Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion
This topic is about
The Haunting of Hill House
Shirley Jackson Collection
>
Haunting of Hill House - SPOILERS
I just peeked at the first page. It's been decades since I read this, so I'm looking forward to the re-read, but I can't stop myself from jumping in with a comment already!The first paragraph sets the tone.
No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream.
That is gorgeous, but that aside, it sets a rational, matter-of-fact tone. (Not your typical ooooooo ghost story.)
Then, Hill House, not sane, stood by itself ...
That tells me that the problem is the house, not the beings. The people are merely doing what they have to do (dreaming?) in order to attempt to stay sane.
Kathleen wrote: "That tells me that the problem is the house, not the beings. The people are merely doing what they have to do (dreaming?) in order to attempt to stay sane..."I think its hard to decide whether dreaming or not dreaming is more of the problem in this book.
I would say its both. Eleanor's dreams are a band-aid which helps her stay sane momentarily but once stripped away by the house leave her insane.
If she didn't indulge her dreams in the first place she wouldn't have felt so empty at the end.
Kathleen wrote: "I just peeked at the first page. It's been decades since I read this, so I'm looking forward to the re-read, but I can't stop myself from jumping in with a comment already!The first paragraph set..."
I loved that first paragraph too...I’m only 30 pages in, but I’m liking Jackson’s style so far.
This book turned out to be very different than what I thought it would be. I thought it would just be a ghost story, but it was so much more. I loved the feeling throughout the book of seeing the events almost through the lens of Eleanor's insanity. The dialogue was sometimes confusing or seemed out-of-place, which maybe was because we were hearing it from Eleanor's socially awkward view. Especially toward the end, there was the impression that everything may or may not be made up by Eleanor. Even with that suspicion that the haunting were part of her delusions, they were delivered perfectly and came across as pretty scary. I thought the pacing of the book was amazing, the slow build toward revealing more of the spooky happenings of Hill House but also toward Eleanor's madness. I love Shirley Jackson's ability to build a character thoroughly while still withholding information about them until the right moment. I highly suggest 'We Have Always Lived in the Castle' to anyone who enjoyed this book.
Well, I have found myself in the position of a skeptical young man in a cliché ghost story: the one who sneers in the evening and is found staring and gray-haired in the morning, stammering brokenly about his experience.Far from being impressed by the opening, I was immediately put on the cynical defensive; I thought Eleanor was set up as a typical nervous subject and every strange happening would be revealed as her problem/hallucination, to be dismissed by the rational researchers. The description of the house as evil in itself and the worked-up melancholy history went to further this impression.
But as the events - and Eleanor's relationships with the others, particularly Theodora - progressed, I was genuinely engrossed, and yes, horrified too. The second half of the book reads at a scorching speed.
Anyone else think that the lesbian overtones here are meant to be disturbing? I personally found more disturbing the fact that Theodora does not return Eleanor's feelings, or that she's only superficially attracted, not ready to give up her other steady relationship - but playing with the possibility of Luke for either of the girls felt like giving them a "respectable" option and an out for the conservative readers.
Nente wrote: "Anyone else think that the lesbian overtones here are meant to be disturbing?..."Its been a while since i've read it but i never got the impression that was supposed to be part of the horror... so to speak. I think it would have been more definite if it meant that.
For lesbianism as horror i highly recommend Carmilla :) .
Wreade1872 wrote: "Nente wrote: "Anyone else think that the lesbian overtones here are meant to be disturbing?..."Its been a while since i've read it but i never got the impression that was supposed to be part of t..."
I’m only about 1/4 of the way through, so I don’t yet have a firm opinion of my own on this, but the lesbian overtones were discussed in the introduction of the edition I am reading (by Laura Miller). She cites a letter written by Jackson in which she is lamenting the fact that some British academic had detected lesbian themes in her first book.
