The title says it all…
Novels portraying alternate histories have long been goldmines for social commentary. That being said, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter can't exactly be considered an alternate history; it's not exactly along the lines of Hitler winning WWII. Instead, Seth Grahame-Smith asks a question that can, in some ways, be considered subtler: What if all of the choices of one of America's great presidents were the same, but the rationale behind them were drastically different?

While that subtlety doesn't extend beyond that initial premise, the story itself is a witty send-up of many of the reverential presidential biographies that have come out in recent years. In Grahame-Smith's version, Abraham Lincoln's mother's death was the result of vampire blood. He spends his formative years in Illinois in much the same manner as that other vampire slayer: Buffy. But it is on a trip to the South in early adulthood that the author of the Gettysburg Address truly grasps the social evil of the undead. "Not long after the first ships landed in this new world," Lincoln writes in his journal, "I believe that vampires reached a tacit understanding with slave owners. I believe that this nation holds some special attraction for them, because here, in America, they can feed on human blood without fear of discovery or reprisal without the inconvenience of living in darkness. I believe that this is especially true in the South…" Interpreted brilliantly by Scott Holst, Lincoln always sounds calmly Midwestern — even when discussing issues that might not be considered quotidian.

Despite turning pieces of history on their sides, there is no great divergence in the course of events of Lincoln's life. He still writes the Emancipation Proclamation; John Wilkes Booth still makes his angry appearance; it's just the reasons that don't follow the generally accepted interpretation.