I’ve not read Dracula so I’m appreciating this on its own merits.

Pros:
Good mix of villainous humans and monsters.
I really like the possessed characters point of view chapters.
Fun cast of characters and Victorian slice of life.

Cons:
A 45 word sentence followed by a 77 word sentence, neither of which add to the story.

Thank you to NetGalley for an ARC

Thank you Netgalley for the opportunity to read this early!

It has taken me a little longer than expected to get this review out there, but here it is!

The Eater of Flies by Richard Gadz is a retelling of the well-known Bram Stoker classic, Dracula. This is a very well written story and Gadz is clearly a highly skilled author.

I first want to preface this review though with the following:
1) I've never read Dracula before, so I don't have a great point of reference for comparing this retelling and I have to view it completely as its own story.
and 2) I typically go more for modern literary fiction over classic literature, and this definitely read more like a classic to me.

So please do not let my 3 star rating keep you from this book, especially if you are a fan of classic literature!

This story evokes the voice of the time period and setting very well and Gadz really paints a picture with his detailed descriptions. I had no problem seeing the world building in my head and especially loved his ability to describe the spookier moments of the story.

But the thing I struggled with, which led to my 3 star rating, was that I had a hard time keeping up with the MANY characters and their roles and connections in the story. The scene would be set really well, but there would be so many characters involved that I'd start to lose track of what was happening. This could totally be a me thing, but I found it distracting and I think it's led to me retaining less of the story than I may have otherwise. It was after chapter 7 that I started to better be able to place and recognize the characters, which for me felt just a little too far into the story.

But please don't get me wrong, I truly did enjoy reading Eater of the Flies! I felt it was a nice challenge to read outside of my comfort zone. Thank you again to NetGalley for the opportunity to read this book before publication!

A great take on Bram Stoker's Dracula that subverts expectations that come with the genre and offers a fresh perspective on vampire mythology.

Thanks to Netgalley and Deixis Press for this ARC eBook in exchange for my honest review. (October 24)

Ok, so...

If Bram Stoker wrote Dracula in a parallel dimension, it might read something like The Eater of Flies - a novel that puts a different spin on vampire lore. And I ate it up!

The story is set in the mid eighteen hundreds, but what I found so impressive is that it truly feels like it was written in the 1800's.

It felt like reading an unpublished (till now) tale by one of my favorite authors of olde. I was thoroughly entertained throughout, and I also feel it stuck the landing.

It's had horror. It had some gloriously gory greatness. And it had some biting humor as well.

I'll be highly recommending this Halloween to any fans of Dracula, or vampires in general. Also, certain elements brought to mind Guillermo del Toro's (& Chuck Hogan's??) The Strain, so I'd also recommend it to those who enjoy that series.

I'll certainly be reading more from Richard Gadz myself.

3.75 / 5

The mini synopsis and the prologue were gripping.
As a fan of the original Dracula and vampire stories, I thought I was the right audience for this book before starting it.
This is loosely based on the original Dracula - you will certainly recognise some names and incidents.
If you are not familiar with the vampyre lore, you can still enjoy this book.
I found the concept/idea interesting and compelling 5/5 for that.
The prose did not grip me - it is a matter of taste.
This is a quick read, though the pacing is a little imbalanced. Same for the characterisation, some are a bit fleshed out.
I wonder, if this were longer and differently edited (about the revelations and with more visual writing), if I would have enjoyed it more.
I appreaciate the book, but I expected more (layers, depth, plot).
I recommend this, and thank you #netgalley and #deixispress for the ARC.

This book is a retelling of Dracula set in Victorian London with epistolary elements. Readers who enjoy more historical horror or fantasy might enjoy this book. While I did enjoy the twist on vampires by Richard Gadz in this novel, I felt that the writing style was unfortunately not my cup of tea.

Thank you Deixis Press and NetGalley for this ARC.