Jackson writes, “I am writing about ambivalence but it is an ambivalence of the spirit, or the mind, not the sex...It is not a he or a she but the demon in the mind, and that demon finds guilt where it can and uses them and runs mad with laughing when it triumphs; it is the demon which is fear...We are afraid of being someone else and doing the things someone else wants us to do and of being taken and used by someone else, some other guilt-ridden conscience that lives on and on in our minds, something we build ourselves and never recognize, but this is fear, not a named sin. Then it is fear itself, fear of self that I am writing about...fear and guilt and their destruction of identity.”
Sarah, that's definitely interesting. It's not easy to judge these elusive feelings when you don't know much about the author's ideas beforehand, though I suppose we should try to understand the book from what is in it and nothing else.I didn't even think there was any ambivalence here, though; when Eleanor and Theodora have a tense discussion and Eleanor thinks how difficult it is to steer around a question like "Do you love me?" - well what was to doubt here... and many, many other episodes are the same.
Sarah, can't thank you enough for sharing that passage. I've read it a number of times now. I love what she's saying here. You don't often find an author giving so much insight into the heart of their book.I don't see any ambivalence either, but I take Jackson's words as saying their sexuality isn't the point, that people were getting distracted by that from the point, that what we really should fear is what we do to destroy ourselves out of guilt and fear.
There is so much in these few sentences! I'm going to enjoy thinking about this as I read: the fear we have of being used by something else, something we've created out of our own guilt and fear.
And, did anyone else think that Mrs. Dudley was a programmed automaton? O.o She seemed to me to have only a limited number of functions and speeches - or at least, until she unbent with Mrs. Montague.
Automaton or not, Mrs. Dudley makes me laugh, at the same time her repetitions provide a spooky backdrop to whatever else is going on. I love the character of Eleanor. She's just so lonely and deprived. She looks at each person she meets, and the house, wondering if they are the answer to her song about lovers meeting.
I'm only 60 pgs in ... savoring.
I felt like I was on pins and needles the whole way through wondering what the house was going to throw at them next. This story is so good because it has the dichotomy of Eleanor losing it mentally but also being in tune with whatever malevolent force is in the house. Even she realizes how strange this is when she wondered why everyone could hear what she could hear in her head.There are parts of the story that were weird in a way that I can't understand what the meaning of the scene is. My copy has an introduction that mentions when Theodora and Eleanor go for a walk and come upon a vision of a family having a picnic. Then Theodora looks behind them and sees something that makes her yell "Run!" Eleanor doesn't look back and so she doesn't see whatever the scary thing is. This is one of the only spirit manifestations that Eleanor did not directly witness. The whole walk was so strange and I don't know what it was supposed to mean.
I loved the doctor's wife. She has such a superior attitude about her perceived abilities in communicating with ghosts. Yet she doesn't hear the pounding on the doors the first night she is there. She is so sure that her way to communicate is the correct and only way that she misses the real manifestations, except when she uses her planchette.
The walk scene/picnic vision was weird. I'm not sure what it meant, but what I took away was the contrast of Eleanor and Theodora's characters. Theodora is a free spirit, Eleanor, in a sense, has been caged. You could see Theodora's craving for freedom and Eleanor's craving for connection as they played out their imagination in this little scene. Then Theodora sees what she decides was a rabbit--and says it ran away, while Eleanor (with her connection to the house) then says "We've been away too long."
I found this a fascinating book. It was certainly a little spooky at times. There are things that mystify me though. The clothes, the dreamlike picnic sequence, Mrs Montague and Arthur... Were the manifestations solely an extension of Eleanor's psyche?!
I was having a conversation with a friend about this book recently and was going to share some of her insightful thoughts with the group, but unfortunately I've forgotten most of what she said. However, I do remember her saying something about the most haunted places in the house (library, nursery, etc.) possibly being the places where the original inhabitants (the daughters) were most happy. It's been a few months since I've read the book so I don't remember a lot of the details, but does anyone else have thoughts on this?
Hilary wrote: "Were the manifestations solely an extension of Eleanor's psyche?!"I don't believe so... There was at least one episode where the men noticed something and went away, while Theo and Eleanor didn't even know about it. Also the mysterious coldness - even Mrs. Montague felt that, but the thermometer showed the same temperature as around. No, I think there were real manifestations, they just affected everyone differently. And perhaps, once the house knew Eleanor to be the most affected, it sort of concentrated on her.
