Dracula in Istanbul: The Unauthorized Version of the Gothic Classic

by Ali Riza Seyfi, Ali Rıza Seyfioğlu, Bram Stoker

For the first time in English comes a remarkable literary discovery. In 1928, Turkish author Ali Rıza Seyfioglu pirated Bram Stoker’s Dracula, rewriting it with new material, patriotic overtones, and Islam. A rare example of a “bootleg” novel, it’s also the first adaptation to plainly identify Dracula as the historical warlord Vlad the Impaler.

When a modern Istanbul is threatened by the invasion of an ancient vampire, three veterans of the Turkish War of Independence are thrust into a conflict with their nation’s hereditary enemy. Seyfioğlu boldly reworks Stoker’s classic tale, retelling it from the unique perspective of a people once routed by the real-life Dracula.

Dracula in Istanbul: The Unauthorized Version of the Gothic Classic, edited by Ed Glaser, also includes a foreword by Anno Dracula author Kim Newman, an introduction by Turkish translation scholar Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar, an afterword on the 1953 movie adaptation by film scholar Iain Robert Smith, and several rare photos from the film. From movie and vampire buffs to literary scholars, there’s enough here to delight all the children of the night.

Genres: Horror, Vampires, Gothic, Fiction, Fantasy, Classics, Turkish Literature

174 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1928

Reviews

[Stacia · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is quite a bit shorter than Stoker's original but still uses much of his basic story, just "updated" to 1920s Turkey. Apparently it was partially written to highlight pride in Turkey (both past & present). One way it differs significantly is in the various references to the actual historical events around Vlad the Impaler (this version being the first time Dracula was identified as Vlad the Impaler) & the Ottoman Empire, along with Islamic touches throughout the story. With quite a bit of Stoker's original novel deleted or condensed, the ending did feel a bit abrupt. Overall, though, it was a fascinating look at the Dracula legend, reworked & updated for (at the time) a modern Turkey & now translated back into English. I still love Stoker's original, but this is a fascinating variation (more so than the Icelandic version, Powers of Darkness: The Lost Version of Dracula, imo). It's a must-read for Dracula fans.

Btw, there was a movie made in 1953 of the Turkish version. The movie is available on YouTube here.

[Anthony · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting background to this one: really, a "bootleg" translation/adaptation of Bram Stoker's novel that cuts out numerous subplots (no Renfield at all!), transfers the action to Instanbul while condensing it to a much shorter page count (no return to Transylvania for the final showdown) and makes explicit what Stoker merely implied about Dracula being the real Vlad Tepes.

I enjoyed it, very much. While I missed Renfield and the stronger role Mina Harker played, I was intrigued by the way the historical connections affected the telling of the story, and by the replacement of crucifixes and holy wafers with written quotes from the Quran as equally powerful religious objects repelling the vampire.

The "crossover universe" fan in me wants to find a way that this novel works in conjunction with / in the same world as the Stoker original. The fanfic writer in me (who never gets to come out and play) wants to write a team-up between Professor Abraham Van Helsing and the honorable Doctor Resuhi Bey.

[Keith Burrows · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm far from an expert on Dracula or Turkey, but I found reading this version (and the accompanying essays) fascinating. There are quite a lot of changes from the original, both to shift the setting from London to Istanbul, and general editing to shorten the story. Most interesting are the added sections which discuss the historic context of Vlad the Impaler and his relationship with the Ottoman empire--a relationship that seems to make Istanbul a much more suitable setting for the book than the London of the original.

If you are a fan of Dracula, I think you must read this book. Or if you have any interest in Turkish history.

[Luke · Rating 3 out of 5]

I know what you've always wanted: a version of Dracula with cars in it, set in Istanbul. And where the head vein-drainer is a military coward instead of a great warlord. And where there's lots of reference to God, and the steadfast nature of a good Turkish gent is the highest achievement one can have.

Right?

Well, you got it here. Dracula in Istanbul is a mash-up of Stokerian text with Turkish pride, and it's kind of nuts but also moustache-rifflingly great. Ali Rıza Seyfioglu, writing in 1928, modernises the tale somewhat, but spares no opportunity to wax poetic about the strength and pride the main characters feel in being Turkish. It's probably unsurprising, given that the book was written only five years after the establishment of the Republic of Turkey, and of the changeover to a Latin character-based form of writing.

