The Science of Vampires - Katherine Ramsland I have never read one of these "science" of books before. (Yes, I read Science of Discworld but that is a real science book). This was at one of those really, really cheap bookstores. It was under $5.00. Which was still too much for it.Here's a list of problems.1. Nothing new in terms of analysis of Dracula. In fact, I'm not convinced Ramsland even read Dracula.2. Nothing new about vampires in general. In fact, Ramsland quotes from many other books, which you are better off reading. Check out Vampires, Burial, and Death and move on from there.3. The science isn't really science, and seems to take the "fun" or the fear out of vampires. 4. The "best" (and I use that adjective very, very loosely) is where Ramsland tries to look at why the view of vampires has changed. However, she doesn't really spend much time on this and when it starts to get intersting, she changes the topic.5. What is strange is the amount of popular vampire literature she doesn't mention. Considering the books copyright, she should have mention Tanya Huff and Laurell K. Hamilton. Instead she focuses on vampire books that are laregely out of print.