Review: The Vampyre by Tom Holland
Sep. 1st, 2008 07:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
erastesIf you missed my post of this morning, pop along over to Lust Bites to be silly with me about gay historicals.
It makes me laugh, you know that when the "big" reviewers pick up something of a genre that they haven't read before they are often impressed with it's "freshness" or its "innovation" or its a "new take on a story". I've seen this with reviewers of m/f/m historicals, and this book is a prime bloody example. In my eyes (and believe me I don't read a lot of vampire tales) there is nothing original, innovative or fresh about this book. Sorry, Mr Holland.
See if you can guess all the derivations that I spotted? I think I made at least four - you may see more.
A young woman in the present day stomps into a lawyer's office and demands that the lawyer gives her access to a certain crypt that he has the keys to. Apparently the young woman is convinced that Byron's memoires are buried in the crypt, and that they must be uncovered for the good of literature. I was with her up to this point, but I don't think I would have gone down into a crypt which basically was the last place her mother was known to be heading before she disappeared forever. OK! So we have the creepy house "DON'T GO NEAR THE CASTLE" scenario. She gets scared and decides not to go, but of course, Flossie (real name Rebecca Ruthven.. yes.. exactly...) ends up there anyway. Ta da! Bet you didn't see that coming.
There she finds Lord Byron who decides to bore her to death by telling her the story of his life, and frankly it made me pretty glad that I'd never met Polidori, Byron, Shelley and co, because I'd have wanted to smack them around quite a bit. The only sensible one seemed to be Mary Shelley and that was probably because she was the only one who didn't fall in love with Gary-Stu the Vampire. Sorry. Vampyre. (Didn't Pratchett have a joke about that spelling?)
Byron rogers his way across Greece and falls in with a handsome boy who he feels that he could fall in love with. I fell around laughing here as every book I randomly grab off the library shelf inevitably turns gay (or is every book in my library gay?) but he loses touch with him. He then gets invited to a big scary castle by a commanding and strangely compelling man with piercing eyes. Anyone see where we are going here? Scary burning eyes (Vakhel Pasha) is mad for Stuey Byron (as everyone is) and turns Byron into a vampire and off we go. Before you all rush off and buy it, the gay scenes are a bit of a cheat - pretty Greek lad turns out to be a girl (gah!) but Byron still falls in love whatever. He's not fussy.
I nearly put the book back in the library bag when we got to the major sex scene because Byron says that his sperm smelled of Sandalwood and the girl smelled of roses. Also Byron (and Vakhel Pasha) are able to go out in the midday sun (well, he is English!) but even so - there wasn't any sparkling.
OK. Bring in a character called Lovelace, who I ASSUME is the character from Clarissa although that's not clarified, Polidori, Shelley (all of whom are in love with Byron) add a twist that in order to be immortal a vampire must eat one of his own family, takes on the strengths of any his kills - but can only be killed by one that he's made (there can be only vun, apparently) and a really stupid ending - this was the kind of book that I put aside regretting that I'd spent time reading.
So, that's that. Not recommended by me, even if everyone else seemed to love it.
ETA: Oh and Byron fires his gun four times in a row. yeah. right. So he's got what? a time machine? Stupid editors? You choose.
It makes me laugh, you know that when the "big" reviewers pick up something of a genre that they haven't read before they are often impressed with it's "freshness" or its "innovation" or its a "new take on a story". I've seen this with reviewers of m/f/m historicals, and this book is a prime bloody example. In my eyes (and believe me I don't read a lot of vampire tales) there is nothing original, innovative or fresh about this book. Sorry, Mr Holland.See if you can guess all the derivations that I spotted? I think I made at least four - you may see more.
A young woman in the present day stomps into a lawyer's office and demands that the lawyer gives her access to a certain crypt that he has the keys to. Apparently the young woman is convinced that Byron's memoires are buried in the crypt, and that they must be uncovered for the good of literature. I was with her up to this point, but I don't think I would have gone down into a crypt which basically was the last place her mother was known to be heading before she disappeared forever. OK! So we have the creepy house "DON'T GO NEAR THE CASTLE" scenario. She gets scared and decides not to go, but of course, Flossie (real name Rebecca Ruthven.. yes.. exactly...) ends up there anyway. Ta da! Bet you didn't see that coming.
