i
can't remember when i bought this book. but it was one of those solo trips to
bonifacio high street's fully booked. i wanted to challenge myself. i told
myself that i'm going to pick up a really thick one, story of which is far from
the usual fare. something that would drive me to google some more because of
some terms used or places that i haven't heard of. oh and one more thing, i
didn't want a fiction-fiction one, i wanted a book that touches on history or a
book based on one of history's famed (or infamous) characters. so off i
browsed. and voila, the historian presented itself.
but
when i got home, i didn't touch it immediately. maybe because i was actually
daunted by its thickness, haha! i completely forgot about it and it laid
forgotten at the bottom of my desk pile. i have read some other books such as
maria ressa's 10 years 10 months and thomas friedman's the world is flat. i finished
and enjoyed the unlikely pilgrimage of harold fry by rachel joyce, as well as
some other books. this was a total of more than a year (super slow reader me)!
and then, i found it (or re-found) and started flipping thru its first few
pages. and didn't let it go… until i finished it just this last month.
and
what a ride it was. others who said that it's a great late night page turner
were spot on. i enjoyed reading a story within a story and no less a story
about the real dracula himself, vlad tepes or vlad the impaler. of course there
have been countless versions about him but the historian focused on the
original dracula, the undead in this book. the book jumps from one setting to
another and from another point of view to another. at the center of which, are
letters written by the central characters such as helen, paul, elena and
professor rossi.
what
i liked about the historian is its thorough historical, almost textbook manner,
way of presenting the story. i like
history and anything that carefully looks into the past and how it was told
would get merit points from me. while kostova chose to keep with the terrifying
characterization of vlad the impaler, a much-maligned character, thanks to the
hollywood cult that perpetrated it, the historian painted another different
side to this bloodsucking monster. vlad tepes, in kostova's imagination, is
also a sucker for knowledge and information. he wants to keep things in order,
through a library, that would open up different views on many personalities and
events that were twisted as time went by. i particularly liked its constant
alternating setting between 70s amsterdam to 1950s budapest, while also bringing
us to vlad tepes' time. it talked about the cold war era and life's challenges
in countries that belonged to the eastern bloc, while also loading us with tabs
of orthodox church politics, bulgarian folksongs, european pagan traditions and
even talking about peculiar differences between ancient territories now part of
a single country (walachia and transylvania in romania).kostova
stressed the importance of history in understanding the way people are. the
historian also put the significance of library and books to the fore.
the
historian also gave me a detailed glimpse of byzantine europe and the ottoman
corridor. it gave me a nighttime trip to the dark ages, just before renaissance
when the byzantine kings ruled the land, and beyond when the ottomans have yet
to conquer much of europe. i like to travel, see new places and walk on
familiar territories and this book just made me want to see the places
described by kostova in detail. a very good travelogue, the historian would get
anyone excited to see ancient places, from the untouched by modernity, such as
the rural villages of romania, bulgaria and turkey, to the well-preserved much-loved
european romantic cities such as amsterdam, budapest, sofia and istanbul.
the
novel from time to time gave glints of horror and suspense. but much of its
pages were on letters written by paul, elena and professor rossi. of course, i
already had some reservations about the scale of these and how on earth could a
man being hunted by a swooping and all-too powerful undead can write in great
detail. because of these letters, the novel was a tad slow for me. while the
research that went with it was good and the details were there, these were just
too protracted. when paul and helen were closing in on vlad himself, the novel
hit its highest note. but sadly, the novel's ending was not a good one. paul's
death was a lazy one. it all seemed to be an afterthought or kostova did not
really care or was told to cut it since the novel was already a lengthy one. after
finishing the book, i wished that kostova actually found the right balance
between the historical research and the excitement that could have been had she
wrote more on dracula and not put him only in the fringes. while there were fiend's
army here and there, dracula figured in the book just way too minimal. i would
have even liked it if kostova gave a sense of a sequel coming up.
others
have also noted that kostova's characters were not written well and just too
similar with each other. i agree. they never seemed to be different from each
other. they seemed to lack the depth and react in the same manner as the
others. aside from dracula himself, the only other interesting characters were
helen's aunt and the folksong singer in bulgaria.
but since i'm a history buff, i still liked the historian despite its shortcomings. for readers hoping to get engrossed with the hollywood-styledracula, this is not the book for you. if you like historiography, research and its methodologies and to read on an uber-detailed historical travelogue, this is a good option.
No comments:
Post a Comment