I like the way you explained that, Nente, and agree they were real manifestations.Sarah wrote: "I do remember her saying something about the most haunted places in the house (library, nursery, etc.) possibly being the places where the original inhabitants (the daughters) were most happy. ..."
This is really interesting too. Maybe this adds meaning to the picnic scene. Eleanor and Theo--affected by the spirits of the sisters when they were happy ...
I just finished the book, and my thoughts about it are still swirling! It's so interesting to read everyone's comments about it.Nente wrote: "And perhaps, once the house knew Eleanor to be the most affected, it sort of concentrated on her. "
It seemed to me while I was reading that Eleanor's intense loneliness and isolation, as well as the guilt she felt over her mother's death, could have made her more vulnerable to the house's influence. I wondered, during those scenes when Eleanor observed others talking about her or laughing at her, if those things were actually taking place or if Eleanor was becoming paranoid? I think there is no way to know the answer to that question for sure, but I felt for Eleanor as she tried unsuccessfully to reach out to Theodora and Luke. I wondered how much of the conflict between Eleanor and Theodora was inherent and how much was due to the influence of the house. The end was so sad...
I agree with the comments about how this book is masterful exercise in POV. We really see everything through the lens of Eleanor even though it's not formally written that way, and her skewed perspective skews everything. I also love how subtle Shirley Jackson is--how she makes the narrative so unsettling without us really realizing it. For example, there's the moment when Eleanor first meets Theodora. Eleanor is at the top of the stairs, looking down, and she begins talking before you realize there's anyone else there. "Thank heaven you're here," she says. To whom? Is there anyone really? Maybe not! Maybe Eleanor is mad. It's a disorienting moment, and then Eleanor sees Mrs. Dudley, but Eleanor is still not described as seeing anyone else until Theodora introduces herself. But even then, there is no physical description of Theodora--there's just a voice: "I'm Theodora." Is this all in Eleanor's head? Wow.
I recently did a really in-depth review of this book, where I tried to focus on these subtle and (for me) brilliant moments. If you're interested, you can find the review here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Mod
Mod
Katy wrote: "And Michael -- you do have a wonderful review. Thanks for posting."Thanks so much, Katy! It's a fantastic book.
I finished, and have to say I just love this book so much. Even more than I remembered loving it. You know how some authors fade a little once you've read so many more to compare them to? It's the opposite with Shirley Jackson for me--she just shines more.I'm so glad this book was chosen for a group read! I'm sufficiently scared enough to last through Halloween. :-)
Kathleen wrote: "I finished, and have to say I just love this book so much. Even more than I remembered loving it. You know how some authors fade a little once you've read so many more to compare them to? It's the ..."I couldn't agree more, Kathleen! My first readings of Shirley Jackson were all a little breathless, and it was only upon a second reading that I could slow down and see how she did it. I'm in awe, and I too feel like she shines ever brighter the more I read her work.
I don't re-read books. This book will be the exception. I hope it wins the revisit poll in a few years.What do others think about the meaning of Eleanor's repetition of the line "Journeys end in lovers meeting?"
I hope you enjoy the re-read too, Marilyn.I think that line is, at least partially, about Eleanor's loneliness, and the way Hill House recognizes that and responds.
I mean, it's all in her mind that it responds ... or is it? :-)
Marilyn wrote: "I don't re-read books. This book will be the exception. I hope it wins the revisit poll in a few years.What do others think about the meaning of Eleanor's repetition of the line "Journeys end in ..."