(The book also inspired a film, viewable here. Indeed, the film was better known than the book, at least outside Turkey, until this translation was made available.)

The historical background of both the Dracula story and its intersection with Turkey are well covered in essays appended to the work. It's an interesting survey of how stories mutate from their origin to their printed form - both the fictional (Stoker's tale) and the factual (the history of the real Dracula).

Is it a good book? No, it's not. But it's endearing: it has the naive optimism and bullheaded pride of the newly-minted nation inside it. It takes a familiar story and gives it an oddly personal national interest: the fight against ole scumbag Drac is a matter of PRIDE, goddamnit, because he represents injustices visited upon the nation in centuries past. It's certainly a different

If you've just read Dracula, this is worth a look. It's short - a lot of the story is neglected in the retelling - but there's a certain naive charm here to reward your time.

[Kevin Folliard · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dracula in Istanbul is a must read for fans of the original Gothic classic. It is a brisk, fun, and fascinating way to re-experience Stoker's story from a brand new vantage point. The foreword and afterward provide great insights about this Turkish adaptation, as well as the broader impacts of Dracula as a character and legend who has spread across so many cultures in so many different mediums. A terrific way to read Dracula "for the first time" again!

[embo · Rating 3 out of 5]

I feel like this book is necessary reading for everyone obsessed with Dracula.

It’s the first fictional text to directly associate historical Dracula with fictional Dracula. I find it fascinating to have a story retold from a Turkish nationalistic point of view. Original Dracula praised British imperialism. Dracula in Istanbul focuses on the Turkish peoples’ pride in their ancestry and their battles against historical Dracula.

I want someone to rewrite THIS translation. There’s a lot of fertile soil here. Dracula, a man once called by The Pope as the “bravest warrior defending Christianity,” becoming the dangerous foreigner to the Istanbul peoples. Christian warrior Dracula, now an enemy to his old religion and a hated figure in Turkish history, to wage war (again) with his old foes’ descendants?! There’s just So Much goodness that could be delved into. I’d love to see someone with the enough historical, cultural, and religious know-how rewrite Dracula in Istanbul and delve into all the complexities that come with switching the heroes from British Christians to Turkish Muslims. This is a goldmine of possibilities. So many layers to be unearthed. AYYYE ;D

Will say, the ending of this one, weirdly quick. Like, quick quick. Sadan (Lucy) took longer to kill. The author must’ve had a deadline to make.

[Dubzor · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's both easy and difficult to compare this to Stoker's original novel. On the one hand it IS an unauthorized bootleg of the original book, however I feel enough has been added or altered to allow this title to stand on its own.

It is very trim and efficient, perhaps too much. The ending feels very abrupt, and lacks the dramatic cat and mouse chase. However this is due to the overall theme of the book being changed dramatically.

This translation/adaptation is focused more on nationalism and the historic connection between Turkey and the historic Vlad III. It makes sense given the historic context and the "modern" setting, just after the Turkish War for Independence.

For Dracula nerds like me, it's a profoundly interesting read. It's brevity makes it a quick read, and overall well worth your time.

[Meghana · Rating 3 out of 5]

I knew this was a Turkish version of Dracula , but I was surprised at just how similar the two books are. Seriously, the plot is the exact same. The only difference is that this shifts the setting to 1920s Istanbul, adds historical context identifying Count Dracula as Vlad the Impaler, and has a heavy emphasis on Islam and Turkish patriotism.

I read this hoping for detailed descriptions of Istanbul a la The Museum of Innocence , but the book didn't meet my expectations there. It's interesting enough, but very condensed for some reason, so I'd just recommend the original unless you're very interested in Turkish literature/history.

[WndyJW · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an interesting version of Bram Stoker's classic and a quick read, but I would only recommend it for serious fans of all things Dracula. This follows the basic outline of the original, but lacks the drama and added a lot of Turkish patriotism. The most entertaining part of this book is the discussion of the Turkish film based on this novel in which the Mina character is a cabaret dancer and includes a dance number for Dracula's entertainment while she is under his sway!

I loved Bram Stoker's Dracula (and the Gary Oldham, Keanu Reeves film, Bram Stoker's Dracula, which took liberties with the centuries long romance of Mina and the Count, but I still love it and watch it every October,) and would encourage reading that before reading any other versions.

