The Haunting of Hill House

I think what makes Shirley Jackson's writing so effective is the underlying uncertainty you feel when reading her works. Under the surface, something isn't right. There's a gothic creepiness that others have copied, but which Jackson first mastered.

The Haunting of Hill House has this trait, but it's certainly no We Have Always Lived in the Castle. This may be in part due to the fact that we're dealing with a much more supernatural book here. The title alone tips off the reader to potential paranormal phenomena. When these phenomena do make their presence in the book, I believe it distracts us from the wonderfully-drawn characters. Now, I would make an argument for the point that in this book, Hill House is itself a character, but it cannot capture our attention the way Eleanor should have. In The Haunting of Hill House you find the various psychoses, the strange and the bullies, that make Jackson's writing so compelling. But the forces of the other world can distract us from these. It feels as though the story becomes about the haunting or the house, not so much about the fragility of the human mind, or the human capacity to hurt one another.

Regardless, I find Jackson's writing so incredibly well crafted. She creates magnificent characters and her sentences are dark, yet lovely. There's much that can be said about her wonderful characterization of the house, how it preys on the weak. But isn't it so much sadder when it is our fellow human who preys on the weakness of other humans? There's some of that here, but nowhere near the magnitude of a story like We Have Always Lived in the Castle. If you haven't read that one yet, I highly recommend it, though this one is good too.

Thankfully this was a very short book. The “unreliable narrator” is definitely not for me. Also, this is not a “horror” book; it's “slightly chilling for half a chapter”. I was pretty darn disappointed and Shirley Jackson's writing style didn't help much. I dug her prose well enough, but its point seemed to want to confuse the reader more than enlighten her story, and I wouldn't read another book from her because of it.

I understand this is considered a classic of the genre, but as we all know from reading shite books in high school, classic does not necessarily mean good. A lot of people love this book; deciding in their head what has been happening all along, but like all books and movies that try to pull this crap on me, I don't want to waste my time only to find out that there is no resolution to the story and I'm supposed to figure it out myself. You and I both know, Shirley, that you have a resolution in your head. Don't try to be clever (or lazy) and not give it to me. Pretentious, I say!

I almost wish I had read this in school. This would have been lovely to read against [b:The Turn of the Screw 12948 The Turn of the Screw Henry James https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1327909344s/12948.jpg 990886], with its supposed repressed male homoerotic subtext, in contrast to Shirley Jackson's far more blatant lesbian anguish. I mean, if you didn't raise an eyebrow at the first mention of Theo's “flatmate” then you're missing a good chunk of the book.Much like Hill House, this book won't behave as you might expect. Depending on what you expect. It will scare you, I can tell you that much. It's always impressive indulging in a horror classic that actually gives you chills, despite being exposed to decades worth of material that's come afterward. The way Jackson goes about it is still unique, and the way she paces out a good scare. I think it may be because we are so in Eleanor's head, especially towards the end of the book, that its hard to tell what's real. And at first you're afraid because Eleanor's confused and afraid herself, and then you're afraid because Eleanor is no longer confused, and in fact she feels pretty good about the figure pacing and singing in the corner of the room that no one else can see. That gave me goosebumps just typing that out.But no, The Haunting of Hill House won't straighten out into a story that's more familiar. The characters won't settle down or develop into attractive character arcs that make them seem like better people than they are. You won't even find out what is haunting Hill House, whether something happened there, or if it was just born awful. Or even if it was the house at all.Classic horror, the real classic stuff like the aforementioned Henry Conrad, lives and breathes on subtext. The characters speak in riddles and rhymes because their very characters are part of the mystery. Four people without a home or anywhere to belong, one of which who suffers in this far more than the others, go to a haunted house and try not to go crazy. They huddle so tight to each other in the darkness that they start to bleed into one another. Children trying to escape punishment, trying to be brave, trying to be rational and not only finding that it's not possible, it just doesn't really suit them.

I run the risk of ruffling some feathers here but I didn't enjoy this book at all. It was very disappointing and, dare I say it, boring. “The Woman in Black” gave me a sleepless night or two. This book nearly put me to sleep. I'm sorry, I know it's regarded by many as a classic horror story, but it just didn't do anything for me.

My original rating for this was 3 stars, and I pretty much stand by that. In my mind, it breaks down something like this:Establishment of creepy house, which rightly influenced so much subsequent fiction: 5 starsAmbiguity and underlying social/emotional forces worthy of [b:The Turn of the Screw 12948 The Turn of the Screw Henry James https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1443203592s/12948.jpg 990886]: 5 starsConstantly listening to Eleanor's neurotic thoughts and her telling herself incessantly that she's thinking something “concretely”: 2 starsLackluster banter among the characters: 2 stars*Obnoxiously out of place comic relief wife: 2 stars

Not really that scary. Liked the writing and the way the narrator's voice is so unsure and confused. Makes you wonder if how much of the haunting is true, and how much is psychological.

What a scary little book! Other reviewers have said it better, but Hill House could keep you awake at night like it did me. A subtle psychological thriller, you won't find a lot of gore (there's just a little bit of blood), and you'll probably dislike the characters. Actually, I thought Dr. Montague seemed like an alright fellow, just doing some research into the paranormal like any good scientist. But Eleanor, Luke, Theodora, and Mrs. Montague seem to rub most readers unsatisfactorily. These are some strange folks.

But one reviewer touched on the Unreliable Narrator, and that really explains this book. After all, the entire story is straight from Eleanor's perspective, there is nothing omniscient or all-knowing, so the perspective IS skewed. Keep that in mind while reading. I think it's clear that Eleanor doesn't have the maturity or life lessons that many thirty-two year olds have since she spent the last 11 years of her life taking care of her invalid mother. She's almost a child, then, maybe a teenager. And so her impressions of Luke, Theodora, and Dr. Montague may not be the same as another narrator would see.

Excellent book, dark, scary, and a very worthwhile read.