I agree with Kathleen, that this is about Eleanor's loneliness and her relationship to the house. I recently did an in-depth review of this book here on Goodreads, and here is what I wrote about that line at the time:
I've been thinking of the line that Eleanor keeps quoting: "Journeys end in lovers meeting." I didn't know this before, but it's actually from Shakespeare's Twelfth Night--it's a line sung by the "fool" in that play. Does this have any significance for Jackson's novel? I'm not sure. It's an interesting line in and of itself--so revealing of Eleanor's romantic desires, the way she seems so attracted to Theodora and to Hill House itself. She has the overwhelming sense that she belongs here, that she's part of this slapdash "family" of people staying at the house. She's excited; she's happy; she's constantly afraid of "missing something." In short, she's having the time of her life. This is her journey's end, and she's met her lover (or lovers), and she relishes every moment.
If you're interested, my full review is here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
I too hardly ever re-read books, but I've been enjoying re-reading Shirley Jackson!
Kathleen wrote: "I hope you enjoy the re-read too, Marilyn.I think that line is, at least partially, about Eleanor's loneliness, and the way Hill House recognizes that and responds.
I mean, it's all in her mind ..."
That's the real question. What is the house and what is Eleanor? Does the house hone in on Eleanor because of her strong feelings of guilt and loneliness? Or does the setting exacerbate her feelings and push her farther over the edge?
This is my third Shirley Jackson this year and I look forward to re-reading all of them.
I'd love to read all of them too, Marilyn!I agree, that is the question. Personally, when I read stuff like this, I like to "suspend disbelief" just like you do with a fantasy story. So the way I read it, it's the house--that house that in the beginning is declared "not sane." But like all love stories, it takes two. :-)
But if anybody did read it as all Eleanor, I have a question. What about that blood all over Theo's room--the blood they all saw and then (if I read it right) they all discovered never existed toward the end?
Kathleen wrote: "I'd love to read all of them too, Marilyn!I agree, that is the question. Personally, when I read stuff like this, I like to "suspend disbelief" just like you do with a fantasy story. So the way I..."
I thought about that too, Kathleen. I tend to see much/most/maybe all of this in Eleanor's mind, but the blood did bother me. As I recall, it happened shortly after Theo was painting Eleanor's toenails red. Could it be that Eleanor wrote those words in toenail polish, not in blood? I think the characters themselves wonder if it was really blood.
Michael wrote: "Kathleen wrote: "I'd love to read all of them too, Marilyn!I agree, that is the question. Personally, when I read stuff like this, I like to "suspend disbelief" just like you do with a fantasy st..."
I was hoping you'd have thought about this, Michael! :-) I think it's plausible that it was red nail polish and not blood. But it was all over her clothes, and then her clothes were fine. ??
Kathleen wrote: "Michael wrote: "Kathleen wrote: "I'd love to read all of them too, Marilyn!I agree, that is the question. Personally, when I read stuff like this, I like to "suspend disbelief" just like you do w..."
I know, Kathleen, it was really weird, and I'm not sure I totally understand. Shirley Jackson really does play it close to the vest. I mean the red is described as smelling bad, but of course that could be either blood or polish. As for the clothes, I can't quite remember, but I think it might have been Theo's clothes that were ruined. And then Theo started wearing Eleanor's clothes after that? I can't recall the details here, or if the others cleaned the clothes or not, but I think there was some suggestion that the clothes would eventually be cleaned, but I don't think we ever see this happen. All so wonderfully ambiguous and mysterious!
message 35:
by
Katy, New School Classics
(last edited Oct 23, 2017 04:33PM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mod
Katy wrote: "Near the end we find out that the clothes (Theo's) were not actually stained or ruined at all, when they go to check her room."Thanks, Katy, for clarifying. But of course this only raises more questions. Was it really all in Eleanor's mind? So hard to pin Shirley Jackson down....
I went back and re-read that scene. All four of them saw the ruined clothes and the writing on the wall. Eleanor looked at it and wondered - why? After reading it again I am wondering if Theodora is actually the crazy one. It still doesn't explain how the room and clothes were fine near the end. If my TBR pile wasn't 8 feet tall, I would start re-reading right now. I bow to the brilliance of Shirley Jackson!