The world of Dracula through a reduced lens

There are moments of brilliance in this Dracula Redux, with familiar characters - Harker, Van Helsing, Dracul - in a dirty, stinking version of Victorian London. The sparks of energy that attempt to bring global vampire myths into a singular focus are drowned in a mire of multiple viewpoints and swiftly changing third person narrators, as well as cinematic images of horror and transgression. I wanted one consistent approach to grab me, but instead it was inchoate, a moil of action that I felt tired by.

Two stars

This might be the best vampire novel of all time. The writing has left me totally starstruck. If you're looking for a vampire horror that strikes every chord, this is the one. Best to ever do it. I'd double the stars if I could.

Thanks to the publisher and NetGalley for this ARC!

This book is quite faithful to the original Bram Stoker novel, however, does fall into a bit of a trap with the points of view in it. It gets a little tangled up in itself and loses the story thread on and off, which doesn't help in a novel that requires some pre-knowledge to begin with. The story is good, but does seem to lose a little of the punch that vampire stories have, faltering into a quasi-possession lore that just doesn't have the same punch as the undead.

That said, the writing is beautiful, and really does capture the original spirit of the source material. The style was well done, and I appreciated the journal entries done as a homage to the original. The descriptions of the city and the events (without revealing too much!) were very much in the essence of the original as well, and this book would not be out of place in the era the original was published.

I do think that the blood and gore was quite good, however, the absence of some noted characters was a bit disappointing too, and I unfortunately didn't connect quite as well with this one as I had hoped. All in all, this one was so worth it for the writing style, but just lost its way a little bit as it went.

The Eater of Flies was a mixed read for myself, the author has a good writing style but throughout the novel there were times of unoriginality that could have been improved upon. Then at other times there were genuine scares and moments where I applauded the ingenuity. The Eater of Flies is a fair read and could have benefited from some more polishing time with the author.

Thank you to Richard Gadz and Deixis Press for the e-arc of this book, in exchange for an honest review.

This novel is an atmospheric tale that offers a fresh take on the vampyre [sic] mythos. One of the most intriguing aspects is its unique portrayal of vampyres. Instead of the typical transformation of a person into a vampyre, these vampyres possess their hosts, adding a layer of psychological horror and depth to the narrative.

The book alternates between traditional prose and epistolary formats, reminiscent of Bram Stoker's 'Dracula.' This switch keeps the narrative dynamic and engaging. As I mentioned above, the vampyres are parasitic, so I appreciated the scenes where you see the hosts view of what is happening. However, I did find the underlined words in Flemming's diary entries a bit irritating, as they disrupted the reading flow.

While the novel's structure is enjoyable, I found that it suffered from too many point-of-view switches, especially at the beginning. This made it challenging to keep track of characters and fully engage with the story early on - I was around half way through the book before I really had a clear picture of who was who.

Despite these minor issues, this remains an interesting read with its unique concept, and I recommend "The Eater of Flies" to vampire and/or horror fans.

An adventurous and gruesome retelling of the story of Dracula, with carnage aplenty. Instead of victims becoming valleys themselves, Dracul is crafted to be a specter/parasite-choosing his victims based on what benefits him the most. He is still the blood-thirsty and brutal destroyer we know so well.

The duo who teams up to hunt him down, Valentine Harker and Alfred Flemming, embodied Holmes/Watson energy, and make a well-oiled machine. They are formidable and cunning, but wrestle with fear and shortcomings. Gadz’s shaping of the team makes them likable, relatable, and you find yourself rooting for them until the end.

One of the things I really liked about this version was the incorporation of different cultures and their take of Dracula-specifically how armies used vampires to their advantage, and left devastation in their wake. It illustrate how the desire for power can lead to ruthless choices.

Ultimately, the heart of this story is how greed can, in the end, destroy you. The desire for more-more money, more power, more prestige-will be your ultimate downfall, and maybe, the death of you.

I enjoyed this reimagining of such a well known story, and how the author gave it new life-bloody and all.

