It is the story of four seekers who arrive at a notoriously unfriendly pile called Hill Dr. Montague, an occult scholar looking for solid evidence of a "haunting"; Theodora, the lighthearted assistant; Eleanor, a friendless, fragile young woman well acquainted with poltergeists; and Luke, the future heir of Hill House. At first, their stay seems destined to be merely a spooky encounter with inexplicable phenomena. But Hill House is gathering its powers—and soon it will choose one of them to make its own.
A slow-paced, creepy haunted house tale that is psychological horror rather than King/Koontz gore.
A paranormal researcher enlists three young assistants to stay with him in a notoriously haunted house for a summer to witness and provide written account of their experiences. One is a friendless introvert with mommy issues, another is a cheery, beautiful woman who revels in attention, and the last is the heir to the house. Later, the researcher's bossy wife and her assistant arrive to communicate with the spirits (and provide some comic relief).
The house is constructed to keep the inhabitants off balance, and is decked out in malevolent decor. Most of the supernatural experiences occur at nighttime, although cold areas and written messages on walls are discovered during the day. Little by little, the young people fall under the spell of the house, one more than others.
I think this book is a three-star; I gave it four because of the excellent narrator of the audiobook. I have two nitpicks. The daylight hours were rather uneventful. I'm not sure what I would expect them to be doing research-wise, but they were mostly just loafing around. And forming relationships, which I do admit does play into the psychological aspect. The other grievance is the abrupt ending. I felt like we missed a few steps before the finale.
I expected more from Hill House. Probably because my generation had Jackson's The Lottery hammered into us in sophomore English, and we either saw or remembered some ABC affiliate stations pulling The Haunting of Hill House mid-movie because viewers were calling in saying it was too frightening or inappropriate or both for Sunday night viewing. I've seen the movie several times (the original, the real one, not that meshugga remake) and both enjoyed and learned from it each time. Jackson's novel is also a good study in technique and craft, although there were a few points where the technique so overshadowed the craft it stood out and stopped my reading because I was more curious why she chose a certain technique at that point in the story than what happened to the characters. Bad move, that. I don’t mind making note of good technique and going back to learn from it after I've finished the read, but not during. Kick the reader out of the story and they may not return. I did return to discover the ending was a bit rushed. No, not a bit, it was rushed. The foreshadowing stopped being foreshadowing and became a series of thrown bricks I wanted to dodge. And then there we were, the end of the story, and I held the closed book up and said, "Huh?"