Marilyn wrote: "I went back and re-read that scene. All four of them saw the ruined clothes and the writing on the wall. Eleanor looked at it and wondered - why? After reading it again I am wondering if Theodora i..."Thanks, Marilyn, for going back and re-reading that scene. I'm stumped, too! One explanation might be that, even though this is third person narration, the POV is really Eleanor's, so she simply imagines that everyone else sees the ruined clothes and the writing on the wall? Or perhaps someone has cleaned everything? I don't know. It's odd and unsettling (like so much of this book). And wow, what a thought that Theo is actually the crazy one! I've got to take a bow as well.
This is great--thank you all for the details! I wonder if Shirley Jackson led her readers on, thinking we could figure out rational explanations for each occurrence, and then left us with that one last tidbit that we couldn't reason away? I'd love to re-read it too, but instead I'll look forward to my next book of hers. Maybe Hangsaman?
Kathleen wrote: "This is great--thank you all for the details! I wonder if Shirley Jackson led her readers on, thinking we could figure out rational explanations for each occurrence, and then left us with that one ..."I'd love to hear what you think if you read Hangsaman! I haven't read it yet. I did recently read The Sundial and The Bird's Nest, which were both fantastic, even if they weren't quite as powerful, IMHO, as The Haunting of Hill House and We Have Always Lived in the Castle, which remain my favorites.
And maybe you're right, Kathleen. Maybe Shirley Jackson wanted to keep this one thing ambiguous and unexplained so that no one theory could really encompass everything.
Isn't it fantastic how extraordinarily Shirley Jackson defined her characters through their style of dialogue and humor without once mentioning their appearances? (On rare occasions she mentioned the clothes some of them chose to wore, that was all.)
Also, I must say I loved the sense of humor these characters exhibited, it was quirky, original and timeless.
Michael wrote: "Thanks, Marilyn, for going back and re-reading that scene. I'm stumped, too! One explanation might be that, even though this is third person narration, the POV is really Eleanor's, so she simply imagines that everyone else sees the ruined clothes and the writing on the wall? Or perhaps someone has cleaned everything? I don't know. It's odd and unsettling (like so much of this book). And wow, what a thought that Theo is actually the crazy one! I've got to take a bow as well. "
I don't think that was the point, the house is truly supposed to be haunted. The blood all over the room was supposedly the house's scary gimmick, an illusion of some sort...
Also, I must say I loved the sense of humor these characters exhibited, it was quirky, original and timeless.
Michael wrote: "Thanks, Marilyn, for going back and re-reading that scene. I'm stumped, too! One explanation might be that, even though this is third person narration, the POV is really Eleanor's, so she simply imagines that everyone else sees the ruined clothes and the writing on the wall? Or perhaps someone has cleaned everything? I don't know. It's odd and unsettling (like so much of this book). And wow, what a thought that Theo is actually the crazy one! I've got to take a bow as well. "
I don't think that was the point, the house is truly supposed to be haunted. The blood all over the room was supposedly the house's scary gimmick, an illusion of some sort...
Mod
I find all our different interpretations and reactions fascinating! The incident with the clothes being ruined for instance. In my memory the only one who actually saw the clothes in the closet that were supposed to be destroyed was Theodora. They all saw the words on the wall (and some things thrown around the room? maybe?) but not the clothes in the closet.Nente wrote: "Eleanor's intense loneliness and isolation, as well as the guilt she felt over her mother's death, could have made her more vulnerable to the house's influence"
I, whimsically perhaps, wonder if Hill House feels a connection with Eleanore because it too is lonely and isolated.... and looking for someone in particular, not just anyone.
It was already mentioned the little quote that keeps coming up "Journeys end in lovers meeting" and Eleanore seems to be searching for the person, the being that she is meant to meet. It's not Theodora, it's not Luke..... When she first arrives at Hill House she is quite frightened, but quickly there is happiness and confusion as well as fear... eventually she seems to just be happy. She has come to accept that the house is that being. There is a scene where she is wrapped in warmth and comfort and protectiveness. This is something she longs for. No one else can, or will, give her this. Hill House gives it to her and in return she gives it to Hill House....