As a fan of vampire stories I really enjoyed this mid-victorian world. I loved the story's use of vampire lore as well. The atmosphere is another fantastic part of this. I'm interested in where the author can take this in the future.

The Eater of Flies is a loosely based retelling of Bram Stoker's Dracula. You'll find similarly named characters and vampires but the ressemblance ends here.

The prologue really gripped me and promised an interesting and gruesome novel but I just found the writing style extremely boring. The chapters alternate between omniscient third person and journal entries (a wink to the original I suppose). The diary entries worked better than the rest in my opinion because the point of view was stronger. But overall I was just bored and this is never a good thing to be when reading a horror novel.

You are introduced to a lot of characters very fast, some not important at all to the rest of the story, and this multitude of characters was confusing. Since I have read the original Dracula I could differenciate and understand the roles of the main characters more easily (Harker, Murray) but I often caught myself wondering who was that again?

I did think that the change made about the vampire lore was interesting. Making it about a sort of spirit possessing people's body definitely adds to the stake. I think it could have been more interesting not to tell the reader who was being possessed as to built up more tension.
The inclusion of different vampire mythology was appreciated.

The pace was very slow in the first half of the book but it picks up after the vampire is out of the box.

Overall this book was not for me, mainly due to the writing style, but also maybe because industrial London and dirty gritty streets are boring to me.

Thank you Netgally for providing me with an ARC of the book.
Find my reviews on Goodreads and The StoryGraph.

An interesting take on Vampirism that is often overlooked.
This books is an interesting read and a comfy one.
A bit of horror mixed with fantasy does the soul a world of good.
Well written, a great story with solid bones.

Firstly, I thank NetGalley and Deixis Press for the early access to this book in exchange for an honest review.

I give it a 3,5 out of 5!

The first chapter quickly introduces us to the story, without failing to completely drawn us to it!

I was missing this sort of old classic vibe that this book gives us, as well as the anxiety kicks when you don't know what will happen and who will get caught!

There is also the occasional wink to the reader with some references to known characters or others associated with vampire stories, particularly with our very well know Bram Stoker!

This is merely my preference, but I believe it could be a bit more eerie, it could have a bit more suspense. Nonetheless, it is quite a gory story and one that leaves you hoping for more!

The atmosphere in this book is everything. In word this book is amazing. It reminded me a lot of classic vampire books like Carmilla and Dracula. It was just the right amount of thrilling and scary. A boon that you'll think about long after you are done with it. This is an author to look out for!

A light spin off of Dracula that borrows a few props from the original and then goes its own way. Fun and entertaining.

A retelling of Bram Stoker’s Dracula which absolutely hit the mark for me.
I’ve never read Stoker’s original but the 1992 Francis Ford Coppola movie adaptation remains one of my favourite films. I loved that the author included reimaginings of the main characters (with a few changes) and even found some laugh out loud moments amongst the grit and gore of the vampyr’s quest in Victorian London.
For me this book was a really easy read. Other reviews cite the slow pace but I really can’t agree with that. I found it gripping and atmospheric and definitely recommend!
This was a 4.5 ⭐️ for me

A retelling of Bram Stoker's Dracula, all with journal entries, Transylvanian opening, mysterious box brought back to England and reimagined Harker, Renfield and many more.
It is an interesting take for the fans of the original book, as the story is set in the same time period, but with a much less romantic and generally gothic portrayal of the time. This is a more gritty, dirty, political and has a modern-day critical view of that colonial England. The characters are more flawed and corrupt, the vampires are more bloodthirsty.
But the construction of the book is surprisingly loyal to the original story, and retains its particular qualities of mixing narrative with character point of views through journals/letters.
This is a very interesting exercise and I was quite intrigued with where it was going to go with such a famous book as a source.
I'm not sure if it will talk very much to people who haven't read the original, but it was fun to see the transformation when you know the book. I did miss Quincey and Mina, though.