On Summer Reading: The Historian

I cannot really say that I was disappointed in Elizabeth Kostava's The Historian, but neither can I say that it surpassed my expectations. The fact of the matter is that I knew nothing about the book prior to opening it and had no expectations for the experience, and consequently I read a book I would not have otherwise even considered picking up. The book was a gift from a friend, and what she didn't tell me when she gave it was that it was, in fact, a vampire novel. I could have inferred this from the summary on the jacket had I only known that Vlad the Impaler was actually the origin of the Dracula myth.

Let me go on a side note here to express my aversion for vampire stories. It is rooted in my general avoidance of fads. Some trends in culture are extremely illusory, and I don't see much point in getting crazed over something as temporal as a fad just because other people like it. Admittedly, there is something contagious about human passion that cannot always be fought. That is, after all, how fads happen, and it is perfectly normal. However, that is also how mobs form, so I don't think that it is a compelling enough reason in and of itself to go along with something. Perhaps it is because I am somewhat of a loner that I have never gotten to invested in fads. Perhaps I have a bit of an independent streak that I do not always readily acknowledge. Perhaps I have a wee bit of the indie/hipster bug. Who knows? Regardless of the origin of those feelings, the fact of the matter is that vampires are a fad right now, and something of a silly one. I apologize to all of the Twilight fans out there, but that series is the ultimate corruption of the vampire myth, and it is a prime example of how overuse can cheapen something once rich and potent. I have an even greater aversion to Twilight because it is a teen fad, but that is a whole different issue. I think my biggest beef with the series is the significant amount vampire themed media that has flooded the market since it was released, all of it pretty cheap and formulaic. Fortunately, this is one fad that finally looks to be passing. Now if only something could be done about Auto-Tune . . .

All that said, I was rather pleased to see a book like this using the popularity of vampire's to create a smart book. That is not to say that the story in this book is particularly original, that the narrative is complex, or that its themes are revolutionary. It is none of those things. Rather it is a book by a smart woman about smart people doing intellectual things. The story resembles some sort of cross of the narrative form of Wuthering Heights or The Woman in White crossed with the fact heavy and fast paced plot style that is the trademark of Dan Brown.

The central narrator of the story is a young girl who incidentally discovers that her father has a long, dark secret: a tale of mystery and intrigue and vampires, and one that he begins to tell her in broken fragmentary stories and, later, in letters. At times, he himself uses other people's letters and stories as well. These multiple levels of narration allow for the story to jump time and place, lending variety to keep the respective time lines interesting, especially as they are all drawn together.

However, as is often the case with young first-person narrators, this young narrator (who is never even named) is soon lost in the fabric of more interesting and better developed characters. So, when the past events have finally caught up with the novel's present, the reader has almost forgotten that she exists. This also makes the supposed climax a bit lack-lustre and rushed. It is almost as if Kostava forgot halfway through which character's story she had begun writing, and finished by writing a different character's.

Thus, the narrator is far from the heroine of the story. Rather, like Dickens' David Copperfield, she is more of an observer or reporter of other people's stories than her own. In this way, she could be considered the titular historian. However, both her father and mother, through her father's stories, are revealed to be quite adept historians themselves, and the central drama involves a pan-European search for another historian who has gone missing. Furthermore, the title could refer to Dracula himself, Vlad Tepes, a historical figure who is portrayed by Kostava as a great lover of books and of history.

In a lot of ways, this book's trappings appealed to me (once I got over the realization that it was about vampires). It is set mostly in Europe and the characters are academics, researchers, and they spend a lot of time in libraries. I began reading The Historian following the most rigourous academic semester of my life at the University of Oxford, so I could definitely relate to that aspect of the characters and of the story. I am also beginning to understand how much I like history (I mean, I may be applying for a doctorate program in history and culture; that's pretty new).

Unfortunately, some of those factors that made the story appeal to me also became detrimental. For, at one point in the story, the characters actually visit Oxford. I was excited at the prospect of reading about this (I am STILL very nostalgic for Oxford, after all, and it was even worse then), but I soon noticed some details that weren't quite right. The true disappointment, however, came when they entered the Radcliffe Camera, my favourite reading room at Oxford, and one in which I spent hours upon hours. I knew reading those passages that there is no way Elizabeth Kostava has ever entered the RadCam. The biggest give away was when she described the buzz of tourists in the lower level of the Camera. If she had ever been there, she would know that they do not let anyone but students of Oxford into the Camera. I promptly checked the "About the Author" information found that Kostava is actually a Yale graduate. Just as I expected. On reflection, I realized that most of the description of the city were very vague, more like something you would know from reading a travel guide than from actually visiting. I tried not to let these inaccuracies bother me for the duration of the cast's stay in Oxford, but it still managed to cast doubt on later details of the story. I mean, the entire story deals with historical details, and if Kostava can't even get a few basic points about Oxford right, why should I trust her information regarding obscure manuscripts? But perhaps I am being too hard on her. Why, after all, should I expect perfect realism from a vampire story?

All in all, though I would not say that Elizabeth Kostava's The Historian is in a must read, I enjoyed it. It helps that it was a return to the original Dracula, not just to Brom Stoker's character, but to the historical figure of the Impaler who inspired Stoker. Any academically-minded reader will appreciate the story's heavy emphasis on research and the frequency with which librarians turn out to be vampire's. However, one need not be an intellectual to appreciate the story. The plot has good pacing and is very engaging, and the basic themes are among the relevant as well as the timeless: things like the conflict between dark and light or the strife between Islam and Christianity. This is most definitely a treatment the Dracula myth deserves and I applaud Kostava's attempt to exploit a fad.