You know what, I don't really have a reason. Probably the same reason most books are so appealing: entertainment and escapism. It's funny, because I was always one of those people who swore they'd never get into the whole "urban fantasy" thing, and now they are some of my favorite books. I mean, anything I read is going to have to meet the basic criteria -- well written, believeable characters, well-paced plot etc. But for some reason, I find the books you listed (vampires, romances and mysteries, oh my) to be the most compelling.
Nice comment, Patricia. I guess it's just a matter of individual taste. I prefer more "real world' plots, but granted, there might be some symbolism there in vampire figures.
I used to be the same way. Every time I tried to read a vampire novel, I couldn't get past the fact that it was totally impossible. The first time I tried to read the Anita Blake books by Laurell K Hamilton, I got to like the 4th page of the first book. I mean, the protagonist was covered in chicken blood and raising a zombie. Hello.
Honestly, after 9/11 I became totally obsessed with cable news and reading every newspaper I could get my hands on. It was around that time I started reading more fantasitcal novels. Maybe I had too much real world in real life. I don't know...
I like dark, Gothic things and many of the vampire novels fit this theme. I don't have any other reason, but i don't just like vamps. I like were-creatures, witches and fairies and all kinds of other supernatural creatures.
People are always fascinated with death. People want to know why people died. Vampire novels and mystery novels give a definite answer when there often isn't one. It simplifies things.
I cannot get into the vampire novels. Don't watch the TV series about them either. I just started to enjoy 'other world' novels. Not sure of the exact label, but they are fantasy novels. I guess I am just rooted in every day life and every day mysteries.
I don't get the whole vampire phenomena. I've tried a couple books and haven't made it past 50 pages. The only vampire book I genuinely like (so far) is Dracula.
My greatest hurdle to get over when I first read it was the structure of the story. Epistolary fiction is sometimes hard to immerse myself in, though Stoker did a yeoman's job differentiating the voices of each character enough to work the suspension of disbelief.
I found Dracula just went on. And on. And on. And on. I think it was quite 'street' in its day but the downside to that is it hasn't aged well at all. The only vampire book I ever warmed to was Stephen King's Christine. And I don't even like Stephen King!