[Tachan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dracula est devenu un classique qui dépasse le simple cadre de la littérature de l’imaginaire. C’est un classique tout court aux nombreuses adaptations. Mais saviez-vous que son traducteur turc, dans les années 1920, en avait profité pour offrir une version bien plus patriotique ? Pas moi et je suis ravie qu’ActuSF nous fasse découvrir ce texte singulier cet automne.

Dracula à Istanbul a vraiment toute une histoire et l’avantage d’avoir un éditeur engagé, c’est qu’il nous propose tout l’accompagnement critique nécessaire à sa découverte. J’ai ainsi pu profiter des éclaircissements de nombreux spécialistes : Kim Newman, Shenaz Tahir Gürçaglar ou encore Iain Robert Smith et Adrien Party pour mieux saisir les enjeux de cette lecture si singulière.

Car Dracula à Istanbul n’est pas seulement une réécriture de ce classique vampire où on changerait les lieux et le nom des personnages, en traduisant et en adaptant le roman de Bram Stocker en 1928, Ali Riza Seyfi fait un acte patriotique alors que son pays, la Turquie, est en train de se forger comme nation. Il reprend, synthétise et éclaire l’histoire originale en accentuant la partie sur les origines de Vlad, lui redonnant son identité historique permettant ainsi de le rattacher à l’histoire turque, puisque ce sont les ancêtres des Turcs qu’il combattit autrefois. La boucle était bouclée et l’occasion toute trouvée.

Pour moi qui ne suis pas une fan du texte original de Stocker, dont l’écriture ne me correspond pas, cette version expurgée de ce qui m’y lassait, pour n’en garder que la substantifique moelle, en y ajoutant une dimension patriotique turque, m’a beaucoup plu. J’ai aimé revivre les aventures d’un Jonathan Harker campé sous le nom d’Azmi, un jeune Turc fiancé à Güzin (Lucy). On y retrouve toutes les grandes lignes et les scènes marquantes. L’ambiance est là également malgré une plume simplifiée. On a la même inquiétude, le même effroi, peut-être accentué en plus par le réel que donne l’historicisation de Vlad. En lui rendant son identité, on ajoute à l’horreur de ce qui se passe.

Mais la vraie plus value ici, au-delà de revivre l’histoire mais à Istanbul au lieu de Londres, ce sont clairement les petites touches turques qui ont été ajoutées. Prévenue par la postface, j’ai su quoi chercher, sur quels points porter mon attention et j’ai trouvé la manière dont l’auteur détourne et recentre le texte de Stocker pour en faire un appel patriotique envers les Turcs combattants et leurs femmes résistantes, très malin. J’ai notamment trouvé, sous sa plume, les femmes bien plus fortes et puissantes, moins passives et victimes qu’avec Stocker. J’ai aussi cru déceler une métaphore vraiment pénétrante sur le sang qu’on leur prend (ici ponctionné par Vlad mais dans l’histoire par les guerres) et celui que donnent leur fils (ici en les défendant, en se battant pour elles contre Vlad). C’est assez puissant.

Je remercie donc vivement ActuSF d’avoir eu la riche idée de publier ce texte singulier et méconnu qui permet à la fois de revivre de manière bien plus accessible l’histoire culte imaginée par Stocker et de découvrir l’utilisation qu’on peut faire d’un texte en l’orientant en fonction de ses besoins. Ce fut passionnant et frissonnant à lire. Je serais curieuse de voir le film qui l’a adapté dans les années 50 et d’en connaître la réception en Turquie.

Article complet : https://lesblablasdetachan.wordpress....

[Madalina · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is Bram Stoker's "Dracula" itself, albeit a little bit altered in a few aspects: the English characters from the original version are now Turkish and the location in the second part of the book is no longer England, but Istanbul. The characters' names are Turkish too. For example Jonathan becomes Azmi Bey, Dr. Van Helsing becomes Doctor Resuhî Bey, Mina turns into Güzin while Lucy will be Șadan and Arthur becomes Turan. (I couldn’t help noticing that, willingly or not, the author made this last character's name start more or less like the English hero, Arthur's name ends.)

