Mr. Darcy, Vampyre is a spin off to Jane Austin's Pride and Prejudice. It follows the couple from the wedding through part of their first year.
Summary from the back of the book: My hand is trembling as I write this letter. My nerves are in tatters and I am so altered that I believe you would not recognize me. The past two months have been a nightmarish whirl of strange and disturbing circumstances, and the future... I am afraid. If anything happens to me, remember that I love you and that my spirit will always be with you, though we may never see each other again. The world is a cold and frightening place where nothing is as it seems.
Amanda Grange's Mr. Darcy's Diary is my favorite retelling of Pride and Prejudice. So when I saw that she wrote a sequel, I was intrigued. When I found that it was from a vampire perspective...I thought: pass. I picked up the book and was hooked by reading the back cover. However, for me, there are retellings, sequels and spin offs. This falls into the category of a "what if" spin off much like Bridget Jones' Diary or Lost in Austen.
Language: A
Characterization: A
Plot: B
Revisit vs. Rehash: A+
Hooked: A+
Nit picky things: B-
Wonderful moments: B+
Originality: A
Language: Lovely. Not Austen but the writing style is close enough.
A
Characterization: One of the strengths of Amanda Grange's writing in Mr. Darcy's Diary (and in all of her Diary retellings of Austen's work) is that she uses the original characterization and deepens it. She takes you through Darcy's feelings and experiences and explains them in a way that makes his actions seem almost unavoidable. (An example: In Mr. Darcy's Diary, she lets the reader experience with Darcy the growing desire to know and be with Elizabeth. His ranting proposal seems like a natural next step for him and the reader.) In Mr. Darcy, Vampyre, Grange takes those same characteristics and desires of Darcy's and explains then with the fact he is a Vampire. When you look at his reserve, haughtiness and desire through the lens of a vampire...it works. And I am not a vampire reading kind of gal.
A
Plot: As I mentioned, I put this into the category of "spin off." A fanciful what if of circumstances. The plot moves along quickly. I read the book in 2 days. I did feel a since of anxiety while I read it. Darcy and Elizabeth travel a lot and I kept waiting for all the little trips to be pulled together in meaning more than they were. And I am not crazy about the ending choice. But I am weird about endings.
As many questions as the story answered, it left many many more unanswered. And yet, it was a very interesting read. Grange makes a good case for Darcy being a Vampire. Though, I'm not sure Darcy as a Vampire fits into the existing storyline that well. I just had to suspend certain dis-beliefs and questions like, "Well, what happens to that character now?"
Having said all that, I liked the book a lot. I would suggest to check it out form the library or borrow it from a friend. It isn't a read it more than once kind of book for me. (And I enjoy re-reading good books quite a bit.)
B
Rehash or revisit: No rehashes. Very little revisits, even. Grange always assumes the reader has read Pride and Prejudice. I like that.
A+
I was hooked by: The back cover. I mean, that was an intriguing letter. AND, I was at Barnes & Noble 2 days in a row and there was always someone on the isle looking at this book....not wanting to admit that they would consider buying it.
A+
Nit picky things: I would have liked the end to have gone another way. It felt like we were building toward something more than what we got. That is probably a bigger deal than "nit picky." But I don't have a category for "slightly big deals that won't keep you from reading the book."
B-
Wonderful little moments: Elizabeth's letters to Jane. Little touches like the fact the people of Paris put so much garlic on their food. She included things like this without over explaining them. She knows we are clever readers.
B+
Originality: I know, Twilight. But I haven't read Twilight.
The Vampyre was written in 1891 by John William Polidori. It is considered the "progenitor of the romantic vampire genre." And, guess what, it was written about an English nobleman.
Still, to apply this idea so well to one of the most beloved of couples in English literature (says all the authority that is me) is pretty clever. It felt like an omage to both Polidori and Austen.
A
When I was in second grade, someone told me that vampire
bats could suck the blood out of my
toes and neck when I was asleep. Having an unusually long neck and a vivid imagination, I proceeded to sleep beneath the safety of a bed sheet with only my face poking out for the next 15 years. Fortunately, I can now select how much bedding I need each night by things
slightly more practical, like room temperature.
(However, I still can never ever let my foot hang off the mattress...alligators under the bed, you know.)
So I think that is why all the hullabaloo over Vampires never appealed to me. And also
why I felt a bit anxious while reading the book.
It sounds like there are a lot of problems with the story. There are. But it was good. Almost like a conversation where someone plays devil's advocate just to make things more interesting. You all agree that no one thinks the scenario is at all real, but it sure makes for an intriguing chat.
If this book were a movie - I think it would be a PG13 due to references about marital passion.
Don't confuse this book with Regina Jeffer's next release (Dec. 1 2009) Vampire Darcy's Desire: A Pride and Prejudice Adaptation.
