"The Haunting Of Hill House" is my favorite supernatural book. I love books set in haunted houses, and this was one of the first I've ever read. Scares me silly and I love getting inside Eleanor's head.

Thanks, Joel --that's a really fascinating thought! On the subject of the poltergeist phenomena with the stones when she was a kid, I seem to recall that her mother or sister (or both) did blame her for this, interestingly. And psychic researchers who have studied that kind of phenomena in real life believe it's caused by subconscious telekinesis, and associated with dysfunctional family dynamics where one person feels powerless, repressed, and ready to explode --just like Eleanor in her family situation. (I believe that research was done after this book was written, though.)

One comment on Werner's comment above regarding Nell and the planchette. One of the ways I think this novel is effective is that it's never clear exactly who or what is haunting the house. And that scene gives credence to the idea that perhaps it is Eleanor herself--or some part of her unconscious--that brings these events to pass. We know that in her youth she was involved in a physical manifestation of psychic phenomenon--the stones falling on/in the house--and there's some question about whether she might have directly or indirectly brought about her mother's death. Is it possible that, without knowing it, she can manifest her will? Is that why the house seems to want her? Why it's her name that's written on the walls? Not that she did it herself, but that she makes it happen?

I don't know. That's part of what makes this book so good. If that is right, then what drives her to suicide at the novel's ending, where she seems in those last moments to be unsure why she is driving into the tree? Is she being haunted? Or is she doing the haunting?

I love this book.

There's no doubt King did a version of this in Rose Hill.

The Haunting of Hill House is a classic, and one of my all-time favorite books of any genre. No one wrote scenes of distorted reality better than Shirley Jackson, IMHO, and she pulled off that style particularly well in Hill House. A particularly astute analysis of the book can be found in Stephen King's Danse Macabre. I read his essay sometime after I read Hill House and it only increased my admiration and enjoyment of the novel. I advise any fans of Jackson, King, or Hill House to check it out.

Unfortunately, it has been a long time since I have read the book - I watch the Robert Wise film roughly once a year. My response to it has always been rather odd - it is a brilliant novel and there are portions of it that have not been captured by the film, but I have always somehow preferred Wise's film. My reasons for this are:

1) The film tones down Eleanor to a slight degree (her whining tends to grate a bit in the book)
and
2) The wife of Dr. Montague (Markway in the film) is a kooky spiritualist, a change in tone that jars horribly. I prefer the character as changed for the film.

There is a very good website devoted to the book & film:

http://www.ficsx22.com/haunting/haunting...

The second movie "based" on the film? The set design is wonderful - too bad they did not reuse the set for a film deserving of it. It is a travesty of the book.

Jim

<<Jackson spends a lot of time inside the character's heads, especially Eleanor's>>

Absolutely. I remember being incredibly struck by that when I read (and reread) this book. The reader becomes so drawn into Eleanor's reality that it's the other characters who begin to seem odd. (And I always felt Jackson had been inspired by THE TURN OF SCREW. Glad to see I'm not alone in that.) Her short stories always struck me as too deliberate and manipulative. Impressive of course, but somehow insincere. (I'm obsessed with that concept this week: honesty in art.) Here -- and in WE HAVE ALWAYS LIVED IN THE CASTLE -- something real bleeds through.

There are a couple of Jackson's novels that I've never read, I blush to admit. Remind me to add THE SUNDIAL and THE BIRD'S NEST to my ever-growing TBR pile. I understand the house in THE SUNDIAL was a sort of first draft for Hill House.

This classic has been on my TBR pile for far too long. I may join all of you this month...

In reading the passage dealing with Mrs. Montague's and Arthur's initial use of the planchette, I noticed a seeming logical flaw in the narrative. "Nell" was the supposed spirit's answer to the question "Who are you?" --not "Who are you trying to speak to?" which in fact they didn't ask. And, indeed, if we assume that one of the Crain daughters, or old Miss Crain's young companion, might have been named Nell, some of the ghostly communications could make a kind of sense. (The coincidence of a ghost sharing Eleanor's first name isn't far-fetched --it's not an uncommon name.) But all of the characters go on to assume that "Nell" is the name of the person the spirit is talking to, in explicit contradiction of the way that name was introduced. Did anybody besides me think this is an anomaly?

In contrast to "The Lottery," where the narrative is strictly of external events taking place outside the character's heads, this novel has a marked degree of "interiority," if we can call it that. Jackson spends a lot of time inside the character's heads, especially Eleanor's; there is a real stress on feelings, perceptions, intuitions (which may or may not be valid), fantasies, etc. In this respect, I was reminded of Henry James --and the author's use of dialogue also has a lot of Jamesian irony in it.

Shirley Jackson is one of my favorite authors, and this book is one of my favorites of hers. I haven't read it for years and years, and I can't wait to read it again. Yay!

Shirley Jackson (1919-1965), by the time she wrote The Haunting of Hill House, had already attained fame for her grim story "The Lottery," which is still often anthologized and frequently assigned in high school and college literature classes. Though she often wrote in a dark, macabre mode, however, she was (like most "horror" writers) neither reclusive nor morbid as a person; she as a devoted wife and mom who also wrote a large body of humorous stories, often drawn partly on her own family life. This was her fifth novel, published in 1959 when she was 39 years old; it was adapted as a movie, The Haunting, starring Julie Harris and Claire Bloom, four years later. (As a kid, I saw the first part of that movie once on TV.)

So far, I've read through page 40. I'd have to say, the description of the house itself, and Eleanor's introduction to it, ranks as one of the most effective ominous opening depictions of a haunted house that I've ever run across!

If you've read the beginning of the book, you probably noticed that Jackson, in her introduction, skirts around any real discussion of the supernatural phenomena that are supposed to be associated with the house, only telling us that it's said to be haunted. Instead, she concentrates on introducing the characters who are going to be staying in the house, especially Eleanor. To me, that suggests that her main focus is going to be on the characters themselves, and that what happens in the house later on will be important primarily for how it impacts the characters. (Those of you who've read the book already, would you agree?) From the two opening chapters, what do we know about what kind of person Eleanor is, and what kind of life experiences have shaped her?

Also, unlike many authors, Jackson doesn't clearly establish a geographical setting for the story; the city Eleanor starts off from could be any American big city, and Hillsdale any part of the American rural landscape. Do you think this vagueness is deliberate; and if it is, what purpose might it serve?

It's now official: The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson is our group's common read for June (or however long it takes people to read and discuss it), having edged The Heart-Shaped Box 4-3 in the poll. So, those of you who can and want to read it this month --or already have read it-- can have at it, and post your comments, questions, criticisms, insights, background facts, etc. right here! I'll join in myself, as soon as I get my mitts on a copy. :-)