Probably sounds cookey :)
At one point I wondered if Theodora, and perhaps Luke?, were deliberately trying to drive her to madness... or at least happily give her a push along the way.
Eleanore didn't seem like she was falling into madness to me until perhaps the very end (after Hill House had it's way with her). In the beginning she was whimsical and she was sensitive, shy and awkward as anyone would be if they'd been cooped up alone taking care of their ailing mother forever.... She enjoyed making up stories -- I don't think that is unusual for bright, lonely, creative people. She was definitely troubled about her mum's death though and feeling guilty about it which also gave Hill House an opening, as did her fanciful nature I think.
I am fully on the Dr. Montague's side in his analysis of the situation. Eleanore was being affected by Hill House and she needed to get away, far away... and she would be fine... she'd still need to deal with her life, her mum's death, her guilt about that death, but she would be safe from Hill House.
I felt an overwhelming sadness at the end.... so tragic.
I plan on going back and re-reading it. There is soooo much going on and the writing is wonderful, but just a tad surreal :)
oops! I ran on a bit -- so much to this small novel!
Nente wrote: "Anyone else think that the lesbian overtones here are meant to be disturbing?"I didn't actually get any lesbian vibes at all from the story.
I found Eleanore to be seeking love, connection, affection, someone to understand her completely, to accept her for who she is, to value her, someone she can trust absolutely..... call it a soul mate, a BFF, a bosom friend (a la Anne Shirley), the unconditional love of a parent (has she ever known this?).... I don't see her as looking for a literal lover, but someone rather to love her. I don't get the impression she has really experienced it before.
Danada wrote: "I find all our different interpretations and reactions fascinating! The incident with the clothes being ruined for instance. In my memory the only one who actually saw the clothes in the closet tha..."Danada, I love your thoughts. Interesting about Theo. Maybe she wanted to mess with Eleanor by having to wear her clothes? One of parts that most scared me was when Theo was reading Eleanor's thoughts ... creepy!
And you have the best profile pic!!
Kathleen wrote: "Maybe she wanted to mess with Eleanor by having to wear her clothes? One of parts that most scared me was when Theo was reading Eleanor's thoughts ... creepy!"oooh! Isn't Theo supposed to be a bit psychic? Could Hill House have used her? Or perhaps she could do a bit of mind reading?
So often I felt Theo was messing with Eleanore :\ Either being catty or jealous/petty or cruel....
was she really not holding Eleanore's hand that night in the dark terror?
(I"m glad you like the profile pic! ^_^)
Danada wrote: "I find all our different interpretations and reactions fascinating! The incident with the clothes being ruined for instance. In my memory the only one who actually saw the clothes in the closet tha..."Well now I've got a lot more to think about. I always thought of the house as a character in the sense of it being an object of Eleanor's affection, but what if were the other way around? That Eleanor is the object of the house's affection? In the end, then, it won't let her go. Journeys end in lovers meeting.
Michael wrote: "That Eleanor is the object of the house's affection? In the end, then, it won't let her go. Journeys end in lovers meeting. ""No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream. Hill House, not sane, stood by itself against its hills, holding darkness within..."
You can interpret this as Hill House is a living organism and it is not sane....
creepy and mind-bending :)
Of course it could just be that Eleanor is insane.
Genius!
Danada wrote: "Michael wrote: "That Eleanor is the object of the house's affection? In the end, then, it won't let her go. Journeys end in lovers meeting. ""No live organism can continue for long to exist sanel..."
Ah, how wonderful, Danada, to point back to the very opening lines. Yes, Shirley Jackson tells us this right away. Or does she? Genius is the perfect word!
Michael wrote: "Yes, Shirley Jackson tells us this right away. Or does she? Genius is the perfect word!"exactly!
I can't wait to read more of her work!
Catching up on Classics (and lots more!)
Books mentioned in this topic
Carmilla (other topics)The Haunting of Hill House (other topics)
We Have Always Lived in the Castle (other topics)
Hangsaman (other topics)
Ledfeather (other topics)
Feel free to post and discuss spoilers in this thread.