Just In Time for Halloween....

[harmony_bites]

I've been reading off this list from The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Ultimate Reading List. I just finished the The Horror list. Thirteen of the 44 below are vampire novels. Go figure... I'd tried at least half of these before--but then many of the below fit other genres from thrillers with no element of the supernatural (Jaws, Silence of the

Comments

[shiv5468]

So much of this isn't horror though, but urban fantasy which is really pron / romance

[harmony_bites]

So much of this isn't horror though, but urban fantasy which is really pron / romance.

Or thrillers or even science fiction w/o a hint of the supernatural--and what's horror w/o the supernatural? Even Frankenstein and Dr Jekyll are really science fiction rather than horror.

I think Barker is overrated, and haven't read much of his after the first thing I picked up which started with gratuitous rape and continued in the same vein for four more rapes and I decided not to bother.

I shall have no regrets I didn't give him more of a chance then.

The Monk is incredibly overblown but a huge hoot.

Indeed. The plot is ridiculous--but then so much of Shakespeare is too--not that I'm saying The Monk is of that quality--or of any quality--but despite myself I thought it great fun--because it's overblown.

Kim Newman's anno dracula is very good if you've an interest in the genre and pick up his references, but I think the series goes off the boil later. I think in the end I find it hard to believe any horror story set in the modern era. You

[shiv5468]

Nods. Horror should tap into something deep and primal and OMG meeeps, and this lot tend not to.

Other Barker may be all right.

Sparklng vampires is just wrong. I think that if vampires were about fear of the other or disease or immigrants or something, you could make a case that friendly vampires are because we're just a whole lot less scared as a people. It may be a good thing overall but Dracula isn't happy.

[harmony_bites]

Well, it's part of why I think I still love the original Dracula and one of my favorite Stephen King books is Salem's Lot. Vampires should be scary, not rich, gorgeous and heroic. But it's not just vampires. Endore's The Werewolf of Paris is rather like The Monk--overblown though shot with humor and a hoot--but no question there the werewolf is a scary, ravening monster--mad, bad and dangerous to know. Well, try to find a werewolf like that now. Kelley Armstrong's are suave and sexy, and JK Rowling's Remus Lupin passive and the soul of politeness. I was struck how it was hard to be scared by Rosemary's Baby or The Exorcist because whether in real life or fiction, its hard to associate witches with the devil rather than friendly peaceable sorts going around saying "blessed be." It's hard to find Hermione Granger scary, let alone evil (unless you're Ron

[death_ofme]

Oh nooo....all of the writers that influenced me the most only ranking two stars or less :( haha, but I understand horror is not everyone's cup of tea

[harmony_bites]

*waves* And do not apologize for rambling *iz often guilty*

Without him we wouldn't have Stephen King, Clive Barker, Dean Koontz, Richard Matheson, Neil Gaiman, China Mieville, etc etc etc. (or a little story called "Wasting Away" lol

I have heard he's enormously influential, so maybe I'll try him again. But gad, ""The Rats in the Walls"" was so unbelievably racist. And believe me, I'm far from politically correct. Given the politics of most I've met in fandom, most would consider me to the right of Atilla the Hun, and believe me I can usually more than allow for the times. I even count Gone With the Wind as a favorite book and recently enjoyed Kipling's The Jungle Books. But Lovecraft was just... well... it hurt reading him.