Written in 1928, after the Turkish War of Independence, the Turkish author, Ali Raza Seyfioğlu, introduces a few passages that prove his patriotism and national pride: "Crossing the Danube River, babbling like a living testament to the glorious past of the Turkish nation, my great and famous race, the train carried me to places closely connected with Turkish history." (Ch.1, at the very beginning). However, he pervades the story with humourous observations as well. For example a statement like "The situation might appear stranger and more worrying to someone more neurotic than myself" (p.8) made me laugh out loud at the dead of night, when I always liked to read any form or version of "Dracula". Or when Șadan / Lucy is going to receive blood from one of the men, Dr. Resuĥî Bey / Van Helsing observes that "when a woman is in trouble, the most effective medicine is a man's blood"!😉😁 (Ch.7, "From Doctor Afif's Diary) Or a kind of humourous meta when Güzin / Mina asks herself: "Am I dreaming, or am I reading a horror novel?" (Ch. XII, "From Güzin Hanım's Diary")

Other examples of adaptation to the Turkish geographic space and culture, but also to the modern times when the Turkish author re-wrote it:
- The characters defend themselves with verses from the Quran written on pieces of paper instead of the Christian cross. (However, Dr Azmi Bey receives a crucifix to protect him "for the sake of his mother" just like Jonathan does.)
- When Șadan / Lucy receives blood from the four men in turns, all of them have their blood types checked, which we don't see in Stoker's novel. In the meantime, blood groups had been discovered. (Fortunately, all of them including Șadan/Lucy have the same blood type!😉😉)
- When the men go to Dracula's properties in Istanbul, the author compares the bravery they need to the one they proved during the Turkish War of Independence.
- Dracula is remembered for all the cruelty and injustice he treated his Turkish prisoners with as Vlad the Impaler centuries before.

Even though I did enjoy this book, I didn't give it 5 stars because the Turkish adaptation consisted in very few things from my point of view. Delicious indeed, yet very few. To me, it looked like Ali Raza Seyfioğlu's contribution was rather small while the biggest part of the book was nothing else but Stoker's version as he wrote it. After all, the Turkish author himself humourously and subtly names his version of the book "The Unauthorized Version of the Gothic Classic" while on the back cover we have a mention - "The Bootlegged Dracula".

[José · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting take on the traditional dracula story. Its decently written and moves at a nice pace. Plus, it has a lot of interesting differences with the original novel (a more direct connection with Vlad the impaler, and turkish nationalism out of all things), but i dont think its strong enough to stand on its own.

its still worth reading if your a fan of dracula, but of you are not that into our undead friend in particular or vampires in general, you can probably skip it.

[Danielle Klassen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Both very similar but very different approach to Stoker's story. This is definitely one that Dracula historians should be aware of and should read, considering that the change in place is steeped in a lot more historical context. It is very nationalistic and pro-Ottoman, which gives the story a very different outlook when the English protagonists were changed to Muslim Turks. Very highly recommended.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

A bit difficult to rate:
Overall the book follows Dracula, which is a five star read.
The story is shifted to the 1920s. But the 1920s aspect does not stand out as much as in, say, a Sax Rohmer novel.
The Turkish aspect was a bit interesting. But as the translation was for Turkish readers in the 1920s, there was not as much description of Istanbul as this non-Turkish reader in the 2020s had hoped for.
Four stars is a tad high but seems about right.

[Patrick McCuen · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am giving this 5 stars, because I think I would recommend it to anyone who has read Stoker's original Dracula (1897) or Kostova's The Historian (2005). It provides an interesting twist on a translation/adaptation, and is a stripped down story that preserves some of the more poignant scenes of the original text. The introduction, preface and afterward make for interesting reading. And it will make you want to watch the 1953 Turkish movie adaptation available on Archive dot com.

[Tom · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting perspective but not particularly well written.

[Ella · Rating 4 out of 5]

Super unintentionally hilarious and thus very fun.

[Andrea Ta-wil · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book the way I love watching MST3K or The Room. It’s basically Turkish nationalist Dracula fanfic, and it’s (blank)ing GLORIOUS.

[Julian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dracula speedrun

[Rachael · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting re-telling of Bram Stoker’s Dracula via a Turk’s perspective. It’s pretty short & abrupt. Very similar with some key omissions like Renfield with the addition of some Turkish history & nationalist propagandizing. Spoiler alert…Dracuphiles finally get a blood type reference for the transfusion scenes. A neat, quick read.