There she finds Lord Byron who decides to bore her to death by telling her the story of his life, and frankly it made me pretty glad that I'd never met Polidori, Byron, Shelley and co, because I'd have wanted to smack them around quite a bit. The only sensible one seemed to be Mary Shelley and that was probably because she was the only one who didn't fall in love with Gary-Stu the Vampire. Sorry. Vampyre. (Didn't Pratchett have a joke about that spelling?)
Byron rogers his way across Greece and falls in with a handsome boy who he feels that he could fall in love with. I fell around laughing here as every book I randomly grab off the library shelf inevitably turns gay (or is every book in my library gay?) but he loses touch with him. He then gets invited to a big scary castle by a commanding and strangely compelling man with piercing eyes. Anyone see where we are going here? Scary burning eyes (Vakhel Pasha) is mad for Stuey Byron (as everyone is) and turns Byron into a vampire and off we go. Before you all rush off and buy it, the gay scenes are a bit of a cheat - pretty Greek lad turns out to be a girl (gah!) but Byron still falls in love whatever. He's not fussy.
I nearly put the book back in the library bag when we got to the major sex scene because Byron says that his sperm smelled of Sandalwood and the girl smelled of roses. Also Byron (and Vakhel Pasha) are able to go out in the midday sun (well, he is English!) but even so - there wasn't any sparkling.
OK. Bring in a character called Lovelace, who I ASSUME is the character from Clarissa although that's not clarified, Polidori, Shelley (all of whom are in love with Byron) add a twist that in order to be immortal a vampire must eat one of his own family, takes on the strengths of any his kills - but can only be killed by one that he's made (there can be only vun, apparently) and a really stupid ending - this was the kind of book that I put aside regretting that I'd spent time reading.
So, that's that. Not recommended by me, even if everyone else seemed to love it.
ETA: Oh and Byron fires his gun four times in a row. yeah. right. So he's got what? a time machine? Stupid editors? You choose.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 07:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 07:14 pm (UTC)Someone saw Gothic one time too many (the whole Polidori/Shelley/Byron thing) and decided to throw in vampyres.
Vampyre is a spelling that should only be used if you also spell it Ye Olde Antique Shoppe.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 07:33 pm (UTC)But in the "What Not TO Say" category, "rock-hard abs" was left out!
Rebecca Ruthven.. yes.. exactly...
::screams and starts stabbing things::
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 07:38 pm (UTC)He was a whiney EMO git and deserved slapping. Ah - didn't know about the Earl of Lovelace, thank you.
There's a really amusing part when Byron is attempting to kill Pasha - and he fires his gun four times in quick succession.
ORLY? In 1815? I don't fink so!
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 07:45 pm (UTC)Correct my historical inaccuracy here, but didn't the Victorians start putting pantloons on their furniture after Byron humped the davenport one too many times?
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 07:45 pm (UTC)I did notice that someone is now using the term wampyr which is just one step too far, imho!
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 07:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 07:47 pm (UTC)*dies about the pantaloons*
That text/mp3 mystery
Date: 2008-09-01 08:04 pm (UTC)Knowing I cannot read standard print books, you sent me a text or pdf file... I also bought the print book. I then used software called Text Aloud to convert the print file to a sound file so I could listen to your book... for my use only. Hope that reassures you.
By the way, my novel "An Involuntary King" which is due out this month, has a gay subplot. It is not a sweet one, but I myslef would not mind having a lover as devoted as MacDhui. http://www.shield-wall.com .
Nan Hawthorne
medieval-novels.com
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 08:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 08:11 pm (UTC)It worked in "The MindWorm" by C. M.Kornbluth, because our vampire was feeding among the very lower classes of Easter European immigrants.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 08:14 pm (UTC)Gah.
Re: That text/mp3 mystery
Date: 2008-09-01 08:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 09:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 09:29 pm (UTC)And good lord. The whole meeting the Byron and the crew part would have intrigued me, but at the same time if I were to read this actual story, I think I'd have wanted to shoot myself for reading such crap. X_X;;
OI.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 09:51 pm (UTC)Jeez...where've I heard that before??? *scratches head*
*points to icon*
*falls about laughing* ^_^
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 10:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 10:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 11:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 11:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 11:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 02:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 09:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 09:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 09:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 10:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 10:01 am (UTC):)
no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 10:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 10:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 10:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 01:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-02 04:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-07 05:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-07 05:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-08 01:56 pm (UTC)