Okay since reddit is apparently going to keep this post at the top of my home page for 2 days, I guess I’ll add my thoughts…

Declaring something fully feminist or misogynist is just like. Not a useful way to do anything. For these purposes, feminism would be a critical lens through which to examine the work - one which should probably also work hand-in-hand with a historical lens for a book 100 years old. There’s going to be elements of both. It was written by a man a hundred years ago. Just by that alone there’s going to be problematic stuff in it, never mind the actual contents of he story. However, as any of the dracula daily tumblr girlies will tell you, there’s also plenty of character work that resonates strongly with a modern feminist audience that has good points to take away, especially depending on your interpretation.

​

Edit: Skimming some of the other comments has made me realize some of the words I want to use for this- I would say that judging dracula through a modern lens is probably misguided (though ngl I do thoroughly judge the twists several adaptations have made ever since that do make it MORE misogynistic imo), however I think analyzing it through a modern lens gives you all sorts of complicated answers to your question!

Stardust.

The book was fine, but the movie was better.

JSYK

Rule 3.4: “What’s that book called?” posts are not allowed. Post instead to /r/whatsthatbook or /r/tipofmytongue.

They were still a thing in the 2010’s, at least, I remember the Pacific Rim novelization. And I know they do novelizations of a lot of Disney stuff, even the Disney Channel movies, if they have good brand tie-ins/merch…

You’re having me flash back to the Glenn Beck book someone got me as a kid. Same outcome lol.

Not me, but my friend’s terrible father bought her a book about STD’s and a book about how to be a Proper Lady one year when she was like 10. Gag.