel sorry for Dracula here because he's clearly grown attached to these people that he has made himself protector of and it's apparent they're all still quite afraid of him. Well, I suppose I'd be a little nervous too if Dracula decided to become my guardian Angel but I've grown to like the guy.
Dracula has been trying very hard to get others to adopt the term Hmo-dirus or Homo-sapien-dirus as a subspecies title for Vampire or as he says Nosferatu. ...It doesn't seem to catch on.
The one thing I dislike about this novel is yet again, like with ghosts in Seance for a vampire, Fred Saberhagen puts his own views in Dracula and it doesn't make much sense that a man from fifteenth century Romania would have issues with a young man having an earring and yet he does. And the author goes out of his way to have multiple characters unrealistically hate the earring, including even a very young character named Dolly. Since when does Dracula have a 1950s middle America mind-set about Jewelry? It doesn't fit.

In any event it's obvious here that this was not meant to be the last book of the series. And it's disappointing to know the book series never truly will be completed since the author passed away.

There are two short stories set in the world of The Dracula Sequence but I haven't had the chance to read those yet.

For anyone who misses vampires who could be terrifying and charming, charismatic yet violent, and not sparkly, I strongly, strongly recommend these books. I think this book series is highly under-rated and Fred Saberhagen's version of Dracula has become one of my favorite literary characters.

I loved the "Dracula Tapes" take on the vampire legend. Book #2 was slightly interesting. The series have rapidly detiriorated since them however. This is a longwinded novel, badly written, badly edited, with the characters that are impossible to care about. It is hard to follow the plot in its full if you do not have the background in the past books. I am severely disappointed.

I think this series is deteriorating a bit. I quite enjoyed the earlier books that I've read, but this one lacks something. As usually happens, the modern-day tie-in to the historical story is dull and practically pointless. The rest of the book is fairly good. I fail to see, though, why Saberhagen feels his books are incomplete without at least one famous historical character popping up. Dracula does fine on his own!

Including this one, I've read three of Saberhagen's Dracula books, waiting for some moment when I feel as if the series (or just one of the individual books) has achieved some kind of point or relevance. Hasn't happened.

Saberhagen's writing is sluggish, heavy on irrelevant action (or rather non-action), without offering much of interest in return. Though he previously managed an almost engaging Sherlock Holmes, his characters here are paper-thin, and some lapse at times into fairly unsavory behavior.

Technically he's not a bad writer, but I have a feeling as if he's been persisting for years in a subject that is out of his element. There are far more intuitive and capable writers of vampire fiction, especially when it comes to "good" vampires. (I highly recommend P. N. Elrod as one who excels in the field.)

Another, personal issue. I happen to enjoy well-written vampire protagonists as much as anyone--but I'm a big fan of Bram Stoker's vampire hunter Van Helsing, and when modern authors base their works on Stoker's, I'm always dismayed to find that character maligned. Saberhagen has had a habit of doing so... though admittedly no worse than many other writers who romanticize vampires.

At any rate, this is probably the last of Saberhagen's books that I'm going to bother with.

The first book of Saberhagen's Dracula series, _The Dracula Tapes_, was a great read; the tale of Dracula, lifted from Bram Stoker's famous book, as told by the Count himself, and oh, had he been misunderstood. Further books on the series never quite lived up to the first one, but were reasonably good reads...

Until this one. "A Sharpness on the Neck" is very disappointing. The premise itself is on par with other books on the series: bound by his honor, Vlad Dracula must protect a descendant of a friend from a murderous vampire, Vlad's brother Radu. In the process, the descendant is introduced to the world of vampires, and we are to get to know some other part of Vlad's story; this time, the period in the final decades of the eighteenth century, during the French Revolution, and more specifically, the Terror.

Unfortunately, the book never quite lives up to the reasonable premise. The narration bounces back and forth between first person and third person, often without the benefit of a break to indicate a change has occurred. Although some characters are meant to be in disguise, their right name pops back and forth at inopportune moments. The narration is overly confusing, the plotting badly done. Having spent some time in the previous books on the series "explaining" that the invitation requirement for a vampire to enter a dwelling has more to do with a psychological hangup on Vlad's part than the nature of vampirism, this is entirely discarded in this book in favor of the traditional meaning.

The book is unpolished, rushed, and poorly written.

It seems that the book is merely an excuse for Saberhagen to make inside jokes and references to other classic literature and history about the period. Percy Blakeney (better known as The Scarlet Pimpernel) makes a useless background appearance. So do the main characters from Dickens' _A Tale of Two Cities_. Superfluous references to a young Auguste Dupin, Madame Toussaud, and others, pepper the book. But rather than being clever, they are tiresome, cumbersome, and silly. Not recommended.

I, too, was intrigued by the idea of a vampire story set amongst one of my favorite historical periods, the French Revolution. What I got was a very poorly plotted story full of inconsequential characters that doesn't really start to get anywhere until exactly halfway through when we are finally introduced to the character whose actions are the very reason this story is happening in the first place. Historical personages are thrown in so half assed I almost feel embarrased for them. I haven't read any of Saberhagen's other Dracula books, and I'm sorry to say I'm in no great hurry to do so.