Horror Aficionados discussion
This topic is about
Hell House
Group Reads
>
August Group Read #2: Hell House by Richard Matheson
message 1:
by
Laurie (barksbooks)
(new)
-
rated it 3 stars
Jul 31, 2017 08:05AM
Hell House by Richard Matheson will be our 2nd Group Read in August. This is the place where the discussion happens. Buy, borrow, read, discuss and please remember to use spoiler tags, page numbers, chapters or % read. Have fun, everyone!
reply
|
flag
Loved this book! Not ready for a re-read though, so I'll stick to the first author reads this month.
I only got partway through last time I tried, I think I got distracted by something shiny. I do love my haunted house books, though. I'm in for this one.
Latasha wrote: "I might re-read this. I find it so disturbing."Ooh! I love disturbing! Count me in :D
This was an excellent read. Unfortunately I felt the films of the time could not do the book justice.
I own this one, and read about 20% a few months ago, but was struggling to 'get into it'. I put it aside thinking, 'maybe one day it will be a group read....' and THE DAY HAS COME! --Jen from Quebec :0)
The story is structured well and held my interest throughout, but the writing style was rigid and lacked immersion IMO. The segues were often confusing, especially at the beginning of chapters. The character development was fairly good, particularly the psychic Florence, but the obscure elderly couple bringing foodstuffs rated more description
I am only on page 70 or so, but the story is really starting to 'pick up' in pace. I am reminded of
Flesh Gothic by Edward Lee ...I think Lee read THIS book and then wrote HIS haunted house book purely about all the debauchery hinted at thus far in 'Hell House'!! --Jen from Quebec :0)
I loved Flesh Gothic that is an absolutely smutty disgusting haunted house stories and easily one of my favorite. Another favorite haunted house story of mine is The Loveliest Dead by Ray Garton.
I think one of the reasons I like haunted house books so much is the history of the house is usually interesting. A lot of ghost stories used to have good background on the ghosts, but some of them now just think ghosts are scary and don't need a history.
Mixofsunandcloud wrote: "I think one of the reasons I like haunted house books so much is the history of the house is usually interesting. A lot of ghost stories used to have good background on the ghosts, but some of them..."
The history of the house MAKES the story, imho. Delving into past events to find out what brought it to its current state... :)
The history of the house MAKES the story, imho. Delving into past events to find out what brought it to its current state... :)
Mixofsunandcloud wrote: "I think one of the reasons I like haunted house books so much is the history of the house is usually interesting. A lot of ghost stories used to have good background on the ghosts, but some of them..."I agree. He did a good job of actually creating a disturbing backstory for the house and why it's tainted. If you don't nail that everything else falls flat.
Joshua wrote: "Mixofsunandcloud wrote: "I think one of the reasons I like haunted house books so much is the history of the house is usually interesting. A lot of ghost stories used to have good background on the..."
That's what gives the lingering "meaning" that readers will think about afterwards. :)
That's what gives the lingering "meaning" that readers will think about afterwards. :)
I'm kinda having trouble liking most of the characters. Fischer, I like. Edith, I feel sympathy for. It does seem a little bit like Moby Dick with three Captain Ahabs all after different whales.
Nancy wrote: "I finished this today. I really enjoyed it. Lots of good creepy and ende of your seat moments."Agree. There was lots of creepy stuff.
Once I started reading, I could not put this book down- loved it, although the ending REALLY needed to be better than THAT, in my opinion- anyone else agree? Also- this novel felt much more current than what it actual is...I think it was written in 1971 or so, but it felt much more modern! I love when a book succeeds in NOT being dated and can withstand the test of time. Even the technology used doesn't make the book seem as old as it actually is, so kudos to the author on that front....but that ENDING....damn, what a shame, eh? --Jen from Quebec :0)
I'm almost done with it. It's definitely picked up. I agree with everyone else on here who's on the Fischer fan club. He's my man.
I've heard a few people comment the ending was lackluster. I'm almost there, haven't had time to finish it, but I'm interested to see how I feel about it.
Will wrote: "I, too, would like to hear thoughts on the ending?"I read this last fall so I'm curious to hear what people think about it.
In that case, I'll expand on what I said before, a bit. (view spoiler)
I'm not actually sure if any of these are the reason I was disappointed. The last one certainly wouldn't do it on its own. Maybe it's just one of those things when you read a book with a lot of hype.
Mixofsunandcloud wrote: "In that case, I'll expand on what I said before, a bit. [spoilers removed]
I'm not actually sure if any of these are the reason I was disappointed. The last one certainly wouldn't do it on its own..."
Regarding Barrett (view spoiler)
Jennifer Lynn wrote: "I am only on page 70 or so, but the story is really starting to 'pick up' in pace. I am reminded of
Flesh Gothic by Edward Lee ...I thin..."I loved Flesh Gothic because I loved Hell House.
The ending did feel a little flat. With all the insanity leading up to it, I expected the payoff to be a little better.
I've just finished it. Three things come to mind, in the order I made notes.1) I was surprised by the use of the word 'tarn' which I thought was quite specific to the UK (quite willing to be told I'm wrong here)? Is Matheson an anglophile?
2) The style and language felt suited to a book written in the late 50s, so I was slightly thrown by the level of sex in the text, and actually went back to check the publication dates. Anyone else felt that disconnect?
3) The ending was just poor and unconvincing. Either rushed, or Matheson couldn't work out how to do it effectively. Left me disappointed.
Will wrote (in part): The style and language felt suited to a book written in the late 50s, so I was slightly thrown by the level of sex in the text, and actually went back to check the publication dates. Anyone else felt that disconnect?
I don’t recall the exact source (it may have been the introduction to the PB edition that I once owned), but Matheson himself once commented that he viewed Hell House as two books melded somewhat unsatisfactorily into one. As best I recall there wasn’t much elaboration on this point, but I assumed that he was more or less referring to the misgivings you expressed. Personally I liked the book more than you, but concede that stylistically it was a bit “bumpy”.
Will wrote (in part):was surprised by the use of the word 'tarn' which I thought was quite specific to the UK (quite willing to be told I'm wrong here)? Is Matheson an anglophile?
I don’t know about Matheson’s personal views, but I don’t see much in his writing that indicates he might be an Anglophile. Most critics describe him as having a definite American voice. I remember thinking that his use of the word “tarn” might have been influenced by the famous Hugh Walpole story, “The Tarn”.
Rachel wrote: "page 130 (43%)[spoilers removed]
also barrett is annoying."
(view spoiler) the first time I listened to this ,i was sitting on the edge of my seat, biting my nails off. when it was over, my mouth was just hanging open and I remember thinking, my sisters can never ever read this! neither of them read so they should be ok. I like very much but it surprised and disturbed me.
Books mentioned in this topic
The Haunting of Hill House (other topics)Hell House (other topics)
Flesh Gothic (other topics)
Flesh Gothic (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Richard Matheson (other topics)Richard Matheson (other topics)
Shirley Jackson (other topics)
Richard Matheson (other topics)
Hugh Walpole (other topics)
More...







